Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes
Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling
You've already been corrected on the true percentages to use. You clearly want to use old data to justify your point of view.
The point that was being made is that technology is getting more and more accurate all the time. Every year the excuses for not using the technology get weaker and weaker.
As others have said, detecting whether or not a pitch is a ball or a strike is really rather easy by modern technological standards. Tech companies are routinely doing far more difficult measurements throughout many industries.
The technology is available if the leadership of MLB chooses to implement it. I think they will eventually, likely soon.
I haven't been corrected on anything, AD. I already explained to you that the 99% used by the new system isn't being measured in the same way. The old system claimed 97% of the strike zone called accurate. The new system is measuring 99% accuracy "within an inch" of the location. They are two different things.
The accuracy still hasn't improved "leaps and bounds" like the hyperbole you suggested earlier.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda