------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | International Replay Baseball League - Founded October 30, 1973 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ***************** IRBL NEWSLETTER # 546 ***************** 1-7-98 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ...................................... ************** ***** URGENT MESSAGE ***** ************** LRD # 546 contains an updated version of the "IRBL Menu Program" (version 7.00.00). The upgrade should have automatically installed when you loaded this LRD. Each manager should verify that the new version was installed correctly by selecting menu choice "Display Or Change IRBL Menu Program Configuration" from the "IRBL Menu Program" and confirming that the 5th line from the top of the screen states the following: "Program version: 7.00.00" This new version changes the following: Changes were made to accomodate DMB version 7. To start the IRBL Menu Program, if you are using MS-DOS, change to the C:\DMB7 directory and execute IRBLMENU; if you are using Windows 95, your IRBL Menu Program Desktop shortcut will have been updated to link to the new version (the icon should now look like a baseball). If the Windows 95 Desktop shortcut did not update or if you upgrade to Windows 95, refer to IRBL Rule # 36. An IRBL Menu option <6> was changed from "Copy ZIP file of selected series to diskette" to "Create ZIP file of Team Instructions Files set". If you still need to copy a series ZIP file to a diskette, you will find directions on another way to do it in IRBL Rule # 17F3B. The new option will make it easier to submit team instructions (refer to IRBL Rule # 15). The IRBL Rules were also revised to reflect changes in DMB version 7. Please follow the new instructions for completing a series (refer IRBL Rule # 17E). The revised IRBL Rules are included IRBL # 546 1-7-98 2 with this newsletter. The rules file has been reformated to a standard 10 characters per inch (cpi), 80 character per line format, to make it easier to read, display and print. NOTICE: This newsletter should be appearing in the \IRBL\RESULTS.Y98 directory. When you installed this LRD, the following three directories should have been created: \IRBL\LEAGUE.Y98 \IRBL\RESULTS.Y98 \IRBL\SERIES.Y98 You can archive or delete any files that you do not want from the 1997 (Y97) versions of the above 3 directories. DMB Version 7.0b: ---------------- Please verify that you are using DMB version 7.0b (not 7.0). You will see this displayed when you start DMB. If you do not have 7.0b, then either download it from the DMB web site or request that I send it to you. ************** ***** URGENT MESSAGE ***** ************** ...................................... PLAYER TRANSACTIONS: The WHITE SOX traded CAL ELDRED, WHITE SOX' 1ST round pick, PIRATES' 1ST round pick to the TWINS for GREG MADDUX. The BRAVES released RUSS MORMAN, DICK SCHOFIELD, ANDY TOMBERLIN, BRIAN GIVENS, VINCE PALACIOS, JEFF PARRETT, DENNIS RASMUSSEN, BEN RIVERA, SERGIO VALDEZ, FRANK VIOLA, KEVIN WICKANDER. The CUBS traded MIKE BIELECKI, OREL HERSHISER to the ANGELS for BRET SABERHAGEN, ANGELS' 2ND round pick. ...................................... MANAGER RESIGNATION: Derrick Jensen (MARINERS) has resigned due to financial problems. ...................................... TEAMS WITHOUT MANAGERS: ROCKIES, EXPOS and MARINERS I have included an updated IRBL Manager Address List. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 3 ...................................... World Series dispute: As announced in the last newsletter, John Parker (PHILLIES) had filed a protest against the results of the last two games of the PHILLIES vs ROYALS World Series in which the ROYALS won the last tow games at home played by Tom Dixon. It was John's contension that he had an agreement with Tom to have Tom call him to arrange to play the games over the telephone. After receiving explanations of what transpired in that conversation from by John and Tom, this is what I have concluded: Although Tom may have told John during the course of the conversation that he would call John when he was ready to play the games in order to arrange for playing over the telephone, after Tom gave a number of excuses why he could not, John concured that John ended the conversation saying "do what you have to do". In Tom's defense, earlier in the day that he had the conversation with John, he had a car accident and he was not feeling well due to the head injuries and the medication he was taking. Tom indicated to me that due to his head injuries, he did not feel up to being on the telephone for the long duration of playing the games and did not know when he would be recovered enough to be up to it. In addition, he had traveling commitments over the next few weeks and had an unpredictable schedule. He decided that what was best for him was to play the games whenever he could squeeze in the time (which is what he did). Whether or not Tom could have found a way to accommodated John's request dispite his situation, only Tom can make that decision. Since there is no IRBL rule requiring a manager to play games over the telephone and since (in my opinion), there was no firm agreement (just a firm request on John's part), I felt I had no choice but to allow the games played to stand as official. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 4 Therefore, the World Series results stands. The ROYALS have defeated the PHILLIES, 4 games to 3, to become IRBL World Champions. Congratulations to Tom Dixon for winning his 2nd straight IRBL World Series and his 4th consecutive AL Championship. The World Series results file is included. ...................................... Summary of LSP's, PUP's and Credits ----------------------------------- TOT=PUP+LSP-CR TEAM MANAGER --- --- --- -- ---- ------- 36 25 14 3 BLUE JAYS R.Doran 15 15 ATHLETICS B.Koens 15 15 YANKEES B.Koopersmith 12 10 5 3 ORIOLES C.Salerno 11 1 14 4 WHITE SOX C.Hopkins 9 9 GIANTS M.Mayko 5 5 RED SOX F.Hopkins 3 3 TIGERS G.Widenor 3 2 3 2 CARDINALS D.Tobin 2 2 MARLINS D.Swearingen TOT: Total effective LSP's LSP: Late Series LSP's PUP: Player Over-Useage Penalties CR : Credits ...................................... The following is the revised team draft order (counting LSP's, PUP's and credits but not counting trades): PRELIMINARY SECOND ROUND 1 ASTROS 28 ASTROS 29 REDS FIRST ROUND 30 RANGERS 31 INDIANS 2 ASTROS 32 PADRES 3 REDS 33 ANGELS 4 RANGERS 34 METS 5 INDIANS 35 BREWERS 6 PADRES 36 EXPOS 7 ANGELS 37 CARDINALS-2 8 METS 38 ATHLETICS-1 9 BREWERS 39 TWINS 10 EXPOS 40 ROCKIES 11 CARDINALS-1 41 BRAVES 12 TWINS 42 DODGERS 13 ROCKIES 43 CUBS 14 BRAVES 44 MARINERS 15 DODGERS 45 YANKEES-2 16 CUBS 46 PHILLIES 17 MARINERS 47 PIRATES IRBL # 546 1-7-98 5 18 PHILLIES 48 MARLINS-2 19 YANKEES-1 49 ORIOLES-2 20 PIRATES 50 WHITE SOX-2 21 ROYALS 51 BLUE JAYS-1 22 MARLINS-1 52 RED SOX-2 23 ORIOLES-1 53 ROYALS 24 WHITE SOX-1 54 GIANTS-2 25 RED SOX-1 55 TIGERS-2 26 GIANTS-1 27 TIGERS-1 Additional rounds will be identical to the Second Round. The teams that were lowered are noted by a dash and a number indicating the round the pick originated from. Please note that the differences in the draft order between the first and the second round is due to how the penalty points are applied: First, all teams that have penalties are lowered the appropriate number of spots. The remaining teams without penalties are moved up to fill the gaps. Two teams were lowered from the first round to the second round. No teams are allowed to be moved from the second to the first round (so there are 26 teams in the first round and 28 in the second and later rounds). When more than one team is lowered to the same spot, the team with more penalties gets lowered an extra spot. ...................................... NEW DMB PLAYER FILES: The 1997 Major League Season DMB Player diskette contained 1123 players (593 batters and 530 pitchers) (after deleting the individual team ratings for multi-team players) (18 players less than last season). According to IRBL Rule # 13B1, 25 teams will be allowed to draft until they have 40 rated players and 3 teams will be allowed to draft until they have 41 rated players. The following 25 teams will be allowed to draft until they have 40 rated players: RANGERS, INDIANS, PADRES, CARDINALS, ANGELS, ORIOLES, METS, BREWERS, WHITE SOX, EXPOS, TWINS, BLUE JAYS, ROCKIES, BRAVES, GIANTS, MARLINS, RED SOX, DODGERS, CUBS, ATHLETICS, MARINERS, TIGERS, PHILLIES, PIRATES and ROYALS. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 6 The following 3 teams will be allowed to draft until they have 41 rated players: ASTROS, REDS and YANKEES. ...................................... All teams are below the rated player limits but if you do want to release players to increase the number of players you can draft, you must release the players by the trading deadline. Please note that if you release too many players, you may end up drafting worse players than you released. Please remember that the 41 or 40 rated player draft limit is affected by trading draft picks. Please also remember that the maximum roster size at any time is 60 players. You must release enough non-rated players to make room on your roster for any players that you draft or trade for. At the end of the final pre-season trading deadline, the maximum roster size is 50 players. ...................................... I have included files of the current cross-referenced IRBL rosters and DMB Game rosters plus the updated DMB IRBL player files. Please notify me immediately if you find any errors on the IRBL or DMB rosters. ...................................... The players who played for more than one team are listed on the DMB Roster team that they played the most for. ...................................... The players on the DMB Game Rosters without cross-referencing numbers will be eligible to be drafted (101 batters and 96 pitchers) (a total of 197 players at the moment). This total will increase by any additional rated players that are released. You can also see these 197 players if you access the "Agents" option using the DMB game. ...................................... There are 30 less players eligible for the draft this year than last year (so far). This will help to try and complete the draft in one day (especially if I get some on site help again this year). The draft will start on Sunday Feb. 23rd at 8 am until 9 pm, Eastern Time. At 9 pm, I will make a determination if I can complete the draft that night or to postpone the continuation of the draft until 8 am on the following Sunday. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 7 ...................................... I have included a file containing the Player Usage Forms for all teams plus a file containing the Player Usage limitations for all the players eligible to be drafted. I have also included some additional information on the forms that you may find useful as a reference in comparing the players. These files will be updated with every new LRD installation throughout the trading season. To print out your own teams Player Usage Form, you can use the LIST program to highlight and print your team's page or you can edit and paste the entire file using your text editor or Word Processor (or using the DOS EDIT program by pressing [E] from the LIST program file list). ...................................... Please let me know if you find any mistakes in the Player Usage Form IRBL season limits. I spot checked and it seems correct. If there are any errors, the correct calculation will override these information sheets. ...................................... VOLUNTEERS NEEDED: Volunteers are needed to handle pre- draft player releases and to handle the draft for the ROCKIES, EXPOS and MARINERS. ...................................... RESULTS OF POST-SEASON PITCHER USAGE PROPOSAL (from IRBL Newsletter # 544): Modify IRBL Rule # 20G3 to read: A pitcher who had <50 actual IP (do not use IRBL statistics) is limited to 2 IP in each post-season series. Managers voting FOR: Massimo Ortensi, Don Tobin, George Widenor and Barry Koopersmith Managers voting AGAINST: Jeff Nicholson, Michael Walsh and Mark Johnson Managers not voting: everyone else NOTE: I gave a FOR vote to George Widenor since it was his proposal although I did not officially receive his vote. SUMMARY: FOR ---> 4 IRBL # 546 1-7-98 8 AGAINST ---> 3 NOT VOTING ---> 18 OPEN TEAMS ---> 3 RESULT: ---> Fail ...................................... MORE PROPOSALS TO BE VOTED ON: Matt Cummings has submitted the following proposals. These are his exact wording and arguments. More (many more) comments about these proposals will be found at the end of this newsletter of the BBS / email messages section. Proposal #1: All games will be played by the Road Manager. Discussion: The DMB game, which we purchase and play because of it's realism, builds in a home-field advantage. Since the IRBL actually INCREASES this advantage by requiring a computer-manager to be played by the road team, the only way to compensate is for the road team to play against the home team's computer manager. I've played in two leagues who do this, and not only do we have no problems in the regular season, we have very realistic results in the playoffs, and very seldom do playoff teams win all their home games (See the next proposal) I'm especially tired of seeing ALCS, NLCS, and World Series Results where the home team won all 7 games. This has happened for many years, and the only reason it has is because of this home-field-computer advantage (unless you want to call into question integrity, which I've also thought about). Anyway, if we enact this rule, you won't all of a sudden see the road team win all the games, you'll see a more realistic and exciting series. ********** Proposal #2: All playoff series will be played either via phone, the internet, or face-to-face, unless each manager agrees to waive this rule and allow his home games to be played by his competitor with the computer manager. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 9 Discussion: I'll look it up, and give some statistics if you want to. All I know is this: In the League Championships of the last 3 years, and in the World Series, the winning percentage of the home team has to be at least .750 (and probably more like .900) This is not equitable, especially since, in a four game series an average team usually beats these guys once. Then in the World Series, against the best team in the majors, hey, a sweep! Whaddya know! It really stinks. Matt. The following two proposals were submitted by Mike Walsh: ********** Proposal # 3 (Playoff pairings): Depart from the way MLB holds the playoffs {Although they might be waking up and changing this}. Seed the playoff pairings. The team with the best winning percentage during the year in each league is seeded #1 and gets home field throughout. The wild card team {regardless of winning pct.} is always seeded #4. The first round would be: Division Winner/best pct vs Wild card ; Division Winner/2nd pct vs Division Winner/3rd best pct. The teams with the best winning pct get the 4 homes games each series. For the World Series, the team with the best winning pct, gets 4 home games. Tie breaking criteria can be set up using head to head record, etc....... Proposal # 4 (Voting approval): For a proposal to pass, it would require 2/3 of all managers to approve. A non vote is a "no" vote. ********** Each of the above four proposals will pass if 2/3's of all votes received by the deadline are "FOR" the proposal. The deadline for submitting your vote is Jan. 31st. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 10 ...................................... COMMISSIONER'S CORNER: I have some comments about the proposal to force each manager to play all his road games instead of his home games: I posed the question of the "built-in" home team advantage to Tom Tippett (designer of the DMB game and owner of the DMB company). I provided Tom with the home records of the IRBL for the last 7 seasons. You will find my letter and Tom's response at the end of this newsletter. In summary, Tom pointed out that the IRBL home winning percentage is actually LESS than the Major League average. Based on the statistics that I supplied, Tom is actually considering INCREASING the built-in home team advantage in order to make the game more realistic! I am quite sure that Matt Cummings will not like the irony of the fact the "Pandora's Box" that he opened may result in the absolute opposite effect that he was looking for. Isn't there also a saying about "Letting sleeping dogs lie". The IRBL home percentage in 1996 was actually .504 (just about .500). The other seasons were not that much higher. I don't see any problem here. I like playing my home games, I like playing games at "Yankee Stadium" and I like winning the games I play. If I have to have a .500 record, my ideal season would be 81-0 at home and 0-81 on the road. The concept of playing road games instead of home games makes me "shudder". Some of the arguments put forward for this rule change really will not be impacted much at all by such a DRASTIC, unsettling change. One argument for the change is the fact that it is too common for a team to win or lose 120 games. I think the causes for this are two-fold. First, some managers are much better than others in drafting players and making trades. In the Major Leagues, every team has many scouts and experts every team just about knows the value of all the players. In the IRBL, most managers only have their own IRBL # 546 1-7-98 11 experience to rely on (and some people have much more time than others to research the players). The wide disparity in knowledge results in some very strong and very weak teams. Second, the change to the Preliminary Round draft pick rule several years ago (which I voted against) makes it more difficult for very weak teams to compete in their division. The rule used to be a team got a Preliminary Round draft pick if it was 35 or more G.B. in two straight years (instead of losing 100 games). The old rule helped more teams get competitive quicker. I still believe that but I was out- voted. The other argument mentions the great home records in the play-offs. The very best teams have always had an advantage in the play-offs (going back 20 years before we used the DMB or PTP computer game). There was no "built- in" home team advantage in the Replay Baseball Board Game but in the post- season, the home teams almost never lost. The only possible solution to this is head-to-head play (as one proposal does address) but how do you accommodate managers who live in time zones, 6 or more hours apart or who have unpredictable work schedules? I don't have a good solution to this question. Well, after reading all the messages recently, at least I have gotten my 2 cents in. ...................................... DEADLINES: Jan. 25 - Trading and player release deadline (6 pm, EST) Feb. 15*- 1998 Draft (start 8 am, EST) Mar. 8*- Trading deadline (6 pm, EDT) Mar. 22*- Team instructions to be received by League Office and all managers within your league Apr. 1*- First series of 1998 season *will slip one week for every Sunday the draft continues beyond Feb. 15 ...................................... Files included on LRD # 546: --------------------------- DRAFTPUF.TXT --> Player Usage Form for all players eligible to be drafted IRBL # 546 1-7-98 12 IRBLROST.xxx --> IRBL Rosters MANAGERS.xxx --> Manager Address List NEWSL546.xxx --> Newsletter # 546 PLAYERUF.TXT --> Player Usage Forms for all teams WS--1116.S97 --> World Series, PHILLIES vs ROYALS File Extension Legend (xxx): --------------------------- PED --> Epson Dot Matrix Compatible Printer "print file" PHL --> HP Laser Compatible Printer "print file" T1C --> Viewable one column newsletter text format TXT --> Viewable text format ...................................... BK IRBL # 546 1-7-98 13  MESSAGES OF INTEREST POSTED ON THE IRBL BBS OR SENT VIA INTERNET EMAIL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- IRBL # 546 1-7-98 14 Msg: 5 (Public, sent 12/27/97 at 22:59) From: MARK JOHNSON To: BARRY KOOPERSMITH (Received) Subj: TRADE WITH WHITE SOX Dear Barry, At 11 PM ET on Saturday December 27th, the Twins traded Greg Maddux to the White Sox of Chip Hopkins for Cal Eldred, the White Sox # 1 pick and the Pittsburgh Pirates # 1 pick. The Twins have got to start rebuilding or be stuck in the same 70-80 win rut every year. Maddux is a great pitcher, but he makes my club too good to get into the top 10 in the draft and not good enough to make a legitimate playoff run. Therefore, as great as he is, I have decided to roll the dice and send Maddux to the White Sox. The Chicago-KC battle should be a great one next year. Thanks, Mark Msg: 10 (Public, sent 12/31/97 at 18:08) From: RICKY DIAZ To: MARK JOHNSON Subj: TRADE Good trade for both teams. Subject: Proposals Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 23:08:09 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: Barry Koopersmith Proposal #1 All games will be played by the Road Manager. Discussion: The DMB game, which we purchase and play because of it's realism, builds in a home-field advantage. Since the IRBL actually INCREASES this advantage by requiring a computer-manager to be played by the road team, the only way to compensate is for the road team to play against the home team's computer manager. I've played in two leagues who do this, and not only do we have no problems in the regular season, we have very realistic results in the playoffs, and very seldom do playoff teams win all their home games (See the next proposal) I'm especially tired of seeing ALCS, NLCS, and World Series Results where the home team won all 7 games. This has happened for many years, and the only reason it has is because of this home-field-computer advantage (unless you want to call into question integrity, which I've also thought about). Anyway, if we enact this rule, you won't all of a sudden see the road team win all the games, you'll see a more realistic and exciting series. Proposal #2 All playoff series will be played either via phone, the internet, or face-to-face, unless each manager agrees to waive this rule and allow his home games to be played by his competitor with the computer manager. Discussion: IRBL # 546 1-7-98 15 I'll look it up, and give some statistics if you want to. All I know is this: In the League Championships of the last 3 years, and in the World Series, the winning percentage of the home team has to be at least .750 (and probably more like .900) This is not equitable, especially since, in a four game series an average team usually beats these guys once. Then in the World Series, against the best team in the majors, hey, a sweep! Whaddya know! It really stinks. Matt. Barry: I'll pontificate on these things further as discussion goes along, one thing is clear: This home-field advantage thing has got to go. It's unrealistic and not healthy to the longevity of the league. It's stirred a real controversy now which will not go away: The home team can not be allowed to have so much of an advantage any longer. Subject: Proposals Again Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 14:04:19 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" Reply-To: tribefan@brookings.net To: IRBL.Managers@serv.brookings.net Greatly appreciate the input by Don Tobin And Don Swearingen, and I'd like to give some input into the widely-ranging views between the two of them, because there's a major difference between the two leagues: The NARC (Don Tobin): I too am disappointed with the results in the NARC. It is a 20-team league where most teams are 'stacked' with players. This seems to increase the home-field advantage in that league. When I've had to play my team's home games against teams with managers who've dropped out, my team performs much better (than it does on the road). The computer manager in that league also performs very erratically, to the point where, after only a couple of months (we send monthly instructions) most teams prefer that you play the games for them, while most teams started out using the CM. I had to smile last year when I received an e-mail from Don (I think it was him) saying that he thought his team would contend for his division title, "but my computer hates me". I was going through the same experience. The NARC used to play its home-games, and, just like the IRBL, you'd often get results of weaker teams who "ate your lunch" on their home field, leaving you scratching your head sometimes. On the other hand, I've been very pleased with the CM in the IRBL and the Federal League, both 28-team leagues. Hopefully ver. 7 will continue to improve the computer manager. The Federal League (Don Swearingen): The home-field IRBL # 546 1-7-98 16 advantage has always been very slight in that league, mainly because playing the road games counteracts the advantage. And, yes, the home-road splits are very similar, there are very few instances (if any) where they appear out-of-wack. You'll also never see a playoff between two teams who appear equal in strength where the home team wins every game. The Study: A couple of years ago, I was very intrigued about the difference in home-field advantage between the IRBL and the Federal League, and how much playing home or road games made a difference. So I did my own study on the matter, because the IRBL's home-field advantage fluctuates greatly with each year, while in the FL, it does not. Unfortunately, after completing the study, a person in my household at the time decided to log on the internet, didn't know how to get out of my word-processing program except for Ctrl/Alt/Del (True story!!!!) and all the data was lost. I can duplicate the data (if anyone wants me to) for this argument, because the results will be the same: For each of the seasons, I compared the Average Games Behind (AGB) for all teams not winning their Division with the home-field advantage. The results were: The home-field advantage was the GREATEST when the AGB was the LOWEST, meaning that the more balanced the teams in the league were, the home team won MORE OFTEN. In other words, when the home games had more meaning, the home team won more often, against presumably tougher opponents. I'll cite a couple of examples just from the last two years: 1997: IRBL Newsletter #534, the IRBL Home Record was 432-351, or a .552 advantage. That was after each team had played 50-60 games, or about 1/3 of the season. At that point there were only 5 teams within 10 games of the division lead. 1997 Final Home Field Record: 1200-1068, or .529. For the rest of the season, the home team went 768-717, or 1996 Final: 1143-1125, .504. Where's the home-field advantage? Well, that year the average SECOND-PLACE finish (or teams finishing second to the wild-card team) was 28.8 GAMES BEHIND. My guess is there weren't very many meaningful games played last year. Then look at the home-field advantage during the playoffs, between teams who looked similar on paper. Just look at this year's ALCS and World Series: Home team 14, Road team 0. Do you think the Home-field advantage may have increased with the importance of the games? Now look at the 1997 NLCS, where the Phillies and Pirates played by phone: IRBL # 546 1-7-98 17 Home team 4, Road Team 3. Yes, to be completely convincing I guess I'd have to do a more comprehensive study, but these results are totally consistent with what I found two years ago. More importantly, especially in the playoffs, it seems the biggest, most deciding factor in who won the series rested with who had the home-field advantage. Football and Basketball may be that way, but Baseball is not. The reason for the two proposals is NOT so much a question of realism as they are a question of FAIRNESS. I'm far more interested in fairness than realism. Gentlemen, thanks for your time. Matt. Subject: Road Games Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 17:26:48 -0800 From: "Chip Hopkins" To: IRBL Managers To The Guys, I just can't afford to play all my road games. All that travel...we even have members in Italy, England and Canada. For Christ's sake I have trouble paying my $15.00 league fees!!! I do have two questions. One, will I have to take my computer with me when I go to Italy to play my games against Andrea? Second, will my computer be considered a carry on? Did Don say "Anal Retentive", man I'd be hurt if I were you guys! I did my own study and by my best figures, for my 17 road games and if I booked my plain fares in advance, I would need to come up with approximately $6,800.00 and I am a lucky one. The AL has no teams outside the continental U.S., while the NL has a two teams in Italy and two in Canada, thank goodness for you NLers that the former Cubs manager in England resigned. I could talk about Jet Lag, but I think I have made my point. I don't know why you guys didn't think of this, but I guess sometimes the obvious escapes us. In closing I will say I will have to agree with Don Tobin, against the proposal, but for money issues alone. CHIP HOPKINS THE WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD Subject: proposals Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 19:32:45 -0600 From: Mike Boling To: IRBL Managers Interesting arguments, but I would have to say no to #1, and I don't mean to be harsh, but there are certainly leagues out there who do this. If this IRBL # 546 1-7-98 18 is what you want to do, join one. As for #2, I would strongly agree with this. Its an inconvenience, but well worth it. Face-to-face or over the net increases the strategies and also the fun. Mike Boling Subject: Proposals Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 17:53:00 -0800 From: Frank Hopkins To: IRBL Managers Just for the record. I proposed that all games be played by the raod managers last year and was easily voted down. There is the technology not to play the games over the internet, etc. and is just a matter of learning how to do it. The more control that both managers can exersize during the season, the more realistic the results will be. I am in favor of anything that will contribute to more realistic results. Subject: Sorry Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 02:07:07 -0800 From: "Chip Hopkins" To: IRBL Managers Matt called me and explained the fact that we don't really have to travel to the opposing teams park to play a road series........... So maybe I agree with him....... I just don't know....... I'm confused!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just don't want to make anybody mad, so I will go with the winner.....Maybe! CHIP HOPKINS THE WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 18:41:44 +0100 From: Massimo Ortensi To: IRBL Managers At 17.53 31/12/97 -0800, Frank Hopkins wrote: >Just for the record. I proposed that all games be played by the raod >managers last year and was easily voted down. There is the technology >not to play the games over the internet, etc. and is just a matter of >learning how to do it. The more control that both managers can >exersize during the season, the more realistic the results will be. I >am in favor of anything that will contribute to more realistic results. In a way that's true, and for the playoff I'm surely in favour of the Net play but there's also a problem of time zones for us in Italy. It would be really hard for me to be awake till 3 AM to play a game that would finish at 9PM for somebody in NJ, and sundays would be a problem for me. So I vote for the proposal 2 only if it's not mandatory but "strongly suggested". Indeed I would like to play all the road series, as it would be nice to see also other ballparks, so I'm for proposal #1 Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 14:26:36 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: IRBL Managers Massimo brings up a good point, you do get to play in all IRBL # 546 1-7-98 19 the other parks, which to me is more interesting. I'd vote for the Proposal for that reason alone. Also, I'd like to clarify the situation with the NARC (20-team league) which recently switched to playing the road games, (1) It has significantly reduced the home-field advantage which seems to be huge in that league (2) There has been no proposal or outcry to switch back to playing home games, and (3) the only complaints you hear is "my computer hates me" because it's so difficult to win on the road in that league, even playing against a wacky computer manager. As for Proposal #2, I hadn't thought of our friends overseas, but really what the proposed rule does is allow any manager who wishes to play face-to-face (or over the phone, etc) to do so. If I had to play Massimo and for some reason couldn't get hooked up on the internet, I'd decide just to let him play the games. That's why I put the "unless otherwise agreed to" part in the Proposal. I'd like to say that the reason I proposed this rule is not because I question anyone's integrity, mainly it's because I've talked with several people in a couple of leagues who either played by phone and the internet, and the common reaction was that "it was a blast!". I had a classic playoff with the White Sox a couple years ago (the last two games were decided in extra innings) that I would have loved to have played over the phone or internet. Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 13:00:41 -0800 (PST) From: Don Tobin To: Matt Cummings To: IRBL Managers Actually, my comments on my computer hating were when I was playing home games. My computer still hates me, home or away. I am still against MANDATORY playing of games head-to-head, even though it gave me my two world series championships in this league and another. However, I will go with whatever the league decides... Go Cougs! Subject: (Fwd) Re: (Fwd) Proposals Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 11:13:08 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: Barry Koopersmith Barry, Mike wanted me to send this to you. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- From: MMayko Date: Thu, 1 Jan 1998 19:17:48 EST To: tribefan@brookings.net Subject: Re: (Fwd) Proposals Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) IRBL # 546 1-7-98 20 Matt: I agree with you that perhaps the home manager in playoff games should be playing as road manager. I agree that all series seem to go 7 games with the manager having the home advantage winning the series. Mike Mayko. Please send this to Barry. Subject: Proposals Date: Sun, 04 Jan 1998 21:15:48 +0100 From: Andrea Cristiani To: IRBL Managers A few lines to let you know the PADRES' Mgr thought about the problem: I support the playing of road games instead of home games in hope to reduce the home field advantage. The hope is the home teams W-L pct will not "unrealistically" drop under .500. Now Barry just has to put this proposal up for a vote. Best wishes for the new year! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 16:18:32 EST From: MJPJ64 To: IRBL Managers The Twins can understand the movement to play road games instead of home games, but we are not sure whether we will support it or not. We are definitely against mandatory face to face or internet play. Take Care, mark Subject: RE: Proposals Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 08:46:00 -0800 From: "Walsh, Mike" The Rangers at this point, would be leaning towards keeping things the way they are are. We actually had a better road record {maybe I should have the CM play ALL my games}. If there is a problem with the CM, then Diamond Mind should fix it. I do like the ease of play with the CM. I did not witness any problems with the CM this past year. As far as playoffs and World Series games. I would support a change that would require teams involved, prior to their series beginning, agree on how the series will be played {via phone, internet, using the CM, etc......} and inform the commisioner. I also believe that changes to the rules of the IRBL should be made only in 2/3 of the Total teams approve. A non vote should be an "Against" vote. But that might be just me. Mike Walsh Rangers ---------- From: Andrea Cristiani To: IRBL Managers Subject: Proposals Date: Sunday, January 04, 1998 12:15PM A few lines to let you know the PADRES' Mgr thought about the problem: I support the playing of road games instead of home games in hope to IRBL # 546 1-7-98 21 reduce the home field advantage. The hope is the home teams W-L pct will not "unrealistically" drop under .500. Now Barry just has to put this proposal up for a vote. Best wishes for the new year! Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 22:59:11 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To help dispense of any fears of the results of playing road games vs. home, I'll give you all the data from as many seasons as I can find for the Federal League (28-team league set up exactly like the IRBL, managers play road games). This stuff was how I conducted the 'study' Home vs. Road, Pct, (# of teams with better road records than home) 1997 Final AL 605-529 .533 (3 out of 14) 1996 Final 1210-1058 .534 (5 out of 28) 1995 Final 1156-1112 .510 (14 of 28) 1994 Final NL 612-522 .540 (4 of 14) 1993 Final 1080-1026 .538 (10 of 26) 1992 Final 1080-1026 .538 (10 of 26) You can see how remarkably consistent the results were, with the exception of 1995 (which I can attribute to it being the 'strike' year, among other things. The amount of teams who finished better on the road than at home each year has more to do with the 'will to win' factor, meaning the fact that they could micromanage their team better on their own computer than against a set of instructions (against the home team). The teams who had better road records than at home mainly were the better teams (i.e., the newsletter for 1992's final standings had the draft list based on records on the same page, and only 2 of the worst 13 teams had better road records, and 8 of the 13 best teams (including the best 6 teams) had better road records, meaning the manager playing the games had a lot at his disposal (pitching, hitting) to decide the games on the road, counteracting the home-field advantage. And vice-versa with the weak teams. However, MOST important are: (1) To give you an example, the BEST team in 1996 (with IRBL # 546 1-7-98 22 a better road than home record) was the Tigers, 54-27 road, 48-33 home. In the IRBL, you see teams go 65-16 at home, and 41-40 on the road. In the Federal League, the biggest discrepancy I've seen so far is 14 games: 1996 Cardinals, 31-50 Road, 45-32 HOME. (2) Changing the rule will lead to constant, realistic home-road records. (3) The rule simply evens the playing field, with the road team using the micromanage advantage against the computer manager, while the home team gets the edge in play-by-play results from the DMB game itself. Well, guys, (and I hear the cheers already) I'm done talking about this stuff, but I felt it was important to address the legitimate fears about tilting the advantage too far in the road team's favor. I've seen only one team win 62 games from either side (and in that season he won 57 on the OTHER side. It wasn't unrealistic) in that league. I'm finished with this argument. Matt. Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 10:48:27 -0500 From: "Donny Ray Swearingen" To: IRBL Managers Mike, I think you are wrong about it being a case of preference over advantage as to whether we play road or home games. It is a known fact that there is a built in home team advantage in the DMB game. Matt has presented his case extremely well. I am involved in the other league with him where we do play road games. I have never seen a team win over 60 games at home, doesnt happen in MLB either. It happens way too often in IRBL. The difference between road and home games won is usually very close as opposed to IRBL, where wild differences are routine. The overall winning pct of MLB and the IRBL will probably mirror each other...after all, both are based on a large number of stats, so the odds of them being very close are very high, statistically speaking. On the other hand, look at the worst two or three teams and the best two or three teams and compare those winning pct's....I havent done it but I guarantee you no one has ever won 120 games in MLB, or only won 40 (speaking of modern era only). I just dont understand the unwillingness to play road games. It creates a more competitive atmosphere. I don't buy the remarks that this is fun and its a hobby. I agree with that, but so is golf and softball, and I like to do well at both and win at both. It is fun and it is a hobby, but that is no argument for resisting change, for the better I think. The argument for having built your team around your stadium doesnt fly either. It doesn't matter folks, you still get to play 81 games at home, you just wont manage them. You will instead manage 81 road games, where you can make immediate adjustments to park conditions and weather IRBL # 546 1-7-98 23 conditions. It is actually EASIER to make a manager profile for all games at HOME...you only have one park to think about whether you play the lefty slugger or righty slugger. I for one will enthusiastically support Matt Cummings proposal to play ROAD games. It will actually be more fun, but you have to try it first before you will believe us. That is my two cents worth. Please vote YES to playing ROAD games. Don Marlins Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 09:46:00 -0800 From: "Walsh, Mike" To: IRBL Managers The Home record for teams in the 1997 IRBL League was the following: W L PCT 1200 1068 .529 The Home record for the 1997 Major League Baseball season was: W L PCT 1213 1053 .535 Pretty darn close { I realize the IRBL 1997 season is based on 1996 stats but I had the 1997 MLB standings handy}......... I really do not see a greater than expected home field advantage. The number of 1997 IRBL teams with winning Road records: 9 The number of 1997 MLB teams with winning Road records: 7 Also not very significant. Granted this is based on limited data. The 1997 season was the first that all the IRBL teams used the computer manager for their road games. In the case of the IRBL, it is more a case of preference rather than advantage as to whether the visiting or home team play the game versus the Computer Manager. Mike Rangers From: Matthew Cummings To: IRBL Managers Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Monday, January 05, 1998 8:59PM To help dispense of any fears of the results of playing road games vs. home, I'll give you all the data from as many seasons as I can find for the Federal League (28-team league set up exactly like the IRBL, managers play road games). This stuff was how I conducted the 'study' Home vs. Road, Pct, (# of teams with better road records than home) 1997 Final AL 605-529 .533 (3 out of 14) IRBL # 546 1-7-98 24 1996 Final 1210-1058 .534 (5 out of 28) 1995 Final 1156-1112 .510 (14 of 28) 1994 Final NL 612-522 .540 (4 of 14) 1993 Final 1080-1026 .538 (10 of 26) 1992 Final 1080-1026 .538 (10 of 26) You can see how remarkably consistent the results were, with the exception of 1995 (which I can attribute to it being the 'strike' year, among other things. The amount of teams who finished better on the road than at home each year has more to do with the 'will to win' factor, meaning the fact that they could micromanage their team better on their own computer than against a set of instructions (against the home team). The teams who had better road records than at home mainly were the better teams (i.e., the newsletter for 1992's final standings had the draft list based on records on the same page, and only 2 of the worst 13 teams had better road records, and 8 of the 13 best teams (including the best 6 teams) had better road records, meaning the manager playing the games had a lot at his disposal (pitching, hitting) to decide the games on the road, counteracting the home-field advantage. And vice-versa with the weak teams. However, MOST important are: (1) To give you an example, the BEST team in 1996 (with a better road than home record) was the Tigers, 54-27 road, 48-33 home. In the IRBL, you see teams go 65-16 at home, and 41-40 on the road. In the Federal League, the biggest discrepancy I've seen so far is 14 games: 1996 Cardinals, 31-50 Road, 45-32 HOME. (2) Changing the rule will lead to constant, realistic home-road records. (3) The rule simply evens the playing field, with the road team using the micromanage advantage against the computer manager, while the home team gets the edge in play-by-play results from the DMB game itself. Well, guys, (and I hear the cheers already) I'm done talking about this stuff, but I felt it was important to address the legitimate fears about tilting the advantage too far in the road team's favor. I've seen only one team win 62 games from either side (and in that season he won 57 on the OTHER side. It wasn't unrealistic) in that league. I'm finished with this argument. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 25 Matt. Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 09:59:00 -0800 (PST) From: Don Tobin To: Donny Ray Swearingen CC: IRBL Managers I have tried playiong road games. I don't care for it. I want to play my home games. I just can't get that worked up about it... I'll vote no. ========================================================= Happy 1998! Subject: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 06 Jan 1998 10:23:04 -0800 From: Frank Hopkins To: IRBL Managers Alright! Bout time we got some controversy in this league. Thanks Matt for shaking up the tree. I really don't see why Matt gets to have all the fun for suggesting the same thing I proposed last year, but whatever. It's great to see that the IRBL has a bunch of people (I would say guys, but the wouldn't be P.C.) that can get worked up over something like this. I happen to agree with Matt's proposal, but whether it passes or not, I know that we have in the IRBL managers who care about this league. Based on the number of e-mails I gotten over the last week, we care alot. For the most part, the discussion has been very stimulating. There was that one from the White Sox that was embarrasing, but other than that, all that have participated have done a good job of presenting their case. Great job, I really enjoy being a part of the IRBL. Happy New Year! By the way, did I mention that I proposed this same thing last year? Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:06:05 -0800 From: "Chip Hopkins" To: IRBL Managers Hey "Guys", WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! IRBL # 546 1-7-98 26 WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD!!!!!! CHIP From: Frank Hopkins To: IRBL Managers Subject: IRBL Forever Date: Tuesday, January 06, 1998 10:23 AM Alright! Bout time we got some controversy in this league. Thanks Matt for shaking up the tree. I really don't see why Matt gets to have all the fun for suggesting the same thing I proposed last year, but whatever. It's great to see that the IRBL has a bunch of people (I would say guys, but the wouldn't be P.C.) that can get worked up over something like this. I happen to agree with Matt's proposal, but whether it passes or not, I know that we have in the IRBL managers who care about this league. Based on the number of e-mails I gotten over the last week, we care alot. For the most part, the discussion has been very stimulating. There was that one from the White Sox that was embarrasing, but other than that, all that have participated have done a good job of presenting their case. Great job, I really enjoy being a part of the IRBL. Happy New Year! By the way, did I mention that I proposed this same thing last year? Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:32:00 -0800 From: "Walsh, Mike" To: IRBL Managers I have no problem with playing the road games against the home computer manager. I believe what will happen will be exactly nothing. You will still have teams winning 120 games and those winning 40. The disparity among the IRBL teams is much greater than in actual MLB. I think this has more to do with it than anything I think the way the game is played now, correctly mirrors the home field advantage. The numbers for the last year bear that out. {Granted it is limited data} If it can be proven that playing the road games vs home Computer manager will decrease the current home field advantage, I would be against it. The few great teams will continue to win most of their games both home and away. The Royals road record was 62-19 last year. They won 121 games, of course their home and away records are going to be lopsided. If we supposedly lessen the home field advantage, they may never lose on the road!!!!! I will now again blend into the background and get off my soap box. Mike Rangers From: Donny Ray Swearingen To: IRBL Managers Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tuesday, January 06, 1998 7:48AM Mike, IRBL # 546 1-7-98 27 I think you are wrong about it being a case of preference over advantage as to whether we play road or home games. It is a known fact that there is a built in home team advantage in the DMB game. Matt has presented his case extremely well. I am involved in the other league with him where we do play road games. I have never seen a team win over 60 games at home, doesnt happen in MLB either. It happens way too often in IRBL. The difference between road and home games won is usually very close as opposed to IRBL, where wild differences are routine. The overall winning pct of MLB and the IRBL will probably mirror each other...after all, both are based on a large number of stats, so the odds of them being very close are very high, statistically speaking. On the other hand, look at the worst two or three teams and the best two or three teams and compare those winning pct's....I havent done it but I guarantee you no one has ever won 120 games in MLB, or only won 40 (speaking of modern era only). I just dont understand the unwillingness to play road games. It creates a more competitive atmosphere. I don't buy the remarks that this is fun and its a hobby. I agree with that, but so is golf and softball, and I like to do well at both and win at both. It is fun and it is a hobby, but that is no argument for resisting change, for the better I think. The argument for having built your team around your stadium doesnt fly either. It doesn't matter folks, you still get to play 81 games at home, you just wont manage them. You will instead manage 81 road games, where you can make immediate adjustments to park conditions and weather conditions. It is actually EASIER to make a manager profile for all games at HOME...you only have one park to think about whether you play the lefty slugger or righty slugger. I for one will enthusiastically support Matt Cummings proposal to play ROAD games. It will actually be more fun, but you have to try it first before you will believe us. That is my two cents worth. Please vote YES to playing ROAD games. Don Marlins Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 19:43:39 -0500 From: "Donny Ray Swearingen" To: IRBL Managers Uhhh, Matt.... You don't think it was Chip do you? Maybe they have a sister or something. Don Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 19:42:59 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: IRBL Managers Uhhhhh, Frank, ummm, guess we know who got the brains in the family, eh? Hee-heeeee! Matt. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 28 Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:22:41 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: IRBL Managers First of all, I would like to thank each and every one of you, even the dissenters from my opinion, for hearing me out, because I railed about this 2 years ago, but not too many people were on the internet back then, so the argument wasn't heard. I would have thought that long ago someone could have told me to give it a rest, but you haven't, and I appreciate it. AND if any of you were wondering, 'does this guy have a life?', hmmmm, well, it's January in Brookings, South Dakota, I recruit for the Army here, and I'm not into ice fishing and bowling, and beyond my professional life................NO, I DON'T!!......But I'm not complaining, I'm used to it, AND I have DirectTV and can watch up to 15 baseball games a day during the season, so I'm just, ya know, in 'Pig's Heaven'. Guys, this IS a great league, with a lot of good managers, and whether or not the proposal passes, I'll always think that, and it IS fun coming home from work and getting so many responses. BUT, you guys (and I knew this would happen) had to dig up the stats from the past year or so, and MADE me do this, so I'm going to re-create my 'Study' of two years ago, only I have two more years of results to work with, and, don't worry, it's not that extensive. Here's the poop, comparing the IRBL (and Chip, darn it, I'm not knocking this league because of the different rules, this league is the best-run league in the country, thanks to Barry) with the FL for the last 6 years, minus 1995, because I can't find the IRBL results for that year. Here are the Home winning percentages: Year/ IRBL/ FL 1997/ .529 / .533 1996/ .504 / .534 1994/ .546 / .540 1993/ .529 / .538 1992/ .556/ .538 My question to IRBL managers is this: Which result would YOU rather see? The evening of the playing field obviously provides for more consistent results, unless you think that the results of 2000+ games can be skewed. I don't have MLB results from those years, but MY guess is that it more closely resembles the last column. Anyone with a baseball encyclopedia, feel free to chip in. During those years I did see one Division race, and this is no lie, where Team 1 was 69-12 at home, 46-35 on the road, and Team 2 was 70-11(!!!!!) at home, 41-40(!!!!!) on the road. The wild splits are alarming at times. You'd never see splits like this if the rule were changed. It was during that season I was thinking about the Federal League and how that could never happen there. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 29 But, believe it or not, my main concern is not the regular season, it's the PLAYOFFS!!!!! I should withdraw the proposal about face-to-face games, because the MAIN difference is how the Home team almost always wins playoff games in this league. In a sport where the home- field advantage is determined by the LUCK OF THE DRAW! I present these arguments about the Regular Season mainly because that's what concerns all of us, to show that there's nothing to be afraid about. In the other two leagues I'm in, no one ever brings up a proposal to change back to playing home games. Why? Well, they remember what that was like!!! Fellow IRBL members, I want to rest my case now, but if you want me to dig up home-road playoff statistics, I will. I know the result is at least a .750 home-winning pct., I'll bet anyone. For now, I'll remind you of the 1997 ALCS/ World Series result: Home team 14, Road team 0. 1997 NLCS result (played face-to-face) Home team 4, road team 3. In the former example, I could cite many instances which have the same result in each season. In the latter, well, like I said, if we change the rule, the same or similar things would happen when you take the home-field advantage away from whoever's playing the game. Please look at these things carefully. I don't want to go thru any more old, dusty files to come up with any more proof..................but I will if I have to. Gentlemen, thanks again for your time, and especially for no one telling me to 'Shut the f--- up!!!!!!!' Thanks, Frank, for your support, and for reminding everyone that you brought this up last year. Luckily, if it doesn't pass, I'll have all these e-mails saved, and if it doesn't pass, I'll forward the same stuff next year!!!! Thanks again, everyone, Matt. Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:33:44 -0600 From: "Matthew Cummings" To: IRBL Managers No, Don, I think it was him, but, then again, looking at his team, I don't think he cares if all his games were played on another planet!!!!! Matt(again). P.S., to Chip: Psssssttt! By the way, if we change this rule, IRBL # 546 1-7-98 30 no one will be able to beat your team in the playoffs with a bogus home-field advantage by winning all their home games (like it hasn't happened before!) and knocking you out! Just a thought!!! Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 21:24:11 -0800 From: "Chip Hopkins" To: IRBL Managers Matt the Nat, Now I have to play my games on another planet!!!!!!!!!! That Sucks, By my best estimates that will now cost $4,345,901,490.34 dollars. Also, I dont know if I can get my results in on time and Lord knows I don't need any more LSP's. This really sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chip WHITE SOX RULE THE WORLD From: Matthew Cummings To: IRBL Managers Subject: Re: IRBL Forever Date: Tuesday, January 06, 1998 7:33 PM No, Don, I think it was him, but, then again, looking at his team, I don't think he cares if all his games were played on another planet!!!!! Matt(again). P.S., to Chip: Psssssttt! By the way, if we change this rule, no one will be able to beat your team in the playoffs with a bogus home-field advantage by winning all their home games (like it hasn't happened before!) and knocking you out! Just a thought!!! Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 08:00:13 EST From: MJPJ64 To: IRBL Managers Hello Everyone, Have we got a time set for the vote yet? Thanks, mark-Twins Subject: Just a Thought Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 07:57:41 -0800 From: Frank Hopkins To: IRBL Managers Last night Chip & I played a game using Microsoft's NetMeeting. It worked really well, once we got the hang of it. The best thing about it is that it's free. You can download the latest version from www.microsoft.com. You can read more about it by going to the Diamond Mind home page. They have a write-up on how to set it up. We had problems with the audio, but it was probably the way we had it configured. The one draw back is that the White Sox beat me 6-2, and I was the home team. Come to think of it, this sucks, I hate the idea. IRBL # 546 1-7-98 31 Let me know if you are interested in trying it out. Bye for now. Subject: Re: Just a Thought Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 09:13:07 -0800 (PST) From: Don Tobin To: Frank Hopkins CC: IRBL Managers Speaking as someone who is doing PhD research into computer security, and as someone who knows some of the dirty tricks MicroSquish pulls, I am very hesitant to load any Internet software from them onto my machine, unless I have source code for it. Now I did get source code for Windows NT 4.0 from them, under very strict legal requirements, but with the crap they have been pulling, like uploading info from your machine if it is connected to a phone line at 3AM (test versions of Windows 97/98 did this), I have very serious trust issues. I would vote for another vendor's software, if need be. don Subject: Re: Proposals Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 11:07:00 -0800 From: "Walsh, Mike" To: bkoopers@nassau.cv.net Barry, How about a couple proposals to be voted on: 1) Depart from the way MLB holds the playoffs {Although they might be waking up and changing this}. Seed the playoff pairings. The team with the best winning percentage during the year in each league is seeded #1 and gets home field throughout. The wild card team {regardless of winning pct.} is always seeded #4. The first round would be: Division Winner/best pct vs Wild card ; Division Winner/2nd pct vs Division Winner/3rd best pct. The teams with the best winning pct get the 4 homes games each series. For the World Series, the team with the best winning pct, gets 4 home games. Tie breaking criteria can be set up using head to head record, etc....... 2) For a proposal to pass, it would require 2/3 of all managers to approve. A non vote is a "no" vote. Mike Rangers Subject: The better one Date: Wed, 07 Jan 1998 22:57:33 +0100 From: Andrea Cristiani To: IRBL Managers Hi everybody, in my opinion mr. TWINS said the only interesting thing in the last 48 hours. Barry, please, cut this up. Subject: DMB home team advantage Date: Sun, 04 Jan 1998 22:00:43 -0500 From: Barry Koopersmith To: Tom Tippett Dear Tom, IRBL # 546 1-7-98 32 Several of the managers in my league are questioning the home team advantage that is built-in to the DMB game. I recall that you mentioned what that factor was a few years ago. Could you tell me that percentage again and if you have any plans to make it an option to turn the advantage off? In my league where there are 28 teams playing 162 game seasons, the home team records for the past few years has been as follows: Home Home Home Year Wins Losses Pct 1991 1151 955 .546 last season using Replay Baseball Board Game 1992 1170 936 .556 PTP PC Baseball Game (no computer mgr used) 1993 1113 993 .528 PTP PC Baseball Game (no computer mgr used) 1994 1238 1030 .546 PTP PC Baseball Game (no computer mgr used) 1995 1194 1074 .526 PTP PC Baseball Game (no computer mgr used) 1996 1143 1125 .504 DMB (20 teams used computer mgr for road gms) 1997 1200 1068 .529 DMB (all teams used computer mgr for road gms) I think the Home Pct. is reasonable but some of my league managers have requested a vote to have managers play their road series rather than their home series which they think will compensate for the DMB built-in home team advantage. Was there any change in the DMB built-in home team advantage over the last few years that could account for a nearly .500 home record in 1996 but 25 points higher the year after and the year before (or was it just a matter of chance)? Thank you if you can provide some information on this topic. Sincerely, Barry Koopersmith Subject: Re: DMB home team advantage Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 09:20:08 -0500 (EST) From: ttippett@diamond-mind.com (Tom Tippett) To: Barry Koopersmith Barry: Thanks for sending along the stats on the home winning percentages in your league over the past few years. If anything, it looks as if the home-field advantage in your league is a little weaker than it should be. As you probably know, the long-term home winning pct in real baseball has been about .550, though it was only .541 in 1996 and .535 in 1997. I did some studies in the mid-1980s to pinpoint the source of the advantage, and found that there was more going on than just the tactical advantage of batting last. There was a small but noticeable edge in hitting stats, mostly singles and walks, for home teams. Why? I can't say for sure, but it's probably some combination of jet-lag and fatigue for the visitors, familiarity with the home ballpark, umpire bias on ball-strike calls (maybe), among other things. So we designed the game to give the same advantage to the home teams, and this aspect of the game has not changed IRBL # 546 1-7-98 33 since version 1. For what it's worth, the home-field advantage in the league I play in has been in the .550 to road games handled by the computer manager. Since these results conform with the historical averages, I've concluded that the game is doing just what it should. I've had a few isolated reports from other leagues where the home winning percentages is much higher. They have usually suspected two things -- that some managers are cheating, or that the computer manager is not smart enough to match wits with the home managers. In my last test run using version 7 and the real-life rosters for 1997, the home winning percentage was .523. Based on your league's results, it's possible that we need to do another study of the real-life home-field advantage and tweak the adjustment just a little, but it looks as if we may need to make it stronger, not weaker. And there's nothing in your league's results to suggest that we need to make it an option that can be turned off. All in all, I'd say there's nothing significantly wrong with the results your league has produced. Your home winning percentages are pretty close to those of recent major-league seasons. And the options you mentioned -- turning off the home-field advantage or having the managers play their road games -- would push the results in the wrong direction. Tom