Invitational league: Weinberg vs Petrosian

[Mr Baseball World]

What is the point of R3, R4 and R5 if they are all supposed to pitch the same number of innings?

[nevdully's]

[quote:479291b763]ever since 2005 it has been the clear opinion of the general public that super relievers are at best gaming the system, and at worst, outright cheating. friend of petro or not, youve been around far too long to not know this as well. [/quote:479291b763]

Whine Berg you are so [b:479291b763]WRONG[/b:479291b763] here. It was [b:479291b763]NEVER[/b:479291b763][b:479291b763] a problem in ATG[/b:479291b763]...Can you read that? Can you understand that? It was NEVER a problem in ATG....Read it one more time. [b:479291b763]IT WAS NEVER A PROBLEM IN ATG[/b:479291b763]....So NO the was NO CLEAR opinion from THIS ATG general public that it was gaming or cheating.

And understand this....many weighing in here WERE NOT around in 05 and even those ATGers that were, most rarely, if ever, played 200x games to know much of what you're talking about....So most of us, like you, have no idea what you're talking about.


And Petro has no friends

[cristano1]

mr bbw: say you are using an R3. in most meaningful games the best you can get out of him is entering in the 6th. aside from blowouts, where the starter lasts 1-2 innings, but you dont want him to enter those games anyway. so even under best case results, he pitches 4 ip, and the majority if not all of his innings are fresh. even if you F0 an R3, he still will only pitch a tiny amount tired. so the value of anything above R3 is minimal. the significant bridge, as ghddka said before, is R2 to R3. to say that an R4 will pitch 4/3 more than an R3, and that an R5 will pitch 5/3 more times than an R3 will never occur, unless every single game is extra innings. so the 165 x 4/3 or 165 x 5/3 isnt valid.

[Salty]

[quote:8bbd2a13b7="weinberg"]mr bbw: say you are using an R3. in most meaningful games the best you can get out of him is entering in the 6th. aside from blowouts, where the starter lasts 1-2 innings, but you dont want him to enter those games anyway. so even under best case results, he pitches 4 ip, and the majority if not all of his innings are fresh. even if you F0 an R3, he still will only pitch a tiny amount tired. so the value of anything above R3 is minimal. the significant bridge, as ghddka said before, is R2 to R3. to say that an R4 will pitch 4/3 more than an R3, and that an R5 will pitch 5/3 more times than an R3 will never occur, unless every single game is extra innings. so the 165 x 4/3 or 165 x 5/3 isnt valid.[/quote:8bbd2a13b7]

Wrong again:

Sir- your assumption that your reliever will only enter in the 6th to pitch important innings for you is incorrect.
You have completely and utterly ignored the fact that in a high scoring TIGHT game your starter may have exited in inning one or TWO- and VERY important innings will then occur.

Id suggest that before you try to give us anymore of your formulae, you MIGHT want to actually find out if ANY OF THEM have any validity.

Again- We never interacted before this weekend-
so I have no long-standing grudge against you- but the things you are saying are just wrong.

If I feel that what you are saying is ever correct, I will happily defend your position, just as Im sure PKB will...

[cristano1]

nevduklly/salt: i have the best record by far of any of the 12 of us in this league. so while you may or may not agree with my assumptions and pricing algorithm, it is still the number 1 method around.

fact: i was #1 in barnstormers this year, #3 in the 2010 tour, #1 out of the 12 of us in win percentage. i am impressed that you guys are a true grinders, and have play a lot of ATG6 teams. but, looking more closely, your playoff percentage is 50% (nev) and under 40% (salt) and a little over 50% (petro). want to know what my ATG6 playoff percentage is? 92%.

from that body of work, it seems like my assumptions are working. so, while my assumptions may seem wrong, and my assessment of duffy may seem wrong, and my assessment of super reliever may seem wrong, perhaps you should have a more open mind rather than dismissing it. however insane it seems, it works. you think i make playoffs in 92% of ATG6 leagues by dumb luck? do you think i made the world series of last years barnstormers by dumb luck? do you think i dominated this years barnstormers by dumb luck?

its not like i am some .500 manager throwing out ridiculous assumptions. so realize this before you say wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. sure, its nice to have an R5 ready to go for, you know, that game where its tied 12-12 after the first inning. except you forgot one piece of info: when a starter is pulled without making it out of the 3rd inning, the probability of the game being within 5 runs is 12%. within 3 runs, 5%. sure it might be nice to have an R5 ready to go, just in case your team comes back in those 5% of games. but in reality, that is nothing more than an unlikely event.

[gkhd11a]

I will state from here on in I am using the super reliever as standard practice and I expect to hear no complaints.

[nevdully's]

Whine Berg I couldn't care less about your winning pct, pricing formula, BS success....However your rantings show me you're a Delunatic.

[Salty]

[quote:24768dd6ad="weinberg"]nevduklly/salt: i have the best record by far of any of the 12 of us in this league. so while you may or may not agree with my assumptions and pricing algorithm, it is still the number 1 method around.

fact: i was #1 in barnstormers this year, #3 in the 2010 tour, #1 out of the 12 of us in win percentage. i am impressed that you guys are a true grinders, and have play a lot of ATG6 teams. but, looking more closely, your playoff percentage is 50% (nev) and under 40% (salt) and a little over 50% (petro). want to know what my ATG6 playoff percentage is? 92%.

from that body of work, it seems like my assumptions are working. so, while my assumptions may seem wrong, and my assessment of duffy may seem wrong, and my assessment of super reliever may seem wrong, perhaps you should have a more open mind rather than dismissing it. however insane it seems, it works. you think i make playoffs in 92% of ATG6 leagues by dumb luck? do you think i made the world series of last years barnstormers by dumb luck? do you think i dominated this years barnstormers by dumb luck?

its not like i am some .500 manager throwing out ridiculous assumptions. so realize this before you say wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. sure, its nice to have an R5 ready to go for, you know, that game where its tied 12-12 after the first inning. except you forgot one piece of info: when a starter is pulled without making it out of the 3rd inning, the probability of the game being within 5 runs is 12%. within 3 runs, 5%. sure it might be nice to have an R5 ready to go, just in case your team comes back in those 5% of games. but in reality, that is nothing more than an unlikely event.[/quote:24768dd6ad]

So, your fallback position is that because you have a good winning pct, any statement despite how illogical it is must be correct?

So, when you start entering leagues with the real top managers in the game- when you start playing in the LIVE leagues and the 200 leagues, and your winning pct plummets precipitously-
thats when you will start to see logic???

Im going to tell you straight up- the best managers (NOT ME) have participated in all these kinds of leagues- and rather regularly in some cases.
When you start winning with even close to the same pct there, come back to me.
Until then, Ill have to go on believing that a persons winning pct. doesnt mean we should suspend logic.

[motherscratcher]

So, if i'm to understand this correctly, if someone tells me that 2+2=5, I'm not supposed to correct them. Instead I'm supposed to ask them what their winning percentage is?

That's a great song BTW. I'll have to find out Thom Yorke's winning percentage.

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:5fc1164f00="motherscratcher"]So, if i'm to understand this correctly, if someone tells me that 2+2=5, I'm not supposed to correct them. Instead I'm supposed to ask them what their winning percentage is?

That's a great song BTW. I'll have to find out Thom Yorke's winning percentage.[/quote:5fc1164f00]

If Thom Yorke's winning percentage were higher, Radiohead would not be the best band since 1990, and possibly since 1980. Losing is key to good songwriting. 2+2=5 is a perfect example of a song that could not have been written with a .560 winning percentage.