MLBU wanted full ABS not challenge system

[dumbdumb]

Full ABS for every pitch, not a challenge system

https://dodgerblue.com/rob-manfred-mlb-umpires-prefer-full-automated-strike-zone-over-challenge-system/2025/12/03/

[johnnyg08]

I don't blame them. Why not? 

[834k3r]

20 hours ago, johnnyg08 said:

I don't blame them. Why not? 

Concur. All one way (full ABS) or the other (no challenges). All challenges will do is highlight the missed calls by the PU, so why would the union find it acceptable?

[SeeingEyeDog]

I just really don't like where they are with the technology currently. The technology is not able to consistently plot the vertical axis. According to that article, the "compromise" mentioned was "...based on the batter's height."

Respectfully, that's garbage. The implication there is that EVERY human being of the same height has the same vertical limits to their strike zone. There are guys who are 6'2" who have short torsos and long legs and there are guys who are 6'2" who have long torsos and short legs. The hollow of the knees on both of those guys is NOT going to be in the same place.

I don't know if this is a practical solution but, at the start of every season and every post-season all players should have their strike zones mapped. Take some BP and have cameras documenting each players pre-swing positioning. And average out the vertical limits through the session. Send a team of people from the league's office around to each club. Callups should have there's done, too...not sure mechanically what that looks like. Maybe once all players are drafted, they should be mapped.

We know eventually the technology will catch up and they will be able to accurately and consistently plot the vertical. Until then, we have to do other things to achieve the objective.

~Dawg

[Velho]

14 hours ago, SeeingEyeDog said:

According to that article, the "compromise" mentioned was "...based on the batter's height."

Correct. They are not using the rulebook vertical zone limits but rather 27% and 53.5% of batter height.

If it makes you feel better (worse?) - the horizontal is measured at the midpoint of the plate. So they've almost entirely abandoned the rulebook zone.

Regarding measurement by player, it's done during spring training. Why they don't measure it to their stance vs raw height 🤷‍♂️

[SeeingEyeDog]

Thanks, @Velho...as I suspected, it seems they are changing the definition of the strike zone to accommodate the limits of the ABS tech (which fundamentally changes the game and it's not being applied equally to all players...) instead of looking at other procedures and policies that ALLOW for the limitations of the ABS technology while ALSO maintaining the existing codified, rulebook definition of the strike zone. Whether you agree or disagree with how MLB is proceeding, this is the beginning of a landmark moment and possibly a new era of The Game at its highest level...

~Dawg

[BLWizzRanger]

So what we are trying to say is that each batter possibly has two strike zones?
One for the PU and one for the computer.
And, the hollow of the knee or the top of the zone for each player could be an inch or two different?

Yeah, doesnt seem like there will be any issues there. There has to be some instance of this already where the PU called the low strike (which was correct) but was overturned by computer because the math didnt reach that low.

No wonder the union wanted all or nothing. Maybe Meta glasses will be introduced that can adjust automatically for each batter...

Call what you call and be confident with it. If it is challenged and changed, dont let it get in your head. What else can you do?

[SeeingEyeDog]

4 hours ago, BLWizzRanger said:

So what we are trying to say is that each batter possibly has two strike zones?
One for the PU and one for the computer.
And, the hollow of the knee or the top of the zone for each player could be an inch or two different?

Yeah, doesnt seem like there will be any issues there. There has to be some instance of this already where the PU called the low strike (which was correct) but was overturned by computer because the math didnt reach that low.

No wonder the union wanted all or nothing. Maybe Meta glasses will be introduced that can adjust automatically for each batter...

Call what you call and be confident with it. If it is challenged and changed, dont let it get in your head. What else can you do?

Ranger, the entire conversation that MLB is having with itself regarding the strike zone and the implementation of ABS and related automated strike zone adjudication simply does not add up factually and logically. Everyone around this game at any level knows that the whole reason that ABS and technology are being explored is because of the strong and accurate belief that technology MIGHT EVENTUALLY be 100% accurate...or at least MORE accurate than human umpires. Leadership does not want MLB games decided by umpire misses. And yet, here we are in 2025 and MLB is implementing an INCOMPLETE technology.

Please explain to me how that while it makes sense that all of us, including leadership, to know that the state of the art again, can NOT consistently plot the vertical axis of pitches which we are then FURTHER compounding with this "compromise" of the strike zone relative to player...that all of this makes for more accurate adjudication of the strike zone and better MLB baseball in 2026?

I get it. I do. The technology has been coming for a long time. Nobody including myself should be surprised by this coming into the game. I simply do not believe as currently constructed that ABS (full-time, challenge, etc.) is ready for prime time. And if MLB wants to "compromise" on the vertical limits of the zone, then we need for them to codify that in the rule book.

They're MLB. They can do or do not as they please. Like all pro sports, MLB is not a competitive athletic contest. It's an entertainment enterprise masquerading as a competitive athletic contest. If the fans accept this and come to the ballpark, that's all MLB cares about. Romantic notion's of "America's pastime" do not help you cover expenses and pocket the rest.

~Dawg

[The Man in Blue]

On 12/18/2025 at 7:50 PM, SeeingEyeDog said:

Everyone around this game at any level knows that the whole reason that ABS and technology are being explored is because of the strong and accurate belief that technology MIGHT EVENTUALLY be 100% accurate...or at least MORE accurate than human umpires. Leadership does not want MLB games decided by umpire misses. And yet, here we are in 2025 and MLB is implementing an INCOMPLETE technology.

 

I don't think that is completely accurate, so let me give it a shot: Leadership does not want MLB betting lines decided by umpire misses.

It is the AI and tech bro age . . . who cares what it can actually do!  The important things is what you wish it could do . . . someday . . . eventually . . . in a fairy tale . . . maybe . . . so please invest. 

[SeeingEyeDog]

3 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

I don't think that is completely accurate, so let me give it a shot: Leadership does not want MLB betting lines decided by umpire misses.

It is the AI and tech bro age . . . who cares what it can actually do!  The important things is what you wish it could do . . . someday . . . eventually . . . in a fairy tale . . . maybe . . . so please invest. 

BlueMan, I had not thought of this angle...this is next level, John Cena "You can't see me..." thinking. Sometimes, the obvious answers are obvious...

~Dawg

[Richvee]

23 hours ago, The Man in Blue said:

 

Leadership does not want MLB betting lines decided by umpire misses.

100% 

It is the AI and tech bro age . . . who cares what it can actually do!  The important things is what you wish it could do . . . someday . . . eventually . . . in a fairy tale . . . maybe . . . so please invest. 
 

I think it’s the perception of what it can do NOW. The public loves to think the tech is infallible .They’re not interested in the facts (technicalities as far as they’re concerned) about “margin of error”, or the non rule book computer defined vertical zone, or the single plane zone. They don’t care.  
If the dot is inside the box it’s a strike. That’s all that matters to ”Joe Fan”

 

[The Man in Blue]

14 hours ago, Richvee said:

I think it’s the perception of what it can do NOW. The public loves to think the tech is infallible .They’re not interested in the facts (technicalities as far as they’re concerned) about “margin of error”, or the non rule book computer defined vertical zone, or the single plane zone. They don’t care.  
If the dot is inside the box it’s a strike. That’s all that matters to ”Joe Fan”

I know we are going off into a related rabbit hole . . .  Which is the underlying issue.  "I was told by them eggheads with money it worked, and I saw on TV how bad them lazy umpires are, so it works."

Oh . . . oh . . . oh . . . 

I think you helped me stumble on to something.  AI is the modern wrestling.

[jms1425]

One thing that no one mentions is that the computer itself has a margin of error of .5".

During Spring Training last year I saw a pitch called a strike, challenged, and overturned to a ball because it was off the plate by .04". That pitch could have been on the plate by as much as .46". Or it might have been off the plate by .54". 

Couple that with the fact that hitters only had 50% of their challenges result in a reversed call, and pitchers were worse at 40%, and the guy with the best look of anyone in the yard, the catchers, were the best at 56%. Overall, 52% overturned. Essentially flipping a coin. Players don't know any better than the umpire. This should have been enough to tell everyone to stop complaining about pitch calls. But, confirmation bias being the powerful force that it is, instead baseball is doubling down on this system.

I absolutely hate it.

[BigBlue4u]

4 hours ago, jms1425 said:

During Spring Training last year I saw a pitch called a strike, challenged, and overturned to a ball because it was off the plate by .04". That pitch could have been on the plate by as much as .46". Or it might have been off the plate by .54". 

The problem is that a pitch that is .04 off the plate is VERY hittable.  So, it would appear the emphasis would then be, or should be, on consistency rather than accuracy.  Also, the current 2D video box that is displayed can be very misleading.  A right-handed curve ball to a right- handed batter can show up as being outside when, in reality, the pitch did cross the strike zone above the plate.  I can hardly wait to see a batter's reaction on a curve ball that crosses the plate in the strike zone and is caught just off the ground called a strike by ABS.  Where is Eric Gregg when we need him? 🙂

 

[Velho]

On 2/15/2026 at 3:13 PM, BigBlue4u said:

I can hardly wait to see a batter's reaction on a curve ball that crosses the plate in the strike zone and is caught just off the ground called a strike by ABS.

A already happened less extreme example

 

[Richvee]

On 2/15/2026 at 11:27 AM, jms1425 said:

One thing that no one mentions is that the computer itself has a margin of error of .5".

During Spring Training last year I saw a pitch called a strike, challenged, and overturned to a ball because it was off the plate by .04". That pitch could have been on the plate by as much as .46". Or it might have been off the plate by .54". 

Couple that with the fact that hitters only had 50% of their challenges result in a reversed call, and pitchers were worse at 40%, and the guy with the best look of anyone in the yard, the catchers, were the best at 56%. Overall, 52% overturned. Essentially flipping a coin. Players don't know any better than the umpire. This should have been enough to tell everyone to stop complaining about pitch calls. But, confirmation bias being the powerful force that it is, instead baseball is doubling down on this system.

I absolutely hate it.

Joe Public doesn't care. "perceived technological perfection". If the little dot is touching the box, they don't want to hear it might really be out of the box. As long as those horrible human umpires didn't blow the call and cost me money on my bet. This is the reality of the state of the game. 

[Velho]

4 hours ago, Richvee said:

Joe Public doesn't care.

Agreed. They don't care about margin of error or understanding results vs risk in their own lives so they certainly don't care about those things in their entertainment.