I actually find it kinda funny ...

Can you explain to the simple minded what it is that you are even talking about?

My premise for "how the simulation works" is that each at bat is a unique and stand-alone occurrence between the batter card and pitcher card during which the "dice" are imaginarily rolled and outcomes determined in similar manner to the board game.

Are egrich and salty asserting that there is some hidden "normalization" code that forces outcomes away from the outliers and back to norms? Something BEYOND ordinary statistical regression?

Because A) If that's true, who cares, it impacts all of us equally; and B) if you do care because you think it happens to you too much, why are you paying money to play the game?

Just curious, sincere questions from a looker-on. I'm not "taking sides" one way or the other. I'm trying to understand the point being argued. Thank you kindly.

You have basically nailed it except they think HAL is designed to stop teams they have designed with absolute perfection from being allowed to display their perfection. Who cares? I think 3 people, but they post on this subject over and over to discourage better players from playing the game in order to improve their standing as the experts is the basic reason. They obviously don''t belive what they say or they would not play the game.

Can you explain to the simple minded what it is that you are even talking about?

My premise for "how the simulation works" is that each at bat is a unique and stand-alone occurrence between the batter card and pitcher card during which the "dice" are imaginarily rolled and outcomes determined in similar manner to the board game.

Are egrich and salty asserting that there is some hidden "normalization" code that forces outcomes away from the outliers and back to norms? Something BEYOND ordinary statistical regression?

Because A) If that's true, who cares, it impacts all of us equally; and B) if you do care because you think it happens to you too much, why are you paying money to play the game?

Just curious, sincere questions from a looker-on. I'm not "taking sides" one way or the other. I'm trying to understand the point being argued. Thank you kindly.

So to answer your questions:
1) there isn't a question that it actually IS happening as at least some of the things happening are posted on the strat wiki page.
The only question is if more than that is occurring-
and I can tell you from having owned one of the first Diskettes SOM had there were a bunch of factors that the game calculated that aren't mentioned.
2) your counter argument is basically what Ive said is the only reasonable response - if you scroll back a bit you can see where I said that
3) Now asking why we play a flawed game- that doesn't mean we hate the game - just maybe feel like full disclosure would be a LOT better- Im not sure where the concept of 'love it or leave it' took hold, but much like our country- we shouldn't be forced to go elsewhere if there are things we'd really like to change about it-- yeah?

You have basically nailed it except they think HAL is designed to stop teams they have designed with absolute perfection from being allowed to display their perfection. Who cares? I think 3 people, but they post on this subject over and over to discourage better players from playing the game in order to improve their standing as the experts is the basic reason. They obviously don''t belive what they say or they would not play the game.

Actually Charlie, since you like to use your own facts to back up your arguments, I'd like to point out that 48 people, NOT JUST THREE, agree with this assertion. As you can see in the poll below, at least 48 people on the boards DO CARE. In fact an overwhelming 80% of the 60 people who responded DO BELIEVE that YES there is something going on behind the curtains.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=651423

And not that I have to defend myself, but I have NEVER said Strat picks on certain people or favors other people. Others may have suggested that, but I have not.

Thank you for clarifying.

Thank you for clarifying.

of course, not a problem--
and also not a problem if you disagree and don't think there is more to it than what SoM has written about;
(just keep in mind that there were numerous times something that was suspected to be real- were denied and then later admitted to actually have been happening all along- its not a short list)
just do so with relevant, intelligent responses (not directed at Hamilton) rather than
making one faulty analogy after the other.

Can you explain to the simple minded what it is that you are even talking about?

My premise for "how the simulation works" is that each at bat is a unique and stand-alone occurrence between the batter card and pitcher card during which the "dice" are imaginarily rolled and outcomes determined in similar manner to the board game.

Are egrich and salty asserting that there is some hidden "normalization" code that forces outcomes away from the outliers and back to norms? Something BEYOND ordinary statistical regression?

Because A) If that's true, who cares, it impacts all of us equally; and B) if you do care because you think it happens to you too much, why are you paying money to play the game?

Just curious, sincere questions from a looker-on. I'm not "taking sides" one way or the other. I'm trying to understand the point being argued. Thank you kindly.

You have basically nailed it except they think HAL is designed to stop teams they have designed with absolute perfection from being allowed to display their perfection. Who cares? I think 3 people, but they post on this subject over and over to discourage better players from playing the game in order to improve their standing as the experts is the basic reason. They obviously don''t belive what they say or they would not play the game.

Says Charlie, the one on record for saying he believed SOM was regularly altering outcomes of certain games to help assuage Bruce's ego by giving him a few more wins while hoping it would shut him up.


Charlie (my buddy) also thought it was easy for SOM to do this...ofc he wants his past comments buried (it's why he hasn't addressed them here) because...well...I won't speak for him...and he obviously won't speak on this himself so...for me, I just take Charlie's posts with the same hypocritical duplicity that he writes them.

Ha ha, I actually missed the part about how 3 people are doing this to discourage others from playing and somehow improve our winning % or whatever it was he said. What a farce.

All any of us tin foil hat people are asking for is transparency.

Can you explain to the simple minded what it is that you are even talking about?

My premise for "how the simulation works" is that each at bat is a unique and stand-alone occurrence between the batter card and pitcher card during which the "dice" are imaginarily rolled and outcomes determined in similar manner to the board game.

Are egrich and salty asserting that there is some hidden "normalization" code that forces outcomes away from the outliers and back to norms? Something BEYOND ordinary statistical regression?

Because A) If that's true, who cares, it impacts all of us equally; and B) if you do care because you think it happens to you too much, why are you paying money to play the game?

Just curious, sincere questions from a looker-on. I'm not "taking sides" one way or the other. I'm trying to understand the point being argued. Thank you kindly.

You have basically nailed it except they think HAL is designed to stop teams they have designed with absolute perfection from being allowed to display their perfection. Who cares? I think 3 people, but they post on this subject over and over to discourage better players from playing the game in order to improve their standing as the experts is the basic reason. They obviously don''t belive what they say or they would not play the game.

Says Charlie, the one on record for saying he believed SOM was regularly altering outcomes of certain games to help assuage Bruce's ego by giving him a few more wins while hoping it would shut him up.


Charlie (my buddy) also thought it was easy for SOM to do this...ofc he wants his past comments buried (it's why he hasn't addressed them here) because...well...I won't speak for him...and he obviously won't speak on this himself so...for me, I just take Charlie's posts with the same hypocritical duplicity that he writes them.

This is the fifth time you stated this, at the time Bruce had been showing up at the headquarters of Strat and speaking to the programmers. Suddenly Bruce's leagues were delayed in giving results over a prolonged period of time where he went on an amazing win streak, I believe he won 18 straight championships, which I calculated was statistically possible in one in 1.8 billion tries. And during that time we had 2 mishaps where stratomatic had inadvertenly run the entire set of games twice for all games, which through a lot of turmoil into leagues as the stats and usage of pitchers hadn't been reset even though games were run again. I was pointing out it is easy for a programmer to rerun a game until results desired occurred and that is certainly possible at any time, no defense for that but there must be some evidence which I thought I saw and commented on. With something as unlikely as that the easiest answer is a programmer was changing the results for a player, and Bruce would not even have to be in on it, could be as simple as programmer not wanting a client to bug him at work so he just let him win. Squeky wheels get the grease, isn't that what you Musketeers are hoping for?

LMMFAO-

Charlie you are a piece of work.

you went so far as to claim SOM was replaying games for Bruce yet
adamantly assert that whatever they say in the game code is EVERYTHING there is to it-
nothing more.
Bc you know- they are dishonest when its convenient to be, but are completely up front when its inconvenient to consider.

But now of course its us who has some nefarious goal of dissuading other good managers from playing so we can win more-
This is comedy gold Jerry, comedy gold.

LMMFAO -

HYPOCRISY NOW

Says Charlie, the one on record for saying he believed SOM was regularly altering outcomes of certain games to help assuage Bruce's ego by giving him a few more wins while hoping it would shut him up.


Charlie (my buddy) also thought it was easy for SOM to do this...ofc he wants his past comments buried (it's why he hasn't addressed them here) because...well...I won't speak for him...and he obviously won't speak on this himself so...for me, I just take Charlie's posts with the same hypocritical duplicity that he writes them.


This is the fifth time you stated this, at the time Bruce had been showing up at the headquarters of Strat and speaking to the programmers. Suddenly Bruce's leagues were delayed in giving results over a prolonged period of time where he went on an amazing win streak, I believe he won 18 straight championships, which I calculated was statistically possible in one in 1.8 billion tries. And during that time we had 2 mishaps where stratomatic had inadvertenly run the entire set of games twice for all games, which through a lot of turmoil into leagues as the stats and usage of pitchers hadn't been reset even though games were run again. I was pointing out it is easy for a programmer to rerun a game until results desired occurred and that is certainly possible at any time, no defense for that but there must be some evidence which I thought I saw and commented on. With something as unlikely as that the easiest answer is a programmer was changing the results for a player, and Bruce would not even have to be in on it, could be as simple as programmer not wanting a client to bug him at work so he just let him win. Squeky wheels get the grease, isn't that what you Musketeers are hoping for?


Bruce NEVER won 18 straight (6 was his best) and Charlie, there's just too much inaccurate crap in the rest of your reply to even address.