Normalization: A Humble Request to Strat-O-Matic

Not that I think there is normalization, but if Eddie hits 40 home runs in a first half of a season, as often as that happens in the first half of the season, there should be a bell curve of results for the second half of the season, along with a possiblity of 40 HR's in the second half of the season. If EVERY time that pace does not continue then that is the very definition of normalization.

True.
But it doesn't quite strike us as unfair when we get those 40 HRs in the first half

Apparently flipping a coin...is not necessarily a 50/50 proposition.


https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science- ... 145465423/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2789164/

Interesting parlor discussion, but nothing (*edit--"little") to do with what was asserted.
1. the flips were in the dozens to a few hundred. Not even close to marching toward infinity for number of trials.
2. "Fair coin" implies a whole bunch of stuff but the most important is we are talking about a binomial distribution, not flipping a physical coin.
3. Flipping a physical coin of course has lots of influential variables--uneven weight and material, imprecise flipping mechanism, wind, humidity, height etc. I will say this is also applicable to the fact that there is also no perfect binomial digital coin flipping algorithm...so there is that...

Cmon counselor, you pulled that one out of left field--fun to drink to/with but I think a different conversation!

I was referring to a college study from years ago and sadly, it is nowhere to be found on the internet. Perhaps I didn't look hard enough. It is also possible I am mistaken and the trials were not 1,000,000 but 500,000 or 100,000, I can't recall for sure. But one thing we do know is that the smaller the sample size, the less consistent the results of the coin flips. So in strat terms, do we really have enough data per instance to conclude everything is fair? For example, how many home run possibilities does Eddie Matthews actually get in a strat season? Then we must consider any potential injuries or his presence on a poor batting team, which will affect his number of AB during a season.

There are other instances where the sample sizes are pretty small comparatively, such as the stolen base success/failure results for a single batter deeper in the lineup. Then we have hold ratings, manager settings, etc. It's quite difficult to ever know with certainty how legitimate the system is. The aggravating thing is that none of us can prove anything without access to the code. It seems that in these discussions there is a significant portion of the posters that believe everything is rolled fairly, and look down on those that disagree, call them conspiracy theorists (in a purely negative manner), and yet they themselves have no proof of anything.

My position is that that game could be pure but it often seems otherwise. This is a safer conclusion than blind faith. This is also a business and a product that can effectively drive off customers when they're exposed to a highly-skilled, small player base. It should be very obvious to all that there is a financial advantage to rigging the results to some degree, especially undetected. That is critical thinking. Offensively telling anyone that thinks something might not be legitimate is not only ignorant, but it is also obnoxious, foolhardy, and the positive of critical thinking.

Lastly, it's a shame the player base is so tiny and it's also not surprising. The game is very complex, full of veteran players, and poorly advertised. The price is also very high IMO. It's often a struggle to even get a 12 team league going, let alone a 24 team league.

Interesting parlor discussion, but nothing (*edit--"little") to do with what was asserted.
1. the flips were in the dozens to a few hundred. Not even close to marching toward infinity for number of trials.
2. "Fair coin" implies a whole bunch of stuff but the most important is we are talking about a binomial distribution, not flipping a physical coin.
3. Flipping a physical coin of course has lots of influential variables--uneven weight and material, imprecise flipping mechanism, wind, humidity, height etc. I will say this is also applicable to the fact that there is also no perfect binomial digital coin flipping algorithm...so there is that...

Cmon counselor, you pulled that one out of left field--fun to drink to/with but I think a different conversation!

Yeah, I just through that out there just because I thought it was interesting, not really because it was pertinent!
My apologies for hijacking the conversation. Good answer from you, though!

The player base is tiny because most of us who play grew up playing the card and dice game. This puts a majority of us over 60, and the great majority over 50. This game is simply not designed to attract a younger group of "video game generation" players. Even the windows game lacks any kind of graphics that would remotely appeal to anyone under 40.
The owner and original founder of the game is in his 80's. I doubt if he's even a little bit interested in attracting a "new generation" of younger players. In the Windows game keeper leagues I'm in (I'm in 8 windows keeper leagues) , we see a manager dying almost every year.
We are the last of the Strat players. Hal Richmond goes, most of us start to go, and that will be the end of it.

Interesting parlor discussion, but nothing (*edit--"little") to do with what was asserted.
1. the flips were in the dozens to a few hundred. Not even close to marching toward infinity for number of trials.
2. "Fair coin" implies a whole bunch of stuff but the most important is we are talking about a binomial distribution, not flipping a physical coin.
3. Flipping a physical coin of course has lots of influential variables--uneven weight and material, imprecise flipping mechanism, wind, humidity, height etc. I will say this is also applicable to the fact that there is also no perfect binomial digital coin flipping algorithm...so there is that...

Cmon counselor, you pulled that one out of left field--fun to drink to/with but I think a different conversation!

Yeah, I just through that out there just because I thought it was interesting, not really because it was pertinent!
My apologies for hijacking the conversation. Good answer from you, though!

Heck no that wasn't my point at all my friend. Alles gut. Banter is good when we can do it without ad hominem attacks.

The player base is tiny because most of us who play grew up playing the card and dice game. This puts a majority of us over 60, and the great majority over 50. This game is simply not designed to attract a younger group of "video game generation" players. Even the windows game lacks any kind of graphics that would remotely appeal to anyone under 40.
The owner and original founder of the game is in his 80's. I doubt if he's even a little bit interested in attracting a "new generation" of younger players. In the Windows game keeper leagues I'm in (I'm in 8 windows keeper leagues) , we see a manager dying almost every year.
We are the last of the Strat players. Hal Richmond goes, most of us start to go, and that will be the end of it.

Damn Steve-O that is biting insight and I think it is on the mark unfortunately.
Especially the part about the folks departing--that is a fact. And this game is something that is not geared for a mass audience of today's expectations. It is not even Baldur's Gate 3, which is a mass market "geek niche"...

I think this game could have great appeal to many in the modern day, the problem is the game is not advertised well and the price is way too high. Most games are free now and use microtransactions or other payment models. $100 CAD for 5 teams can get pretty damn expensive. It's just not a good value.

Look at me, I'm not even a baseball fan and can say with confidence that I know the least about baseball in the entire Strat community. I am 39 years old and first played over 10 years ago. There are lots of fans of baseball, board games, and even web games in 2022. There are also a lot of people intrigued by math. This game absolutely can attract new players but the truth is that most people have never heard of it. It's a shame too because this is a great game. Strat needs to modernize their monetization methods and advertise like other game companies do. Even very small indie companies do a better job and they have essentially a $0 budget in some cases.

There is also an issue with the transparency of the code. This is not an open source so the customers have no knowledge of what really goes on behind the scenes. There have been several mentions by Hal and his son of "Secret Sauce" and what that means could really be anything. Some people see it as a reference to the code having secret functionality. Now, and this is very important, what matters is that there has been quite a few paying customers that believe the "secret sauce" or "black box" is tampering with the product they pay for. This is a huge problem as it divides the player base, and causes people to quit. In a small player base, this is simply an unaffordable cost. To exacerbate the issue further, some managers avoid leagues with strong players, thus reducing profit even further. With a steady influx of new players, this problem is lessened. So in summary, it doesn't matter which party is right, it matters that the profit is adversely affected.

In all the threads I've seen on the topic of normalization, black box, etc I have witnessed the original poster be harassed, trolled, and disrespected. Anything aggressive I have said here has been in retaliation. As you can see, this is a volatile topic that brings out the worst in the community. I would prefer it if everything was civil but unfortunately, it has not been the case, but I refuse to sit back and take it when my intentions are good.

Lastly, just to prove that there have been mentions of a "secret sauce", I will show you a video. There are no real details given but I would encourage you to listen with an open mind and pay close attention to how quickly Hal's son says "So, let me answer that. It is as if he is afraid his father will slip up and reveal what the secret sauce is, so he quickly interjects. This particular discussion is about how defense ratings work and how they were decided, in particular, in relation to the pitcher cards. This is actually pretty relevant and there seems to be a decent consensus here that believe that mid-tier pitchers underperform. Could it be because of the secret sauce?

Again, I am pointing out that there is a secret sauce and it is a factual thing. That doesn't mean it's anything sketchy, but it is this kind of stuff that causes customers to be upset. We should have all dice results displayed, full transparency on manager settings and how the game works. The game is dying, what do they have to lose? Fulll transparency, advertising, a modernized business model, let's get the game on the right track.

Start watching at 23:40. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD8dKZKNfvA&t=3332s

Interesting parlor discussion, but nothing (*edit--"little") to do with what was asserted.
1. the flips were in the dozens to a few hundred. Not even close to marching toward infinity for number of trials.
2. "Fair coin" implies a whole bunch of stuff but the most important is we are talking about a binomial distribution, not flipping a physical coin.
3. Flipping a physical coin of course has lots of influential variables--uneven weight and material, imprecise flipping mechanism, wind, humidity, height etc. I will say this is also applicable to the fact that there is also no perfect binomial digital coin flipping algorithm...so there is that...

Cmon counselor, you pulled that one out of left field--fun to drink to/with but I think a different conversation!

Yeah, I just through that out there just because I thought it was interesting, not really because it was pertinent!
My apologies for hijacking the conversation. Good answer from you, though!

Heck no that wasn't my point at all my friend. Alles gut. Banter is good when we can do it without ad hominem attacks.

First you jab with Deutsch...and finish with Latin! Nice.

It's all good. Tone can be difficult to read but I wasn't taking your response as being critical. So I guess maybe "apologize" wasn't the right word? I do humbly apologize for my misuse of the word apologize...

https://youtu.be/QSlnFzRXBrY

Have a good one!