Htters counts, Pitcher counts

[Sweed]

One can check their BA by count for their league via the splits menu. Here is my league on 3-0 counts. Smallish sample size, quarter of a season, with teams hovering around 40 games played. Sorry, that's where I am in my season so can't do anything about that. I didn't take a screen but in contrast my league hits .160 ish on 0-2 counts.

With regard to 3-0? I'd submit with 973 PA and 855 BB they're not swinging too much. Yes, I do believe the counts are massaged under the hood, but if your guy is coming up with a 3-0 in a game you are managing the odds are he's BB first and hitting well above league BA second. Of course their is variance dependent on the batters skill set. Note the slash line in my game, .362/.924/.517.

No I have not compared these numbers to real life, but there they are along with a way to check your league and make any comparisons you choose to do.

Yeah, and don't ask why I underlined 0 strike outs. I was just moving along too quickly and did it without thinking.

[md40022]

If you're league is at .160 on 0-2 counts and .362 on 3-0 counts I would be very curious what the numbers look like from a larger sample size because that sure as heck seems to contradict the "count doesn't matter" ide that seemed to be considered fact a year or two ago.

This makes me want to check my splits when I get home today.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by md40022

If you're league is at .160 on 0-2 counts and .362 on 3-0 counts I would be very curious what the numbers look like from a larger sample size because that sure as heck seems to contradict the "count doesn't matter" ide that seemed to be considered fact a year or two ago.

This makes me want to check my splits when I get home today.

I don't pretend to know what goes on under the hood, and that's ok. I want the game to simulate baseball, not play a math game where I solve the formula to win. I'll post how I think it works, and if someone tests and proves me wrong I probably won't read their detailed results. I want the game to simulate reality, that's what I buy it for. Knowing how it does it's magic MAY kill that illusion.

Having said that I think the general understanding is the whole AB is simulated and you get to the point of "action". Even in pitch by pitch the game shows you the AB as it develops, but you have the opportunity to change things with your decisions, ie hit, hit and run, take, steal etc. At the point you make any input in pitch by pitch, I imagine, the AB is "redone" from that point and each time you input another choice. Similar to how FM plays the whole match, but when you as the manager make a tactic change it re-simulates from the point you made the tactical change, be it subs or actual tactics.

Take this to OOTP and the whole AB being done. The AB is still establishing the count from all of the batter, pitcher ratings (plus any other variables)up to the point of contact or non-contact (k or BB). That "action" point may come on 0-0, 3-0 or anything in between. It is that count that affects the likely outcome (ie .360 on 0-3 or .160 on 0-2). At least that is what I have always thought the process would be. If it's not then the game has to be backfilling the count to "build" that .360 on 3-0 or .160 on 0-2 counts so the league stats "look right". Seems like that would be harder than just getting it from the AB to me. But I'm not a coder.

[md40022]

I'm going to check my splits once I get back to my home PC just for the sake of comparison. If your stats prove anything though, it's that none of us have any idea what we're talking about when it comes to the game engine lol.... because last year it seemed nailed down that count doesn't matter.

If that ends up statistically being proven wrong, there's going to be a lot of veteran board members taking a hard L on that one lol.

This is a specifically interesting topic to me because I've been very vocal about seeing way too many garbage results from my hitters on 3-0 counts..... So if it turns out my team is hitting .400 or something on 3-0 I guess I'll have to eat that haha.

[Brad K]

If the AB was supposed to be a strike out I assume calling H&R with a 1-1 count will result in a swing and miss.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by md40022

I'm going to check my splits once I get back to my home PC just for the sake of comparison. If your stats prove anything though, it's that none of us have any idea what we're talking about when it comes to the game engine lol.... because last year it seemed nailed down that count doesn't matter.

If that ends up statistically being proven wrong, there's going to be a lot of veteran board members taking a hard L on that one lol.

This is a specifically interesting topic to me because I've been very vocal about seeing way too many garbage results from my hitters on 3-0 counts..... So if it turns out my team is hitting .400 or something on 3-0 I guess I'll have to eat that haha.

I've never looked closely at counts specifically on the league stats screen until reading this thread that had me thinking the stats were actually there to check. I just closed out my game, but while there went back and looked a little deeper. It was interesting to change from 3-0 to 3-1, and then full count. Again haven't compared to real numbers but the changes looked to be about what I'd expect.

Previously I spent time on this screen when I wondered how my team was doing with runners in scoring position, 2 on and 2 out, etc. etc. etc. It's a good way to disprove what your mind is thinking happened compared to what actually did.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Brad K

If the AB was supposed to be a strike out I assume calling H&R with a 1-1 count will result in a swing and miss.

Just to be clear your thought is if a user spams the take button and works a 3-0 count, but the AB was "supposed" to be a K the batter will still K? Could be. Don't know and probably don't want to, and since I play "one pitch" it wouldn't affect my game. I only use the take to combat the possibility of a pitch out

[md40022]

Here's my splits through about 65-70 games on my current season. 0-2, 3-0 and 3-1......

And honestly, these are pretty darn in-line with real life

Small sample size, but combined with Sweed's small sample size of similar results - now it's a slightly bigger sample size.

Unless these are just made up numbers for the sake of giving us something to look at, I think the thought process of count doesn't matter in the result of the AB very well might be incorrect. I'm definitely surprised by this, but you can't argue the numbers.

Ironically, this is one topic that most people seemed to agree on... and it looks to be wrong lol.

[md40022]

I should add that in 3-0 counts, despite the league as a whole hitting .300+, my team is hitting .167. Granted, tiny sample size..... but I still stand by my team has poor results when they swing 3-0 haha.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Just to be clear your thought is if a user spams the take button and works a 3-0 count, but the AB was "supposed" to be a K the batter will still K? Could be. Don't know and probably don't want to, and since I play "one pitch" it wouldn't affect my game. I only use the take to combat the possibility of a pitch out

Sometimes its best not to know.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Just to be clear your thought is if a user spams the take button and works a 3-0 count, but the AB was "supposed" to be a K the batter will still K? Could be. Don't know and probably don't want to, and since I play "one pitch" it wouldn't affect my game. I only use the take to combat the possibility of a pitch out

Not sure that spamming the take button would be a good thing anyway. More strikes are thrown than balls more often than not. So taking pitches trying to get into a hitters count should theoretically work against you just based on the odds.

Taking pitches to get the pitcher's pitch count up and get him out of the game is a different story. I'm not saying it's wrong, because that's a strategy used plenty IRL.... Though to expand that thought process a bit, if you're taking tons of pitches to work pitch counts you're probably putting yourself in more pitcher-friendly counts based on the idea that more strikes are thrown than balls. And if it turns out that the results in OOTP do in fact take count into effect, you're giving yourself a lower batting average when hitting in pitcher-friendly counts. Therefore you're putting few runners on base. Therefore the pitch count that you *think* you are working is actually working against you since the pitcher is getting you out 1-2-3 every single inning since your putting yourself in counts where you're hitting .200. Maybe if you go up there swinging from the start of the AB it yields a higher batting average and more hits, therefore involuntarily working the pitch count more so than mashing the take button.

I don't know. Whatever. Haha.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by md40022

Not sure that spamming the take button would be a good thing anyway. More strikes are thrown than balls more often than not. So taking pitches trying to get into a hitters count should theoretically work against you just based on the odds.

Taking pitches to get the pitcher's pitch count up and get him out of the game is a different story. I'm not saying it's wrong, because that's a strategy used plenty IRL.... Though to expand that thought process a bit, if you're taking tons of pitches to work pitch counts you're probably putting yourself in more pitcher-friendly counts based on the idea that more strikes are thrown than balls. And if it turns out that the results in OOTP do in fact take count into effect, you're giving yourself a lower batting average when hitting in pitcher-friendly counts. Therefore you're putting few runners on base. Therefore the pitch count that you *think* you are working is actually working against you since the pitcher is getting you out 1-2-3 every single inning since your putting yourself in counts where you're hitting .200. Maybe if you go up there swinging from the start of the AB it yields a higher batting average and more hits, therefore involuntarily working the pitch count more so than mashing the take button.

I don't know. Whatever. Haha.

My taking of pitches is not a complicated thing, and it's not to get into a hitter's count. It comes down to when playing one pitch the P is free to pitch out with a 0-0 count. The only defense is to, on occasion, take and hope for 1-0. To blindly go, in one pitch mode on the 0-0 count, leaves you vulnerable. If the count goes 0-1 against me I don't continue taking trying to get the count in my favor. I either don't run or take a bigger risk and still go.

It's not like I never go on 0-0, or even 0-1. I do. I just pick my times. It also doesn't mean the AI pitcher doesn't pitch out with a 1-0 count, it will though rarely. It's a guessing game, same as real life.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Sometimes its best not to know.

Agree.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Just to be clear your thought is if a user spams the take button and works a 3-0 count, but the AB was "supposed" to be a K the batter will still K? Could be. Don't know and probably don't want to, and since I play "one pitch" it wouldn't affect my game. I only use the take to combat the possibility of a pitch out

My guess is that if you go in and do a strategy the game will re-calculate what's going to happen on that particular PA but I also am not sure if there's really a difference if you get the K you were "predestined" to get. The take is widely considered to be a thing you don't use except in very specific circumstances for exactly that reason: if you have a .280 hitter and you tell them to take until they get 2 strikes, they'll still be a .280 hitter for the rest of that PA, all else being equal (at the least, if there is a malus it's not super duper noticeable and it's certainly easier for the devs to not make adjustments like that than it is for them to make them). For stuff like the hit and run, I lean towards the idea that the game has a separate "table" or the equivalent that it "consults" the way you do with Strat-o-Matic where a given hitter is much more likely to make some kind of contact and much less likely to hit the ball really far (although of course the hitter and pitcher ability come into account here). I also, hate to say it, very much doubt that the game will cause a hit and run to be more effective on a 1-0 or 2-1 count than a 0-1 or 1-2 if I'm being honest (except of course that if you do miss on a 1-2, that will result in an automatic strikeout on top of the automatic CS that a busted hit and run turns into).

The thing about those raw per-count numbers is that it's reeeeeally hard to separate talent from strategy there. Like, how much of the fact that hitters are .345 on 3-1 counts come from the fact that hitters rarely get to 3-1 unless they're decent and the guy that they're facing is a bit wild? Sure, they'll also get a good pitch to hit but baked into that, too, is the fact that if the next pitch is a ball it's ball four and so there are some outcomes that can't continue. I'm sure that not all or maybe even the majority of that 100 point difference in BA accounts for that but *how* much? Also, are you now supposed to add to pitchers (and hitters) some kind of special ability to get to certain counts more often than others on top of their abilities to walk and strike out guys? Are there guys IRL who just hit to the league average in count situations but hit .300 because they work the count to 3 balls a lot? I'm very skeptical that that really and truly exists as its own skill (I mean, of course some guys get to 3 ball counts more than others but at the end of the day I think they hit well or not based on their ability to hit the ball and avoid strikeouts); why would OOTP spend time doing this if the end result is less accuracy/realism?

I definitely can see the case for just determining the result of the entire PA beforehand and then "retrofitting" the result. I understand that this has weirdness with some strategies but... the game just plain isn't modeled to do pitch-by-pitch strategies. That would require a complete overhaul of the game and in some cases probably some rework as to how some mechanics work at all (knuckleballers never throw a true fastball in this game but IRL they have a 75-80mph gooser that they throw specifically when they need a strike, for example). Long story short, I agree with the others that I don't really want to think about that too much.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by Sweed

My taking of pitches is not a complicated thing, and it's not to get into a hitter's count. It comes down to when playing one pitch the P is free to pitch out with a 0-0 count. The only defense is to, on occasion, take and hope for 1-0. To blindly go, in one pitch mode on the 0-0 count, leaves you vulnerable. If the count goes 0-1 against me I don't continue taking trying to get the count in my favor. I either don't run or take a bigger risk and still go.

It's not like I never go on 0-0, or even 0-1. I do. I just pick my times. It also doesn't mean the AI pitcher doesn't pitch out with a 1-0 count, it will though rarely. It's a guessing game, same as real life.

I am the exact same where really the only time I use the take command would be to set up a situation where I can put the base runner in motion and lessen the likelihood of a pitchout..... I'm identical in that regard.

The only other time I will use the take command is if a pitcher walks 2 or even 3 of my guys in a row. Whether there is any truth to it or not, I have no clue, but when it feels like the opposing pitcher lost his command with 2 or 3 straight walks, then I will take a few pitches with the next few hitters.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

My guess is that if you go in and do a strategy the game will re-calculate what's going to happen on that particular PA but I also am not sure if there's really a difference if you get the K you were "predestined" to get. The take is widely considered to be a thing you don't use except in very specific circumstances for exactly that reason: if you have a .280 hitter and you tell them to take until they get 2 strikes, they'll still be a .280 hitter for the rest of that PA, all else being equal (at the least, if there is a malus it's not super duper noticeable and it's certainly easier for the devs to not make adjustments like that than it is for them to make them). For stuff like the hit and run, I lean towards the idea that the game has a separate "table" or the equivalent that it "consults" the way you do with Strat-o-Matic where a given hitter is much more likely to make some kind of contact and much less likely to hit the ball really far (although of course the hitter and pitcher ability come into account here). I also, hate to say it, very much doubt that the game will cause a hit and run to be more effective on a 1-0 or 2-1 count than a 0-1 or 1-2 if I'm being honest (except of course that if you do miss on a 1-2, that will result in an automatic strikeout on top of the automatic CS that a busted hit and run turns into).

The thing about those raw per-count numbers is that it's reeeeeally hard to separate talent from strategy there. Like, how much of the fact that hitters are .345 on 3-1 counts come from the fact that hitters rarely get to 3-1 unless they're decent and the guy that they're facing is a bit wild? Sure, they'll also get a good pitch to hit but baked into that, too, is the fact that if the next pitch is a ball it's ball four and so there are some outcomes that can't continue. I'm sure that not all or maybe even the majority of that 100 point difference in BA accounts for that but *how* much? Also, are you now supposed to add to pitchers (and hitters) some kind of special ability to get to certain counts more often than others on top of their abilities to walk and strike out guys? Are there guys IRL who just hit to the league average in count situations but hit .300 because they work the count to 3 balls a lot? I'm very skeptical that that really and truly exists as its own skill (I mean, of course some guys get to 3 ball counts more than others but at the end of the day I think they hit well or not based on their ability to hit the ball and avoid strikeouts); why would OOTP spend time doing this if the end result is less accuracy/realism?

I definitely can see the case for just determining the result of the entire PA beforehand and then "retrofitting" the result. I understand that this has weirdness with some strategies but... the game just plain isn't modeled to do pitch-by-pitch strategies. That would require a complete overhaul of the game and in some cases probably some rework as to how some mechanics work at all (knuckleballers never throw a true fastball in this game but IRL they have a 75-80mph gooser that they throw specifically when they need a strike, for example). Long story short, I agree with the others that I don't really want to think about that too much.

One can always quibble or guess at the details but I'd agree with virtually all of this.

On the bold I wouldn't say the developers have to add any special skills to get to certain counts. I think that would happen generically using the hitter's eye and the pitcher's control, among anything else (framing comes to mind) the game needs to use. The AB's, I think most agree are done in one dice roll, and IMHO there are limited ways to influence it. Take, run and hit, hit and run, sac bunt, etc. I think your theory on the H&R being done in a separate routine, like Strat is correct, and I imagine the same type of thing for bunts too.

[s1murc1]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

Because an Intentional Walk has risk. You take a guy, and turn whatever the result was (probably an out) into a walk.
Taking a pitch in PbP has no risk or possible downside. If you tell every batter to take pitches until they get to 2 strikes in every single PA, in real life your team would be striking out a ton by getting themselves into 2-strike counts. In OOTP your team would strike out less and make less in-play outs too.


Of course a shift affects the outcome. You seem to be confusing "using strategy" with "abusing the game engine."

Like i said it may be missing something because im not talking about every batter just taking pitches but taking pitches on a 3-0 count which is game strategy. basically what im saying is if its taking advantage of the system to take a pitch that is a flaw in the game unfortunately tho a flaw that cant be fixed

[Brad K]

For those who manage games, if giving a batter the take sign on 3-0 makes them feel better they should do it. Same with making a trip to the mound or playing a likeable but declining veteran.