9 ms·
Boston Red Sox Used Apple Watches to Steal Signs Against Yankees
- harryh 9y agoIt's hard to follow what the Red Sox were actually doing but it sounds like the actual sign stealing was being done with cameras. They were just using Apple Watches to receive messages (probably just plain on SMS or iMessage?) in the dugout. If I've understood correctly it sounds like the "electronic devices" part of the story is kind of peripheral.
- Waterluvian 9y agoI think it matters because electronic devices are explicitly banned. Sign stealing itself is okay so long as you don't use binoculars, electronic devices, etc.
- harryh 9y agoI guess I don't understand the chain of events then. Do you feel like you do? Catcher makes a sign -> ????? -> info is relayed to the batter. What's happening in ???? exactly and where does the Apple Watch come into play?
- magikbum 9y agoOpposing player on Second base could see the sign from the catcher and then sign his own back to dugout or player. Player batting can see his own dugout or his own third base/first base manager and easily receive a signal from them. As is now all major broadcasts easily show the catcher's sign and it can easily be decoded back to his pitches. Without the use of cheating you could only really get the signs today by having a player of your own on second base.
- thefalcon 9y agoWhich is why signs are obfuscated whenever a runner is on second base.
- astura 9y agoIn this specific case, it sounds like: Catcher makes a sign -> someone watching video electrically relays sign to dugout (in this case the athletic trainer who was receiving the info using Apple watch) -> info is relayed to an injured player on the bench (probably verbally) -> info is relayed to an outfielder (I guess who is a runner?) -> outfielder/runner relays information to batter with yet another set of signs. Oh and all this was apparently going on without the knowledge of the manager or front office. You don't need to use an Apple Watch when a runner is on second- they can see the signs directly from the catcher, that's why catchers put down multiple signs with a runner on second. When there's no baserunners or baserunners on first or third then the catcher typically uses just the standard signs and only one. It sounds to me like the sign stealing was going on when the "standard" signs were being used, I agree the article is confusing as to what is going on exactly. SMS doesn't sound fast enough for this purpose either. [In baseball everyone is giving everyone else signs the whole game, it's how everyone communicates with each other to execute plays. Players need to know what other players are going to do to be able to work as a team. ]
- saghm 9y ago> info is relayed to an outfielder using another set of signs (say touch the nose if fastball, touch cap if breaking ball, etc), outfielder relays information to batter with yet another set of signs. Slight nitpick; the players in the field at a given time aren't on the same team as the batter, so the outfielders relaying signs to the batter doesn't make sense. However, Holt and Young are not starters for the Red Sox, so it's more like that one of them formed the part of the chain in between the trainer and the batter rather than an injured player and a fielder.
- astura 9y agoYeah, I realized that after I posted that it didn't make sense so I edited it. I don't know why NY Times are referring to people on the bench and/or baserunners as "outfilders," it's ridiculously confusing to figure out what's exactly going on the way they explained it. I think the author must not be very familiar with baseball.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- wink 9y agoHad to read half the article (that lead with "sign stealing is normal?") until it came to "electronics are forbidden". Wouldn't have been too hard to insert that fact in the beginning, this is not a novel of suspense and mystery...
- passivepinetree 9y agoRight. The mention of the Apple Watch was a little disingenuous. The sign-stealing could have just as easily been performed with any number of smart watches or even just a cell phone.
- seangrant 9y agoNot really disingenuous when the point was he was looking at his "watch" and then calling plays. Looking at your phone every time would be an obvious tell.
- astura 9y agoCell phones are banned in the dugout during a game in MLB http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/08/19/mlb-okays-apple-watch-for-use-in-the-dugout-cell-phones-still-banned http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/08/19/mlb-okays-apple-wa... >While there is no official rule against electronic devices, then-MLB operations chief Sandy Alderson effectively laid down the law with a memo distributed in 2000: >Please be reminded that the use of electronic equipment during a game is restricted. No club shall use electronic equipment, including walkie-talkies and cellular telephones, to communicate to or with any on-field personnel, including those, in the dugout, bullpen, field and-during the game-the clubhouse. Such equipment may not be used for the purpose of stealing signs or conveying information designed to give a club an advantage.
- Digory 9y agoThe Apple Watch, in particular, has been a Yankees bugaboo for awhile. There was a minor kerfuffle around Ned Yost wearing an Apple Watch in 2015 for the All Star game, building on Yankee complaints against Cleveland [0] Presumably Joe Torre had approved their return ... [0] http://www.kctv5.com/story/29888526/kansas-city-company-replaces-nedyosts-banned-apple-watch http://www.kctv5.com/story/29888526/kansas-city-company-repl...
- 40acres 9y agoSMS or iMessage is probably too slow, trainers were probably using physical cues (like if I touch my cap it's a slider) to relay messages.
- jdoliner 9y agoMaybe it was: if I touch my Apple watch it's a slider, if I touch my Android watch it's a fast ball. The article seemed fairly confident they were using the Apple watch for something.
- giarc 9y agoNo... from the article "The commissioner’s office then confronted the Red Sox, who admitted that their trainers had received signals from video replay personnel and then relayed that information to some players — an operation that had been in place for at least several weeks." The video replay personnel are sending messages, via Apple watch to the trainers.
- 40acres 9y agoAh I see, I'm referring to the message transaction from trainer to player.
- rhinoceraptor 9y agoThe most effective (and hard to spot) way IMO would be some sort of custom app that would do different wrist tap patterns. The players on the field wouldn't need to look at the watch at all.
- sibartlett 9y agoI don’t think the camera room were relaying the signs, but rather what the signs meant. So that when a base runner was at 2nd they’d understand the signs they were seeing.
- hammock 9y ago> the "electronic devices" part of the story is kind of peripheral. It's actually critical. Sign stealing is not illegal, although frowned upon. However, FTA: >Binoculars and electronic devices are prohibited to communicate about signs.
- tucif 9y agoYou probably misread, the camera was allegedly used by the Yankees. That was the complaint filed in response by the Red Sox.
- giarc 9y agoI think they both used camera's. For the Red Sox to get signs without someone on second, they would need a camera. If they only got them when a man was on second, they wouldn't need an Apple watch (man on second can signal to batter themselves).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- hitgeek 9y agoi'd be surprised if this scheme was actually successful. its very difficult to relay signs from the dugout to the batter in the few seconds between when the sign is given and when the pitch is thrown. base runners on second base have always been able to see the signs between pitcher and catcher and relay the information to the batter. To counter this catchers use a complex combination of signs that change inning to inning, sometimes batter to batter.
- spike021 9y agoNot sure. Batters already look back to the dugout sometimes in order to know if they want a bunt, squeeze play, hit and run, etc. That doesn't take more than 3-5 seconds. If they already coordinate some kind of sign between the trainer (in question) and a player, then it shouldn't take any more time.
- fcbrooklyn 9y agoThe catcher throws the sign after the batter has taken his stance. No more looking at the dugout.
- bluGill 9y ago3 seconds is more than enough time for the pitcher to realize the batter isn't paying attention and throw a strike. Batters will look of course, but they step out of the batters box (or otherwise - I don't know all the rules) to indicate that a pitch cannot be thrown now. Once the batter is ready to receive a pitch the catcher can signal a new pitch.
- sibartlett 9y agoI don’t think the camera room were relaying the signs, but rather what the signs meant. So that when a base runner was at 2nd they’d understand the signs they were seeing.
- canistr 9y agoGood time to remind people about the previously false accusations from the Yankees on the Blue Jays sign stealing using a "Man in White" sitting the outfield with binoculars. The interesting part here is that the Yankees alleged the "Man in White" was positioned right above the pitcher's head in the outfield seats so that the batter did not have to move his head in order to see the signal. I can't imagine the logistics and speed required to relay a signal from the outfield -> dugout -> batter in a reasonable amount of time to be able to hit. http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6837424/baseball-toronto-blue-jays-suspicion-again-stealing-signs-rogers-centre http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6837424/baseball-tor...
- golfer 9y agoThe Red Sox have admitted to the wrongdoing. This is not crying wolf. They are guilty.
- carfacts 9y agoHow did they ensure the sign interpretation was correct? Seems like the information/disinformation problem in espionage.
- sokoloff 9y agoYou get immediate feedback when the pitch is thrown, which is prior to the next time you need to interpret the signs.
- supercanuck 9y agoKeep in mind, for those doubting the efficacy, its not necessary to know what exact pitch is coming (Fastball, curve, slider, change up,etc). Just knowing whether it is a fastball or an off speed is enough, at which point, it simply becomes a matter of transmitting a binary signal. Transmitting the sign, could be as easy as sending a 1 or 2, then the dugout simply yelling, "Let's go so-so" for offspeed, or "C'mon #12" for fastball. Most major league pitchers not named, Kershaw, Felix, Max, etc, only have 2 ++ pitches,
- dmix 9y agoSo what is being 'stolen' is something that largely comes down to a 50% probability in most situations? Is there a history of 'stealing signs' in baseball? ...Since it could be communicated almost as effectively offline as by a smartwatch. Also, how accurate can the team read the other team's signs from the dugout? Is it a high probability the information between sent to the players is accurate?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Dan_Nguyen 9y ago>So what is being 'stolen' is something that largely comes down to a 50% probability in most situations? Yes, but that 50% probability makes a huge difference. .300 is considered a fantastic batting average to have. .400 makes you a legend. The former means that a great batter can hit the ball in pay and not get out before they reach first 30% of their at bats. So even improving your batting average by .05, i.e. have 5% more of your at bats result in hits, makes a huge difference to both your team and your career. And as far as that 50% probability goes, it tells the batter a huge amount. A typical fastball comes in in the high 90s mph, an offspeed in the 80s. So even just knowing whether it's an offspeed or fastball ensures you won't swing too late or too early. >Is there a history of 'stealing signs' in baseball? ...Since it could be communicated almost as effectively offline as by a smartwatch. Yes. First it's worth noting that stealing signs without technological aid is legal. The issue here is that the Red Sox were using an Apple Watch to aid them. By far the most common and traditional method of stealing signs is using a runner on second. If a batter reaches second base, he has a clear line of sight to the batter and catcher. The catcher is the one making the signs to the pitcher, and by observing the catcher, the runner on second can relay those signs to the batter thereby improving the batter's chances of getting on base. The obvious issue here is that if you cannot use electronics to assist you, then your chances of stealing signs is limited. The runner on second is about your only chance of being able to do so. >Also, how accurate can the team read the other team's signs from the dugout? Not very. If you watch a typical at bat, pay attention to the catcher. He holds his hand between his legs, right in front of his crotch. His signs makes him look like he's scratching his crotch. Because of how close his hand is to his body, the fact that his legs are always extended on either side of his hands, and that the dugouts are on either side off the field, the dugout's view of the catcher's hands are obscured so they can't see his signs. Goes back to my above statement of the time proven method of stealing signs with a runner on second. >Is it a high probability the information between sent to the players is accurate? Depends on their pre-game preparations and adjustments. What often happens is catchers mask their signals. A simple example of this would be the catcher and pitchers plan beforehand to send four signals, and the second signal is their real one. Obviously it's more complex than this in real life, but the point is there are safeguards against stealing signals. If you have figured out their code then you have a very good chance of predicting pitches. If not, then the signs you steal probably won't be any better than guessing.
- Touche 9y agoIt's always baffled me that the pitcher doesn't get to decide what pitch to throw.
- anderiv 9y agoThe pitcher does get to choose what to throw. The catcher signs, then the pitcher either shakes his head "no" or winds up for the pitch. If "no", the catcher chooses another pitch until they agree.
- ISL 9y agoExactly - this way they both know what's going to happen. If the pitcher indicated somehow, the batter could see the sign.
- thefalcon 9y agoThe pitcher has final say, but a good battery (pitcher-catcher combo) is especially valuable because it lets the pitcher focus on throwing his pitches (and tracking runners as needed) instead of also involving him in the batter-pitcher mind games. Smart catchers are very under-rated by most casual fans, and can tell you why they called every single pitch in every single at-bat in a ball game (which will run well over a hundred pitches a game).
- aidenn0 9y agoDon't think meat, just throw! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBUS3vQtDCA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBUS3vQtDCA
- astura 9y agoThe pitcher absolutely does get to decide what pitch to throw. If the pitcher does not like what the catcher puts down he just shakes his head and the catcher puts down a different sign. Repeat until the pitcher is happy. The big reason why pitchers don't signal to the catcher is because pitcher and catcher must both know what pitch is being thrown beforehand and the batter can see the pitcher but not the catcher, so it's 1000% easier to keep the pitch secret when the catcher calls the pitches. However, the catcher calling the pitches is beneficial because it allows the pitcher to better concentrate on the act of pitching.
- fcbrooklyn 9y agoA couple of things about sign stealing, from someone who is not an expert, but has watched a great deal of baseball: 1) The signs are usually not complex, you can easily read them yourself when you see them on TV. One finger might mean a fastball, two fingers some kind of breaking ball, three fingers might be the pitcher's least favorite pitch. Often, the sign is accompanied by a second sign indicating where the catcher wants it. So one finger followed by a hand lifting up-up, means he wants a high fastball. The players will know what the signs mean after one batter at most. 2) The only time the batting team can actually see the signs is when there's a runner on second. In this case, frequently, the catcher will go to the mound and he and the pitcher will come up with some simple obfuscation. Normally this looks like 3-4 signs indicated in quick succession. I assume they've agreed that number 3 is the meaningful one or something. 3) The communication doesn't have to be perfect. In a lot of cases, a batter is waiting for a specific pitch. It would be enough to signal "Yeah, it's gonna be a fastball outside". The article suggests that a specific camera crew was the original source of the signs, but it's not clear how that worked. It happened in Boston, so perhaps the camera was manned by local people who turned out to be red sox fans. If such a person was watching a continuous feed, and a specific redsox player asked to be alerted when a high fastball was coming, the apple watch would seem to be a practical solution.
- pjungwir 9y agoDo batters bat better with a runner on second? Actually the relative performance for all the different base combinations would be pretty interesting to know. Only eight possibilities!
- hkmurakami 9y agoDepends on the batter. There's a stat for batting average with runners in scoring positions (at least one runner on at least second base). It has a lot of factors though like the batter's own psychology, the pitcher having to pitch from the stretch (an abbreviated motion to defend against base stealing when there are >0 runners on base), etc. Baseball stats by the actual teams to get an edge is the most advanced in all of sports. The internal stats of the teams likely have much more sohpicticated numbers that control for a lot more variables.
- trapperkeeper74 9y agoIt's 2017. If on-field only electronic communication systems were legal in baseball, why couldn't pitchers and catchers have some sort of encrypted "Google Glass"-like head-mounted display and chording glove-button system?
- dsr_ 9y agoIf it were legal to do so, they would. But they'd be much more likely to just set up an audio system.
- joshmn 9y agoIs this YC-able? Is there a pending RFS? Neural network/machine learning for major sports leagues and subsequent advantages? The market is huge, guys. Just think of all the cross-platform potential between all major sports. In other news, here's some stats[0]: Red Sox with a runner on second at Fenway: 273/373/417 Red Sox with a runner on second at Fenway, April thru July: 269/370/380 (94 for 352) Red Sox with a runner on second at Fenway, August: 292/392/557 (31 for 106) Red Sox with a runner on second at Fenway vs the Yankees, April/July: 056/103/056 (2 for 36) Red Sox with a runner on second at Fenway vs the Yankees, August: 375/448/625 (9 for 24) The August series is the series in question. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/6yaos8/boston_red_sox_used_electronic_devices_to_steal/dmlxdcw/ https://www.reddit.com/r/baseball/comments/6yaos8/boston_red...
- saghm 9y agoNot disputing that the cheating was happening, but sample size for August is smaller, not to mention that hitters in general do better during than the summer months than April/May.
- bitmapbrother 9y agoWhat is it with Boston sport teams and their penchant for stealing signs. First it was the Patriots with recording signs from their opponents defensive coaches and now it's the Red Sox stealing signs.
- mannykannot 9y agoThe Sox didn't have many choices - you can't deflate a baseball.
- bitmapbrother 9y agoTrue, but you can cork a bat.
- dogruck 9y agoSomeone finally found a killer app for the Apple Watch!
- beedogs 9y agoBeing a fan of Boston sports must be tiring. Defending the indefensible year after year can't be fun.
- pjdemers 9y agoGiven the Red Sox lost 3 out of 4 in that series, the Yankees should just given them a video feed next time.