Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 345

Thread: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

  1. #16
    Start the Reactor! *BaseClogger*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    6,458

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    There simply is no counterargument.
    I enjoy the game-within-the-game involved with tricking the human eyes. It's just one of the little charms that adds to the overall romance of the sport...
    "On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    480

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    If a catcher can get away with it, he's going to do it. Is raising umpire's awareness to pitch framing an option? I am not a proponent of implementing robots into the game.
    There are only two seasons - Winter and Baseball.

  4. #18
    Danger is my business! oneupper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Back in Florida
    Posts
    8,158

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Put my vote in for robo-ump. Do away with the "framing" and the "context" strike zones (veterans vs. rookies, home vs. away, score-related, standings-related, "lesson teaching",etc. ).

    The NFL has become far more enjoyable in my opinion now that there is a clear mandate to try to "get it right".
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."

    http://dalmady.blogspot.com

  5. #19
    Member Sea Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    15,629

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    As most of you know, I'm as traditional as they come, but I'm with Doug on this one and I thought the same thing while watching these post season games with the graphics showing the strike zone on every pitch. I've been fed up with ump's strike zones for awhile now but I think as this technology gets better and if it's feasible to set up a system that can work at the major league level, I'd be all for it

  6. #20
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,448

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by *BaseClogger* View Post
    I enjoy the game-within-the-game involved with tricking the human eyes. It's just one of the little charms that adds to the overall romance of the sport...
    It's about as romantic as dating a compulsive liar.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  7. #21
    My clutch is broken RichRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Asheville, NC or thereabouts
    Posts
    3,891

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by oneupper View Post
    Put my vote in for robo-ump. Do away with the "framing" and the "context" strike zones (veterans vs. rookies, home vs. away, score-related, standings-related, "lesson teaching",etc. ).

    The NFL has become far more enjoyable in my opinion now that there is a clear mandate to try to "get it right".
    Agreed, it's time. Past time, actually.
    "I can make all the stadiums rock."
    -Air Supply

  8. #22
    Member blumj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Northern MA
    Posts
    4,683

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by MrRedLegger View Post
    If a catcher can get away with it, he's going to do it. Is raising umpire's awareness to pitch framing an option? I am not a proponent of implementing robots into the game.
    Because the technology makes obvious fools out of the umpires, who need to be in control to do their jobs, and it's nearly impossible to be in control when you're being shown up for a fool regularly.
    "Reality tells us there are no guarantees. Except that some day Jon Lester will be on that list of 100-game winners." - Peter Gammons

  9. #23
    Member muddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Raleigh, N.C.
    Posts
    1,982

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    I've got no idea why there isn't an electronic strike zone. No one buys a ticket to watch the ump call balls and strikes. It doesn't speed the game up and umps miss calls way too often. It frustrates players and it frustrates fans. The excuse that it all evens out is not a valid reason for MLB sticking with a problem that has a clear and easy solution. You can still have an ump to run the game and act as backup in case the electronic system malfunctions. It's time to bury this relic.

    Calling balls and strikes accurately is fundamental to a fairly contested game. We have a way to get those calls right 100% of the time rather than the current system which can miss dozens of calls in a single game. There simply is no counterargument.
    Umpires are as much a part of the game as are the players. As far as "umps miss calls way too often" is concerned...players make errors way too often in my opinion. Managers make bad decisions that cost their teams games. So let's eliminate the managers and set up a preprogrammed system that reacts to specific situations based on the input. Why don't we just invent a computer game and call it baseball. Eliminate all the bad calls, pitches, errors, and decisions and see what that looks like.
    Baseball is a game that is as human as we are and that's why I enjoy it. We all make mistakes and that's a part of who we are. The mistakes are a part of the entertainment in an odd way.

    We have a way to get those calls right 100% of the time...

    Totally disagree. Let me know when you get 100% agreement on anything. You would still contest what is "right."

  10. #24
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    4,127

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    The inanity of NFL instant reply is overwhelming. I just don't want any part of it in the batter's box.

  11. #25
    Red's fan mbgrayson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,061

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    It would be interesting for MLB to try this out in spring training, even at just a couple ball parks.

    Of course, you can expect the umps would go out on strike.

    What about giving each manager three ball/strike challenges per game? If the challenge wins, they don't have to use it up. There would need to be rules for borderline calls.

    The problem I see with Gameday strike zones is that they are two diminsional. The plate is three diminsional, and a curve can theoretically cross the zone behind the front plane of the plate. How do we measure for that?

    I like the idea, but I don't think the technology is quite there yet.
    __________________
    ďA healthy Reds team is a strong Reds team"

  12. #26
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,712

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by muddie View Post
    Umpires are as much a part of the game as are the players. As far as "umps miss calls way too often" is concerned...players make errors way too often in my opinion. Managers make bad decisions that cost their teams games. So let's eliminate the managers and set up a preprogrammed system that reacts to specific situations based on the input. Why don't we just invent a computer game and call it baseball. Eliminate all the bad calls, pitches, errors, and decisions and see what that looks like.
    Baseball is a game that is as human as we are and that's why I enjoy it. We all make mistakes and that's a part of who we are. The mistakes are a part of the entertainment in an odd way.

    We have a way to get those calls right 100% of the time...

    Totally disagree. Let me know when you get 100% agreement on anything. You would still contest what is "right."
    An umpire's call is obviously a different category than a play by a player or a decision by a manager. Playing the game and the strategy of the game are a part of the fabric of the game. Exact calling of balls and strikes by an automated system is not the same category as attempting to use artificial intelligence for managing a game, or having robots that field perfectly play the game.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  13. #27
    Flash the leather! _Sir_Charles_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    8,675

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    I'd be in favor of using the computers to evaluate and discipline the umpires. If an umpire is shown to miss balls/strikes at an inordinate rate, I'd be fully in favor of demoting that umpire to the minors. But I do NOT want a computer calling the balls/strikes in a game.

    And by the way, that video Doug posted in that initial post, 6 inches outside...sure, it's a ball...but lets not act like it's such a blatant error that we get bent out of shape over it. That's just slightly more than one baseball's length outside. Sure it's a mistake, but I've seen worse mistakes on plays with balls that are trapped, or close plays at a base, etc. Are we going to have computers call those to? Implement replay to make an already long game even longer? I vote no.
    Last edited by _Sir_Charles_; 11-13-2012 at 07:17 PM.
    Chapman to the rotation!!!! Do it already!!!!

  14. #28
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,933

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_ View Post
    I'd be in favor of using the computers to evaluate and discipline the umpires. If an umpire is shown to miss balls/strikes at an inordinate rate, I'd be fully in favor of demoting that umpire to the minors. But I do NOT want a computer calling the balls/strikes in a game.

    And by the way, that video Doug posted in that initial post, 6 inches outside...sure, it's a ball...but lets not act like it's such a blatant error that we get bent out of shape over it. That's just slightly more than one baseball's length outside. Sure it's a mistake, but I've seen worse mistakes on plays with balls that are trapped, or close plays at a base, etc. Are we going to have computers call those to? Implement replay to make an already long game even longer? I vote no.
    Why can't we? The problem is that baseball has a dumb replay system to begin with. Don't send the entire crew into the tunnel to watch the video. Have 3-4 umpires working in New York watching the replays. By the time the manager gets hit butt out of the dugout and tells the umpire what he wants to review, we folks at home already know whether the right or wrong call was made. Have the crew chief hooked up with an ear piece. When the right call comes in on a disputed play, the guy in New York tells him the result of the play and that is that. It would take less than a minute. Balls and strikes are already being done. Just make it happen (and be sure to calibrate the system an hour before each game). It isn't difficult. It is actually incredibly easy given that we already have every piece of technology in place except for an ear piece and a few umpires sitting in New York in front of some TVs.

  15. #29
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,732

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Why not give the umpire behind the plate an ear piece and give him a tennis-like beep when the ball is a strike? You still have a human in charge who can deal with the unforeseen. The umpire isn't shown up, but he will be trained to call the objective strike.

    High and low might be a challenge, but inside and outside seem doable.

  16. #30
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,181

    Re: Why we need computers calling balls and strikes

    Quote Originally Posted by mdccclxix View Post
    The rules were written before computers though. Computers weren't even dreamed of yet. I don't know baseball history well at all, so maybe others can offer in some insight. I want to say at some point there weren't even umpires.
    And yet, the plate has precise measurements that are consistent from park to park. And yet, the rule book provides very specific guidelines about how to define the height of the zone by player.

    Clearly, the task given to the umpire is to assess whether or not the ball crossed through the zone. That's what the rulebook says his job his. We have evidence that certain players can and do systemically abuse the umpires' physical limitations in doing their job.

    The question becomes, which is the bigger affront? Changing our rule enforcement mechanism, to which some people seem to have great affinity, or allowing players to gain an advantage through their skill in abusing the limitations of our current mechanism?

    The umps are there to enforce the rules. MLB should be doing what it can to allow them to do their jobs as well as possible. Choosing not to so when they clearly have a solution available is an insult to anybody who thinks that the game should be decided by the players' ability to score and prevent runs within the rules rather than their ability to abuse the limitations of our ability to enforce them.

    I've yet to see anybody make a compelling argument against a solution such as the one BCubb described. I'm sure the umps would resist, but that's the only reason, that's sad.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25