Posted by Jtpsops on 6/14/2021 1:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 6/14/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chargingryno on 6/14/2021 12:35:00 PM (view original):
But also penalizes your team, which is already at a disadvantage to run scoring. Dodger doesn’t just give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits, and then suppresses xbh. So the xbh teams will still get hits, and will get exponentially more xbh’s than the singles team. Yes, a +xbh team will benefit the teams with doubles/triples, but your teams singles will also be turned into xbh and give your team a chance IMO. I think j4m’s team will be a perfect example of this I think

"Dodger doesn't give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits"

This is a myth that has been shared for a long time. The singles rating is for singles only. The Park Factor is for hits as a whole.

I’m curious how you determined this is a myth. Every discussion I’ve seen on the decision tree (including contrarian’s pinned threads in the SLB forum) indicates the singles factor is used in the hit/out portion of the decision tree (i.e. it impacts overall hit frequency, not type of hit).

Anecdotally by winning 163 championships, 43 TOCs, and 2 WIS Championships in the last 5 years while using that as a guiding principle.

So your anecdotal evidence trumps the published decision tree?

There’s no questioning your success. But everything published and discussed previously suggests you’re wrong here.

I'm being a bit inflammatory but I'm not sure what you mean by published. Research done by users on small sample sizes of data is hardly conclusive either.

The pinned thread in the SLB forum. You’ve been part of that discussion. Obviously there’s some room for interpretation but the information presented seems to strongly indicate that the singles factor is used to determine overall hit frequency. Most owners seem to share that interpretation as well.

Posted by just4me on 6/14/2021 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 6/14/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chargingryno on 6/14/2021 12:35:00 PM (view original):
But also penalizes your team, which is already at a disadvantage to run scoring. Dodger doesn’t just give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits, and then suppresses xbh. So the xbh teams will still get hits, and will get exponentially more xbh’s than the singles team. Yes, a +xbh team will benefit the teams with doubles/triples, but your teams singles will also be turned into xbh and give your team a chance IMO. I think j4m’s team will be a perfect example of this I think

"Dodger doesn't give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits"

This is a myth that has been shared for a long time. The singles rating is for singles only. The Park Factor is for hits as a whole.

No, park factor has no impact at all and is a general reference to run scoring environment.

This post might help understand how ballpark effects work:

https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=519598&threadID=11831758#l_11831758

1B modifier is absolutely overall hits as it is worked backwards in the decision tree (see above).

there's nothing in this link to indicate that the singles modifier is the overall hits modifier. the slide says "ballpark hits multiplier used" for the hit vs out piece of the decision tree, which could be anything from the singles modifier to the park factor to some secret factor not published anywhere.

my (admittedly anecdotal) experience and that of many others is that Dodger Stadium reduces overall hits. I run a regressive league that's in its 36th season and has had a team in Dodger Stadium every year so I'll take a look to see home vs road average for that team and report back.

just4me's supposed singles team hit 339 doubles. Ozomatli's double team hit 359 doubles. I wouldn't be too surprised if just4me's team performed well in Baker Bowl given that his singles team is a borderline double's team as well.

I don't understand the argument:

• The fact that it is pinned doesn't mean 100% of the information in it is correct
• Even multiple seasons worth of data does not prove anything — you'd need thousands of seasons to remove the variance and reach a threshold for conviction
• It's been a self-fulfilling prophecy for years. Most owners believe it because it is presented. Then it continues to get presented because most owners believe it.
• Most owners don't really understand the intricacies of the game

Posted by buddhagamer on 6/14/2021 2:29:00 PM (view original):
just4me's supposed singles team hit 339 doubles. Ozomatli's double team hit 359 doubles. I wouldn't be too surprised if just4me's team performed well in Baker Bowl given that his singles team is a borderline double's team as well.

This doesn't account for the difference in PAs. I skimped as always

Posted by 06gsp on 6/14/2021 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by just4me on 6/14/2021 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 6/14/2021 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by chargingryno on 6/14/2021 12:35:00 PM (view original):
But also penalizes your team, which is already at a disadvantage to run scoring. Dodger doesn’t just give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits, and then suppresses xbh. So the xbh teams will still get hits, and will get exponentially more xbh’s than the singles team. Yes, a +xbh team will benefit the teams with doubles/triples, but your teams singles will also be turned into xbh and give your team a chance IMO. I think j4m’s team will be a perfect example of this I think

"Dodger doesn't give a + to singles, it gives a plus to hits"

This is a myth that has been shared for a long time. The singles rating is for singles only. The Park Factor is for hits as a whole.

No, park factor has no impact at all and is a general reference to run scoring environment.

This post might help understand how ballpark effects work:

https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=519598&threadID=11831758#l_11831758

1B modifier is absolutely overall hits as it is worked backwards in the decision tree (see above).

there's nothing in this link to indicate that the singles modifier is the overall hits modifier. the slide says "ballpark hits multiplier used" for the hit vs out piece of the decision tree, which could be anything from the singles modifier to the park factor to some secret factor not published anywhere.

my (admittedly anecdotal) experience and that of many others is that Dodger Stadium reduces overall hits. I run a regressive league that's in its 36th season and has had a team in Dodger Stadium every year so I'll take a look to see home vs road average for that team and report back.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the actual impact may be somewhat masked since singles are, by far, the most common type of hit (and more common than the other three, combined).

I say this all with the utmost respect for what guys like just4me and contrarian23 have done for the game. Being so open and transparent with data and advice is a huge benefit for all of us, and new players in particular.

All I'm saying is that taking it as gospel is probably ill advised.

Posted by ozomatli on 6/14/2021 2:29:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand the argument:

• The fact that it is pinned doesn't mean 100% of the information in it is correct
• Even multiple seasons worth of data does not prove anything — you'd need thousands of seasons to remove the variance and reach a threshold for conviction
• It's been a self-fulfilling prophecy for years. Most owners believe it because it is presented. Then it continues to get presented because most owners believe it.
• Most owners don't really understand the intricacies of the game

I wasn’t suggesting being pinned meant it was gospel. I personally have never paid much attention to it either way, because as you said, singles are the most common type of hit regardless. I just think it makes the most sense that it’s an overall hit modifier. Maybe Admin will read this and be kind enough to settle the debate for us all.

Since my pinned thread has been referenced here...I should note that I have never claimed to know anything about this with certainty. The thread in question is pinned because (at the time I compiled that thread) it had the most comprehensive discussion on the topic. It doesn't mean that any of the information in it should be taken as gospel.

Here is a table used in the infamous Paul Bessire presentation from 2009, discussing ballpark effects in SLB:

Effect	Ballpark	High	Ballpark	Low
Hits	Coors Field	1.182	Petco Park	.908
2B	Baker Bowl	1.291	Dodger Stadium	.795
3B	Palace of the Fans	1.868	Great American Ballpark	.523
HR_RF	Coors Field	1.374	Municipal Stadium	.636
HR_LF	Coors Field	1.385	Municipal Stadium	.634
Runs (unused)	Coors Field	1.380	Petco Park	.830

Assuming (a) that Bessire was accurately presenting information on how park factors work at that time and (b) that the algorithm has not changed since then, I have concluded that "Hits" is the 1B Park factor and "Runs" is the overall park factor, which is clearly stated above to be unused.

The fact that Bessire specifically says "hits" and not "singles" is a strong indication to me. Definitive, no. I certainly suppose there are other interpretations.

For me it comes down to the data published by WIS in Bessire’s presentation. The slides indicate where the ballpark modifiers are used (I copied those relevant slides into the linked post above). For the hit decision it indicates ballpark modifier used. For HR, 3B, and 2B, it also indicates a park modifier. For the 1B decision it does not indicate a modifier used. Following the tree, and those modifiers, is what leads to the conclusion and data above and in the link.

I’ll also see if I can find it, but TZemtmeyer also posted something indicating this in one of the dev chats. I know I quoted it somewhere in the last year or so, as well.

My confidence on this is high because of these data points shared by WIS.

And also not trying to inflame anything and with utmost respect for ozo as an owner and member of WIS community, I do think he’s wrong on this. I also find it humorous because I initially wanted to reply to the “anecdotal” reply with, “While anecdotally commenting that good teams win more on the road because you don’t do as well in your home ballparks.” But I don’t know that ozo has actually ever said that (though many have), and I’m not trying to argue or fight, especially with someone I genuinely like.

Agreed. I enjoy these types of debates. Lord knows my knowledge of this game can always improve.