I normally don't complain

But this was the most inexplicable result I have ever seen.
Look at the bottom of the ninth inning. There is a runner on first, Escobar. He is not an * base stealer. The next result is a 2bx for a single. The problem is: I have a 1e11 2nd baseman. There would be no reason to hold the runner or have the infield in. The next result is another 2bx for a single. You can look at the rest of the nightmare inning 3 wild pitches that score those runners that should have not been on base in the first place. If someone can explain it to me I am all ears.

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/game/play ... 473365/595

But this was the most inexplicable result I have ever seen.
Look at the bottom of the ninth inning. There is a runner on first, Escobar. He is not an * base stealer. The next result is a 2bx for a single. The problem is: I have a 1e11 2nd baseman. There would be no reason to hold the runner or have the infield in. The next result is another 2bx for a single. You can look at the rest of the nightmare inning 3 wild pitches that score those runners that should have not been on base in the first place. If someone can explain it to me I am all ears.

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/game/play ... 473365/595

Escobar is not an asterisk, but he is a 2/- (20-6) to steal if he gets the lead. It's not out of the realm of possibility that HAL would hold in that situation trying to keep him from taking the bag and getting into scoring position.

I agree with ninersphan that is the only logic that seems likely...but

He has a better chance to get picked off than stealing 2nd, so why hold him???

1/36 to steal (.0277...) ... 1/20 x.7 to get picked off (.035). The 6 in the stealing rating of 20/6 is the odds he gets back on a pickoff attempt. That doesn't even count the odds of him getting thrown out if he does get the lead assuming the pitcher and catcher have good hold ratings.

Since he should never have been held, especially when those early runs in the inning are not relevant in that situation, the 1 rated 2B should not have given up a single---anyway you look at it... it is ridiculously bad managing by HAL.

I don’t think HAL would hold him unless it were a * stealing.

...

I don’t think HAL would hold him unless it were a * stealing.

There really is no other explanation for a 1 rated 2b to give up a single on a fielding check though. The 1 rated fielder is either holding or positioned in reducing their rating to 2 to allow for a single. With the runner being on first base, it makes no sense for the infield to be in. It has to be that HAL held.

Just spitballing here— what about holding him since Edman is a B hit and run guy? Maybe that would trigger a hold? Up by 3 in B8, not good managing— but who knows?

Just spitballing here— what about holding him since Edman is a B hit and run guy? Maybe that would trigger a hold? Up by 3 in B8, not good managing— but who knows?

Still a hold which even in your argument, is really the only logical reason for the result.