Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

Pete Rose hit a home run against a right-hander in the Astrodome. So, is it in any way possible that he has either his '81 or '83 card? He's obviously a "W" in both of those years (0 home runs). I've checked both his cards and the pitcher's card and there were no TRIPLE (XF) rolls so that a triple could have been extended into an inside-the-park homer. There is one DOUBLE(CF) on the pitcher's card -- could that result in a home run?

He's currently hitting like Doug Flynn. 0.146, 0.200, 0.254 with one extra base hit (his dinger) after 55 at bats.

So, is he just off to a crappy start, or did he somehow get a magical dinger? :roll:

I'd guess you have either 78, 79, or 80.

As far as I know, the game engine won't let a batter stretch a triple to a homerun with max rules for W power hitters with 0 HR.

However, I do know for a fact that the game engine WILL allow hitters to hit triples off of the pitcher's card despite seasons of 0 3B for the batter.

I stuck it out with Tom Herr one time just to see. He had 2 triples for me early on and his worst seasons have zero triples. End of the year reveal was one of Herr's worst cards.

So much for max rules, eh?

[quote:d8c08e96e1="bjs73"]

As far as I know, the game engine won't let a batter stretch a triple to a homerun with max rules for W power hitters with 0 HR.

[/quote:d8c08e96e1]

Incorrect. I had an "Iron Glove" season with Juan Pierre hitting 2 HR and his card had zero. The "W" power only has to do with the BPHR effect on pitchers cards and it also turns a natural HR into a Single**. It does not though prevent a player from stretching a triple into a HR if the OF arms are weak and the running is anything greater than "normal".

That's what I was thinking, too... I do set my running to "aggressive". However, can they stretch out any TRIPLE? I thought that it had to be a TRIPLE(XF) in order to stretch it.... and there ain't none of those there.

I don't think the exact details of how the "stretching" rules work have ever been publicized. So although, for all I know, you [i:5838e5a80e]could[/i:5838e5a80e] be right about it being based on a triple hit to a particular field (BTW, I'm much more of a stat guy than a card scrutinizer, but do those rolls even exist?)... I'm not aware of any specific reason to believe that that is in fact how it works.

If there was a 4 or 5 fielder in the OF, it's also possible for a player to get a HR on a rare play where the clumsy oaf collides with another OF.

hmmm... maybe those rolls don't actually exist. I looked on a few cards (including Willie Wilson, the king of triples) and didn't see any rolls like that. I assumed that's how stretching a triple would work since that's how stretching a single or a double works, to my knowledge. If that's not how a triple works, then how does strat know which fielder's arm he should use?

As a "computer only" rule, I'm sure the computer knows where the ball was hit, but I've never seen any connection made between stretching a hit and anything you'll find on the cards. Are you getting that from a particular source?

Folks, maybe I'm missing something not having the super advanced complicated rules sitting in front of me, but I'm looking at Roger Clemens, 1986 card, and on a roll of 6 and 4, then with a roll of 1-14, against an RHB, 1-1 against an LHB, it is a homerun, not a ballpark homerun, just a home run.
So if Rose came to the plate facing that Clemens card, and the first roll with one die was 6, then a 4 was rolled with the two die and finally a one was rolled on the 20 sided die, is that not a home run?

Because Rose is "w" (weak) power, the homerun on Clemens card would be changed to a single**, I think.

I used to use this is a way to discover which card I have, basically forgetting about the possibility of an inside-the-park HR. Oops. Still a fairly strong indicator, imo.

[quote:7355925fe2]As a "computer only" rule, I'm sure the computer knows where the ball was hit, but I've never seen any connection made between stretching a hit and anything you'll find on the cards. Are you getting that from a particular source? [/quote:7355925fe2]

First, my understanding is that this isn't like a video game where the computer uses an algorithm (besides what's on the cards) to decide where the ball goes (if you play the CD Rom game, you actually do see the flight of every ball, but I think that's just to make the game pretty, not actually to make a decision on the outcome). It's my understanding that this is a simulation game that actually uses the strat-o-matic cards and (for the most part) the strat-o-matic rules. If that's not the case, then I don't think I'll choose to ever play again.

That being said, there is a note in the "how to read a strat-o-matic card" screen that says "SI */**/CF -- The number of asterisks following the hits indicates how many bases the runners may take. If there is a position instead, then the runner may attempt an extra base at risk of getting thrown out. " It's been awhile since I've played the board game version (ok, a really long while), but my memory is that this is how it's played as well. Vague hits that say "SI" or "DO" on the card are just hits to some arbitrary field. Is this how others understand this?