Does a real life manager do this?

Strat:

Darin,

The game situation also dictates it; at this point the team is already trailing so you just need an out. Willingham has 37.4 OB chances with the clutch included while Morneau has 26.8. Marmol gives 40.9 OB to RHB, giving Willingham a total of 78.3 OB chances. Marmol allows only 31.35 OB chances to LHB, giving Morneau a total of 58.15 OB chances. Marmol's chances of getting Morneau out are much greater than getting Willingham.

Me:

Thank you for the clarification.

Last thing. Let's say Morneau and Willingham have identical #'s. Would Marmol still IBB Willingham to get to Morneau based upon his (Marmol) #'s vs LH's?

Strat:

Darin,

Although it could be a possibility to walk Willingham if the numbers were equal, it certainly wouldn't happen as often as it would with their current numbers.

Me:

Thanks for your help again.

In real life, I can't see ANY manager with a RH closer walking a RH batter to get to a LH.
Lefties tend to hit RH's better than righties do.

I know statistics/#'s play a big part in the computer making decisions during the game.
IMO, I think in order to keep some realism to it, 1 decision the computer must make is if the batter is RH and the closer is RH, then the closer should pitch to him.

I don't feel that Willinghams' #'s were that overwhelming enough to force the computer to IBB him to get to a lefty.

I want RH's pitching to righty bats and LH's pitching to lefty bats.

Strat:

Darin,

The game situation also dictates it; at this point the team is already trailing so you just need an out. Willingham has 37.4 OB chances with the clutch included while Morneau has 26.8. Marmol gives 40.9 OB to RHB, giving Willingham a total of 78.3 OB chances. Marmol allows only 31.35 OB chances to LHB, giving Morneau a total of 58.15 OB chances. Marmol's chances of getting Morneau out are much greater than getting Willingham.

Interesting, but the problem with using OB chances (ironically) is that it doesn't distinguish between walks (which are somewhat harmless in this game situation, and which Willingham has more of) and hits (which are not harmless, and which Morneau has more of).

I think that this indicates that a more nuanced program logic is required. Using OB is not going to get the proper job done unless it distinguishes between walks and hits.

Visick, your comment on the "default" logic of RHB vs RHP is problematic for me, because it suggests a departure from pure card-based probabilities and logic. Once you do that, you would essentially be taking the brains out of the computer. I think it should be based entirely on game result logic and probabilities. IMO. I realize that your goal is more to get the game to mimic real life baseball.

Geoff,

Have u ever played the board game?

Geoff,

Have u ever played the board game?

In the 70's and 80's I probably played about 3,000 games with dice, a board and a split deck or 20 sided die.

I used to play with my brother, who now lives in another city.

There is still nothing like playing the game with dice. It's the pure joy of the surprise of the die roll.

My brother can't stand my good luck. I always have my sheepish, wry smile and shrug ready.

There is simply nothing as good as playing a game live with dice!

In face 2 face, would you prefer a RH'er pitching to a righty bat late in the game or a RH'er pitching to a lefty?

In face 2 face, would you prefer a RH'er pitching to a righty bat late in the game or a RH'er pitching to a lefty?

The way I look at it now is very mathematical. I use my run production model to figure out what bullpen settings I want, and I evaluate the game decisions that way. I am really happy with the way the bullpen settings get carried out in online strat. I just think that HAL goes really beserk with intentional walks, so now I've basically told him to "cool it" by setting the IBB to "extra conservative". I'm still sort of seeing what HAL does with that. At "conservative" HAL was still issuing intentional walks here and there. I have yet to see a game recap where I said to myself, "Gee I wish HAL had whe walked that guy intentionally" when HAL didn't actually issue the IBB.

The way I looked at it in 2007 and prior would have been based on my visual assessment of the respective cards, including the clutch ratings. (I have been familiar with the mathematical aspects of counting the die rolls almost from the moment I started playing, so I would either count the die roll chances on the cards, or just scan them to get an overall impression). I have to say that HAL's tendencies with IBB's really mirrors my own. I just think that HAL issues too many of them.

Either way, what I do, now and then, is assess the overall combined result from pitcher and batter. This takes into account the L-R balance of each of them, and their "handedness". With the cards, you get a quick idea by scanning the cards. It isn't always completely accurate, but my visual impression is usually close. Sometimes I'm wrong, but not usually really wrong. Basically, it's either run production, or getting the out, depending on the situation. Usually it's about getting the third out. I wouldn't normally walk a batter intentionally with less than 2 outs - that would have to be an extreme situation.

But I've never just automatically said, "OK - RHP facing LHB, walk him to face the RHB" or vice-versa. If Matt Cain (2011, 6L) was facing a reverse balance lefty hitter (L balanced) (e.g. Mike Carp 3L), I would pitch to him instead of facing an R balanced RHB who was up next (e.g. Heise, 7R), assuming that they were similar hitters overall (in my example, about the same salary for each of them). It depends on the cards. That's the way I've always done it, to get the best game result that I can.

In the example that started this thread, though, the cards and the math don't support HAL's decision, in terms of game logic. Willingham doesn't hit any better than Morneau against Marmol in a clutch situation. There's no logical reason to walk Willingham. The fact that Willingham gets lots of walks against RHP, and Marmol gives up lots of walks to RHB, doesn't make a logical argument to intentionally walk him. You might as well TRY to get the out! But my decision would be based on the cards and probabilities of that situation, not just an automatic decision that you would pitch to the same handed batter.

Thanks bud...

I actually don't want it to be an automatic decision by the computer.
But I'd like it to have some weight in the decision making process.

If we looked at the set, I'd say lefties hit righties better than righties hit righties.

So when the decision to IBB or not comes up to the computer, I'd like the computer to decide...

RH batter to face RH pitcher. Check.
The decide the other factors after that...