Starli... Silly ratings guide quibling

If a player card has one BP HR on a roll of 12 in a column then in the ratings guide that is listed as 1.0 BPHR. It is not an advantage to use the ratings guide to find that out vs counting the 1 chance on the card (or just looking at the card and not counting the 1 as someone refuses to admit he counted the 1 chance, he only looked at the card).

I assumed you'd be addressing my points, so I looked at your post. Reading and interpreting the card entails heuristics far more difficult than interpreting a BP HR on a roll of 12. So, that example does not represent the difficulties of interpreting an entire card.

So the ratings guide simply lists in numeric form what is on the card itself. You can look the player up in the guide, count the card, or just "look" at the card and come to the same conclusion in all three ways. No advantage to reading it in a guide, counting the card or from looking at the card. Same conclusion no matter how you do it.

Yes, the ratings guide does do that, and considering that provides actual information the "coded" card does not, it is doing its user a great service. And as I said before, considering counting the cards is an excruciatingly long and monotonous process, and few people could actually do it, the ratings guide is giving them what they could not achieve, themselves. And nobody can just "look" at the card and come to the conclusion the ratings guide gives people. As someone who reads cards by looking at them, I can attest to that. So, ratings guides significantly help them as well.

Some may want to feel superior in winning a league over others that may have a guide. That is their right to do so. Personally I don't use the guide but I don't care if others do or don't. Winning a league is not as simple as owning a ratings guide. For one thing the guide doesn't tell you what players to choose. You still have to factor in salary, defense, bunting, injury factor and many other things to comprise a quality team.

I certainly don't feel superior in winning a league over those using ratings guide, and I have never implied it. I just won't stand for someone who uses a ratings guide to lord over me about their "superiority" when they rely on a ratings guide and I don't. And you are absolutely right about all of those elements being factors in winning a league and being indicative of a talented manager. That's why I have great respect for many managers who use ratings guides. I just only compare myself to those who don't.

Sorry, I know this is off-topic. One more question (to anyone in general). If you know/think it gives you an advantage, why would you not use it? Other than not being able to afford it (which certainly may apply to some people, although it is far less than the cost of one regularly priced team), I can't see any.

I enjoy reading the cards myself, looking for patterns, and doing my best to discern the best cards and--for SOM online--the best values. That's always been a favorite part of SOM for me, as well as a skill which I've always valued and admired... and I would never give that up.

Dave, I've already addressed and countered everything you said, as well as answered your questions, in my previous posts. Let's move on to Starlin Castro.

You havn't addressed any of them, as you do this all the time when you know you are wrong. Time and time again here you have stated that you do not compare yourself to those who use a ratings guide, laughable, guess you do not trust your own math?

How can we move on to Castro if you cannot address the questions that are being discussed and you have no answer for besides "Let's move on to Starlin Castro". You opened a can of worms and now you cannot backup your statements. I am shocked you even play in any leagues with managers who even use a ratings guide, how such an unfair advantage that must be for you.

I love the ratings guide and would use the hard copy all the time if I had more money to spend on SOM products.

I just noticed where Strether wrote:

If you want to consider yourself a better manager than me, fine. Firstly, it is irrelevant to our discussion. Secondly, you and I have only played in three leagues together, and you did so with help from a ratings guide and I did so without using one. So, such a comparison would be both premature and inapt.

Sorry 'bout your luck Friend, but I have not bought the ratings guide in at least six years. My name rings out regardless, however, I would not hesitate to use said guide. And I don't just consider myself a better manager than you, I put up the numbers to back it up!

You need to check yourself Strether, my post was in good fun and you must have missed where I credited you with knowing more about baseball than myself. That is a serious compliment. You have got to ask yourself if you are perceiving problems everywhere and from everyone maybe it is you who should think of changing some of your tactics in your dealings with peoples.

You havn't addressed any of them, as you do this all the time when you know you are wrong. ... You opened a can of worms and now you cannot backup your statements.

Standard operating procedure there Dave!

You havn't addressed any of them, as you do this all the time when you know you are wrong. ... You opened a can of worms and now you cannot backup your statements.

Standard operating procedure there Dave!

No doubt, now waiting for the breakdown line by line showing where he has addressed everything......wait for it.....

If a player card has one BP HR on a roll of 12 in a column then in the ratings guide that is listed as 1.0 BPHR. It is not an advantage to use the ratings guide to find that out vs counting the 1 chance on the card (or just looking at the card and not counting the 1 as someone refuses to admit he counted the 1 chance, he only looked at the card).

So the ratings guide simply lists in numeric form what is on the card itself. You can look the player up in the guide, count the card, or just "look" at the card and come to the same conclusion in all three ways. No advantage to reading it in a guide, counting the card or from looking at the card. Same conclusion no matter how you do it.

Some may want to feel superior in winning a league over others that may have a guide. That is their right to do so. Personally I don't use the guide but I don't care if others do or don't. Winning a league is not as simple as owning a ratings guide. For one thing the guide doesn't tell you what players to choose. You still have to factor in salary, defense, bunting, injury factor and many other things to comprise a quality team.

From the ATG forums I know folks have put together their own rating guide call Diamond Dope. Seems you can plug in players and a BP to get expected output (I think that's how it works). Never used it, don't care if everyone else does. The ability to do math is hardly an unfair advantage and not much of a fair advantage either. I rarely consult it once I become familiar with the set.

You havn't addressed any of them...

How can we move on to Castro if you cannot address the questions that are being discussed and you have no answer for besides "Let's move on to Starlin Castro". You opened a can of worms and now you cannot backup your statements. I am shocked you even play in any leagues with managers who even use a ratings guide, how such an unfair advantage that must be for you.

Hi, Dave.

I did address your questions about ratings guides giving an edge, and your other questions as well. Here is the post where I did so:

Since you didn't address my post that answered all these questions, I'll say it again. "Time savers" are those that save time on mundane activities of workable time lengths. Ratings guides do much more than that. Considering almost none of us, including myself, have even close to the time necessary to actually count out every card on the set. So, the ratings guides give their user information they most likely never would have gotten without them. And, as I said before, counting out the cards doesn't guarantee one would count them out correctly.

Your acknowledging people might not count them out correctly perfectly supports my point. The ratings guide provide a service guaranteeing they'll be counted out correctly for those who can't...even though very few of us have the time to count out a whole set.

So, the ratings guide do give helpful, vital information that give their users an edge they most likely wouldn't have had without them. I don't know why people who actually pay for that edge try to say they didn't. I'm not saying it's unfair in anyway. Let's get back to Starlin Castro.

That countered every point you made and answered every question. If you disagree, feel free to address it yourself.

Sorry 'bout your luck Friend, but I have not bought the ratings guide in at least six years. My name rings out regardless, however, I would not hesitate to use said guide. And I don't just consider myself a better manager than you, I put up the numbers to back it up!

That's funny. On another thread, you told JoetheJet you loved his ratings guide and was looking forward to buying another. So, you were either lying then and now. You can't blame me for taking you at your word.

You need to check yourself Strether, my post was in good fun and you must have missed where I credited you with knowing more about baseball than myself. That is a serious compliment. You have got to ask yourself if you are perceiving problems everywhere and from everyone maybe it is you who should think of changing some of your tactics in your dealings with peoples.

I had no need to "check myself." I had posted politely to you, and you responded with this impolite post:

And I know I am right and you are wrong because I am a better manager and people person than you! ....However, I will admit that your knowledge of baseball just might best my knowledge of the game. And we will both have to live with that!

Yes, you did complement me about baseball knowledge but you also derided me personally and as a manager. I politely responded with this:

P.s. If you want to consider yourself a better manager than me, fine. Firstly, it is irrelevant to our discussion. Secondly, you and I have only played in three leagues together, and you did so with help from a ratings guide and I did so without using one. So, such a comparison would be both premature and inapt.

So, there was nothing for me to check, and I certainly wasn't perceiving any problems that weren't there. So, I have no idea what you're talking about. I still think you're a sweet guy, though, Rich, and there are no hard feelings. Just try to keep your posts focused on SOM and baseball.

oy vey - enough already