"Secret Sauce" Admitted by Strat

I decided to make a new thread since it is an interesting topic in itself. Hal's son admits that Strat uses a "Secret Sauce". It is rather ambiguous so I'm curious what you make of it. This has potential interest to those that claim that mid-tier pitchers perform poorly, and also those that discuss the black box. Start watching at 23:30 or earlier for some context. The phrase is stated about a minute later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD8dKZKNfvA&t=3332s

The "secret sauce" comment is in reference to the question of how they arrive at some of the defensive ratings. The "secret" part is, based on the context of his answer and the actual words that Adam uses, referring to their proprietary algorithms that they've developed using available research and data to determine these intangible defensive ratings.

Looks like a nothingburger to me.

The "secret sauce" comment is in reference to the question of how they arrive at some of the defensive ratings. The "secret" part is, based on the context of his answer and the actual words that Adam uses, referring to their proprietary algorithms that they've developed using available research and data to determine these intangible defensive ratings.

Looks like a nothingburger to me.

It may surprise you, but that's how I interpreted it as well. However, I did find it peculiar how quickly he interjected to answer the question instead of his father. Perhaps he was just worried the secret would accidentally be revealed. My main reason for making this thread was to point out the company using the term "Secret Sauce". I figured some might like to actually witness it as it could be difficult to find it otherwise. It also does show that Strat at least in this case has a secret to keep. I don't think discussing the thought process that goes into deciding defensive ratings is really anything special at all, to be honest. Calling it a secret sauce is unusual. That is of course, just my opinion!

I appreciate the clickbait headline, even if the link to the video is to a segment seemingly unrelated to the headline. I never heard the actual utterance because I'm not going to sit through the whole interview. But judging by leeroy's comment and Backfire's reply, "secret sauce" is used in a context completely separate from any of the conspiracy theories often discussed on these boards. One poster in particular likes to post an anecdote wherein Hal explicitly admits to him the existence of a "secret sauce" and that poster assumes the statement encompasses all the nefarious conspiracy theories often alleged. All this video would seem to suggest is that the Richmans have a much different understanding of the term than the people on these boards.

I appreciate the clickbait headline, even if the link to the video is to a segment seemingly unrelated to the headline. I never heard the actual utterance because I'm not going to sit through the whole interview. But judging by leeroy's comment and Backfire's reply, "secret sauce" is used in a context completely separate from any of the conspiracy theories often discussed on these boards. One poster in particular likes to post an anecdote wherein Hal explicitly admits to him the existence of a "secret sauce" and that poster assumes the statement encompasses all the nefarious conspiracy theories often alleged. All this video would seem to suggest is that the Richmans have a much different understanding of the term than the people on these boards.

I think you and a few others have some kind of PTSD from all the normalization, black box, etc threads that popped up over the years. I can't help but feel like I'm being the recipient of some long-term pent-up frustration and aggression that has nothing to do with me, as I see all such threads take the same course, regardless of the poster. As I said to leeroy, I had the same interpretation. It's around the 24 minute mark, give or take about 30 seconds btw.

So do you think that's what's really going on is there is a conflation between the black box and secret sauce, so Strat has admitted to the secret sauce (meaning something different entirely) and it was misconstrued as the black box? That would actually make a fair bit of sense. So far I have heard of employees admitting such things but have not heard of the terms being mixed up between customer and employee. I am not privy to all that has transpired over the years, still trying to get caught up on all I've missed.

I do not detect any aggression towards you in my comment? I understand you agreed with leeroy's interpretation.

People believe in the black box because they want to, it's as simple as that. They never present any compelling evidence for its existence then get upset about being dismissed for lack of evidence. I am also not privy to everything that's happened over the years but I can still recognize brain worms when I see them.

I don't know everything though. A few weeks ago someone presented evidence that the max rule for guarding lines is on when it's listed as off. Actual evidence! So yes, there may be areas where the wiki is not 100% accurate and it would be great if Strat addressed those. But no one has yet presented any actual evidence for the idea that there is a vast complex conspiracy to favor new players. First of all, Strat can't tell who is a new player and neither can we. New players get a great deal on their first two teams so presumably players who run out of credits will re-up with a new email address to get the deal again. Second, the level of competence of veteran players is overestimated. Very few people take a systematic, analytical approach to this game. Maybe a couple dozen. Third and most important, the salary cap enforces parity. A new player throwing darts will, on average, manage to draft an average team. Some of his players will be good values, some will be bad, some will be average. And even veteran players who max out value at each position (which again, there are very few who fit this description) are still working with small margins. There are no game-breaking, huge value cards out there. That keeps the game competitive and can keep new players in the mix. Strat doesn't need to code secret blue shells and lie about it to create parity, they just need to price the players accurately! That's literally it.

player's aren't priced accurately. never have been . They half-assed addressed some of them with the launch of ATG9. went crazy overpricing RP only's, Tekulve amomgst others an exception, and some sp/rps like Pinero, Henry, Heredia come to mind. as for hitters, went both ways. several platoon hitters are way underpriced. as 4 overpriced, most of the ss/2b r overpriced, its ez to tell as most of the top 50 are always available. by 50 I mean cards. Morgan, Gehringer, Wagner excluding his non ss card, Larkin, Boudreau to name a few. even Hornsby and Vaughan r mostly available. I'm convinced of the blackbox. but, HAL's in game decisions are manipulation enough. why doesn't Strat have a 50/50 dice roll as a League Setup Option? not just 50/50 but alternating on every roll? or at least no more than 2/3 rolls in a row on either the pitcher's or hitters cards? just this week Hal pinch hit in the top of the ninth for an F9 pitcher with a 4-0 lead who was pitching a no hitter? better yet, he pinch hit in the 5th inning for Ty Cobb!!!?? Cobb nor his position were checked for defensive replacement or removal??? totally random or is there now a "secret sauce" managerial algorithm based on Dave Roberts and Dusty Baker? there ARE issues. some quite easily fixable. or don't like it, leave it. we always got the Southwestern Border to replace you. when's the new Futbol game going to be introduced? maybe LIV golf?

@MaxPower, I am not referring to you specifically but the general group of posters that contest the black box speculation. I would hardly call what I've received here a warm welcome, In fact, it makes me think many like-minded players likely quit the forums for this reason. Some have told me to not even waste my time here as it would be futile and met with rudeness. So far that has been the case. I have even been called a troll after responding to someone who is 100% a troll (and I run forums so I know what I'm talking about here). But anyway, let's move on!

I really have to strongly disagree with your statement about the player cards being roughly balanced and a new player picking whatever looks good should result in an average record. Don't you agree that a lot of cards are complete trash? Especially pitchers. I mean just HORRIBLE. I'm not sure if examples are worth going into since there are thousands of cards but we could if you really want to, I just wonder if it would be a waste of time.

As for evidence, nobody seems to have any. What I've seen is that the people that believe in, or suspect the black box basically get looked down on as idiots and the people that don't believe in the black box have just as much evidence. The whole thing is bizarre IMO. All the threads go downhill and yet it seems that over time, more of these surprise features keep popping up. Yet it's written off each time as an accident, why can it not be considered potential evidence that something awry is going on? The incentives are crystal clear. A great example is Treyomo's Homerun experiment. Prior to that people adamantly stated there was nothing shady going on, then BOOM, it turns out there was. "Oops, we had something turned on so we'll turn it off now." How does anyone know if that's true or not just a cover-up? Intentional or not, it happened.

Regarding your statement about guarding lines supposedly being turned off and it turned to be on and was proved with evidence: Don't you see the problem? People have been suspicious and we get proof again and again and it's dismissed as an accident. I work on video games for a living, and a big part of my work is working with XML files that control things precisely like this. Do you know how unlikely it is for all these settings to be accidentally turned on, discovered, and then turned off? I'm sorry but I'm calling it what I see it: Blatant lies. Yet I'm just a "conspiracy theorist" with "no evidence". Again, not upset with you specifically but the overall experience here has been terrible so far.

To clarify my beliefs: I don't know exactly what is going on with the code but I do think there are hidden factors making it impossible for top-level managers to dominate the game the way they should be able to. I bet you that a team constructed by an elite manager (top 10 in history) vs a brand new player, would be such a landslide victory over a 162 game season that you'd change your opinion quickly. But it takes a LOT of time to roll out an entire season and thus nobody is going to bother, especially because the naysayers here will say things like "It's an anomaly" or "Sounds like someone was cheating" or "This is anecdotal". Lastly, I have real experience with code, tackling large volumes of data, running game companies, etc. Sure, you can dismiss everything I say due to a lack of evidence but it's not like I'm a moron or watching out for spaceships from my telescope every night. I mean, what are we to do, just not talk about anything without evidence when we don't have access to the code? The hilarious part is the primary way to get "evidence" is to spend MONEY, and lots of it.

One last thing: Don't your find it at all weird that people like Petrosian and nevdully's believe(d) shady stuff was going on? We're talking about two of the BEST players in HISTORY, both who are highly intelligent. Both players had clearly superior teams and obviously put tremendous effort into their skills, even sacrificing a huge portion of their lives to win. Most likely, this was the most passionate hobby in their lives. I find it baffling that all that can be disregarded.

@scorehouse, I love competing against you, you're a great player and a very interesting one as well. Very fun team designs. I also agree that the cards are not balanced (and never will be). That's precisely why the salaries change over time, because certain cards are stronger and win more than Strat intended. I analyze all cards and can say that I find a large portion of them to be inferior and poor values. I have seen the strange occurrences you speak of as well, like how the game decides to make Vince Coleman (my LF) repeatedly pinch hit for absolutely no logical reason. That is just one of many examples. Most of us have seen this stuff! You're right, there are issues.

I'll say this again: A lot of the problems with this game are due to a lack of transparency AND either poorly written code, or black box features, or a combination of the two. Regardless, the game can and should be in a much better state than it is.

Backfire I'm on board with you. the fact that you work on video machines/games and program outcomes is solid evidence to me. I play Strategy War games and the game forums are full of MODs, cheat Codes, etc. I owned 8 liners in bars years ago and payouts/outcomes were adjusted easily. I'm not sure to what u r referring when you said I was correct about cards not being balanced? did you mean dice rolls on cards or card pricing or....? major addition I'm an advocate is more choices. I'm a firm believer in adding more options in League Setup, preferences/options on On players cards and Team/Pitching/Hitter setup options. what's wrong with allowing more option choices for variation? If a player doesn't like the league setup options, don't join. I choose the option not to play in 100 mil and over Leagues. that's why I don't do tournaments like Barnstormers. used to not play DH, but with so many cheap platoons now available, I'm not sure I don't prefer them. anyway, I enjoy the conversation so keep it up!

Backfire I'm on board with you. the fact that you work on video machines/games and program outcomes is solid evidence to me. I play Strategy War games and the game forums are full of MODs, cheat Codes, etc. I owned 8 liners in bars years ago and payouts/outcomes were adjusted easily. I'm not sure to what u r referring when you said I was correct about cards not being balanced? did you mean dice rolls on cards or card pricing or....? major addition I'm an advocate is more choices. I'm a firm believer in adding more options in League Setup, preferences/options on On players cards and Team/Pitching/Hitter setup options. what's wrong with allowing more option choices for variation? If a player doesn't like the league setup options, don't join. I choose the option not to play in 100 mil and over Leagues. that's why I don't do tournaments like Barnstormers. used to not play DH, but with so many cheap platoons now available, I'm not sure I don't prefer them. anyway, I enjoy the conversation so keep it up!

Thank you very much for the support! I am a lifelong gamer and I have played countless video games, board game games, war games, tabletop RPGs, poker, basketball, etc. My life has been one big competition for the most part I remember when I was talking about behind-the-scenes stuff with the lead developer in a game I was working on. I was a player first and when I transitioned over, some of the reveals shocked me. He had implemented what I considered unfair and dishonest features. I told him I strongly disapproved and he said "What they don't know won't hurt them." I couldn't believe it, the guy literally didn't even play the game he was developing and was pulling invisible puppet strings. He also did other things like creating false randomization that the players had no way to perceive. In other words, the game was not quite what I thought it was. And the sad part is, he might have been right to do it. At the end of the day, business is business and it's better to keep the lights on than lose everything.

It's interesting that you mentioned mods because a lot of them, I believe, are made by people that are passionate to learn, love the game they're playing, and want to take it to the next level. They often begin with little-to-no experience or skill, yet they make it work. Which is why I'm perplexed by what goes on in Strat. We have a seemingly skillfully made code that somehow allows for bizarre happenings. Just minutes ago I lost a game in the 8th or 9th inning, by 1 run, because the game pulled Harry Hooper for PH Jimmy Bloodworth. I do not have that in my settings and it makes zero sense. When I see things like that, I can't help but think the game makes occasional arbitrary decisions to decrease the skill expression in the game. This may affect all managers equally or selectively. It *could* be bad code but I have my doubts, this is not a very difficult game to design by modern standards and I think people overestimate the existence of these "bugs" being accidental. Maybe the code is not as good as it seems. Who can know?

The way you talk about the game is like an echo of how I feel. I want all the same things you want. More settings, more controls, more decision points, more strategies, more to explore. I only play 80M DH leagues. My reason is that I always felt baseball was boring to watch when the pitcher came up to bat and struck out or bunted over and over. I never really saw how that was supposed to be entertaining. A DH is far more interesting to me. As for Barnstormers, I was excited when I heard about it but playing old sets at different salary caps, etc is really not something I feel like tackling. I have a lot to learn and want to focus my development on my specialty. I feel like I'm improving but definitely have a long way to go. Every time I look at an old team, I can see things I dislike about it. Speaking of my teams.

Regarding your question on what I meant by poor balance, I meant that there are many cards that are just awful. Hitters with worse defense, worse hitting, etc and too expensive vs others that are superior in many, if not all ways. A lot of the cards are so bad I would never use them under any circumstances. The pitchers are even more lopsided in many cases. There are also a bunch of 500k players that are unusable and meritless. I don't know why they're even in the game! I think many cards should be removed or upgraded with better potential or reduced prices.