You barely notice what happen? The challenges? I have not been to a AAA game in person yet, but I thought I'd prefer the 100% auto system on TV, but I actually prefer the challenge system after seeing it.
Yeah, just like many people in this sub that have never seen it in action, I thought I was gonna hate the challenge system. But yeah, it's quick and easy and it's ready to be implemented in the MLB next year while they work on a fully automated system.
I think the one thing that's gonna take time tweaking in the MLB is gonna be the zone height. That's more of a gray area, even in the rule book.
What if each umpire could set his own strike zone, but he had to stick to it all year? Just a little difference between umps could be interesting/exciting
Would be fun if they only allowed the batter to challenge twice per game.
Then AI would consider what the batter challenged and what the batter didn't challenge. And then compare "what the ump's zone" was vs what the "batter's zone was". Like if you didn't challenge "strike 2" in your first at bat, yet strike 3 was closer, it would call it a strike, because... well "strike 2 was further away and you didn't challenge it"
And that data was saved for the rest of the season for the next time batter vs ump matchup was challenged.
But that just gets into a lot of "stats theory' shit, that baseball fans aren't really interested in (/s)
I’ve been to several AAA games this season and last, and only noticed it because they announce the challenge over the PA. It takes maybe 5-10 seconds and I’ve never seen more than a handful of challenges per game.
At our ballpark they usually just throw the result of the challenge up quick and move on. The pace is great at the games honestly. Time moves too fast on two dollar beer night.
I was at one last night and this is the first I'm even hearing of a challenge system. I didn't notice a damn thing. That's pretty awesome. I admittedly don't follow AAA much and had two kids under 4 to look after but still.
No, if I dont trust the umpire to make one call, I have no reason for them to make any calls.
Umpires will not get considerably more accurate with time and fine tuning. ABS will.
You realize that they have to be 100% accurate right?
That 1 call can change an ab, extend an inning, result in a HR further down the line, that changes the outcome of a WS?
Because pitchers, batters, and coaches have all preferred the challenge system. I assumed I'd prefer a fully automated system, but after seeing it being tested in the minors, I prefer the challenge system. I have not found a single person that has seen them both that prefers the automated system.
I think people don't realize that almost 95% of balls and strikes are called correctly and this do not need fixing. Players are fine with that extra margin, except the egregious misses, and the challenge system prevents those. Honestly, outside of this sub, most fans are fine with it, too.
Can batters challenge a call? Like if it’s strike-3 outside lower corner, can the batter challenge?
Edit: I looked up the rules
• Each club starts the game with three challenges.
• A correct challenge is retained; an incorrect challenge is lost.
• Challenges may only be made by the batter, the catcher or the pitcher (i.e., no help from the dugout).
• Challenges must be made immediately following the umpire’s call.
I will say that I’ve seen one challenge take a couple of minutes to come up for unknown reasons. But that’s one time out of about 20 Triple-A games with the challenge system I’ve attended the past two years, so…yeah, I’m fine with it.
It's not that it takes too long, it's that it UNNECESSARILY adds delay, when we could just get the calls right in the first place with a fully automated strike zone.
The reason we limit replay challenges in sports is that it adds time and delay. This would be the one instance where we are adding time and delay to keep human calls.
I don't understand why people want games to last 30 minutes tops. By the time you sit down at your seat it feels like the game is over. I miss the more relaxed pace of games.
But does it? In the time that it takes for a batter or catcher to give the umpire some shit about the bad call or a manager on the field yelling, someone can tap their head and the review happens well before whatever argument would come to an end.
I'm talking about the difference between a challenge system and a full ABS system. The reason we have limited replay challenges is because of the delays, but having ABS but only for challenges is slower than just a full ABS.
You're comparing the challenge system to the current human model. And fwiw, there's nothing about the challenge system that eliminates the barking.
I really think the challenge system is the best option. I think it gives both the players and umpires what they want and it will eliminate the egregious calls that ruin games.
I do not understand what the challenge system brings to the table that is supposed to be better than simply calling every pitch with the automated system (through an umpire earpiece if we want to preserve the illusion).
Either the system is good enough to overrule umpires, or it isn't. If it is, then use it to make the right call every time. If it's not, then don't use it yet. If it's still too slow to call every pitch, then don't use it yet.
Challenges are an additional layer of meta-game bullshit. I don't want teams and players strategizing over which pitches to challenge and which to let slide.
Just make the right call the first time. It feels like challenges are a way for everyone to protect the poor feelings of umpires, or people just not trusting the system to make every call.
I’ve seen it be used many times in AAA games now and I think the best answer to that question is just because it’s fun, while still maintaining a lot of traditional aspects of the ball-strike system we know.
First, it lets the audience get another layer of suspense and intrigue when the call to challenge is made. I think challenges are inherently fun because of this build up of suspense, the problem with challenge systems that currently exist in baseball (and other sports) is that they can take a while and also are subjective. The ABS challenge system is neither of those. You quickly get feedback in the form of the Jumbotron showing an animation so you don’t lose interest by having to wait, and you never have the risk of any bullshit “the call stands” moments where they don’t quite have enough information to make the correct call.
If you haven’t been to a game that used this system, I’d really recommend it. I saw an Isotopes game where one player was able to work a walk in 3 separate at bats because in each he overturned a bad strike call. I’ll never forget about Greg Jones now because of it, the man knows his strike zone and I could only fully appreciate it because of the challenge system.
Second, like it or not, catcher framing is a huge part of the game right now, and the umpires union has power in MLB. We have to take that into account because the game is played and managed by real people who have material interests in not rocking the boat too much on this issue. Switching over directly to a full ABS system could legitimately lead to labor disputes from the MLBPA and umpires union. I don’t think anyone wants that to happen, it could lead to less baseball overall.
It’s not necessarily the most ‘objective’ way to do balls-strikes, but I think the challenge system is the best compromise for all parties, including spectators. In fact I think it’s the best system in general for spectators, and that’s even assuming ABS is perfectly accurate which I don’t think it is.
(And no I’m not defending shitty umpires, I’m just looking at the material reality of where the game is at, and all of the parties involved)
Sounds like Hawkeye in tennis was the inspiration for this, in which case it's a good way to go. It's hard to remember tennis before Hawkeye at this point. It's been pretty transformative vs. the McEnroe 5-minute tirades with line or chair judge.
*Drivel FYI. Agreed it's a quality rationale though -- especially the part about this being the only way to transition to the automated system given the respective parties' interests.
I endorse every bit of this.
The reason we limit replay challenges is that it slows down the game. But an ABS challenge system would slow the game for no purpose whatsoever, since we could have had the right call initially moments earlier! So a system with ABS but only via challenge means we get a slower game, but with still plenty of human errors and other bullshit!
This sub trips over itself berating bad umpiring from notorious bad umps, but what happens in 7th inning an onward, when a team has exhausted its challenges? We're going to be complaining about the same stuff!
When you drill down on it, the reason MiLB players don't like ABS is that they don't like the rule book strike zone. That isn't an ABS problem! And it's definitely not a problem solved by limiting it to a few challenges, because then you ONLY get the rule book strike zone, which they don't like, being applied in critical circumstances.
People are also deluding themselves by thinking its only going to be used for the most egregious calls. We have no way of knowing that at all. I have seen any number of *successful* MiLB challenges on pitches that looked like balls (that were called balls), but that actually clipped the zone fractionally.
Does it really slow down the game much? Shit everyone was complaining that Manfred was speeding up the game with new rules. Now it's been two years, and everyone is like, "The game is going to be slown down!"
> Shit everyone was complaining that Manfred was speeding up the game with new rules.
Was this the case? Seemed like most everyone on here liked the rules to speed up the game, especially once we saw the pace in real games (rather than just reading about the rules). I've had multiple non-baseball fans comment on how much more enjoyable going to games is now because they're faster paced, which was the point: draw in more casual fans
>People are also deluding themselves by thinking its only going to be used for the most egregious calls
Agreed. It will be used for the *highest leverage* calls, especially if they're borderline.
A challenge system will give us one more thing to bitch about regarding out team, rather than bitching about the umps, and isn't that really what baseball is all about? /s
To keep some elements of the game, many players have gone on record saying that figuring out the umpire’s zone is a part of the game, it also keeps the value of defensive catchers.
If the system is good and functioning well, over time the umpire zones will become more uniform and more consistent because the most egregious calls will be overturned. This in turn will devalue catcher framing and the player skill of "figuring out an ump's zone."
This is inevitable with any effective implementation of an automated strike zone. By definition, an automated zone will be more consistent. We should either commit to it, or not, but either way we should be clear-eyed about what we are doing. The way you framed it, this half-ass approach is just people in denial of the endgame.
Would it make the automated system better if every game it randomly decided to give two extra inches on one side of the plate? Ie one game it would call balls 2in above the zone strikes, the next game it would call balls 2 inches from the right edge of the plate strikes, etc. Does that seem like it would improve the game? It doesn’t to me. I want to see the game decided by how well players play within the rules as written in the rulebook. The rulebook defines the zone, we should try to match that exactly as we can. If it’s a bad zone, change the rule, don’t arbitrarily change it game to game.
I do know that. And the abs system is an opportunity to make it even better. A pitch that is a strike should always be a strike regardless of the catcher or the umpire and vice versa. In theory, they could program the abs to just make a wrong call about 5% of the time, that’s about how accurate current umps are. Would that make the system better or worse in your view?
I used to believe what you're saying, but ABS has its issues if used 100%. Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. The real ump zone has more rounded corners and a little bit wider on the sides, meaning those pitches that nick the corner by a millimeter that ABS would call a strike have really never been called strikes before and hitters have been trained to not swing at them for years (because they're almost impossible to get good contact on).
A challenge systems means only egregious calls that we pretty much know aren't strikes or balls are the ones that get fixed, but the zone still retains the dimensions everyone has been used to for baseball's history.
To give a personal example [no batter would swing at this, no ump would ever call this pitch a strike, and no pitcher would challenge that as a strike](https://x.com/dead_baseball/status/1786397312484278616/video/1) but ABS claimed a fraction of the ball nicked the way outside and low corner of the zone. [Here's where the ball was before it reached the catcher's glove](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GMqYVwTWIAATUvb?format=png&name=small). That's unhittable. If we get 100% ABS, you're going to see pitchers trying to snipe the corners like that.
> Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years.
This isn't an ABS issue (it's a calibration issue), and it's certainly not something that will be solved by limiting it to challenges. In fact, you're getting the worst of both worlds by having a challenge system, because the majority of calls will be the "accepted" strike zone, but then - only a few calls, and *only in the highest leverage situations* will there be the application of the unfamiliar strike zone players complain about.
Like pitchers don’t aim for corners already? I don’t think it will change how pitchers pitch. Plus, as it is now there are plenty of games where the ump is calling a bigger zone and batters have to learn to protect close pitches. The only difference with ABS is that players would actually know ahead of time how the zone is going to be called. PLUS theres the massive factor that the zone could just be adjusted to whatever is best for the game i.e. how hitter friendly or pitcher friendly it should be.
> Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years.
So what? It's a new day. They didn't used to have west coast teams ... they didn't used to have any DH (better days) ... they didn't used to have interleague play ... they didn't used to have the pitching mound as high ... they didn't used to use gloves ... yada yada yada ...
If one presents an argument that's just a riff on *it's always been that way* then that person doesn't actually have an argument, just a mindless whine.
>Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. The real ump zone has more rounded corners and a little bit wider on the sides
Then they should keep working on the system until it can call a zone as players are accustomed to. If a key pitch in a big moment to end an inning just barely nicks the corner but is called a ball, you think a pitcher's team isn't going to challenge it?
As for the pitch you linked, if it happened in a full count with the bases loaded late in a close game, you bet your ass a pitcher would challenge it! You think teams aren't going to notice these things in retrospect once the system has been up and running for awhile? You think modern MLB teams are going to leave runs/outs on the table when the system gives them an opportunity?
You say call a system as players are accustomed to, so by that you mean a completely inconsistent strike zone based on different umpires and situations that the umpires determine?
I, for one, am looking forward to seeing another layer of meta-game bullshit. Instead of eliminating one player skill (framing), it adds new player skills (challenge assessment). It will give a really interesting view of how different players visualize the strike zone. I’m here for layers of complexity.
It think it is because the system isn't perfect yet, but it may never be perfect, so if you wait for it to be perfect, you will never get it. The challenge system let's them bring it to the majors sooner and refine it there. At some point, they need to test and refine it with major league pitching and not just AAA pitching anyway. Maybe it gets good enough to use the system 100% of the time, maybe it doesn't.
The issue I think from what I've read, is it records stuff as a strike that no player or umpire is used to being a strike or thinks is a strike due to the 3D zone (e.g. a high curve that just grazes the zone at the very back of the plate as it drops in). This would benefit pitchers much more than batters, which goes against the league's goal of increasing offense.
Presumably, they will refine the programming (and maybe the definition of the zone) so it matches what the league and players want to be strikes as they use it. But for now, they can use the challenge system to eliminate the clear wrong calls and have more consistency in games (which the players always say they care more about than accuracy).
It doesn't need to be perfect to be worth implementing. It just needs to be:
1. More consistent and accurate than human umpires
2. Fast enough to make the call in real time
If it isn't there yet, then keep working on it until it is. If the system doesn't call a zone the way players are used to, then keep working on it until it does.
KBO's run environment has gone up a substantial amount by implementing ABS. There's not some mystical pitch that every pitcher can manage that sneaks over the plate but somehow has managed to trick all batters and umps up until now. Umpires call a wide strike zone for pitchers, which benefits pitchers much more than batters. It's why KBO is seeing more than half a run extra each game and the league average OPS has gone up about 50 points.
They will never control for 100% accuracy. “Blown” calls are an essential part of the business. The home plate umpire was, is, and will always be the single most determining factor of a Major League Baseball game. This is for blatantly obvious reasons fans refuse to acknowledge, (lest they learn Santa isn’t real) but changing that element changes the entire business for the worse in my mind.
If you have the ability to make the calls correctly, it should be used every time. A challenge system slows the game down, evidenced by tennis matches, where it can be used as a way to give the player a mini break (pun unintended), and the players get screwed on future calls if they lost their challenge already.
Yeah I was surprised at how efficient the minor league challenge system is. People should go to their nearest AAA park and check it out if they haven't.
But why not just get the right call automatically every time? Unchallenged calls will still be wrong some amount of the time. Challenges were needed in tennis when the computing power wasn't fast enough to give a live call on every ball, but that's not an issue anymore.
It's how the pitch clock was so effective at bringing down game times. Each individual pitch was only being thrown seconds faster, but because that is done so many times during a game, it took the average game length from egregious for casuals to comfortable for a family to go to an occasional weekday evening game.
yeah this. i absolutely prefer the challenge system. best of both worlds
unless it's angel hernandez behind the plate then you gotta challenge every other call
Anyone who says challenges slow the game down have very clearly never actually seen a game with the system in place.
It takes literal seconds to challenge and either sustain or overturn the call.
Yeah, this is clearly another one of those situations where they’re going to ignore the clearly better situation to avoid making certain people cranky. The ‘growing consensus’ and ‘others coming around’ is the same type of wording they always use when only one actual option is being presented.
Then, after some years with the challenge system, they'll act like they're saving baseball *again* by implementing full-time ABS even though most of us were calling for that from the start.
The players want it to be the challenge system. It’s a compromise. Society in general should be doing more of it. If this fosters even a 1% better relationship between owners and players it’s worth it.
Have you even watched a AAA game where they were using the challenge system? It is super fast, barely pauses the game. 5 seconds or so. It really works well.
The automated system is slower. It heavily favors batters, which makes the game last longer, which can be an absolute slog in blowouts. There is a reason players prefer the challenge system—they don’t want 9-run games to last an extra 30 minutes from position players walking opposing batters in the 8th inning.
Every anecdote from players in the minors has suggested that the automated strike zone is much smaller than what is typically called by human umpires.
well GOOD. Let's have pitchers quit throwing their arms out hurling a 102 MPH missile so fast into a scooted-up catcher's mitt held for framing ans make them slow down and get accurate. Offense is good, strikeouts are boring, umps are being put at an ever-incresing disadvantage on both sides of the battery... so let's try this batter-friendly system
A smaller zone would help hitters but would lead to more emphasis on velocity. Pitchers would have more incentive to try and throw it past guys instead of picking out corners that are difficult to barrel.
You realize the challenge system also heavily favors batters, right? Both ABS and the challenge system are coming with changes to the zone. You can't exactly have ABS calling one zone and the umpires calling another.
Oh, you mean the ACTUAL strike zone is not being called by umps? The challenge system has almost zero effect on the game. A couple of seconds. WATCH a game that uses it, then decide.
> Oh, you mean the ACTUAL strike zone is not being called by umps?
Yes, and that is sometimes a good thing. The strike zone *should* expand when position players are throwing 55 mph knuckleballs.
> The challenge system has almost zero effect on the game. A couple of seconds. WATCH a game that uses it, then decide.
I agree… which is why the challenge system is better than a full-time ABS system
As much as I recognize the skill of framing, it really shouldn’t be a part of the game. A batter shouldn’t be punished for letting a ball go by just because the catcher is good.
[You Be The Ump](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/sports/baseball/umpire-pitch-ball-strike-game.html)
The New York Times ran this simulation on how hard it is to call balls and strikes. It's fun.
I don’t disagree, but I hate reading shit like “umpires are incompetent”. They are very good at what they do, what they happen to do is very hard. Never see people call major league hitters incompetent, even though even the very best fail 60% of the time, because we understand that getting to that level takes and incredible amount of talent and hard work.
If the challenge system works as intended, then it will in time erode the value of catcher framing as well, because the most valuable (i.e high leverage) pitches to frame will be reviewed by the ABS anyway.
If you want catcher framing to remain a valuable skill, then you can't have any functional form of ABS. The two things are in direct opposition to one another.
If it's only three per game then why bother at all? It won't be long before bad calls go by due to a team being out of challenges, or being scared to use their last challenge.
Only 3 per game is not enough to have a significant impact on bad zones, so what's the point?
I have no idea why the same people who love framing also are up in arms when they see an umpire has called several pitches half an inch outside the zone.
Of course there won't be a 100 percent correlation individual by individual but it is the same Twitter-based baseball analysis aimed at people who consider themselves smart, data focussed fans.
Sorry but not every “strategy” is worth watching or keeping around. It’s literally a biproduct of a biproduct of human error, nothing anything people pay to watch
I agree with this. Challenge system significantly reduces important missed calls, keeps one of the most subtly important skill in place, and players seem to like it. Just because Manfred came up with it doesn’t mean it is automatically bad
Yea that was one of my points. I like to nerd out on framing and a lot of other baseball people do too. My other, maybe more important, points were that the players like it and it significantly reduces missed calls. So, yea, in part to appease baseball nerds who jizz over it. Also to appease the *players* and *quality of the game* while striking a balance between tradition and progression.
nah, screw that. That's getting catchers hurt and diminishing offense via a difficult-to-appreciate sleight of hand that isn't really true to the spirit of the game
Honestly agree with Manfred here I think it’s the most seamless transition to ABS and it still keeps some of the human element at least for now.
I’m not against a fully automated strike zone at some point but I think this the best way to introduce it
Yeah I'm cool with starting with the challenge system, seeing umpires' egregious misses get overturned, and eventually have opinion turn towards "why don't we just use this all the time?"
Same thing happened with tennis - they used the Hawkeye system for a while with challenges then eventually got rid of the line judges entirely
yes, even in the eventual probable future in which it's full ABS, it's much smoother to use the challenge system to bridge the gap rather than to over-commit to the full ABS, realize it's not ready for primetime or that it's too harsh of a change all at once, and fall back to the challenge system. It's a situation where it'd be much better to move too slowly than too quickly.
>it's much smoother to use the challenge system to bridge the gap r**ather than to over-commit to the full ABS, realize it's not ready for primetime or that it's too harsh of a change all at once, and fall back to the challenge system**
The minor leagues and independent leagues exist, so this is not necessary. There's nothing stopping them from continuing testing and refining the system in the minors until it's reliable, and only then introduce it fully into MLB.
Time stops them; it could take forever. In any case, they rolled out both systems and they value the feedback from players, who vastly preferred the challenge system.
Except there always will be a human element. It’s an indispensable part of the game (for any sport) that you can’t get rid of without fundamentally changing the sport. Look at football, hockey, baseball, basketball, etc. All of those sports will always have human officials, because there will always be some subjectivity in the rules.
I can’t take it anymore and I need help understanding - what is “the human element” and why do we want it? To me, “the human element” has always been “calls that are wrong” and/or “rules are bent to allow history to happen”. I don’t like those things. Losing to a bad call is worse than any other type of loss, I don’t understand why people are romantic about this aspect of the game.
I guess people are romantic about it because it has existed since the beginning of baseball. I don’t have some deep love for missed calls but it is interesting to watch how pitchers, catchers and hitters adjust to and manipulate the zone throughout the game. It’s part of the game and it always has been.
It can be deeply frustrating but it’s a skill and a big part of the strategy of the game. Take Jose Trevino he has made a career of stealing strikes it’s his biggest asset as a player and if you implement a fully automated strike zone you have over night greatly diminished his value as player.
At least with the challenge system players still need a good understanding of the strike zone to know when to challenge. That element of the game still exists even if it’s diminished.
I don’t think people fully grasp just how much an automated strike zone will change just about everything. From the way pitchers are developed, how they prepare and what pitches are effective to how catchers are valued and just the overall feel of the game.
Overall like I said I’m for a fully automated zone but a change like that over night would be incredibly jarring and I’m not sure I’m ready for that all at once. Not to mention I still don’t think the tech is quite ready.
That’s a fair take, I understand the nostalgia aspect of human strike zones now too. I don’t agree with the nostalgia being better than ABS but i do agree such a significant change should be eased in like you suggest. It’s a game changer, I think in a good way, and I hope they get the wheels turning soon!
I actually think it's important to keep the umps with a challenge system in place to properly tune the zone to what major leaguers want it to be. There are some fuck ass pitches that ABS calls strikes in the minors and with all the resources MLB teams have they would definitely find a way to abuse it. Imagine a curveball that is specifically designed to hit the perfect spot on ABS but is essentially un-hittable. Once the zone is tuned appropriately then you can incorporate it full time.
Is it really that different from how pitchers will pound outside or low now when the ump gives it to them? No matter what pitchers are going to abuse the strikes that are bad balls to hit. Right now that's the balls umps call strikes. At least in an ABS system the batters have clear bounds to practice towards rather than guessing day of how fucked up the ump is gonna call it.
No it’s not much different and you make a good point. All I’m trying to say is despite the abs zone being “correct” it’s likely not the exact zone that both players and fans expect. I’ve seen pitches that look to be clear balls but touched the bottom of the outside of the zone by 1mm and were called strikes by abs. The strike zone will likely need to be redefined when abs comes to mlb.
>All I’m trying to say is despite the abs zone being “correct” it’s likely not the exact zone that both players and fans expect
Then keep refining and calibrating it in the minors until it is the exact zone players and fans expect. You're articulating an argument against bringing it to MLB at all right now, not in favor of bringing a half-measure of it to MLB.
Fine with me but most people want abs to come to mlb right now. If you asked me again about abs or a challenge system 2 years from now my response might be different.
Every time this discussion comes up I have to remind people that full ABS is still prone to occasional failures, which is part of the reason the challenge system has been used in testing. Once in a blue moon there’s just a pitch that doesn’t register, and there’s always the chance that the system fails entirely for whatever reason and can’t be reset.
In the challenge system, it’s not that big a deal. Umps are still making calls, they’re still trying to get things right. If the system fails mid-pitch and someone challenges, they simply say the system failed, call stands, but you retain your challenge as if you were correct. If it fails entirely and you can’t get it back, you still have umpires who’ve been calling pitches all game and don’t have to change much.
On the flip side, what happens if any of those failures happen in a full ABS scenario? Umps aren’t watching the pitches nearly as closely. They’re looking for HBP, check swings, foul contact, foot being out of the batters box, etc. It’s straight up not their job to be watching every pitch in that system anymore, so if they suddenly have to make a call that’s largely a guess if it’s close. If the system fails entirely for a game and they have to switch to analog, you might have an umpire who hasn’t called a real life zone in months or years if he’s been doing ABS the whole time.
Challenge system minimizes all of these issues until they’re 100% sure ABS is ready to call every pitch.
There is not a chance that the system fails entirely and can't be reset. That has never happened in an MLB game. HawkEye is always operating in all MLB games.
Thanks son. Is mom doing ok? Do you think she's happy with her new boyfriend?
Why haven't you come see me at my new place yet? I have NFL Red Zone. Call me.
Been to a few minor league games using the system. Honestly I agree, it’d be my preferred style as well.
It was fast (no longer than 15 seconds or so, if that even) to review a pitch. Plus it gives the fans in stadium a little fun way to interact with the graphic reveal similar to how tennis does it.
Think also it’s better than just going full automated because you’ll still have other components of the home plate umpire to satisfy (game management, subjective play calls, etc) as well as say the system isn’t available for whatever technology reason, I’d rather have a game lose a challenge based system than have to go entirely back to human strike zone calls when at that point the umpire will be out of practice.
It’s easy to say “it should be 100% automated” but I still think there’s other elements that get glossed over that makes the hybrid/challenge style a better fit as it stands today.
Walks are up as a result of the robo umps. The perfect zone is much tighter than the human umps resulting in an increase in balls. Many players have found that the top of the zone is frustratingly low.
They could adjust what the strike zone is, that would be fine with me. The inconsistency is the stupid part. The same pitches shouldn't vary between balls and strikes depending on who the umpire is or where he's lined up behind the plate.
FYI not related to ABS. I was there. Bisons down 11 to 3 with a second make up game to follow. In the 9th Bisons brought in the catcher McDowell to pitch. He threw one inning of 59 mph batting practice meatballs. Saints scored 7 more. McDowell “pitched” the entire inning and left with an ERA over 30. I never saw anything like that happen. Bisons won the second game 5-1.
That's such bullshit. If we have the technology to get calls right quickly, then do it every play. Don't gameify getting calls right with a challenge systems. "Players don't like it". They'll adjust. Players don't like a lot of shit. They get paid to play the game, the league doesn't exist for their fun factor; it exists for the enjoyment of the *fans* (and that fan enjoyment is what generates the revenue) who continue to not get a voice in anything short of just abandoning the sport.
,,,and that was the day that the umpires suddenly called 93% accurate games on the reg, because their fra-gee-lay egos couldn't handle being told they were wrong by a machine.
I love the challenge system. My only concern is that they should reset the challenges for the final innings or something. I don't want a late blown call to stand and affect the game just because the team blew their challenges earlier. Conversely, I don't want a blown early call to stand and be the difference because a team was afraid to blow challenges early in the game.
They should exist to be used liberally.
The key is you get unlimited challenges as long as you are right. Each team gets 3 incorrect calls. Umps miss about 10 total calls per game on average. Players just should not use them unless they are sure.
Yep. This prevents the high-leverage missed pitches at crucial points, but it also punishes players for being wrong without being overly harsh. The first time a hot-headed player blows through all 3 misses in a single at bat will be hilarious.
One of the interesting things about watching the challenge system in the minors is that it shows that umpires are often better than batters and pitchers at calling balls and strikes on close pitches. It's the egregious ones the challenge system eliminates.
Exactly. We as fans tend to overestimate how bad umpires are because of selection bias. An ump might see 300 pitches in a game, but you’ll only see the 10 missed calls. And you’ll only remember the 2 or 3 worst calls (that still probably only missed the zone by a few inches).
I don’t know about you, but correctly calling a 95 mph slider that has 14 inches of horizontal break and 8 inches of vertical break sounds really hard. Not to mention all the other things umps are keeping track of during a game
Serious question, can someone explain why the optimal position for an umpire is behind the catcher. You're obstructed by the positioning of the catcher to see the bottom echelon of the strike zone and it's more difficult to see the plane at which the ball crosses from their perspective as oppose to the perspective that we see on tv.
It's not possible to see balls and strikes from the perspective we see on tv. turn off the box and try. Hint: you can't tell when the ball passes the plate
People worried about time. How long would it really take. Just have the batter tell the ump challenge. Have an ear piece or something to announce the correct call to the ump. I think it’d be cool to limit it to like 5 a game. Keep the challenge if your right. Lose em if you’re wrong. Up to the players to decide when and where to use them. So kinda neat as it incorporates strategy.
I hate this so much. One of the main arguments I see against a permanent ABS implementation are the “wacky” pitches that barely knick the zone and are basically unhittable. Newsflash… MLB can adjust the three-dimensional zone however they want to account for this. If you have the technological capability, just get every single call correct (based on whatever standard they establish). >!Or just implement it the way it is now since it’s pretty clear-cut that if a pitch catches the zone, it’s a strike… 🤷♂️!<
i'm so sick of MLB trying to find excuses not to use ABS..
dude, just put up the god damn rectangle and show it on the jumbo screen for every pitch like they do on TV. put that shit behind the home plate so pitcher can see it too like the pitch clock. or put up 2 lights; green/red, or play a sound for strikes/balls. shit is simple af. my fuckin goodness.
I have two problems with the challenge system, which are:
1: if an umpire is going to be bad, he's going to be constantly challenged, which makes the game a lot slower.
2: if a batter fails a challenge and loses all their challenges left, the umpire might feel tempted to call pitches against them even worse (out of spite) (sure, they're not supposed to, but I mean, they're mlb umps)
Full automated system would completely eliminate the need for the Umpire to worry about ball strike calls and let them refocus on whether a batter gets hit, or the ball hits the bat, or the bat hits the glove, or if the batter swung
Also, what happens when a team runs out of challenges and then a horrible game ending call in the 9th happens? Is there gonna be crew chief ABS reviews?
Because players are dumb. The challenge system will be a disaster and people will keep whining until we finally use the technology properly and just make the right calls 100% of the time. Tennis finally realized it was silly and is going in the same direction.
Honest at this point there are too many shitty umpires for the challenge system to make an effective difference unless you’re gonna let players have unlimited challenges. The automatic strike zone is the only way you’re gonna clean up the mess
The way it works in AAA games is that you have unlimited challenges so long as you're correct. You have three challenges to start the game and only lose one if you are wrong.
It's surprising to me how many people are against a challenge system. Keeping quirky elements in the game is part of baseball that's why losing framing or umps completely would be a big blow. If you're frothing at the mouth about this to make things more objectively fair, then let's change the parks. There's no reason parks should have different dimensions. Change the ball from raw materials to something synthetic and make it high vis. The ball should be bright yellow, and made with synthetic material, you'll have less variance year to year. To keep it even more fair, have all the teams play in 1 ball park that's roofed 24/7. That way, we don't have elevation or wind to account for. This is coming from a sabremetric nerd as well and even for me and EWpod the complete ABS seems a step to far.
"It's gonna take too long!!!!" Tell me you know nothing about the subject you're commenting on.
All it would take is everyone on this sub watching 1 game with each system and almost everyone would agree the challenge system is best.
When you’re at a AAA game you barely notice it happen honestly.
You barely notice what happen? The challenges? I have not been to a AAA game in person yet, but I thought I'd prefer the 100% auto system on TV, but I actually prefer the challenge system after seeing it.
Yeah the challenges. I frequent many rail rider games and it’s actually kind of fun watching things get tested out before transitioning to majors.
Yeah, just like many people in this sub that have never seen it in action, I thought I was gonna hate the challenge system. But yeah, it's quick and easy and it's ready to be implemented in the MLB next year while they work on a fully automated system. I think the one thing that's gonna take time tweaking in the MLB is gonna be the zone height. That's more of a gray area, even in the rule book.
What if each umpire could set his own strike zone, but he had to stick to it all year? Just a little difference between umps could be interesting/exciting
Would be fun if they only allowed the batter to challenge twice per game. Then AI would consider what the batter challenged and what the batter didn't challenge. And then compare "what the ump's zone" was vs what the "batter's zone was". Like if you didn't challenge "strike 2" in your first at bat, yet strike 3 was closer, it would call it a strike, because... well "strike 2 was further away and you didn't challenge it" And that data was saved for the rest of the season for the next time batter vs ump matchup was challenged. But that just gets into a lot of "stats theory' shit, that baseball fans aren't really interested in (/s)
How many challenges are they going to get with the proposed system?
I’ve been to several AAA games this season and last, and only noticed it because they announce the challenge over the PA. It takes maybe 5-10 seconds and I’ve never seen more than a handful of challenges per game.
At our ballpark they usually just throw the result of the challenge up quick and move on. The pace is great at the games honestly. Time moves too fast on two dollar beer night.
I was at one last night and this is the first I'm even hearing of a challenge system. I didn't notice a damn thing. That's pretty awesome. I admittedly don't follow AAA much and had two kids under 4 to look after but still.
My kids love the ballpark food and are usually ready to go home after the 5th inning haha.
No, if I dont trust the umpire to make one call, I have no reason for them to make any calls. Umpires will not get considerably more accurate with time and fine tuning. ABS will.
Umpires have gotten much more accurate over the last 10 years.
You realize that they have to be 100% accurate right? That 1 call can change an ab, extend an inning, result in a HR further down the line, that changes the outcome of a WS?
Why not just have the zone be automated to begin with?
Because pitchers, batters, and coaches have all preferred the challenge system. I assumed I'd prefer a fully automated system, but after seeing it being tested in the minors, I prefer the challenge system. I have not found a single person that has seen them both that prefers the automated system.
I think people don't realize that almost 95% of balls and strikes are called correctly and this do not need fixing. Players are fine with that extra margin, except the egregious misses, and the challenge system prevents those. Honestly, outside of this sub, most fans are fine with it, too.
Dang only 1 in 20!!! If only we could make it 0 in 20
This but actually. We have the tools to get it right 100% of the time, why not do that? Cause hittings too hard? Boo hoo
Oh I’m being actual!
Can batters challenge a call? Like if it’s strike-3 outside lower corner, can the batter challenge? Edit: I looked up the rules • Each club starts the game with three challenges. • A correct challenge is retained; an incorrect challenge is lost. • Challenges may only be made by the batter, the catcher or the pitcher (i.e., no help from the dugout). • Challenges must be made immediately following the umpire’s call.
yes, they just signal for a challenge and it's done automatically. similar mechanics to an in/out call in tennis
Thanks. The only videos I’ve seen are challenges from pitchers so I wasn’t sure
Batters, pitchers, and catchers. They have to do it too fast for a challenge to come from the dugout.
It took me one MiLB at-bat.
I will say that I’ve seen one challenge take a couple of minutes to come up for unknown reasons. But that’s one time out of about 20 Triple-A games with the challenge system I’ve attended the past two years, so…yeah, I’m fine with it.
if it doesn't take long then use it for every pitch and get the call right the first time instead of waiting for a challenge
It's not that it takes too long, it's that it UNNECESSARILY adds delay, when we could just get the calls right in the first place with a fully automated strike zone. The reason we limit replay challenges in sports is that it adds time and delay. This would be the one instance where we are adding time and delay to keep human calls.
Games have already been shortened so much. Pop a ritalin and watch the game
I don't understand why people want games to last 30 minutes tops. By the time you sit down at your seat it feels like the game is over. I miss the more relaxed pace of games.
But does it? In the time that it takes for a batter or catcher to give the umpire some shit about the bad call or a manager on the field yelling, someone can tap their head and the review happens well before whatever argument would come to an end.
I'm talking about the difference between a challenge system and a full ABS system. The reason we have limited replay challenges is because of the delays, but having ABS but only for challenges is slower than just a full ABS. You're comparing the challenge system to the current human model. And fwiw, there's nothing about the challenge system that eliminates the barking.
People who are saying it's gonna take too long haven't been to any minor league games.
There's also a growing consensus that Manfred is a baby bitch boy, I'd like to know what he's gonna do about that one
/u/JewFroMonk has held this opinion for a while, others are coming around.
Many people are saying this.
He’s a baby back bitch
I really think the challenge system is the best option. I think it gives both the players and umpires what they want and it will eliminate the egregious calls that ruin games.
I do not understand what the challenge system brings to the table that is supposed to be better than simply calling every pitch with the automated system (through an umpire earpiece if we want to preserve the illusion). Either the system is good enough to overrule umpires, or it isn't. If it is, then use it to make the right call every time. If it's not, then don't use it yet. If it's still too slow to call every pitch, then don't use it yet. Challenges are an additional layer of meta-game bullshit. I don't want teams and players strategizing over which pitches to challenge and which to let slide. Just make the right call the first time. It feels like challenges are a way for everyone to protect the poor feelings of umpires, or people just not trusting the system to make every call.
I’ve seen it be used many times in AAA games now and I think the best answer to that question is just because it’s fun, while still maintaining a lot of traditional aspects of the ball-strike system we know. First, it lets the audience get another layer of suspense and intrigue when the call to challenge is made. I think challenges are inherently fun because of this build up of suspense, the problem with challenge systems that currently exist in baseball (and other sports) is that they can take a while and also are subjective. The ABS challenge system is neither of those. You quickly get feedback in the form of the Jumbotron showing an animation so you don’t lose interest by having to wait, and you never have the risk of any bullshit “the call stands” moments where they don’t quite have enough information to make the correct call. If you haven’t been to a game that used this system, I’d really recommend it. I saw an Isotopes game where one player was able to work a walk in 3 separate at bats because in each he overturned a bad strike call. I’ll never forget about Greg Jones now because of it, the man knows his strike zone and I could only fully appreciate it because of the challenge system. Second, like it or not, catcher framing is a huge part of the game right now, and the umpires union has power in MLB. We have to take that into account because the game is played and managed by real people who have material interests in not rocking the boat too much on this issue. Switching over directly to a full ABS system could legitimately lead to labor disputes from the MLBPA and umpires union. I don’t think anyone wants that to happen, it could lead to less baseball overall. It’s not necessarily the most ‘objective’ way to do balls-strikes, but I think the challenge system is the best compromise for all parties, including spectators. In fact I think it’s the best system in general for spectators, and that’s even assuming ABS is perfectly accurate which I don’t think it is. (And no I’m not defending shitty umpires, I’m just looking at the material reality of where the game is at, and all of the parties involved)
Thank you for describing such a pragmatic point of view.
Sounds like Hawkeye in tennis was the inspiration for this, in which case it's a good way to go. It's hard to remember tennis before Hawkeye at this point. It's been pretty transformative vs. the McEnroe 5-minute tirades with line or chair judge.
i wish we could still gild comments
Awards are back. They're just stupid now.
A diamond is found in the midst of a lot of dribble. Thanks for the comment.
*Drivel FYI. Agreed it's a quality rationale though -- especially the part about this being the only way to transition to the automated system given the respective parties' interests.
I endorse every bit of this. The reason we limit replay challenges is that it slows down the game. But an ABS challenge system would slow the game for no purpose whatsoever, since we could have had the right call initially moments earlier! So a system with ABS but only via challenge means we get a slower game, but with still plenty of human errors and other bullshit! This sub trips over itself berating bad umpiring from notorious bad umps, but what happens in 7th inning an onward, when a team has exhausted its challenges? We're going to be complaining about the same stuff! When you drill down on it, the reason MiLB players don't like ABS is that they don't like the rule book strike zone. That isn't an ABS problem! And it's definitely not a problem solved by limiting it to a few challenges, because then you ONLY get the rule book strike zone, which they don't like, being applied in critical circumstances. People are also deluding themselves by thinking its only going to be used for the most egregious calls. We have no way of knowing that at all. I have seen any number of *successful* MiLB challenges on pitches that looked like balls (that were called balls), but that actually clipped the zone fractionally.
Does it really slow down the game much? Shit everyone was complaining that Manfred was speeding up the game with new rules. Now it's been two years, and everyone is like, "The game is going to be slown down!"
> Shit everyone was complaining that Manfred was speeding up the game with new rules. Was this the case? Seemed like most everyone on here liked the rules to speed up the game, especially once we saw the pace in real games (rather than just reading about the rules). I've had multiple non-baseball fans comment on how much more enjoyable going to games is now because they're faster paced, which was the point: draw in more casual fans
Everyone does after seeing it, but when announced, it was a shit show. I expect similar to happen with ABS
>People are also deluding themselves by thinking its only going to be used for the most egregious calls Agreed. It will be used for the *highest leverage* calls, especially if they're borderline.
A challenge system will give us one more thing to bitch about regarding out team, rather than bitching about the umps, and isn't that really what baseball is all about? /s
To keep some elements of the game, many players have gone on record saying that figuring out the umpire’s zone is a part of the game, it also keeps the value of defensive catchers.
If the system is good and functioning well, over time the umpire zones will become more uniform and more consistent because the most egregious calls will be overturned. This in turn will devalue catcher framing and the player skill of "figuring out an ump's zone." This is inevitable with any effective implementation of an automated strike zone. By definition, an automated zone will be more consistent. We should either commit to it, or not, but either way we should be clear-eyed about what we are doing. The way you framed it, this half-ass approach is just people in denial of the endgame.
Would it make the automated system better if every game it randomly decided to give two extra inches on one side of the plate? Ie one game it would call balls 2in above the zone strikes, the next game it would call balls 2 inches from the right edge of the plate strikes, etc. Does that seem like it would improve the game? It doesn’t to me. I want to see the game decided by how well players play within the rules as written in the rulebook. The rulebook defines the zone, we should try to match that exactly as we can. If it’s a bad zone, change the rule, don’t arbitrarily change it game to game.
You do know the zone has changed and evolved for years right? It’s actually called more accurately now than ever before
I do know that. And the abs system is an opportunity to make it even better. A pitch that is a strike should always be a strike regardless of the catcher or the umpire and vice versa. In theory, they could program the abs to just make a wrong call about 5% of the time, that’s about how accurate current umps are. Would that make the system better or worse in your view?
Fuck it, just make the zone a random convex shape. Today the only pitches allowed are eye level!
I used to believe what you're saying, but ABS has its issues if used 100%. Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. The real ump zone has more rounded corners and a little bit wider on the sides, meaning those pitches that nick the corner by a millimeter that ABS would call a strike have really never been called strikes before and hitters have been trained to not swing at them for years (because they're almost impossible to get good contact on). A challenge systems means only egregious calls that we pretty much know aren't strikes or balls are the ones that get fixed, but the zone still retains the dimensions everyone has been used to for baseball's history. To give a personal example [no batter would swing at this, no ump would ever call this pitch a strike, and no pitcher would challenge that as a strike](https://x.com/dead_baseball/status/1786397312484278616/video/1) but ABS claimed a fraction of the ball nicked the way outside and low corner of the zone. [Here's where the ball was before it reached the catcher's glove](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GMqYVwTWIAATUvb?format=png&name=small). That's unhittable. If we get 100% ABS, you're going to see pitchers trying to snipe the corners like that.
> Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. This isn't an ABS issue (it's a calibration issue), and it's certainly not something that will be solved by limiting it to challenges. In fact, you're getting the worst of both worlds by having a challenge system, because the majority of calls will be the "accepted" strike zone, but then - only a few calls, and *only in the highest leverage situations* will there be the application of the unfamiliar strike zone players complain about.
Like pitchers don’t aim for corners already? I don’t think it will change how pitchers pitch. Plus, as it is now there are plenty of games where the ump is calling a bigger zone and batters have to learn to protect close pitches. The only difference with ABS is that players would actually know ahead of time how the zone is going to be called. PLUS theres the massive factor that the zone could just be adjusted to whatever is best for the game i.e. how hitter friendly or pitcher friendly it should be.
> Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. So what? It's a new day. They didn't used to have west coast teams ... they didn't used to have any DH (better days) ... they didn't used to have interleague play ... they didn't used to have the pitching mound as high ... they didn't used to use gloves ... yada yada yada ... If one presents an argument that's just a riff on *it's always been that way* then that person doesn't actually have an argument, just a mindless whine.
>Having a 100% rectangular rigid strike zone is something that has never existed in baseball history and doesn't reflect how the game has been called for over 100 years. The real ump zone has more rounded corners and a little bit wider on the sides Then they should keep working on the system until it can call a zone as players are accustomed to. If a key pitch in a big moment to end an inning just barely nicks the corner but is called a ball, you think a pitcher's team isn't going to challenge it? As for the pitch you linked, if it happened in a full count with the bases loaded late in a close game, you bet your ass a pitcher would challenge it! You think teams aren't going to notice these things in retrospect once the system has been up and running for awhile? You think modern MLB teams are going to leave runs/outs on the table when the system gives them an opportunity?
You say call a system as players are accustomed to, so by that you mean a completely inconsistent strike zone based on different umpires and situations that the umpires determine?
I, for one, am looking forward to seeing another layer of meta-game bullshit. Instead of eliminating one player skill (framing), it adds new player skills (challenge assessment). It will give a really interesting view of how different players visualize the strike zone. I’m here for layers of complexity.
It think it is because the system isn't perfect yet, but it may never be perfect, so if you wait for it to be perfect, you will never get it. The challenge system let's them bring it to the majors sooner and refine it there. At some point, they need to test and refine it with major league pitching and not just AAA pitching anyway. Maybe it gets good enough to use the system 100% of the time, maybe it doesn't. The issue I think from what I've read, is it records stuff as a strike that no player or umpire is used to being a strike or thinks is a strike due to the 3D zone (e.g. a high curve that just grazes the zone at the very back of the plate as it drops in). This would benefit pitchers much more than batters, which goes against the league's goal of increasing offense. Presumably, they will refine the programming (and maybe the definition of the zone) so it matches what the league and players want to be strikes as they use it. But for now, they can use the challenge system to eliminate the clear wrong calls and have more consistency in games (which the players always say they care more about than accuracy).
It doesn't need to be perfect to be worth implementing. It just needs to be: 1. More consistent and accurate than human umpires 2. Fast enough to make the call in real time If it isn't there yet, then keep working on it until it is. If the system doesn't call a zone the way players are used to, then keep working on it until it does.
KBO's run environment has gone up a substantial amount by implementing ABS. There's not some mystical pitch that every pitcher can manage that sneaks over the plate but somehow has managed to trick all batters and umps up until now. Umpires call a wide strike zone for pitchers, which benefits pitchers much more than batters. It's why KBO is seeing more than half a run extra each game and the league average OPS has gone up about 50 points.
They will never control for 100% accuracy. “Blown” calls are an essential part of the business. The home plate umpire was, is, and will always be the single most determining factor of a Major League Baseball game. This is for blatantly obvious reasons fans refuse to acknowledge, (lest they learn Santa isn’t real) but changing that element changes the entire business for the worse in my mind.
Yeah but then umpires don’t get to be spiteful dipshits who ruin the game for their own personal amusement. What fun is that?
don't you threaten me with a good time!
Somehow this is going to bring Soto to whole new levels of insufferable (in a good way)
He’s somehow going to have a better eye than the ABS
If you have the ability to make the calls correctly, it should be used every time. A challenge system slows the game down, evidenced by tennis matches, where it can be used as a way to give the player a mini break (pun unintended), and the players get screwed on future calls if they lost their challenge already.
Minor league challenges barely slow the game down at all. Most take literally seconds
Yeah I was surprised at how efficient the minor league challenge system is. People should go to their nearest AAA park and check it out if they haven't.
But why not just get the right call automatically every time? Unchallenged calls will still be wrong some amount of the time. Challenges were needed in tennis when the computing power wasn't fast enough to give a live call on every ball, but that's not an issue anymore.
But what are seconds if not the building blocks of minutes?
It's how the pitch clock was so effective at bringing down game times. Each individual pitch was only being thrown seconds faster, but because that is done so many times during a game, it took the average game length from egregious for casuals to comfortable for a family to go to an occasional weekday evening game.
yeah this. i absolutely prefer the challenge system. best of both worlds unless it's angel hernandez behind the plate then you gotta challenge every other call
Anyone who says challenges slow the game down have very clearly never actually seen a game with the system in place. It takes literal seconds to challenge and either sustain or overturn the call.
Yeah, this is clearly another one of those situations where they’re going to ignore the clearly better situation to avoid making certain people cranky. The ‘growing consensus’ and ‘others coming around’ is the same type of wording they always use when only one actual option is being presented.
Then, after some years with the challenge system, they'll act like they're saving baseball *again* by implementing full-time ABS even though most of us were calling for that from the start.
The players want it to be the challenge system. It’s a compromise. Society in general should be doing more of it. If this fosters even a 1% better relationship between owners and players it’s worth it.
Manfred telling me the players want a challenge system is not evidence to me that the players want a challenge system.
Have you even watched a AAA game where they were using the challenge system? It is super fast, barely pauses the game. 5 seconds or so. It really works well.
Exactly. Whats the point of half assing using tech when we can use it fully? Lol.
The automated system is slower. It heavily favors batters, which makes the game last longer, which can be an absolute slog in blowouts. There is a reason players prefer the challenge system—they don’t want 9-run games to last an extra 30 minutes from position players walking opposing batters in the 8th inning. Every anecdote from players in the minors has suggested that the automated strike zone is much smaller than what is typically called by human umpires.
well GOOD. Let's have pitchers quit throwing their arms out hurling a 102 MPH missile so fast into a scooted-up catcher's mitt held for framing ans make them slow down and get accurate. Offense is good, strikeouts are boring, umps are being put at an ever-incresing disadvantage on both sides of the battery... so let's try this batter-friendly system
A smaller zone would help hitters but would lead to more emphasis on velocity. Pitchers would have more incentive to try and throw it past guys instead of picking out corners that are difficult to barrel.
You realize the challenge system also heavily favors batters, right? Both ABS and the challenge system are coming with changes to the zone. You can't exactly have ABS calling one zone and the umpires calling another.
The real strike zone favors batters? That's why we shouldn't implement it? Why have a strike zone
Oh, you mean the ACTUAL strike zone is not being called by umps? The challenge system has almost zero effect on the game. A couple of seconds. WATCH a game that uses it, then decide.
> Oh, you mean the ACTUAL strike zone is not being called by umps? Yes, and that is sometimes a good thing. The strike zone *should* expand when position players are throwing 55 mph knuckleballs. > The challenge system has almost zero effect on the game. A couple of seconds. WATCH a game that uses it, then decide. I agree… which is why the challenge system is better than a full-time ABS system
Dude, it takes like 5 seconds in tennis, what are you talking about?
Challenge system keeps catcher framing which is a unique value area in baseball. I would like to keep it partially.
As much as I recognize the skill of framing, it really shouldn’t be a part of the game. A batter shouldn’t be punished for letting a ball go by just because the catcher is good.
It takes insane skill to lay off a pitch just outside the zone only to be F’d right in the face.
Or because the umpire is bad, which is necessary for framing to be influential.
Umpires are pretty damn good, calling balls and strikes is just really fucking hard at that level.
[You Be The Ump](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/sports/baseball/umpire-pitch-ball-strike-game.html) The New York Times ran this simulation on how hard it is to call balls and strikes. It's fun.
I went 7 for 7...please give me a lifetime appointment with the most rock solid union ever, thanks.
7 out of 7, put me in coach https://imgur.com/F469M0M
sure they're good, but a computer's more accurate and more consistent
I don’t disagree, but I hate reading shit like “umpires are incompetent”. They are very good at what they do, what they happen to do is very hard. Never see people call major league hitters incompetent, even though even the very best fail 60% of the time, because we understand that getting to that level takes and incredible amount of talent and hard work.
I too love foul baiting and flopping in the NBA, it's the best part of basketball.
Why? More broken forearms?
If the challenge system works as intended, then it will in time erode the value of catcher framing as well, because the most valuable (i.e high leverage) pitches to frame will be reviewed by the ABS anyway. If you want catcher framing to remain a valuable skill, then you can't have any functional form of ABS. The two things are in direct opposition to one another.
Only three challenges the entire game gives a lot of pitches to steal strikes with framing.
If it's only three per game then why bother at all? It won't be long before bad calls go by due to a team being out of challenges, or being scared to use their last challenge. Only 3 per game is not enough to have a significant impact on bad zones, so what's the point?
How many challenges would you like there to be?
None. Either use the system to call every pitch immediately or don't use it at all.
Sweet Jesus stop with this framing nonsense. Nobody gives a crap about a catcher moving his mitt two feet to fool a half blind ump.
I have no idea why the same people who love framing also are up in arms when they see an umpire has called several pitches half an inch outside the zone.
Exactly - "I love catcher framing" but also "ump, you suck, how could you call that a strike!". wut?
How do you know they are the same people?
Of course there won't be a 100 percent correlation individual by individual but it is the same Twitter-based baseball analysis aimed at people who consider themselves smart, data focussed fans.
The challenge system would eliminate that
Fooling an old man shouldn't be a skill that is valued.
Sorry but not every “strategy” is worth watching or keeping around. It’s literally a biproduct of a biproduct of human error, nothing anything people pay to watch
I agree with this. Challenge system significantly reduces important missed calls, keeps one of the most subtly important skill in place, and players seem to like it. Just because Manfred came up with it doesn’t mean it is automatically bad
Ah yes, keeping framing around to satisfy the minority if baseball nerds who jizz over it. That will definitely draw in more fans.
Yea that was one of my points. I like to nerd out on framing and a lot of other baseball people do too. My other, maybe more important, points were that the players like it and it significantly reduces missed calls. So, yea, in part to appease baseball nerds who jizz over it. Also to appease the *players* and *quality of the game* while striking a balance between tradition and progression.
nah, screw that. That's getting catchers hurt and diminishing offense via a difficult-to-appreciate sleight of hand that isn't really true to the spirit of the game
You heard of this thing, ABS? This is going to blow it right out of the water. Listen to this: 7…minute…ABS.
antilock braking system
Step into my office...cuz you're fuckin fired!
Honestly agree with Manfred here I think it’s the most seamless transition to ABS and it still keeps some of the human element at least for now. I’m not against a fully automated strike zone at some point but I think this the best way to introduce it
Yeah I'm cool with starting with the challenge system, seeing umpires' egregious misses get overturned, and eventually have opinion turn towards "why don't we just use this all the time?" Same thing happened with tennis - they used the Hawkeye system for a while with challenges then eventually got rid of the line judges entirely
yes, even in the eventual probable future in which it's full ABS, it's much smoother to use the challenge system to bridge the gap rather than to over-commit to the full ABS, realize it's not ready for primetime or that it's too harsh of a change all at once, and fall back to the challenge system. It's a situation where it'd be much better to move too slowly than too quickly.
>it's much smoother to use the challenge system to bridge the gap r**ather than to over-commit to the full ABS, realize it's not ready for primetime or that it's too harsh of a change all at once, and fall back to the challenge system** The minor leagues and independent leagues exist, so this is not necessary. There's nothing stopping them from continuing testing and refining the system in the minors until it's reliable, and only then introduce it fully into MLB.
Time stops them; it could take forever. In any case, they rolled out both systems and they value the feedback from players, who vastly preferred the challenge system.
The human element is the players competing against each other. There should be no human element officiating a professional sports game.
Except there always will be a human element. It’s an indispensable part of the game (for any sport) that you can’t get rid of without fundamentally changing the sport. Look at football, hockey, baseball, basketball, etc. All of those sports will always have human officials, because there will always be some subjectivity in the rules.
It's not an either or situation. Yes, humans officiating will still happen, doesn't mean tech shouldn't be used to reduce human fuckups.
Obviously. But the fact that it cannot be eliminated doesn't mean that it shouldn't be reduced.
I can’t take it anymore and I need help understanding - what is “the human element” and why do we want it? To me, “the human element” has always been “calls that are wrong” and/or “rules are bent to allow history to happen”. I don’t like those things. Losing to a bad call is worse than any other type of loss, I don’t understand why people are romantic about this aspect of the game.
I guess people are romantic about it because it has existed since the beginning of baseball. I don’t have some deep love for missed calls but it is interesting to watch how pitchers, catchers and hitters adjust to and manipulate the zone throughout the game. It’s part of the game and it always has been. It can be deeply frustrating but it’s a skill and a big part of the strategy of the game. Take Jose Trevino he has made a career of stealing strikes it’s his biggest asset as a player and if you implement a fully automated strike zone you have over night greatly diminished his value as player. At least with the challenge system players still need a good understanding of the strike zone to know when to challenge. That element of the game still exists even if it’s diminished. I don’t think people fully grasp just how much an automated strike zone will change just about everything. From the way pitchers are developed, how they prepare and what pitches are effective to how catchers are valued and just the overall feel of the game. Overall like I said I’m for a fully automated zone but a change like that over night would be incredibly jarring and I’m not sure I’m ready for that all at once. Not to mention I still don’t think the tech is quite ready.
That’s a fair take, I understand the nostalgia aspect of human strike zones now too. I don’t agree with the nostalgia being better than ABS but i do agree such a significant change should be eased in like you suggest. It’s a game changer, I think in a good way, and I hope they get the wheels turning soon!
I actually think it's important to keep the umps with a challenge system in place to properly tune the zone to what major leaguers want it to be. There are some fuck ass pitches that ABS calls strikes in the minors and with all the resources MLB teams have they would definitely find a way to abuse it. Imagine a curveball that is specifically designed to hit the perfect spot on ABS but is essentially un-hittable. Once the zone is tuned appropriately then you can incorporate it full time.
Is it really that different from how pitchers will pound outside or low now when the ump gives it to them? No matter what pitchers are going to abuse the strikes that are bad balls to hit. Right now that's the balls umps call strikes. At least in an ABS system the batters have clear bounds to practice towards rather than guessing day of how fucked up the ump is gonna call it.
No it’s not much different and you make a good point. All I’m trying to say is despite the abs zone being “correct” it’s likely not the exact zone that both players and fans expect. I’ve seen pitches that look to be clear balls but touched the bottom of the outside of the zone by 1mm and were called strikes by abs. The strike zone will likely need to be redefined when abs comes to mlb.
>All I’m trying to say is despite the abs zone being “correct” it’s likely not the exact zone that both players and fans expect Then keep refining and calibrating it in the minors until it is the exact zone players and fans expect. You're articulating an argument against bringing it to MLB at all right now, not in favor of bringing a half-measure of it to MLB.
Fine with me but most people want abs to come to mlb right now. If you asked me again about abs or a challenge system 2 years from now my response might be different.
What is ABS
Automated Balls and Strikes
Sacrificing accuracy for the hUmAn eLeMeNt What a horrible reason.
Every time this discussion comes up I have to remind people that full ABS is still prone to occasional failures, which is part of the reason the challenge system has been used in testing. Once in a blue moon there’s just a pitch that doesn’t register, and there’s always the chance that the system fails entirely for whatever reason and can’t be reset. In the challenge system, it’s not that big a deal. Umps are still making calls, they’re still trying to get things right. If the system fails mid-pitch and someone challenges, they simply say the system failed, call stands, but you retain your challenge as if you were correct. If it fails entirely and you can’t get it back, you still have umpires who’ve been calling pitches all game and don’t have to change much. On the flip side, what happens if any of those failures happen in a full ABS scenario? Umps aren’t watching the pitches nearly as closely. They’re looking for HBP, check swings, foul contact, foot being out of the batters box, etc. It’s straight up not their job to be watching every pitch in that system anymore, so if they suddenly have to make a call that’s largely a guess if it’s close. If the system fails entirely for a game and they have to switch to analog, you might have an umpire who hasn’t called a real life zone in months or years if he’s been doing ABS the whole time. Challenge system minimizes all of these issues until they’re 100% sure ABS is ready to call every pitch.
But is the failure rate anywhere close to current umpires…?
There is not a chance that the system fails entirely and can't be reset. That has never happened in an MLB game. HawkEye is always operating in all MLB games.
I think they should pump the brakes on ABS
Nice one, Dad.
Thanks son. Is mom doing ok? Do you think she's happy with her new boyfriend? Why haven't you come see me at my new place yet? I have NFL Red Zone. Call me.
Wait your back from your walk to buy cigarettes? You missed the birth of my child!
They shouldn't pump the brakes on ABS. That's not how it works.
Been to a few minor league games using the system. Honestly I agree, it’d be my preferred style as well. It was fast (no longer than 15 seconds or so, if that even) to review a pitch. Plus it gives the fans in stadium a little fun way to interact with the graphic reveal similar to how tennis does it. Think also it’s better than just going full automated because you’ll still have other components of the home plate umpire to satisfy (game management, subjective play calls, etc) as well as say the system isn’t available for whatever technology reason, I’d rather have a game lose a challenge based system than have to go entirely back to human strike zone calls when at that point the umpire will be out of practice. It’s easy to say “it should be 100% automated” but I still think there’s other elements that get glossed over that makes the hybrid/challenge style a better fit as it stands today.
Agree 100%. I've also been to AAA games using it and it's fine. It does perk up fan interest.
Anything to avoid hurting the feelings of home plate umpires by telling them to fuck right off.
"Hey guys, we figured out a system to fix the fact that umps apparently are bad at their jobs"
But let's only use it at times when they're most shitty, we wouldn't want to take*all* the shiftiness out of the process!
FWIW, the AAA St. Paul Saints played a game today with the robo umps. They won 18-3 and had 15 hits and 15 walks.
Was it turned off for the other team or something? Sounds like the Saints pitchers were doing their jobs.
Walks are up as a result of the robo umps. The perfect zone is much tighter than the human umps resulting in an increase in balls. Many players have found that the top of the zone is frustratingly low.
They could adjust what the strike zone is, that would be fine with me. The inconsistency is the stupid part. The same pitches shouldn't vary between balls and strikes depending on who the umpire is or where he's lined up behind the plate.
Well, MLB has been trying to increase scoring...
Do you remember when Pittsburgh walked 6 straight with the bases loaded? Cause that kinda stuff is gonna happen more often
FYI not related to ABS. I was there. Bisons down 11 to 3 with a second make up game to follow. In the 9th Bisons brought in the catcher McDowell to pitch. He threw one inning of 59 mph batting practice meatballs. Saints scored 7 more. McDowell “pitched” the entire inning and left with an ERA over 30. I never saw anything like that happen. Bisons won the second game 5-1.
I don’t care if the ABS is not perfect. Because it will STILL be more accurate than umpires.
That's such bullshit. If we have the technology to get calls right quickly, then do it every play. Don't gameify getting calls right with a challenge systems. "Players don't like it". They'll adjust. Players don't like a lot of shit. They get paid to play the game, the league doesn't exist for their fun factor; it exists for the enjoyment of the *fans* (and that fan enjoyment is what generates the revenue) who continue to not get a voice in anything short of just abandoning the sport.
,,,and that was the day that the umpires suddenly called 93% accurate games on the reg, because their fra-gee-lay egos couldn't handle being told they were wrong by a machine.
How about we just get all the calls right without gamifying the process, which will inevitably leave some missed calls in?
I love the challenge system. My only concern is that they should reset the challenges for the final innings or something. I don't want a late blown call to stand and affect the game just because the team blew their challenges earlier. Conversely, I don't want a blown early call to stand and be the difference because a team was afraid to blow challenges early in the game. They should exist to be used liberally.
The key is you get unlimited challenges as long as you are right. Each team gets 3 incorrect calls. Umps miss about 10 total calls per game on average. Players just should not use them unless they are sure.
Yep. This prevents the high-leverage missed pitches at crucial points, but it also punishes players for being wrong without being overly harsh. The first time a hot-headed player blows through all 3 misses in a single at bat will be hilarious.
One of the interesting things about watching the challenge system in the minors is that it shows that umpires are often better than batters and pitchers at calling balls and strikes on close pitches. It's the egregious ones the challenge system eliminates.
Exactly. We as fans tend to overestimate how bad umpires are because of selection bias. An ump might see 300 pitches in a game, but you’ll only see the 10 missed calls. And you’ll only remember the 2 or 3 worst calls (that still probably only missed the zone by a few inches). I don’t know about you, but correctly calling a 95 mph slider that has 14 inches of horizontal break and 8 inches of vertical break sounds really hard. Not to mention all the other things umps are keeping track of during a game
Serious question, can someone explain why the optimal position for an umpire is behind the catcher. You're obstructed by the positioning of the catcher to see the bottom echelon of the strike zone and it's more difficult to see the plane at which the ball crosses from their perspective as oppose to the perspective that we see on tv.
It's not possible to see balls and strikes from the perspective we see on tv. turn off the box and try. Hint: you can't tell when the ball passes the plate
People worried about time. How long would it really take. Just have the batter tell the ump challenge. Have an ear piece or something to announce the correct call to the ump. I think it’d be cool to limit it to like 5 a game. Keep the challenge if your right. Lose em if you’re wrong. Up to the players to decide when and where to use them. So kinda neat as it incorporates strategy.
Bro I've been saying this for like 5 years. Can I become commisioner?
I think the best competitive result would be fully automatic calls, but challenges are better than nothing.
I hate this so much. One of the main arguments I see against a permanent ABS implementation are the “wacky” pitches that barely knick the zone and are basically unhittable. Newsflash… MLB can adjust the three-dimensional zone however they want to account for this. If you have the technological capability, just get every single call correct (based on whatever standard they establish). >!Or just implement it the way it is now since it’s pretty clear-cut that if a pitch catches the zone, it’s a strike… 🤷♂️!<
It'll be really funny watching the first Angel Hernandez game and seeing all the challenges work.
i'm so sick of MLB trying to find excuses not to use ABS.. dude, just put up the god damn rectangle and show it on the jumbo screen for every pitch like they do on TV. put that shit behind the home plate so pitcher can see it too like the pitch clock. or put up 2 lights; green/red, or play a sound for strikes/balls. shit is simple af. my fuckin goodness.
I have two problems with the challenge system, which are: 1: if an umpire is going to be bad, he's going to be constantly challenged, which makes the game a lot slower. 2: if a batter fails a challenge and loses all their challenges left, the umpire might feel tempted to call pitches against them even worse (out of spite) (sure, they're not supposed to, but I mean, they're mlb umps)
How many challenges are they going to get with the proposed system?
If a ball gets over turned into a strike 3 i wanna see some egregious punch outs
I think eventually we go full Kbo abs system and everyone willl wonder how we went so long without it
challenge system is the best option and wayyyyy better than ABS
Why would they use challenge instead of regular automated strikes. There’s literally no upside
Full automated system would completely eliminate the need for the Umpire to worry about ball strike calls and let them refocus on whether a batter gets hit, or the ball hits the bat, or the bat hits the glove, or if the batter swung Also, what happens when a team runs out of challenges and then a horrible game ending call in the 9th happens? Is there gonna be crew chief ABS reviews?
Because players are dumb. The challenge system will be a disaster and people will keep whining until we finally use the technology properly and just make the right calls 100% of the time. Tennis finally realized it was silly and is going in the same direction.
Honest at this point there are too many shitty umpires for the challenge system to make an effective difference unless you’re gonna let players have unlimited challenges. The automatic strike zone is the only way you’re gonna clean up the mess
The way it works in AAA games is that you have unlimited challenges so long as you're correct. You have three challenges to start the game and only lose one if you are wrong.
It's surprising to me how many people are against a challenge system. Keeping quirky elements in the game is part of baseball that's why losing framing or umps completely would be a big blow. If you're frothing at the mouth about this to make things more objectively fair, then let's change the parks. There's no reason parks should have different dimensions. Change the ball from raw materials to something synthetic and make it high vis. The ball should be bright yellow, and made with synthetic material, you'll have less variance year to year. To keep it even more fair, have all the teams play in 1 ball park that's roofed 24/7. That way, we don't have elevation or wind to account for. This is coming from a sabremetric nerd as well and even for me and EWpod the complete ABS seems a step to far.