ASG ABS

[dumbdumb]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/cal-raleigh-successful-as-4-of-5-challenges-reverse-calls-in-first-all-star-use-of-robot-umpire/ar-AA1IFYR2?ocid=BingNewsSerp

do we want to catch most egregious calls? think that boat sailed with regular IR and the law of unintended consequences

since we are suppose to be getting perfection still note the margin for error is stiil 1/2 inch with ABS itself (how come after all this time it's not down to 1/1000th of an inch yet, which would be much more respectable, from all the techies out there), instead of 0 margin of error which is perfection. and supposedly margin of error for umpires went down from 2 inch buffer to 3/4 inch buffer for post season strike zone considerations as just one part of the post season considerations for assignments.

go to second post on john bacon most recent ejection in the ccs section and take a look at the graph of each pitch missed and then apply the old 2 inch buffer to the new 3/4 inch buffer just to see the difference in how the old scores (dings) will come up now vs new scores (dings), just like with each umpires scores (dings) ie overturns on the base challenges.

and before everyone says i am unfairly picking on john, yes the only place i can find that graph is on ccs and it is the most recent and i would be glad to post every umpire that misses more than 1 pitch as examples everyday, but i do not know where that web address is to get all this info and grafts and i refuse to possibly pay for things like this. maybe baseball savant has it or if you know how to make it happen you can get it there, but i are not that smart.

P.S. i found an old ACC article that stated they were going to start using ABS technology in 2024 and we know that the SEC has already been using it since then. where are those scores just like with MLBU. and you dont have to identify the names, just go be numbers or letters for each individual scores and the margin of error, ie buffer zone used for correct and incorrect calls. but, i would imagine there is a very close correlation with the MLBU  top to bottom using the same margin of error buffer for each group, MLB, collegiate and high school.

[johnnyg08]

Pandora's Box

[grayhawk]

5 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/cal-raleigh-successful-as-4-of-5-challenges-reverse-calls-in-first-all-star-use-of-robot-umpire/ar-AA1IFYR2?ocid=BingNewsSerp

do we want to catch most egregious calls? think that boat sailed with regular IR and the law of unintended consequences

since we are suppose to be getting perfection still note the margin for error is stiil 1/2 inch with ABS itself (how come after all this time it's not down to 1/1000th of an inch yet, which would be much more respectable, from all the techies out there), instead of 0 margin of error which is perfection. and supposedly margin of error for umpires went down from 2 inch buffer to 3/4 inch buffer for post season strike zone considerations as just one part of the post season considerations for assignments.

go to second post on john bacon most recent ejection in the ccs section and take a look at the graph of each pitch missed and then apply the old 2 inch buffer to the new 3/4 inch buffer just to see the difference in how the old scores (dings) will come up now vs new scores (dings), just like with each umpires scores (dings) ie overturns on the base challenges.

and before everyone says i am unfairly picking on john, yes the only place i can find that graph is on ccs and it is the most recent and i would be glad to post every umpire that misses more than 1 pitch as examples everyday, but i do not know where that web address is to get all this info and grafts and i refuse to possibly pay for things like this. maybe baseball savant has it or if you know how to make it happen you can get it there, but i are not that smart.

P.S. i found an old ACC article that stated they were going to start using ABS technology in 2024 and we know that the SEC has already been using it since then. where are those scores just like with MLBU. and you dont have to identify the names, just go be numbers or letters for each individual scores and the margin of error, ie buffer zone used for correct and incorrect calls. but, i would imagine there is a very close correlation with the MLBU  top to bottom using the same margin of error buffer for each group, MLB, collegiate and high school.

 

[stevis]

There's no such thing as "zero measurement error."  That's not how measurement works.  Heck, the ball itself has 0.06 in of tolerance in diameter. So if your tracking is just measuring the "center" of the baseball, it can't get more accurate than that. 

Despite ESPN's attempt to display the difference in HR lengths from Monday down to the width of a hydrogen atom, we have to be realistic about the limitations of measurement.  Data presented without error bars is a good sign you can end the meeting early and shuffle people out of the office. 

[Velho]

47 minutes ago, stevis said:

Data presented without error bars is a good sign you can end the meeting early and shuffle people out of the office. 

I couldn't decide which to use, and this comment is so on it (and I've been yelling it from the rooftops myself), that I'll just give you all of them

[Velho]

7 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

the margin for error is stiil 1/2 inch with ABS

Where did this come from? I've hunted for this and not been able to find it published by any of the responsible parties (Hawkeye, MLB, MiLB, ATP).

Given the distance, pitch movement, and tech being used (unless they have many more cameras I'm not aware of), I think this is actually pretty good. Can't imagine getting more accurate without a laser system.

 

 

[BLWizzRanger]

The HRD was decided by a tenth of an inch. (Well, whats his name advanced, and actually won the whole thing, from the first round due to having a HR a tenth farther than someone else).  The technology has to be the same, doesn't it?  If not, I can't believe that it would be more accurate than used for pitches.

Conclusion:  The HRD was fixed.

 

[BLWizzRanger]

3 hours ago, grayhawk said:

 

Its easier to read using a Boomhauer voice, <shrug>

[dumbdumb]

4 hours ago, Velho said:

Where did this come from? I've hunted for this and not been able to find it published by any of the responsible parties (Hawkeye, MLB, MiLB, ATP).

Given the distance, pitch movement, and tech being used (unless they have many more cameras I'm not aware of), I think this is actually pretty good. Can't imagine getting more accurate without a laser system.

 

 

other than in the article mentioning it. i will look around

[umpstu]

Mad Max, help us out with another minutiae comment.

[SeeingEyeDog]

5 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

Its easier to read using a Boomhauer voice, <shrug>

That reboot will be televised! August 4th! And that noise you hear will be me...minding my own business and watching it while grilling with pro-PANE and pro-PANE accessories!

~Dawg

[dumbdumb]

On 7/16/2025 at 1:17 PM, Velho said:

Where did this come from? I've hunted for this and not been able to find it published by any of the responsible parties (Hawkeye, MLB, MiLB, ATP).

Given the distance, pitch movement, and tech being used (unless they have many more cameras I'm not aware of), I think this is actually pretty good. Can't imagine getting more accurate without a laser system.

 

 

you can also go to ccs and the post by umpire in chief. of course Trackman is now HawkEye and just like Trackman not commenting on margin of error, neither does hawkeye or it is hard to find and i think some tech wizards can come pretty close. and since someone representing the players mentioned it in the other article i am pretty sure they have the resources to have pursued it, the 1/2 inch margin.

found this later about tech can never be perfect either

https://www.techspot.com/article/2975-baseball-hawkeye-tech/

[Velho]

Which makes me remember that NFL is using Hawkeye to do First Downs this coming year. I'm skeptical how well it will work. Very noisy environment.

[BLWizzRanger]

1 hour ago, Velho said:

Which makes me remember that NFL is using Hawkeye to do First Downs this coming year. I'm skeptical how well it will work. Very noisy environment.

While there will always be complaints, I don't see there would be as much of an issue in football than in baseball. You already have a degree of error with two pairs of eyes looking where to spot a ball.  Meaning, you have sideline judges spotting the ball where they think the ball is at when the body part is on the ground while being touched by another player and then, another ball is spotted in the middle of the field from a look 20 yards away. Out of bounds plays are a guess as well.  Let's not forget that in years past, a chain was set up to point to a spot that lined up to a referees foot (big toe? middle of foot? pinky?)  Plus, how fast the ball is set down when under two minutes in a half. The referees aren't looking to be exact in those cases.

There is about 10 degrees of error on just spotting the ball let alone having an eye in the sky with a plus/minus measuring error determining if the ball is past the lead marker. 

 

[Velho]

46 minutes ago, BLWizzRanger said:

While there will always be complaints, I don't see there would be as much of an issue in football than in baseball. You already have a degree of error with two pairs of eyes looking where to spot a ball. 

Fair in comparison to the existing methodology. I was thinking about it in a vacuum and accuracy to within inches.

 

[SeeingEyeDog]

1 hour ago, BLWizzRanger said:

While there will always be complaints, I don't see there would be as much of an issue in football than in baseball. You already have a degree of error with two pairs of eyes looking where to spot a ball.  Meaning, you have sideline judges spotting the ball where they think the ball is at when the body part is on the ground while being touched by another player and then, another ball is spotted in the middle of the field from a look 20 yards away. Out of bounds plays are a guess as well.  Let's not forget that in years past, a chain was set up to point to a spot that lined up to a referees foot (big toe? middle of foot? pinky?)  Plus, how fast the ball is set down when under two minutes in a half. The referees aren't looking to be exact in those cases.

There is about 10 degrees of error on just spotting the ball let alone having an eye in the sky with a plus/minus measuring error determining if the ball is past the lead marker. 

 

What's sad about marking the ball for a first down or knowing what line they gained and help with boundary calls in football...the technology exists that could get this far more exact than the human eye. With a combination of lasers, cameras, buried sensors under the field and microchips in the ball, the ball could be spotted for the next play's snap far more accurately.

Same in hockey...chip the puck and again, lasers, cameras and sensors under the ice could definitively indicate WHEN a puck crossed the goal line (between the pipes and under the crossbar) for goals that are close to whistles or the end of the period and WHETHER it fully crossed the goal line or not. Add chips to the players' skates and you could increase the accuracy of offsides calls and crease violations.

The technology exists...I understand why MLB is not full-time ABS but, I don't think that's the same reason not to use the technology in football and hockey. Is The Chain Gang in football a jobs program? If we're worried about putting The Chain Gang out of work (and we are!), you could decide to notify all of them in advance you're going to eliminate that function in 10-12 12 years or whatever in advance, giving them ample opportunity to pivot. Yes? No?

~Dawg