Baseball games lenght.

[roncli]

Waaaay too confusing. How about just the soccer method? 100 for a win plus the point difference.

[Chad]

point difference is not good enough for defensive ability. you really think a 11 to 10 game should be scored the same as a 1-0 game??? And a 10-0 game is the SAME as a 12-2 game?? no! it would be nice to have a simple scoring method. I would prefer (100perWin)*offense/defense and (100perWin + 100)*offense if defense is 0, but options are many.

[Frankie]

The vote is over and it was decided that we must play nine innings. But please don't start submitting scores with nine innings before we've decided on a new scoring system.

I suppose we can continue the scoring system debate here, as some of you have already started it

My suggestion is this:

100 x won innings + 50 x draw innings + points diffence (500 minus points if you lose the match.)

This is very much the same as the scoring rules for football games, and is therefore known by many of you. Take a look at the football score lists and you'll see that there are very few draws.

The 500 minus points for loosing the match must be used, because you could win the first 8 innings 1-0 and lose the last inning with 0-9 and still get a very good score, unless you get some sort of punishment for losing the match.

This method also makes the defence play very important as you must play your best to make sure you win the inning, and get the 100 points for that inning.

This is just my opinion. I know some of you will say that winning an inning is not important in baseball, what counts is that you win the match. Well, the more innings you win the better the chances that you win the match. Besides that, playing baseball games on MAME is not the real thing

Bye.

[Chad]

the "wins" for each inning doesn't bother me a lot actually now that you put that extra bonus for winnin the game it's ok. But the points difference will kill baseball defensive scores. Why would people have to work at defence when all they need to do is gain another run in the offence to get the same score.

12-6 is not the same as 8-2 . In football this might be the same, but in most mame baseball games, losing saving 4 runs is usually much harder to do than gaining 4 runs. So, in my humble opinion, defense should be given more credit because it's so easy to "slack" on defense and get away with it by making up some runs.

[roncli]

Why would people have to work at defence when all they need to do is gain another run in the offence to get the same score.

What? Especially in baseball, offense and defense are separate issues. Point difference is incentive enough to play well on defense, because if you allow a run, you've just taken away one of the runs you've earned on offense. You LOSE a point if you allow a run.

What you're saying is that the ability to score runs is not equal to the ability to prevent runs. I disagree, because in the end, runs is all that counts. 1-0 and 11-10 are both close games, but both result in a 1 run win. The 1-0 shutout, yah, it's impressive on defense, but if you can only score 1 run in the game, you shouldn't get a crapload of bonus points because you were awesome on defense. You should need to be good at both offense AND defense to get the points. Sports games are balanced between offense and defense for a reason, and I think that should be reflected in the scoring system. For this reason, I stand by 100 for a win plus the point difference. It's simple and balances offense and defense.

I hate the games that have (10*ScoreFor) - ScoreAgainst (which is OPPOSITE of what Chad wants) because it says to me offense is 10 times more important than defense, which is wrong. Defense needs to count EQUALLY to offense. Is a 10-0 (100 pts) really better than 11-9 (101 pts)? Of course not! But 10-0 is NOT better than 20-10. Yah, you allowed 10 points, but you made 10 more points too. Equal give, equal take.

Frankie, I think your formula is also a bit too complex, because now you have to go through 9 innings (or more!) of scores, and does not look at what is important, the overall game. For example, assume the player is the away team.

111 111 110 8
000 000 009 9

This gives 299 (8 x 100 - 1 - 500) points under your system, although the player loses.

000 000 009 9
111 111 110 8

This gives 101 (1 x 100 + 1) points under your system, although the player wins.

[MDenham]

Okay, time for a more interesting scoring proposal.

Score = (10 - your pitcher's ERA) * 100 + (computer's ERA) * 50.

If anyone actually knows how to calculate the ERA, that would help - and this takes into account defense, offense, and errors, as well as making a 1-0 game better than a 2-1 (by a bit), 3-2 (a little more), and so on... although I think, say, a 6-4 game might actually be worth more than a 4-1 game (dunno; as I said, we need someone who knows how to calculate ERAs.)

[Chad]

Why would people have to work at defence when all they need to do is gain another run in the offence to get the same score.

What? Especially in baseball, offense and defense are separate issues. Point difference is incentive enough to play well on defense, because if you allow a run, you've just taken away one of the runs you've earned on offense. You LOSE a point if you allow a run.

What you're saying is that the ability to score runs is not equal to the ability to prevent runs. I disagree, because in the end, runs is all that counts. 1-0 and 11-10 are both close games, but both result in a 1 run win. The 1-0 shutout, yah, it's impressive on defense, but if you can only score 1 run in the game, you shouldn't get a crapload of bonus points because you were awesome on defense. You should need to be good at both offense AND defense to get the points.

Exactally my point! With a offense divided by defense approach: 11-10 would be 100*11/10 = 110, 1-0 would be (100+100)*1 = 200. I'm sorry but giving up 10 runs is stupider than scoring 10 runs BECAUSE your opponent was able to score them. If Either of these games could be played in a given game, a *good* player could score 11-0, provided the AI doesn't get a lot smarter when you score more runs, and get a score of (100+100)*11 = 2200, which is obviously better than both. Thus, A similar result to points difference with mo better tie elimination.

[roncli]

Chad - What that formula says is that defense is more important than offense. When it comes to the final score, it's not. The ability to score runs should be weighed equally to the ability to prevent runs. Division doesn't accomplish that. Subtraction does.

I'm sorry but giving up 10 runs is stupider than scoring 10 runs BECAUSE your opponent was able to score them.

Then why isn't the AI equally as stupid for allowing the player to score 10 runs? What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Matt - ERA, or Earned Run Average, is the average number of runs a pitcher allows their opponent to earn over the course of nine innings. It is equal to earned runs, times nine, divided by innings pitched. Note that runs scored as a result of walks or errors are not considered earned. That's a bit crazy.



Fighting for equal rights for the AI,

[roncli]

Just for fun, I calculated the scores the AL and NL would have received under each proposed scoring system for the All-Star game. Stats that are being used: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/scores/20020709/alanla.html

Matt 1: AL 618 / NL 630
roncli: AL 50 / NL 50
Chad: AL 100 / NL 100
Frankie: AL 600 / NL 500
Matt 2: AL 672 / NL 795

[Chad]

We're not scoring the AI here were scoring the humans!

I don't think defense is more important than offense; i think they are equivalent in worth. But just because you score them equivalently doesn't mean the same effort is made on both sides. The reason why i'm arguing against pts difference is because it's harder to save runs more so than it is to score them and people who want a better score won't try to improve their defensive score they'll try to improve the offensive score. Example:

Joe scores 7-3, gets 4
Sam scores 13-4, beats Joe with 9
Joe Scores 20-7, beats Sam with 13
Sam scores 30-10, beats Joe with 20

it's the same old 10*offensive - defensive routine but with the blessed soccer points difference scoring. Nearly no credit is given to defense here, since you can keep on losing more goals (runs) and still be a winner.
With a division, the best score would be 13-4 so Joe with 20-7 couldn't beat Sam with 13-4 and by giving up (7-3) 3 more runs than him.

[Chad]

Just for fun, I calculated the scores the AL and NL would have received under each proposed scoring system for the All-Star game. Stats that are being used: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/scores/20020709/alanla.html

Matt 1: AL 618 / NL 630
roncli: AL 50 / NL 50
Chad: AL 100 / NL 100
Frankie: AL 600 / NL 500
Matt 2: AL 672 / NL 795

very cool! and talking about halted games, there are games that end because of the 10 run mercy rule, how do we score those?

[Frankie]

Frankie, I think your formula is also a bit too complex, because now you have to go through 9 innings (or more!) of scores, and does not look at what is important, the overall game. For example, assume the player is the away team.

111 111 110 8
000 000 009 9

This gives 299 (8 x 100 - 1 - 500) points under your system, although the player loses.

000 000 009 9
111 111 110 8

This gives 101 (1 x 100 + 1) points under your system, although the player wins.

Going through all nine innings or more? In many of the games you can write it down while playing. If that's not possible you check it while you do your playback before submitting the score, which you do every time, right

The calculating is as easy as on the football games.

I see your point about getting more points loosing than winning with my formula, so maybe we should only allow scores submitted where you win the match. That would be interesting and challenging

I just hope we find a formula that is not to complex. Something simple, that eliminates many draws, and my idea does that. I change my formula to this:

100 x won innings + 50 x draw innings + point difference

And its only allowed to submit recordings where you win the overall match.

Skito, you still have to do your best in defence with this formula. If you get one point in your own game, you must prevent them from getting a point to earn the 100 points for winning the inning.

Bye.

[Chad]

I don't like the idea of negating all scores that lose the game, not that we'll have many recordings like this, but we should cater to all possibilities. Plus look at these three game scores.

111 111 000 6
000 000 005 5

This gives 701 (6 x 100 + 2 x 50 + 1) .

999 000 000 27
000 000 099 18

This gives 509 (3 x 100 + 4 x 50 + 9) .

999 000 000 27
000 000 111 3

This gives 474 (3 x 100 + 3 x 50 + 24) .

A 27-18 game is better than a 27-3 game????? ugh!

A 6-5 game is better than a 27-18 game????? ugh!

[roncli]

We're not scoring the AI here were scoring the humans!

But the game scores evenly for both! You're saying defense is more important in a baseball game. Well, I guess we're just gonna have to disagree on this one and put it to vote.

As far as what to vote in, I think Matt's ideas are a bit too much for the average user, and Frankie's just doesn't work (thanx for the better examples). That leaves:

200 * RunsScored for a shutout, 100 * RunsScored / RunsAllowed for all others

100 + RunsScored - RunsAllowed for a win, 50 for a tie, 0 for a loss

I personally am against 10 * RunsScored - RunsAllowed, as it favors offense, but if someone wants to see it in the poll, we can put it there.

As far as the mercy rule goes, in my system it wouldn't matter if you got one run short of the mercy rule and then let the CPU catch up, only to get your lead back later. Under your system, it would be adventagious to get to the mercy rule as soon as possible. For those two, I wouldn't worry about it. If the third system here ends up getting the votes, then we'll discuss it.

[Chad]

I think i'll revise the divisor scoring rule to

1000 * RunsScored for a shutout, 100 * RunsScored / RunsAllowed for all others

to make the math easier. Any other scoring suggestions?

I think both methods have problems with mercy rules, but the divisor method works better . If there was a 10 run mercy rule: Say you were leading by 9 runs and then held there, and then in the 5th inning you let a run slip past to make it 9-1. In the 6th inning you now could make up the runs to force the mercy rule to make it 11-1. this game would be scored with pts difference the same score! (110), if you never made the defensive mistake and kept the game at 10-0 (110) too. The divisor method would give a pretty big bonus for the shut out (less bonus for 12-2 verses 11-1) but at least it would reward you (and eliminate the ties) for not having made the fatal 1 run mistake.