3 ms·

Nothing makes me feel more like a grumpy old man than the new strike zone box. My favorite part of watching a baseball game with friends was the heated argument

Nothing makes me feel more like a grumpy old man than the new strike zone box. My favorite part of watching a baseball game with friends was the heated arguments about what was or wasn't a strike. I realize that it's an objectively ridiculous thing to have strong feelings about, but boy do I hate it :D

Loughla 1y ago
No, I'm with you. And maybe it's just because I'm an old man, but this is another place where joy and wonder (meaning arguing with friends lol) are replaced with data. It just sucks some of the fun out. The quest for eternal optimization is exhausting.
- dehrmann 1y ago
  MLB lost the narrative of what it is and what people like about it. It's looking at other sports, seeing what they're doing, and starting to take itself too seriously.
- whartung 1y ago
  We’ll see but I don’t think that’s going to be the case. The primary use case is the glaring wrong calls. 1/2 a ball in/out of the zone called wrong. The batter/catcher/pitcher have to do the challenge, so, ideally, the “obvious” ones should be readily challenged. But the close calls, the squeakers, the players have very little time to make the challenge and we saw lots of failures in Spring Training this year. So, there’s still a lot of judgement and uncertainty to deal with. And don’t forget the the Umpires have been being evaluated based on the automated box for years. They review each game and the Umpires performance. It’s just not had actual game impact before. I have no doubt that there will be some important, game impacting “bad calls” going forward. It just that there will be fewer of them. Also be interesting to see if the get extra challenges in the post season/WS games.
Spivak 1y ago
In a very literal sense a non-trivial part of the entertainment value of sports has been taken from you. I don't think it's ridiculous at all, I think the people making the decisions to have computer accurate refs don't understand what makes sports fun to watch holistically.
- rkomorn 1y ago
  I think it's very double-edged. I don't think anybody genuinely wants refs affecting outcomes with bad calls. The problem is we have more and more technology (camera angles, first down markers, strike zones, HD and 4K resolution, etc) that make it easier to see errors after the fact. Not using technology to get things right starts to feel like dereliction of duty by the leagues as evidence of errors pile up. I accept the "human element" but I wouldn't say I like it. I do think umps having their own strike zones is one of the better instances of human element, though (so long as they're consistent).
  - llbeansandrice 1y ago
    Umps aren’t consistent tho and because of the way seniority works, the worst umps (the older ones) get the jobs in the playoffs and World Series. If you want a human element this is just using it as a challenge system. So the players have to have a good eye to decide whether an ump was right or wrong and they can’t get help from anyone else to decide to challenge a call.
    - rkomorn 1y ago
      My point was mainly that leagues are leaning towards computer-accurate stuff because mistakes are increasingly easy to spot. Arguing about calls when we were watching blurry slow-mo on CRTs isn't the same as when we're watching crystal clear 4K. Even with a challenge system as you describe, you still have potential for an ump missing calls that are obvious to everyone watching on TV. Being able to challenge is good, sure, as a bare minimum, but it's very arguable that players shouldn't have to.
YesBox 1y ago
I started watching baseball 5 years ago when I had a roommate who loves the Red Sox. I don't have cable at home so I cant say Im a true fan or anything; but if its on and I happen to be in front of a TV, Im content watching a game. At the time, every umpire had their own strike box, and I loved it! It added variance to the pitches and swings each game. Some batters would turn their head and confirm with the umpire where one edge of the box was when they called a strike (and others would silently curse without turning their head haha)
dehrmann 1y ago
> My favorite part of watching a baseball game with friends was the heated arguments about what was or wasn't a strike. I think players liked arguing with the umps, too.
arcfour 1y ago
Speak for yourself. The most fun part of baseball for me was having a correctly called game by the rules, and not being at the mercy of some septuagenarian with an ego.
- yesfitz 1y ago
  As I recall, some baseball video games will let you set both teams to be controlled by the computer. Guaranteed perfectly-called games every time. Doesn't sound particularly fun to me, but to each their own.
  - arcfour 1y ago
    Now, if only there was some way to distinguish between the performance of the players and the performance of the umpires. Oh! Oh! I know! Players don't have to be perfect, but umpires do! Yes, now we have really gotten at the spirit of competition: who is the best physically, vs "the umpire screwed up and blew the call, this is fun!" Is this even a serious argument? Come on. I would almost think you were trolling, conflating the performance of the umpires vs the performance of the players, were this not HN.
    - yesfitz 1y ago
      I think it would 100% work for someone who truly finds the "most-fun part of baseball" "having a correctly called game by the rules". Initially I was going to argue that that's a silly thing to prioritize in a game, but it's a matter of taste and I'm not going to tell you what to like or not. It's not like you said that you liked arguing with your friends or something. In all seriousness though, sure, everyone wants a fair game, but there's limitations. For instance, I only watch minor league baseball, and it's not because they got the pitch clock and ABS first, it's because the teams aren't completely optimized like the majors, and the game isn't as refined - it's closer in spirit to the first game of baseball ever played. Frankly, I'd rather watch a pick-up game without an umpire if it weren't weird (and I could get a beer and some hotdogs). Long story short (too late), baseball's a lot of different things to a lot of different people. The stats, the camaraderie, the competition, or the culture around the game itself. If you prized a game going off like clockwork, I couldn't fault you, even if that doesn't factor into my love of the game at all.
carefulfungi 1y ago
I'd prefer they'd show the location of the ball without drawing the box (even if just the location at the front edge of the plate). I like seeing where the ball reached the plate, which is quite hard to see with the typical camera angle.

Loughla 1y ago

No, I'm with you. And maybe it's just because I'm an old man, but this is another place where joy and wonder (meaning arguing with friends lol) are replaced with data. It just sucks some of the fun out. The quest for eternal optimization is exhausting.

dehrmann 1y ago
MLB lost the narrative of what it is and what people like about it. It's looking at other sports, seeing what they're doing, and starting to take itself too seriously.
whartung 1y ago
We’ll see but I don’t think that’s going to be the case. The primary use case is the glaring wrong calls. 1/2 a ball in/out of the zone called wrong. The batter/catcher/pitcher have to do the challenge, so, ideally, the “obvious” ones should be readily challenged. But the close calls, the squeakers, the players have very little time to make the challenge and we saw lots of failures in Spring Training this year. So, there’s still a lot of judgement and uncertainty to deal with. And don’t forget the the Umpires have been being evaluated based on the automated box for years. They review each game and the Umpires performance. It’s just not had actual game impact before. I have no doubt that there will be some important, game impacting “bad calls” going forward. It just that there will be fewer of them. Also be interesting to see if the get extra challenges in the post season/WS games.

Spivak 1y ago

In a very literal sense a non-trivial part of the entertainment value of sports has been taken from you. I don't think it's ridiculous at all, I think the people making the decisions to have computer accurate refs don't understand what makes sports fun to watch holistically.

rkomorn 1y ago
I think it's very double-edged. I don't think anybody genuinely wants refs affecting outcomes with bad calls. The problem is we have more and more technology (camera angles, first down markers, strike zones, HD and 4K resolution, etc) that make it easier to see errors after the fact. Not using technology to get things right starts to feel like dereliction of duty by the leagues as evidence of errors pile up. I accept the "human element" but I wouldn't say I like it. I do think umps having their own strike zones is one of the better instances of human element, though (so long as they're consistent).
- llbeansandrice 1y ago
  Umps aren’t consistent tho and because of the way seniority works, the worst umps (the older ones) get the jobs in the playoffs and World Series. If you want a human element this is just using it as a challenge system. So the players have to have a good eye to decide whether an ump was right or wrong and they can’t get help from anyone else to decide to challenge a call.
  - rkomorn 1y ago
    My point was mainly that leagues are leaning towards computer-accurate stuff because mistakes are increasingly easy to spot. Arguing about calls when we were watching blurry slow-mo on CRTs isn't the same as when we're watching crystal clear 4K. Even with a challenge system as you describe, you still have potential for an ump missing calls that are obvious to everyone watching on TV. Being able to challenge is good, sure, as a bare minimum, but it's very arguable that players shouldn't have to.

YesBox 1y ago

I started watching baseball 5 years ago when I had a roommate who loves the Red Sox. I don't have cable at home so I cant say Im a true fan or anything; but if its on and I happen to be in front of a TV, Im content watching a game. At the time, every umpire had their own strike box, and I loved it! It added variance to the pitches and swings each game. Some batters would turn their head and confirm with the umpire where one edge of the box was when they called a strike (and others would silently curse without turning their head haha)

dehrmann 1y ago

> My favorite part of watching a baseball game with friends was the heated arguments about what was or wasn't a strike. I think players liked arguing with the umps, too.

arcfour 1y ago

Speak for yourself. The most fun part of baseball for me was having a correctly called game by the rules, and not being at the mercy of some septuagenarian with an ego.

yesfitz 1y ago
As I recall, some baseball video games will let you set both teams to be controlled by the computer. Guaranteed perfectly-called games every time. Doesn't sound particularly fun to me, but to each their own.
- arcfour 1y ago
  Now, if only there was some way to distinguish between the performance of the players and the performance of the umpires. Oh! Oh! I know! Players don't have to be perfect, but umpires do! Yes, now we have really gotten at the spirit of competition: who is the best physically, vs "the umpire screwed up and blew the call, this is fun!" Is this even a serious argument? Come on. I would almost think you were trolling, conflating the performance of the umpires vs the performance of the players, were this not HN.
  - yesfitz 1y ago
    I think it would 100% work for someone who truly finds the "most-fun part of baseball" "having a correctly called game by the rules". Initially I was going to argue that that's a silly thing to prioritize in a game, but it's a matter of taste and I'm not going to tell you what to like or not. It's not like you said that you liked arguing with your friends or something. In all seriousness though, sure, everyone wants a fair game, but there's limitations. For instance, I only watch minor league baseball, and it's not because they got the pitch clock and ABS first, it's because the teams aren't completely optimized like the majors, and the game isn't as refined - it's closer in spirit to the first game of baseball ever played. Frankly, I'd rather watch a pick-up game without an umpire if it weren't weird (and I could get a beer and some hotdogs). Long story short (too late), baseball's a lot of different things to a lot of different people. The stats, the camaraderie, the competition, or the culture around the game itself. If you prized a game going off like clockwork, I couldn't fault you, even if that doesn't factor into my love of the game at all.

carefulfungi 1y ago

I'd prefer they'd show the location of the ball without drawing the box (even if just the location at the front edge of the plate). I like seeing where the ball reached the plate, which is quite hard to see with the typical camera angle.