Quote: Originally Posted By contrarian23 on 5/05/2009I'm sticking with Occam on this one

Me too. That razor shaves pretty well for me.

ARVID, here's the deal...

Once you make Hall-Of-Famer and receive the cheat codes, Admin expects you to be a better SIM player than you once were. They throw these little off-kilter schematics at us to keep things fair with the non-HOF'ers. If you would start utilizing Cheat Code #34 and insert it after Game 48, you'll find that it will bring Cisco back up to speed and shame any batter who faces him afterwards.

Does the Sim Intentionally Insert Drama?

Is what I asked in a since retired MLB SimLeagues thread.
I will take this thread as a measure of Vindication for me, Thank you.


Ridiculous Sim Levelling, perhaps as witnessed in Kurt Vonnegut Junior's Short Story, Harrison Bergeron.

Follow this link for the full text of the story. Harrison Bergeron

...anyone who spends time, money and effort on something they believe is rigged is an idiot, imo...

...the site's addressed this a number of times over the years and they always say the same thing, that they don't do anything of the kind...if anyone doesn't believe that, why are you here?

What JohnGPF said.

I've sent in my share of tickets to Admin complaining about a variety of things, but this particular issue is one I can't believe exists. In most instances where this "rigged" accusation is thrown out, the cause IMO is most likely one of the following:

1) dumb luck/small sample size

2) owners expecting RL results for their players in high cap leagues (you don't hear many complaints about performance in prog leagues)

3) a bug in the program (like when 0 HR pitchers were giving up lots of HRs)

4) owners misusing players (e.g., not talking into account in-game fatigue and having too high a PC for their pitchers)

Quote: Originally Posted By thejuice6 on 5/05/2009
ARVID, here's the deal...

Once you make Hall-Of-Famer and receive the cheat codes, Admin expects you to be a better SIM player than you once were. They throw these little off-kilter schematics at us to keep things fair with the non-HOF'ers. If you would start utilizing Cheat Code #34 and insert it after Game 48, you'll find that it will bring Cisco back up to speed and shame any batter who faces him afterwards.

at what point do they give out the instruction manual for the cheat codes? Like that trick there about #34 only being good after G48? So far they haven't helped me none.

u,u,d,d,l,r,l,r,b,a,b,a

okay. i could reply to a few of these stats based on my post, not the joke ones. but i feel better now.

this happens every few months

Don't think its that small of a sample size myself...you're looking at half a season of Cisco there.

Yeah, I think God Himself is capable of putting up bad numbers in 22 innings of a high cap league.

Well, I gotta say, it's basically for practical purposes like a 90-100mil cap league. Even with WAA AAA the pitchers aren't lights out and the players are generally 6-7mil guys. Not too many owners from what I have noticed have gone to the trouble of identifying their actual WAA studs.

There really hasn't been too much light shed. I'm just not buying any of the points made here simply b/c I have RL Mike MacDougal, Chad Bradford and Mellie Wolfgang all outperforming Carlos by leaps and bounds. I also saw this exact same happening with Eckersley in two seperate leagues and other owners concurred as well. It is what it is I guess.

Any player can outperform a better player "by leaps and bounds" in a tiny sample size. In 1922, Babe Ruth had an OPS of 1.106 (best in the AL) and teammate Aaron Ward had an OPS of .685.

In the World Series that year, Ruth's OPS was .426, Ward's was .910.

Unrealistic? Rigged? Or just a tiny sample size?

M. Wolfgang '15 R 36 0 0 0 1 1 6 9 33.7 42 14 14 0 9 9 .302 .340 .374 1.51 3.74
C. Carlos '67 R 37 0 0 0 2 2 5 6 22.0 24 21 21 0 10 16 .267 .340 .322 1.55 8.59
C. Bradford '98 R 37 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 19.3 19 5 5 0 5 8 .257 .296 .297 1.24 2.33
M. MacDougal '06 R 31 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 11.3 9 5 5 0 12 7 .209 .393 .233 1.85 3.97

yeah, no... MacDougal isn't pitching well at all... Bradford's numbers are very close to Carlos'. The only difference between Bradford and Carlos is their BB, where Bradford has 5 less BB in 2.2 less IP. The ERA's are very different, but JohnGPF already gave a very good explanation for that earlier. 22 IP, or 19, or 11, are way too small a sample size. Wolfgang is also not pitching well, his BB numbers are better, but he's giving up tons of hits and I would say just from that observation is possibly the one responsible for all of Carlos ER. Actually in looking up their IR and IRS, Bradford and Wolfgang have allowed 12 and 13 IR to score, respectively. That's exactly where Carlos' bad ERA is coming from. Carlos' stats aren't bad, he's just been unlucky with his results. MacDougal has been bad, but has been much luckier. Bradford has been very similar, but has also been luckier. Wolfgang has been bad, but also luckier. It also isn't very conducive to judge a pitcher's worth solely by ERA, as is clearly evidenced here, Carlos is pitching much better than 2 of 3 you think are pitching better, and roughly the same as the other...

And looking at the stats, I would say the WAA AAA has the league playing much closer to a $120-140m league...

easy on the detailed explanations... this guy won't be able to understand it. All he really wants is some sympathy

Quote: Originally Posted By darkballer on 5/06/2009
easy on the detailed explanations... this guy won't be able to understand it. All he really wants is some sympathy

You're a jerkoff. That's out there.



Now then, as for the detailed explanation by just4me I would again disagree on a few things. The guys I mentioned that you attempted to tear down are far cheaper. I was being relative in my term usage. For any of those 3 to be near Carlos is ludacris.

Believe me it does not play anywhere near a 120-140 league either. That assumption is ludacris. There aren't teams littered with $10mil batters or knockout studs like 2000 Pedro Martinez. It's closer to a 90-100, like I already stated.

Almost forgot- it's not a small sample size either. It's 91 games in and more than half of Carlos' season. Put that one to bed as well.