Ballpark singles oddity

About the only time I see a hitter without BP singles on their card is if they have few if any natural singles. So I happened to look at the $500K for Randy G. Johnson and noticed BP singles at 1-3 and 3-10 vs RHP were the only singles on the right side of his card. Is this a mistake? Does anyone know why this is true? Are there more like this? I'm not likely to use this card, so it's just a quirk, but I thought I'd throw it out there and see what your knowledgeable responses might say.

That's indeed the only card in the set with 5 BPSI and 0 SI, although I don't really see why it would be a mistake or why one should preclude the other.

More odd to me is 1922 Oscar Charleston having 2 BPSI when every other card has either 0 or 5. I'm guessing 2-4 vsL was supposed to be > and got rendered as $? Would be interesting to know if it is really a clutch roll in practice.

That's indeed the only card in the set with 5 BPSI and 0 SI, although I don't really see why it would be a mistake or why one should preclude the other.

More odd to me is 1922 Oscar Charleston having 2 BPSI when every other card has either 0 or 5. I'm guessing 2-4 vsL was supposed to be > and got rendered as $? Would be interesting to know if it is really a clutch roll in practice.

Max, can you (or anyone else) point me to a league where Oscar Charleston (1922) is being used. I can pull pbp and see if I can answer your question.

Don't think I've seen him used yet but will post here if I do

That's indeed the only card in the set with 5 BPSI and 0 SI, although I don't really see why it would be a mistake or why one should preclude the other.

More odd to me is 1922 Oscar Charleston having 2 BPSI when every other card has either 0 or 5. I'm guessing 2-4 vsL was supposed to be > and got rendered as $? Would be interesting to know if it is really a clutch roll in practice.

Wow. Learn something new every day! I thought ALL CARDS had BPSI of 5.

Nice to know finally.

That's indeed the only card in the set with 5 BPSI and 0 SI, although I don't really see why it would be a mistake or why one should preclude the other.

More odd to me is 1922 Oscar Charleston having 2 BPSI when every other card has either 0 or 5. I'm guessing 2-4 vsL was supposed to be > and got rendered as $? Would be interesting to know if it is really a clutch roll in practice.

Wow. Learn something new every day! I thought ALL CARDS had BPSI of 5.

Nice to know finally.

I mean, I've known that to be the case with some pitchers, but never knew it to be the case with any hitters.

Max, can you (or anyone else) point me to a league where Oscar Charleston (1922) is being used. I can pull pbp and see if I can answer your question.

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/league/463834

Barrmorris, he is on the Lansing Lancers.

Thanks, the 2-4 roll vs left has only happened once so far but it wasn't in a clutch situation. So the only thing I can confirm is that it is not being interpreted as a ballpark single. I'll check back after more games.

Ah, well that's likely our answer then. No reason to think the clutch symbol isn't operative if there's no phantom BPSI occurring. Thanks! Always nice to know the cards are the cards.

I agree, plus it might take more than one season to see a 2-4, vs left in a clutch situation.