Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

Recent Blogs

Photo

Robo Umps

  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#81 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,373 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 06:33 AM

It seems our closest proximation to Robo Umps would be instant replay. I think tennis may have something closer for line calls, but I kept getting a kink in my neck from watching it, so I quit. And even with the aid of instant replays, tags and foul balls and HR poles shown to the N-th of a degree, we still cannot always agree on the result.


Unlike the umpires, whose calls are universally agreed to be correct?

If your argument is that you can't do it if it's not going to be 100% accurate, then it reminds me a bit of the automated car opponents who say, "there would still be some accidents, so no way", even if millions of accidents could be prevented.
  • Nine of twelve likes this

#82 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 02 February 2018 - 06:42 AM

If I'm batting, and the count is let's say, 1-1, and a pitcher throws a pitch- which I take- on the outside corner, it's in the zone, but the umpire calls it a ball, and now the count is 2-1- that's fun. 
 
It is fair. It's fair because everybody gets calls in their favor and calls against them. It comes out in the wash. In one of the worst calls in Twins history, a ball Joe Mauer hit was called foul even though it was fair. It sucked. In one of the worst calls in Twins history, Kent Hrbek pulled Ron Gant off first base and he was called out. It was and still is tremendous fun.
 
Occasional blown calls are fair and fun!

Your opinions are not the same as mine. Blown calls are neither fair nor fun. And if you look at the replay of the Gant/Hrbek play you'll clearly see that Gant was out because his foot came off the base as he lost his balance BEFORE Hrbek lifted Gant's leg up.

#83 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 02 February 2018 - 06:49 AM

you think Jose altuve and Richie sexon should have the same strike zone?

Yes. Having a different strike zone for every batter requires readjustment by the pitcher with every plate appearance, whereas the batter has the same strike zone every time. This is not fair for the pitcher. Having the same zone every time for every batter means no readjustment. I'll talk more about this in another post when I have more time. Gotta go.

Edited by Nine of twelve, 02 February 2018 - 06:50 AM.


#84 Sam Morley

Sam Morley

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 237 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 10:01 AM

 

Your opinions are not the same as mine. Blown calls are neither fair nor fun. And if you look at the replay of the Gant/Hrbek play you'll clearly see that Gant was out because his foot came off the base as he lost his balance BEFORE Hrbek lifted Gant's leg up.

 

Wait, there's a replay?! This whole time I've been basing my opinion of that play on my memory of seeing it live as a seven year old, and you're telling me there's a replay?! Stand by...

 

In any other context, I'd argue the same point. It's my duty, and it's fun. I've never met or heard a non Twins fan who thought that Hrbek didn't pull Gant off the bag.


#85 bizaff

bizaff

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 65 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 10:19 AM

 

Yes. Having a different strike zone for every batter requires readjustment by the pitcher with every plate appearance, whereas the batter has the same strike zone every time. This is not fair for the pitcher. Having the same zone every time for every batter means no readjustment. I'll talk more about this in another post when I have more time. Gotta go.

 

I posted this a while ago in another thread (http://twinsdaily.co...he-strike-zone/):

 

For the sake of example, more on the set height/size strike zone:

The strike zone of Jose Altuve (5ft 5 in) is smaller than that of Jon Rauch (6ft 11 in) - that's an 18 inch spread.If you center the zone between those two (which isn't average, but it's the probably the best case for batters), a player is up to 9 inches away from the average zone.They don't need to adjust that whole height, since you're only taking the area between the knees and armpits.. let's say that's half (in reality it's worse as it's not at the waist, it's at the armpits and knees).A tall/short player needs to adjust their swing vertically up to 4 inches to deal with a batter-independent strike zone.That seems pretty significant.That moves the strike zone from the knees down to the shins, or the armpits up to the shoulders.

Now the pitchers - assume the strike zone is as it is today.If a pitcher releases around 55 feet from home plate and has to adjust 4 inches for different players, they need to adjust the angle of the delivered pitch by about half a degree.That's a pretty tiny adjustment.They need to deal with wind which already affects it in that neighborhood (best source I could find - https://jmcdonaldmed...ffect-baseball/), and they "calibrate" that out with warmup pitches every inning.

A batter-independent strike zone would least affect an average sized batter, but would hamper anyone not of average size, far worse the less "average" the batter is.The adjustment a pitcher has to make today in a batter-dependent strike zone is half a degree, which they already do.

I can't see a world I'd ever support a batter-independent strike zone.

  • Craig Arko likes this

#86 Platoon

Platoon

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 4,552 posts
  • LocationTwinsWorld

Posted 02 February 2018 - 10:38 AM

Unlike the umpires, whose calls are universally agreed to be correct?
If your argument is that you can't do it if it's not going to be 100% accurate, then it reminds me a bit of the automated car opponents who say, "there would still be some accidents, so no way", even if millions of accidents could be prevented.

I don't remember saying we can't do it. I do remember saying that even after we went to the base and foul ball version of Robo, we still don't eliminate the disagreements. But what we did do is extend the game time, and allow more free time for bathroom breaks. And we made the game just a little less liveable in some people's minds. My argument against Robo umps has nothing to do with their inability to be perfect. I accept that. I just don't think the difference will warrant upsetting a long time component of the game. By the by, if I was a proponent of, or insistent on perfection, I highly doubt I would be on TD! :) :). :).
TwinsWorld: Did you hear we just updated the Stadium Club?

If I wanted balls and strikes called by a robot, I would get an Xbox!

#87 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,373 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 12:38 PM

I don't remember saying we can't do it. I do remember saying that even after we went to the base and foul ball version of Robo, we still don't eliminate the disagreements. But what we did do is extend the game time, and allow more free time for bathroom breaks. And we made the game just a little less liveable in some people's minds. My argument against Robo umps has nothing to do with their inability to be perfect. I accept that. I just don't think the difference will warrant upsetting a long time component of the game. By the by, if I was a proponent of, or insistent on perfection, I highly doubt I would be on TD! :) :). :).


True about replays. But, unlike replays, robot umps wouldn't add any delays to the game.
  • Platoon and Nine of twelve like this

#88 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 02 February 2018 - 06:35 PM

I promised (threatened?) to post more about the batter-independent strike zone and I'm following through on that now.
I already mentioned that it's unfair to the pitcher to have to adapt to different sized strike zones while the batter has the same strike zone every time. The size of the adjustment may be small, but pitching is a finely-tuned skill as it is. Seemingly small adjustments are not necessarily easy ones.
With a uniform strike zone very tall and very short batters would be at a bit of a disadvantage compared to a batter of average height. That's obvious. But the variation in physical characteristics among players is not compensated for in any other aspect of the game. I don't think it would be right to use a large first base for a short first baseman and a smaller one for a tall first baseman to compensate for the height difference. I don't think the pitcher's mound should be higher for a short pitcher and lower for a tall pitcher. I've never heard anyone advocate for either of those rules. The same logic should apply to the strike zone. (IMHO, of course.)
So why is the strike zone different under the rules? Here's why. The strike zone needs to have upper and lower boundaries. However, it's not feasible to have a measuring stick protruding from home plate to give the human umpire a reference point. The only thing that was feasible way back when was to use the batter as a surrogate measuring stick. That's how the strike zone came to be defined as it is. We now have the ability to determine the location of the ball as it crosses home plate without interfering with the pitched ball or the batter's bat.
Automated pitch calling systems give us the opportunity to correct an anomaly that was only there because mathematically inclined primates had yet to develop the technology to make the strike zone the same for all players, just like ***every*** other aspect of the rules of play, LIKE GOD INTENDED! (OK, so I got a little carried away. Sorry.)

#89 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 02 February 2018 - 06:47 PM

(OK, so I got a little carried away. Sorry.)


#90 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Mathematically inclined primate

  • Members
  • 8,181 posts
  • LocationThe Congo Basin

Posted 02 February 2018 - 07:06 PM

I promised (threatened?) to post more about the batter-independent strike zone and I'm following through on that now.I already mentioned that it's unfair to the pitcher to have to adapt to different sized strike zones while the batter has the same strike zone every time. The size of the adjustment may be small, but pitching is a finely-tuned skill as it is. Seemingly small adjustments are not necessarily easy ones.With a uniform strike zone very tall and very short batters would be at a bit of a disadvantage compared to a batter of average height. That's obvious. But the variation in physical characteristics among players is not compensated for in any other aspect of the game. I don't think it would be right to use a large first base for a short first baseman and a smaller one for a tall first baseman to compensate for the height difference. I don't think the pitcher's mound should be higher for a short pitcher and lower for a tall pitcher. I've never heard anyone advocate for either of those rules. The same logic should apply to the strike zone. (IMHO, of course.)So why is the strike zone different under the rules? Here's why. The strike zone needs to have upper and lower boundaries. However, it's not feasible to have a measuring stick protruding from home plate to give the human umpire a reference point. The only thing that was feasible way back when was to use the batter as a surrogate measuring stick. That's how the strike zone came to be defined as it is. We now have the ability to determine the location of the ball as it crosses home plate without interfering with the pitched ball or the batter's bat.Automated pitch calling systems give us the opportunity to correct an anomaly that was only there because mathematically inclined primates had yet to develop the technology to make the strike zone the same for all players, just like ***every*** other aspect of the rules of play, LIKE GOD INTENDED! (OK, so I got a little carried away. Sorry.)


In much the same way as Shaquille O’Neal and Peter Dinklage should wear the same shoes.

Mathematics knows no races or geographic boundaries;
for mathematics, the cultural world is one country. - David Hilbert


#91 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 18,910 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:31 AM

Ervin Santana on the mound facing Didi Gregorius in the bottom of the 1st inning of the AL Wild Card Game. 

 

The Twins are leading 3-0... There is one out with runners on 1st and 3rd. 

 

1st Pitch: Fastball Fouled off 0-1

2nd Pitch: Fastball up out of the zone for a ball 1-1

3rd Pitch: Fastball up out of the zone for a ball 2-1

4th Pitch: Change Fouled off 2-2

5th Pitch: Fastball in the zone. RULED A BALL. Would have been a strikeout for the 2nd out. Who knows what happens after that. The Twins are still not guaranteed victory.

 

However... 

 

6th Pitch: Home Run to RF... Game Tied. 

 

**** happens... it is what it is... nothing we can do about it... Wait... there is something we can do about it. 

 

 

http://www.espn.com/...ameId=371003110

  • Hosken Bombo Disco and Nine of twelve like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#92 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:33 AM

In much the same way as Shaquille O’Neal and Peter Dinklage should wear the same shoes.

That's funny, even though it's an inaccurate analogy.

#93 Craig Arko

Craig Arko

    Mathematically inclined primate

  • Members
  • 8,181 posts
  • LocationThe Congo Basin

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:44 AM

That's funny, even though it's an inaccurate analogy.


No, the analogy works just fine. If it is ‘unfair to the pitcher’ to deal with a variable height strike zone, it is even more unfair to the cobbler to have to make variable size shoes. Were there only one shoe size, manufacturing could be even more efficiently automated; leading to both higher profits for the cobbler, and possibly lower shoe prices for everyone. Unfortunately, in most cases one size doesn’t actually fit all.

Having spent as much thought on that as I care to, I have a different question for all:

Has anyone asked the pitchers and catchers their preference? If a statistically significant majority of those folks wanted an automated zone, I would reconsider my objections. Is there anything published on this?
  • Hosken Bombo Disco likes this

Mathematics knows no races or geographic boundaries;
for mathematics, the cultural world is one country. - David Hilbert


#94 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 03 February 2018 - 11:13 AM

I would ask all players, not just pitchers and catchers. And umpires too.

#95 Nine of twelve

Nine of twelve

    Chattanooga Lookouts

  • Members
  • 750 posts
  • LocationEarth, for the time being

Posted 03 February 2018 - 11:42 AM

No, the analogy works just fine. If it is ‘unfair to the pitcher’ to deal with a variable height strike zone, it is even more unfair to the cobbler to have to make variable size shoes. Were there only one shoe size, manufacturing could be even more efficiently automated; leading to both higher profits for the cobbler, and possibly lower shoe prices for everyone. Unfortunately, in most cases one size doesn’t actually fit all.

OK, so then let's expand this and try to mitigate any other aspects of the game that are unfair. Why should the strike zone be the only part of the game that varies from one player to another? I've already mentioned base size and mound height. There are other things as well. Outfield fences could have adjustable heights based on the height of the outfielder or moved in or out based on the speed of the outfielder. The distance between bases could be altered based on the speed of the base runner. The distance from the pitcher's mound to home plate could be adjusted based on the speed of a pitcher's pitches. Ridiculous? Of course. So explain to me now why the strike zone must be required to be based on a player's height and stance?

#96 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 8,417 posts

Posted 06 February 2018 - 10:04 PM

If someone is interested in this issue, I highly recommend an old Ben Lindbergh story from Grantland (he might have said or written something in the meantime, don't know). Not likely to persuade anyone whose mind is set. However I think it has aged well.

 

http://grantland.com...lacing-umpires/

 

Shorter Lindbergh: We need home plate umpires to call the balls and strikes, but home plate umpires need the technology to do a better job. (or vice versa?)

 

 

Also, I think we need fewer Jerry Crawfords in MLB (or anywhere else):

 

Twenty minutes after each game, Crawford said, somebody would knock on the umpires room door and hand him a CD with the pitch video on it.

 

"I threw it in the trash," Crawford said.

 

http://www.star-tele...e105378146.html

It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All Star

Game and an old timer's game. - Vin Scully