Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:40 am**

I'm currently participating in a Superstar 60s league, and one of my players is Mike Andrews (no card reveal, but he's performing well, so I believe it's his 1969 card). Anyway, while I was perusing through his five seasons, I noted that three of the seasons, 1968, 1969 and 1970, do not have a GB A+ reading against either LHP or RHP.

Regardless of how good or how mediocre a player is, I always thought that a GB A+ (or B+) reading showed up on the batter's card. If my memory serves me right, I believe that even a 1 hitting pitcher has a reading on 3-7.

Is this a unique circumstance? I don't believe I've ever encountered it before.

Posted: **Thu Sep 12, 2013 7:51 pm**

Weird. My guess is it's a mistake and his gbA+'s just aren't showing.

Posted: **Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:19 am**

I do not think the + GB's have an effect in this game(superadvanced) anyway. I remember reading a post about it years ago.

Posted: **Sat Sep 14, 2013 11:04 am**

durantjerry wrote:I do not think the + GB's have an effect in this game(superadvanced) anyway. I remember reading a post about it years ago.

GB A/B+ doesn't matter when holding a runner like it does in the basic game. However, it becomes a base hit when the infield is in.

Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Aren't GB A+ (or B+) supposed to be Standard Features?

Aren't GB A+ (or B+) supposed to be Standard Features?

Re: Aren't GB A+ (or B+) supposed to be Standard Features?

Re: Aren't GB A+ (or B+) supposed to be Standard Features?

Re: Aren't GB A+ (or B+) supposed to be Standard Features?