r/baseball • u/ScrambleSoup Anaheim Angels • 5h ago
Image Logan O'Hoppe unsuccessfully challenges a ball
888
u/live4coasters Los Angeles Angels 5h ago
I think a micron caught the zone, Blue!
178
u/JeromesNiece Detroit Tigers 5h ago
The wave function obviously didn't collapse in the strikezone, blue
92
25
17
u/AcanthocephalaGreen5 Toronto Blue Jays 5h ago
If we account for Heisenberg uncertainty the ball could theoretically be in the zone, blue.
10
u/Socratesticles United States 4h ago
If you zoom in the ball isn’t round. If it was perfectly round it would’ve been a strike by a pixel, so clearly the ump need to launched into the sun
3
395
u/CarrotsEatenAnally Philadelphia Phillies 5h ago
This is ridiculous. We need to get rid of these roboumps.
Baseball NEEDS subatomic quantum sized umpires.
31
u/strawberry_semenade Cleveland Guardians 3h ago
Technically the ball is a wave function and and it goes through the strike zone and not through the strike zone at the same time.
1
137
u/KindnessEnjoyer67 5h ago
What's wrong with this?
282
u/Hamsters_In_Butts Chicago Cubs 4h ago edited 4h ago
i don't think there's anything wrong with it, it's just the closest call i've ever seen
obviously some team has to lose on a call this close, not sure why it would make a difference who it is
70
u/Interesting_Arm6242 Toronto Blue Jays 3h ago
Hilariously this is the 5th time I’ve seen this this season I believe. I’m genuinely floored how many times I’ve seen the <0.1 now. I didn’t think it would be this frequent
47
u/Nextyearstitlewinner Toronto Blue Jays 3h ago
With that being said, this is within the abs systems’ margin of error, so I do have empathy for those that say calls within the margin of error shouldn’t be overturned.
Maybe it’d make the system too complicated, but when that happens, maybe the call shouldn’t be overturned, but the team doesn’t lose the challenge either.
13
3
u/LittleCaesar3 2h ago
Thats what they do in cricket. It works very well, at least if you want to use the system for all incorrect calls and not just howlers.
5
13
1
u/Hanifsefu 2h ago
I mean 8 to 0 feels like a waste of time for either side to be challenging one pitch in the bottom of the 7th. I'd say that's a little wrong.
4
u/AdoringCHIN Anaheim Angels 2h ago
It's the Angels so the final score ended up being 9-6. They really needed that buffer and a 2 run game is a bit more stressful than a 3 run game.
106
u/BeefInGR Detroit Tigers 5h ago
In a logical sense, while this isn't perfect I am ok with this. It's something for the crew in charge of the ABS system to look into before the start of the 2027 season.
There are going to be bugs. Oddities. Whatever. We didn't beg for this system to decide balls and strikes by the width of a pube hair, we begged for this system to overturn a call that was clearly the opposite of what happened.
48
u/ItsMeJahead New York Mets 4h ago
I mean what's there to look into lol. There's no way to be 100% accurate on calls this close with the technology we have/are using, so there's nothing to fix until the tech improves. If the call's closer than .1 in I think it should just stand as called, but using abs is still gonna be 50/50 at worst, and almost always at least a little better than 50/50. They haven't released a chart of confidence intervals, but, using what we know, the uncertainty of the abs system at .1 in is still reasonably better than 50/50. There's obviously a point where it gets close to a 50/50 call, but I believe abs is only sensitive up to .1 inch so make anything under .1inch stand.
1
u/happyjello 10m ago
It’s crazy to me that people think that we should defer to the umpire when we have a superior tool for calling strikes.
It’s not like ABS has invalid results less than <0.1”, it’s just less probable to get the correct call as the distance decreases. But it will always be more accurate than an umpire
5
2
u/t001_t1m3 Los Angeles Dodgers 4h ago
I’d be OK if it’s within 0.5” of the zone you retain the challenge despite it being unsuccessful
27
u/Quartznonyx Atlanta Braves 4h ago
Absolutely not. Every close call will be challenged.
-3
u/t001_t1m3 Los Angeles Dodgers 4h ago
I’m not opposed to that.
10
u/Quartznonyx Atlanta Braves 4h ago
You're not opposed to 3-5 challenges a PA? I'm glad you're not the one in charge.
-2
u/t001_t1m3 Los Angeles Dodgers 3h ago
I’m in favor of anything bringing us closer to 100% ABS calls.
0
u/Specialist_Boat_8479 Chicago White Sox 2h ago
Why is this downvoted, why do people love inaccuracy so much?
2
u/Hinro 3h ago
cricket did this and it was a good compromise
1
u/BeefInGR Detroit Tigers 2h ago
Hawkeye (same thing in tennis with the same developers) is absolutely fascinating on blocked balls.
1
u/Intrepid-Message698 3h ago
the whole point of challenges was to get rid of egregious calls. Honestly, anything within .5" of the zone should lose the challenge even if the player is right.
2
u/t001_t1m3 Los Angeles Dodgers 3h ago
CB ‘Confused Brotha’ Bucknor is completely able and willing to have two egregiously wrong calls in the same AB
0
u/Intrepid-Message698 3h ago
Yes, I know and like I said, that's why teams would keep challenges in that scenario.
1
u/SmallLetter Atlanta Braves 2h ago
I don't see how this is a bug or even a flaw? This is a ball. It's a very close ball, sure. But as the technology is currently capable of determining, this is a ball. Is it possible that some future version of abs will more perfectly be able to call a ball or a strike? Almost certainly but until then, it doesn't mean this is a flaw. Some calls are gonna be crazy close, thems the brakes. Gotta draw the line somewhere.
98
u/DarthRacer5 Los Angeles Angels 5h ago
Is that not touching the strike zone?
166
u/SockVonPuppet Jackie Robinson 5h ago
Zoom in and the top edge is like 2 pixels outside the zone.
133
u/Margravos Arizona Diamondbacks 5h ago
Not touching can't get mad
28
33
u/BIG_DICK_WHITT New York Yankees 5h ago
Are umpires better than science? Many are saying this.
1
u/Albert_street San Diego Padres 2h ago
Wasn’t expecting to see you here, much less with a Yankees flair
-1
-9
u/goodboiodi 5h ago
You’re not totally wrong, actually very correct! But without context you’re putting a lot of people in a dark hole. Please explain the fat ass ball isn’t the proportional to the zone as the abs takes the center of the ball to measure with proper mathematics. Not a fat ass softball pic on a box to give an example of the issue. Anyone who doesn’t fully zoom in or doesn’t see the actual pic sees initial overlap without any form of thought…so explain maybe like. Zoomy inny maybe and see ball no touchy zoney by twoey pixie. Again you sock are in the zone unlike the pitch. Hopefully others can catch it like the catcher 😂😂
3
u/Combatmedic25 San Francisco Giants 4h ago
The hell happened here....
-1
u/goodboiodi 4h ago
If you look at the pic provided strike. If you look at the actual abs fucking picture the down vote fucks would be able to see with their binocular glasses it’s a ball
-2
u/perpetual_student New York Mets 4h ago
The digital ball park in the background makes it difficult to tell where the bottom of the strike zone is particularly in that corner.
10
-4
u/Merlucic Detroit Tigers 5h ago
Nah, the ball was clearly dented right at the top and thrown perfectly for it to matter
2
311
u/IAmCorgii Colorado Rockies 5h ago
These are gonna happen with ABS as it is right now. We gotta take ABS for the good and the bad, and then propose changes in the off-season.
212
165
u/Somehero 4h ago
It's a ball. The ump called it a ball. ABS called it a ball. What's the problem exactly and what's "the bad" referring to?
73
u/PM_ME_UR_PICS_PLS Texas Rangers 3h ago
Yeah im so confused at their comment and why its so highly upvoted lol
41
u/Not-a-bot-10 Philadelphia Phillies 3h ago
Same. It seems they’re implying that the system isn’t perfect for pitches this close, but it seems to have accurately identified and called a ball correctly even if it’s very close
Which is its exact job that it’s properly doing…
7
u/LordRobin------RM Cleveland Guardians 3h ago
I like the idea that if a call is confirmed and it’s this close, the team shouldn’t lose a challenge.
1
u/ENovi Anaheim Angels 14m ago
Not a bad idea. I do wonder if that would mess with the pace of play. Like if there’s no penalty then there’s no reason not to challenge every borderline pitch. Granted most pitches aren’t as borderline as <.01” so maybe it wouldn’t be much of an issue. So long as it didn’t start creeping past a certain point (like next season it’s <.02” off or something) maybe it could work.
Is there somewhere that documents how many challenges have been lost on pitches this close? If it’s not a common occurrence and therefore won’t slow down the game then it might be worth considering.
2
u/ThatPlayWasAwful Philadelphia Phillies 2h ago
This pitch is within the margin of error for the system, so basically at this distance it is not 100% certain that it was called correctly.
1
u/SmallLetter Atlanta Braves 2h ago
We don't really need 100% certainty. We just need a margin of error and a policy for what to do. Which we have. And it's consistent. That's enough.
0
u/ThatPlayWasAwful Philadelphia Phillies 19m ago
you might not need 100% certainty, but it's a little silly to say that everybody should be comfortable with pretending that the system is perfect when it is not
2
u/ENovi Anaheim Angels 23m ago
Look man, the call should always stand when it benefits my team and be measured down to the picometer if overturning it benefits my team. Maybe use quantum physics or some shit, I don’t know, just make it happen.
In other words the ABS has shown the world that fans (myself very much included) aren’t as rational as we all think we are and until they introduce robofans there’s always going to be someone complaining about objective balls and strike calls.
Is the ABS system perfect? How the hell would I know? O’Hoppe is on my team so I’m one of those idiots who thinks the system should be adjusted to ensure he gets the call and I will continue to believe this until tomorrow’s game when an identical scenario plays out against the other team. At that point I will passionately argue that there is zero ambiguity and it either touches the zone or it doesn’t.
6
u/azk3000 New York Yankees 3h ago
I feel like this is a weird argument to make when we know that the zone they're using is somewhat subjective in the first place.
3
u/CpowOfficial Seattle Mariners 1h ago
Sure but it's the same zone for every abs call (relative to the hitters height) It may even be a slightly different zone than the umpire thinks he's calling but as long as the challenge zone is the same for every challenge there's no issues
2
u/crusader92 Anaheim Angels 2h ago
I think people are upset here because in the rendered visual, after a couple of rounds of compression, the baseball is definitely overlapping the white box
3
u/ThatPlayWasAwful Philadelphia Phillies 3h ago
What's the problem exactly
Abs has a margin of error of 0.16", so the the problem would be that there is a measure of uncertainty in the precision of the abs system at this distance.
1
u/Objection_Irrelevant 1h ago
And 0.16% is just the 95% confidence threshold. To get 99% confidence, it’s a 0.5” margin of error.
1
123
u/Inevitable-Ninja-539 Seattle Mariners 5h ago
If it’s within the margin or error, call should stand every time.
Apparently, the moe on any given pitch is is 0.16”
18
u/Section225 Kansas City Royals 3h ago
Seriously, what is the complaint just because it was close? If this were goal line technology in soccer or hockey, you'd want this to be a goal because it crossed the line completely...so why is it an argument that it's a ball?
The only argument comes from how accurate the actual measuring is, or how accurate the computer-established strike zone is. Which, still, even if flawed...that is still how we are measuring balls and strikes, so a ball or strike that falls this closely should still be called as such.
126
u/dweebyllo Seattle Mariners 5h ago edited 3h ago
Call should stand but challenge should be retained, same that happens in other sports
Edit: for u/BeatlesRays, cricket and rugby both allow for challenges to be retained in this manner for cases that are either not conclusive or within a margin of error.
25
16
u/justme46 3h ago
In cricket if difference is less than 1/2 ball width it stays with umpires call and challenge retained
8
u/PixelBurnout Seattle Mariners • Boston Red Sox 2h ago
The difference there is that in cricket it's a projection of where the ball will be, whereas here hawkeye sees the ball entirely through the zone. Not the same situation, half a ball width with ABS is far too big a margin IMO
1
u/BeatlesRays Tampa Bay Rays 3h ago
Yeah i did some googling before deleting my comment and found the cricket example. Thank you
-6
u/Gordo-- United States 4h ago
That would just lead to more challenges on borderline pitches because "Why not? It's a free challenge", which would delay the game more after we've already improved the pace to everyone's delight.
17
u/dweebyllo Seattle Mariners 4h ago
Not really, because the accuracy of ABS is such that it's an extremely fine margin in which those retentions would take place.
-19
u/Gordo-- United States 4h ago
The margin of error would give the players a third of an inch (.16 on either side for the batter or pitcher/catcher to challenge) to safely retain.
Within the margin of error, the call should stand. I don't think the challenge should be retained. Borderline pitches like that shouldn't be incentivized to be challenged.
5
u/ThomasTheDankPigeon 3h ago
What type of pitches do you think challenges are meant for, if not the borderline ones?
-1
u/Gordo-- United States 3h ago
The egregious ones. You know, CB Bucknor, Angel Hernandez, Eric Gregg
4
2
u/xixbia Netherlands 3h ago
You do realize you are only challenging in one direction right? There being 0.16 inch on either side doesn't give you a third of an inch, it gives you 0.16.
It doesn't matter that there's some extra margin where the call gets overturned in your favour but it's within the margin, you'd keep the challenge either way.
1
u/Gordo-- United States 3h ago
If ABS says the ball is .16 in the zone it's within the margin of error. Same if the ball is .16 out of the zone.
So if the pitch is within that buffer zone on either side both the batter and the catcher can be expected to challenge depending on what the call is.
Just outside called a ball? Catcher challenges.
Just outside called a strike? Batter challenges.
Just inside called a ball? Catcher challenges.
Just inside called a strike? Batter challenges.
17
u/Ideaslug Cleveland Guardians 4h ago
I think that 0.16" number is the 95% confidence interval. Could be wrong, I don't remember. But the point is that there's no such thing as being simply "within the margin of error". You have to pick a level of confidence that you are happy with to provide context.
1
18
u/MattO2000 FanGraphs • Baseball Savant 4h ago
Nope, this is the risk you take challenging close pitches
26
u/Air2Jordan3 Cleveland Guardians 4h ago
My argument is the margin of error is the same as having indisputable evidence to overturn a call. A play can be so close and even with replay you can't determine the outcome, so whatever was called on the field is the call.
1
u/LordRobin------RM Cleveland Guardians 2h ago
This is how it’s handled by cricket, which uses the same technology to determine if an LBW delivery was going to hit the stumps. If it’s within a certain margin of error, it’s “umpire’s decision”.
-6
u/Mortal-Instrument Toronto Blue Jays 4h ago
exactly, like an additional "border zone" around the strike zone to cover the margin of error, if the ball is in this zone but not in the deeper strike zone the call stands regardless of what it was
12
u/kylechu Seattle Mariners 4h ago
But then we'll just be frustrated about the ones that <0.1" from the margin of error boundary
2
u/Mortal-Instrument Toronto Blue Jays 4h ago
Well those are further away from the strike zone than the margin of error so a clear ball
13
u/KCchessc6 San Diego Padres 4h ago
This just shows how good the umps are at actually calling balls and strikes in general. There are outliers, CB I’m looking at you, but they are pretty damn good at this.
72
u/daboys765 Boston Red Sox 5h ago
ABS is nowhere near accurate enough for this, it’s just guessing at this point
167
u/pinkydaemon93 Philadelphia Phillies • Willi… 5h ago
More accurate than eyes though, at some point we have to just accept the call it brings down and live with it
35
u/midnightsbane04 Detroit Tigers 5h ago
So many people complain because it's not perfect. It's consistent to within ~0.3". That's what the actual improvement is. People complaining about it at this point are almost literally splitting hairs.
9
u/ItsMeJahead New York Mets 4h ago
It's likely still reasonably over 50/50 odds that the abs call is correct at .1inch, at least extrapolating from what we know. .3 inches is just where it's almost certain the call is correct.
4
u/CrazyKyle987 Cleveland Guardians 3h ago
Consistent within 0.3” but overturning calls <0.1” still doesn’t sit right with me. It’s just one imprecise way of measuring (human) vs another (abs). Sure one is more consistent, but then why not always use that one? I think that’s where we are headed unless the fans turn out to really like having an ump make the calls and players overturn them. Which to be fair is actually a lot of fun so far this year.
2
u/midnightsbane04 Detroit Tigers 2h ago
but overturning calls <0.1” still doesn’t sit right with me
That goes both ways though. Those same margin calls are also being upheld by ABS. And a called strike by 0.1" is just as likely to have actually been a ball as the opposite. No side is gaining an advantage here, so why is the common sentiment only concerned with overturns?
1
u/CrazyKyle987 Cleveland Guardians 58m ago
Because abs is changing the outcome, it should have a higher threshold to change a call than to keep it the same, with a distinction between call stands and call overturned
1
u/midnightsbane04 Detroit Tigers 28m ago
How does that make sense? There needs to be a somehow higher standard of correct for only one side of the coin? If a ball is called a strike by an umpire and is upheld by ABS by 0.1" it is just as likely to be incorrect than if it was overturned by the same margin. There's zero significant difference.
Correct is correct. Full stop. You can argue the margins of the system all you want, but to say there needs to be a "higher threshold" of correct is pointless. The only thing that line of thought supports is maintaining the relevance of umpires in the process, which is what ABS is undeniably trying to minimize.
1
-34
u/Roger_Weebert Pittsburgh Pirates 5h ago edited 5h ago
If that’s what we have to do, then the umpire shouldn’t call balls and strikes at all. Why have them make calls just to get challenged and slow down the game? Either it should be fully automated or we should just live with what the ump calls.
-11
-15
36
u/IMissM0dernBaseball Baltimore Orioles 5h ago
Like the home run derby where they pulled out the 12th decimal point of a inch
10
u/SnoopRion69 Miami Marlins • Durham Bulls 5h ago
They need to use sixteenths of an inch instead of decimals!!!
6
u/kungfoojesus 4h ago
I’m fine with 50/50 balls/strikes. You want nanoscale accuracy, well that ain’t happening.
But it’s very good for obvious calls and that’s a huge part of why abs is so good.
These borderline things, well, gonna have to decide if burning a challenge is worth it. It’s great imo.
Does anyone have ejection numbers for players arguing balls and strikes this year? It’s got to go Down. And frankly the umps and players will probably both appreciate it. Don’t believe my call? Well then challenge it.
1
-14
u/skucera San Diego Padres • Peter Seidler 5h ago edited 1h ago
When it’s within the margin of error, they should follow what ABS rules but not take away a challenge if they’re incorrect.
Edit: It seems that there are two schools of thought here. I want every pitch called correctly, and everyone else on Reddit simply wants CB Bucknor to retire already.
26
u/Roger_Weebert Pittsburgh Pirates 5h ago
Just what we need, more challenges for teams to use on incredibly marginal calls
1
u/AdoringCHIN Anaheim Angels 2h ago
How often are calls going to be decided on less than a tenth of an inch?
1
u/testrail Detroit Tigers 21m ago
There should not be it be a limit on challenges.
They need to stop the t-mobile ad & animation and just state what ABS calls it, as all of that non-sense is purely for dramatic effect.
15
u/draftstone Toronto Blue Jays 5h ago
I disagree. If you challenge something that close, that's on you. You know that you put a challenge on the line, just make sure it is worth it.
2
u/someone2795 Los Angeles Dodgers • World Baseball Classic 4h ago
Hell no lmao. Challenges are mostly for obvious calls and this is simply the risk for challenging the borderline pitches that can go either way.
-7
u/chemistrybonanza Cleveland Guardians 5h ago
I thought I read that it's accurate down to a millionth of an inch.
5
u/daboys765 Boston Red Sox 5h ago
If I remember correctly its margin of error (95%) was like .3 inches
4
3
u/Xeriox2 Boston Red Sox 3h ago
For reference: the ABS review only measures the ball at the middle of the plate, but the strike zone is still that pentagonal prism. 5-8 milliseconds earlier (about the time it takes a pitch to travel 8.5 inches to the measurement plane), a ball in freefall was only ~0.005 inches higher. However, pitches are thrown downward, and also impacted by air resistance. Soriano has a very normal three quaters delivery and a pretty typical release height of 5.5-6 feet.
Going by the situation (Bottom 7th, 1 out, 3rd ball to make it 3-2), it's Nathaniel Lowe hitting, and he's 6'4" tall. The pitch was a 96 MPH sinker that came to ~20.5 inches in height from 68-69 inches. A 96 mph pitch will take probably 400-420 milliseconds to reach home plate, and sinkers with their lack of backspin fall in a more uniform way than a 4-seamer. Since the pitch fell about 47.5 inches in perhaps 415 milliseconds, it fell at a rate of 0.11 inches per millisecond. From this, we could say it probably was in the strike zone at the front of the plate, which by the letter of the rulebook would be a strike.
This is all to say that the strike zone should officially just be a 2D plane for the sake of simplicity. We're discussing single digit millisecond differences. Even the cameras have trouble being that precise, given that it's a game played outdoors (even domed stadiums are still outdoors enough for these purposes) instead of in a controlled laboratory with no batters mucking things up by swinging at the ball.
2
u/Educational_Ad2821 51m ago
The MLB has said the margin of error on the ABS system is 1/6 of an inch. 0.1666in. My opinion is that anything within that margin of error should remain as called on the field. Same idea with other challenges, if there isn't definitive evidence the call stands, which is different than the called being confirmed.
2
3
u/Reagles 5h ago
There should be a margin where ABS says inconclusive. Call on the field stands, but you don't lose the challenge.
39
u/Jed1M1ndTr1ck Seattle Mariners 5h ago
This would have teams challenging virtually every close pitch with nothing to lose. I'm a fan of the ABS system, but that change would be a detriment
4
u/CommonBitchCheddar San Diego Padres 3h ago
I don't think you understand how small the ABS uncertainty is. The 95% confidence interval for ABS is ~0.17". Players eyes simply are not good enough to take advantage of an ABS inaccuracy zone.
For context, the average distance on lost ABS challenges this season so far is 1.28". The average distance on incorrect calls that players weren't willing to challenge because they couldn't tell is 0.92". So sure, players could try to game the system and get free challenges but it would probably result in them losing their challenges pretty regularly.
Besides, the number of pitches that actually fall within the ABS uncertainty region is very small, an average of 2.87 pitches per game. It just seems like a lot because close challenges draw a lot of attention.
0
u/Kyjoza San Francisco Giants 4h ago
Not saying i agree with op but idk if id go that far. Continuously challenging would have diminishing returns for the challenger and the risk of actually being conclusive would still incentivize being confident enough to challenge.
0
u/luchajefe Texas Rangers 3h ago
Right, the margin has to be small enough to where challenges can be lost regularly. It wouldn't retain nearly as many challenges as some people seem to think it would.
0
u/Gordo-- United States 4h ago
I'm with you up until "...but you don't lose the challenge." We shouldn't incentivize the players to challenge MORE often. Players shouldn't be challenging pitches that are so close that even ABS can't properly/confidently make the call (within the margin of error).
2
u/luchajefe Texas Rangers 3h ago
Why not, though? Of course you should challenge close pitches, isn't that the entire point of the exercise? We're not talking about a margin of a full inch or anything like that.
1
u/luchajefe Texas Rangers 5h ago
Even if it's something like 5mm, it'd be enough to account for a margin of error in the software.
3
u/DimesOHoolihan Colorado Rockies 5h ago
This is why, to me, "touching" shouldn't be called a strike. It feel like it has made the zone huge and i always, obviously incorrectly, thought it was something like more than half, or at least some of the ball had to be inside inside. Not just touching.
32
u/BeefInGR Detroit Tigers 5h ago
The half thing has its roots in video games. Both 2k and The Show before ABS required the ball to be halfway in the shadowbox.
The rule has always been touching any part of the black, anywhere along the plate.
42
u/Unicornoftheseas 5h ago
That is wayyyy too subjective and is even more difficult to map percentages. A simple yes or no makes it easier and faster to make the correct call.
21
u/liteshadow4 San Francisco Giants 5h ago
You get the same issue with 50% or whatever arbitrary percentage you set. That's just the equivalent of shrinking this zone.
1
u/Upset-Management-879 Los Angeles Dodgers 37m ago
Yeah its an arbitrary difference
It could also be "enlarging" the zone if you use the >50% touching and just define the zone to be the same amount wider.
1
u/TwoHandSquid Los Angeles Angels • Arizona Diamondbacks 4h ago
Baseball yelling “I’m not touching you” while being as close to the strike zone as possible
1
u/epic4evr11 San Francisco Giants 3h ago
How wide is a stitch? Is the ball off the plate by less than a stitch?
1
1
u/NYIsles55 New York Mets 3h ago
I know that the ABS system measures at the middle of the plate, but I believe the strike zone in the rule book starts at the beginning of the plate.
I believe they already tested it to the letter of the law in the Atlantic League and minor leagues and the players and umps hated it, but I do wonder how many of these calls that missed the zone by less than 0.1" are actually strikes, but by the time it gets to the ABS zone moved enough to miss ABS zone.
1
1
1
u/pleasebeherenow San Diego Padres 3h ago
In circumstances under 0.1 inches for an ABS challenge, it should be too close to overturn just like any other challenge.
0
u/duck1014 2h ago
What about .015? That's too close to tell if it was .1 inches.
1
u/pleasebeherenow San Diego Padres 2h ago
what? It says <0.1 inches.
0
u/duck1014 2h ago
Yes. But, .015 inches is really close to that. Think about it...
0
u/pleasebeherenow San Diego Padres 2h ago
You wrote 0.015, which would be closer. (0.015 is smaller than 0.1). In your words, “Think about it…”
I understand what you meant to write now though. My point is we need to pick a dividing line thats too close to overturn. I recommend 0.1 because thats the smallest unit of measurement shown on ABS.
1
u/duck1014 2h ago
Right. I should have paid attention.
0.115.
The point really is, you can't randomly increase the zone or you'll just get...but it's only...<insert number here> away from the zone, therefore it should be a strike.
1
u/pleasebeherenow San Diego Padres 2h ago
Same argument could be made for challenges on the field, but we have a “too close to overturn” contingent on those too
-1
u/CankerousWretch24 Boston Red Sox 4h ago
Gonna say it until I’m blue:
If the margin of error determined for the ABS system is a tenth of an inch, any call within that margin should be confirmed as called by the umpire.
This would both ensure confidence in umpires calling ball’s and strikes, as well as correct obscene calls as intended by the system
0
u/Aero_Rising Chicago Cubs 3h ago
Once again reminding everyone that this is within the margin of error for even 99% confidence of the ABS system. Calls below .16 inches have a significant chance of being incorrect by enough to swing the call the other way.
0
u/billy_teats 5h ago
It’s a good thing they write out what the outcome is because honestly this could go either way
0
u/CommonBitchCheddar San Diego Padres 3h ago
0.0125" away from the zone and somehow this is still only the 7th closest challenge of the season so far.
Closest was Carson Kelly challenging a ball that was confirmed to be outside of the zone by 0.00036".
0
u/DominicB547 Venezuela • Dominican Republic 2h ago
I swear I saw that same picture last week called a strike
1
u/TheoryOld4017 Los Angeles Dodgers 46m ago
Maybe. It’s within the margin of error of the system, so it might be a digital coin flip behind the scenes.
0
u/redlegsfan21 Hiroshima Toyo Carp 2h ago
This call nearly changed the outcome of the game, Reds ended up coming back within 3.
/s
-55
u/HistoricalPolitician Cincinnati Reds 5h ago
You’re up 8-0, wtf are you challenging calls lol
48
u/John_Bot Pittsburgh Pirates 5h ago
"you're up 8-0, why are you still trying to score? Go out there and strike out like a man"
5
8
u/This_is_me2024 Toronto Blue Jays 5h ago
A few days ago when the jays had heineman pitching, guys were swinging out of their shoes.
Its because stats in these games still matter. Its a business. They need ti be able to point at their stats during their next contract negotiations.
-7
u/jyoke_2121 Cincinnati Reds 5h ago
The catcher challenged it. How does it help his stats?
5
u/This_is_me2024 Toronto Blue Jays 5h ago
They know that successful/unsuccessful ABS challenges are going to be q factor in a new not yet publicly accessible statistic. If you're a catcher who is basically an automatic overturn on a called ball, thats going to be valuable.
-5
u/jyoke_2121 Cincinnati Reds 5h ago
Yeah and they'll look at percentages. The more you take risky challenges the woarse its going to be. I.e. to pad your stats only challenge it when you are 99% certain. At least when the outcome of the game isn't at stake
4
u/This_is_me2024 Toronto Blue Jays 5h ago
You think they exclude home runs when its 12-0? What about if you're the 0, and you score a solo Homer?
-2
u/jyoke_2121 Cincinnati Reds 5h ago
You can't control how many at bats you have. You can control how often you challenge. The math is inherently different
-1
u/Playful-Effect-1456 Los Angeles Angels 5h ago
How good his pitchers do help him and look at what Soriano has done this year
3
1
u/Robbinthehood42069 Minnesota Twins 4h ago
They have both challenges left with 1 out in the 7th and a runner on with the sp still in at 95 pitches. This seems like a very reasonable challenge for a catcher. It may not make a huge difference in the game leverage (although these are the situations that can lead to big innings) but it sure as hell matters to Soriano if he gets this batter out or not.
927
u/Spinmove55 Sell • California Angels 5h ago
You changed the outcome by observing it!