ABS Stops Calling Strikes, Manager Ejected in 20-4 Romp

[Lindsay]

HP Umpire Takahito Matsuda ejected Charlotte Knights manager Justin Jirschele in the 9th inning of a 20-4 blowout game designed as a full Automated Ball/Strike System (ABS) affair, meaning that computers rather than the umpire called all balls and strikes for the game...except that in the 9th, ABS seemed to stop calling strikes and Gwinnett tacked on four more runs thanks to six walks (there was also a hit-by-pitch).

Indeed, even the Gameday computer readout seemed to be missing a few pitches during multiple at-bats in the 9th inning as catcher-turned-position player pitching Xavier Fernández threw 33 pitches (just five of them strikes) as the three-plus hour game slowly trudged to a lopsided conclusion.

The final score was Gwinnett Stripers 20, Charlotte Knights 4.

Video as follows:

Alternate Link: ABS keeps calling balls on close pitches in blowout game; manager ejected in the 9th

View the full article

[Velho]

Not so sure ABS malfunctioned. Assuming ABS measures only at front of plate I can see those pitches shown being balls since they are slow pitch softball trajectories.

[beerguy55]

51 minutes ago, Velho said:

Not so sure ABS malfunctioned. Assuming ABS measures only at front of plate I can see those pitches shown being balls since they are slow pitch softball trajectories.

Why would it only measure at the front of the plate?

It's supposed to be measuring a 3D representation of the plate - front, back, sides, top, bottom.

If it doesn't do that wtf are we doing here?

 

These jackasses should be swinging.

As the ump, I think I'm giving the universal symbol for "my earphones aren't working" and then calling a bunch of strikes.

[The Man in Blue]

4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

Why would it only measure at the front of the plate?

It's supposed to be measuring a 3D representation of the plate - front, back, sides, top, bottom.

If it doesn't do that wtf are we doing here?

 

Well, now ... that's the multi-million dollar question now, isn't it Rob?

 

 

4 hours ago, beerguy55 said:

As the ump, I think I'm giving the universal symbol for "my earphones aren't working" and then calling a bunch of strikes.

Nope, not at all.  But I'm a bit of an a@@#0!3 when it comes to making a point to people who make horrible decisions and double down on them.  I have no problem standing by with the marshmallows ready to go.

Oh, you think that's how it works?  OK then, that's how it works.  I'm just going to stand ... over here.  

[Vegas_Ump]

It's simple!  AI said, "I blow 'em as I sees 'em!"

Mike

[SeeingEyeDog]

We cannot have this at the MLB level. I don't know the specifics of what PitchTrak can and can't do but, The Game must have software that reads the strike zone as a 3D polygon in the shape of home plate, with a top and bottom of that polygon set to each batter. The strike zone CANNOT be a plane! Can...not! So, until they get the technology there? Automated strike zones are just a non-starter for me.

Page 2...I don't know what happened in this game here. Let's take it at face value...let's assume that what happened was the computer crashed or the system otherwise stopped functioning and plate was no longer getting strike/ball notifications. There need to be protocols for this and those protocols must be followed. Either the game should be paused while stadium ops attempt to re-boot the system and/or the umpire should be empowered to resume the game calling balls and strikes...gasp!...manually. Obviously, both managers should also be notified of what is happening, too. Once the system is a fully operational Death Star again, then Skynet may resume control of the strike zone. Again, we simply cannot have a broken/non-functioning automated strike zone system and then allowing all pitches to be called as balls because the umpires have not been made aware of the problem.

~Dawg 

[Velho]

This conversation got me curious so I went looking.

Most deep dives I found are 4-5 years old so not putting much stock in them regarding the current technology. [One nice quote though regarding the 3D strike zone: “It’s unlikely that umpires would call strikes in such a 3D space.” Struck me as out of touch but I’ve never called 100mph with 20 inches of break.]

Regarding the technical aspects, the called zone is both 2D and set by batters height, i.e. the zone is not the knees or midpoint between top of shoulder and top of pants.

See 1 minute mark in this video that discussed both the above. https://www.mlb.com/news/explaining-ball-strike-challenge-system

Note: The width has been reduced to 17" in May 2023 (the above video was Aug 2022)

Regarding the middle of the plate reading, when that was changed from the front it was reported “The depth of where the pitches are being registered has also been pushed back to the middle of the plate, rather than the front. This should take away the strike calls on breaking balls in the dirt” [last part feeds to an agenda that is touched on below])

Back to the tech...

MLB seems to feel it’s passed minimal viability: In January 2023, MLB’s Chief Operations and Strategy Officer Chris Marinak said “the technology is pretty much ready to be used at whatever scale we want to use it at”. He also said “the zone that’s called by ABS is not the zone that’s actually called in real life” and that “what we’re in the process of working through right now is looking at the mechanics of using the system rather than refining the actual technology itself”.

The article further states “Marinak told SBJ Tech that the only deterrent was buy-in from players, managers and umpires.”

If that’s all true, why have system zone dimensions changed over time from 17" to 19" and back to 17" in May? You want to give the benefit of the doubt and attribute it to simply calibrating the system but quote like this make you wonder:

MLB EVP of Baseball Operations in May 2023 “The second question (we’re trying to answer), which is also a very tricky question, is the geometry of the zone,” Sword said. “And coming up with a strike zone to load into that system that will produce ball-strike calls that make sense to both teams and promote the kind of on-field outcomes that we are seeking to promote.”

Feels like managing ABS outcomes is part of the way they are seeking to “improve the game for fans”.

 

Primary sources:

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/the-automated-strike-zone-is-slightly-different-at-triple-a-in-2023/

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2023/01/13/Technology/mlb-aaa-ballparks-automated-strike-zone.aspx

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/the-automated-strike-zone-is-slightly-different-at-triple-a-in-2023/

https://twitter.com/JohnVittas3/status/1417581944846618630

[The Man in Blue]

I don't want to totally $#!+ on their efforts, but part of the reason I left the private sector and made a mid-life career change is I was sick of leaders who declare "This is the solution, now figure out how it solves the problem."  This is where Robo Manfred and MLB are at.

I am not just saying this as an umpire, but as somebody who spent years on a "smart technology" project team.  It was the same thing.  The CEO said "do this."  We spent years trying to explain to him that the technology was smoke and mirrors at that stage.  The vendors who were supposed to come in and show us what their product did spent ALL of there time trying to convince us it worked rather than actually showing us it worked.  It did not work, as the tech just wasn't (still isn't) there yet.  An autonomous ABS system is not a viable product with current technology.  

The practical application of the system -- both for the tech and for the game -- is one of the tests going on in AAA right now: the challenge system. 

Another line I have used through many years of customer-facing positions ... Computers are perfect machines.  They do exactly what they are told.  The problem is, from the programming to the end user, people tell them what to do and how to do it.

 

Thank you for the deep-dive, @Velho.  I started to do some research for a discussion on another forum.  Like you, I couldn't find much that wasn't 4-5 years old.  You kept digging though ... thank you!

[dumbdumb]

Coming up with a strike zone to load into that system that will produce ball-strike calls that make sense to both teams and promote the kind of on-field outcomes that we are seeking to promote.

That will be the new definition of the strike zone, "the kind of on-field outcomes that we are seeking to promote".

So analytics will be the driver of the strike zone based on outcomes that bring in the most fans or produce more home runs or higher batting averages etc and higher scoring games.

So will they reconfigure/tinker with the zone every week, month, 2 months etc, and will they tell us the new configurations for the outcomes that we are seeking to promote, or just try to hide it and let Lindsay discover by the numbers and tell us when they change.

[The Man in Blue]

How long until they require the batters to wear the sensors that are actually needed to be able to provide an accurate zone?

Yes, because human umpires cannot maintain consistent strike zones ... 🙄

[LMSANS]

So thinking about this strike zone...when I was a kid, we would draw a plate-shaped box on a wall. If the ball hit that "box", it was a strike. It didn't matter if we were playing stick ball or whiffle ball (think 10 foot curves). We dealt with it.

Same thing here.

[beerguy55]

On 8/13/2023 at 11:33 AM, The Man in Blue said:

Computers are perfect machines.  They do exactly what they are told.  The problem is, from the programming to the end user, people tell them what to do and how to do it.

I'll add to that - computers don't fix bad processes, they make them fail faster.

Agree 100% - the strike zone should follow a challenge process and that's as far as it should go - I don't care if it's ten challenges per game per team, or whatever number they come up with, but everybody (even pitchers) will hate the entire game called by a computer.

[SH0102]

1 hour ago, beerguy55 said:

but everybody (even pitchers) will hate the entire game called by a computer

Especially pitchers.  Far more strikes are called just off the zone than balling a pitch within the zone.  Usually a “balled strike” results from a cross up, a terribly missed spot that happened to be in zone, or catcher butchering their reception of the ball 

The P will lose the most with a full robo  zone and the art of framing and receiving goes away for catchers, making them defacto hitters who happen to catch the pitches.

Working with umpires, receiving the ball, framing, all go away.

The challenger system is the only way to go that allows for some correction of error but also allows the human element to take place (not challenge a borderline pitch on pitch one of an at bat, expanding in a blowout, etc)