Disappointed with 90s Injury No-Reveals

[phillyhemp]

Joey Cora has HBP+injury for all 5 years against both L + R. Takes away the idea of gaining an edge on the injury reveal. I think part of the fun of the mystery card, or at least the idea of managerial skill, was pinpointing the exact year of your players.

I guess I'll be forced to spend several more hours scanning each card and calculating the frequency for "pop outs" on each.

[LMBombers]

Cora has 2 seasons of 3 game max injury which will help some. Also his first card has no chance of a HR but then again I suppose he could leg out an inside the park HR from a triple.

I don't mind the injury results. It seems that many of the players have lomax in the 80s and HBP in the 90s. I remember being amazed at how easy the injury year determination was when playing the 70s game for the first time.

[YountFan]

[quote:eebd9b1dda]Takes away the idea of gaining an edge on the injury reveal.[/quote:eebd9b1dda]
Good

[Hakmusic]

[quote:e5113832a2="Phillyhemp"] I think part of the fun of the mystery card, or at least the idea of managerial skill, was pinpointing the exact year of your players.[/quote:e5113832a2]

I agree with YF. To me "managerial skill" is looking at L/R balance, power vs. singles, walks and strikeouts and trying to make a determination. Then balancing that with the risk of making a move and being wrong. I would much prefer to have no injury reveals at all.

[chess2899]

Hakmusic is "always" right! :D

[AllStarInc]

I agree...injury reveals shouldn't be a part of the game at all.

My guess is that anybody who likes injury reveals would prefer the player card just exposes the year of the card after the draft? I guess that wouldn't be totally bad.

It should be completely one way or the other. Why should you need an injury to reveal what year the card is? Doesn't make any sense...to me anyway.

Let it remain a mystery leaving the manager to try to figure it out via performance...rather than an injury.

[Panzer ace]

The lack of the clear injury reveal certainly helps the veteran manager. I am not sure how well managers new to Strat will do at playing the 90's. In the long run, I think that will hurt the game. If the learning curve is too long, we loose new blood.

[chess2899]

No problems! The learning curve has just been shortened! I just finished publishing a paperback book called: Chess's Secrets on Winning in the 90s! It is very comprehensive and thorough, with an introduction by Panzer Ace, the Mystery Game Wizard with the most Championships ever.

It is well worth the price, 2 books for $24.95 or a free credit. It IS time for some of managers to win a Championship and from I can see happening in the 90s, most of you need this book! :lol: :lol:

Contact me if interested! I am about to become the 1st 90s Champion so buy now before they are all gone!!!!!

Afterall, you certainly don't want to lose to Phillyhemp! 8-)

[Outta Leftfield]

[quote:4cd8f1f845="AllStarInc"]I agree...injury reveals shouldn't be a part of the game at all.

[/quote:4cd8f1f845]

My understanding (this happened before my time) is that Bernie tried removing the injury reveal shortly after the 80s game came out —and that change lasted about two days before squeals of protest brought it back.

My guess is that, by popular demand, the injury reveal is here to stay—but it's been made a bit harder to use, so I guess we have a middle ground. It's a middle ground I can live with... :D

[voovits]

I don't know how you could remove the injury reveal without removing the play by play entirely