Runner Not Scoring on DP Attempt

[BeachBum]

I had an instance where there were runners on 1st and 3rd with 1 out and then the following happened.

"Batter" swings...
Hits a slow roller...
Toward the mound...
"Pitcher" over to make the grab...
To second for one...
"Shortstop" fires over to first...
and he's safe!

The runner on third did not score and then there were runners on 1st and 3rd with two out. I can not imagine a situation where the runner from third would not score on an attempted double play.

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by BeachBum

I had an instance where there were runners on 1st and 3rd with 1 out and then the following happened.

"Batter" swings...
Hits a slow roller...
Toward the mound...
"Pitcher" over to make the grab...
To second for one...
"Shortstop" fires over to first...
and he's safe!

The runner on third did not score and then there were runners on 1st and 3rd with two out. I can not imagine a situation where the runner from third would not score on an attempted double play.

I assume there was only one out, not two. The runner won't advance from 3rd in that situation if the infield is in (possible exception being if that would be the winning run at the bottom of the 9th, for example) and/or the ball is hit to the pitcher. That is the way it works in OOTP.

It's the PbP text that says the ball is a "slow roller". That may or may not reflect anything that is going on the calculation of the outcome. So the pitcher gets the ball, looks the runner on 3rd back, and throws to 2nd. Note that the DP wasn't successful, so it's not too far-fetched an outcome.

[BeachBum]

Yes there was only one out.

I would agree with your statement about holding the runner on third if the shortstop had not thrown the ball to first. I think if he throws to first, the runner has to at least try to score.

Maybe this is a PbP issue in that the SS should have held the ball.

In this scenario, is there a possiblilty that the DP could have been completed?. If so, this would imply to me that the Pitcher didn't take the time to look the runner back to third.

If you look the runner back, there is not going to be a possibility of a DP unless the runner is exceptionally slow.

[SteveP]

In this scenario, is there a possiblilty that the DP could have been completed?

Apparently the SS thought there was a chance. Maybe the batter was slow. Maybe he was slow getting out of the box. Maybe he stumbled on the base path. Maybe he slowed down to wave at his girlfriend sitting behind the dugout.

If so, this would imply to me that the Pitcher didn't take the time to look the runner back to third.

The pitcher did, because the runner didn't go. The runner never goes in OOTP in that situation. I would like to see the runner go more often on GBs hit to INFs in OOTP, but I can understand this behavior when the ball is hit to the pitcher.

If you look the runner back, there is not going to be a possibility of a DP unless the runner is exceptionally slow.

OK, so maybe the SS was fooling himself. Maybe it was just instinct taking over. The DP wasn't successful, so you are correct: the pitcher looked the runner on third back, which delayed his throw to second, which meant the the DP wasn't successful. You might have had a better point if the DP had worked. Even then, you'd have to make allowance for the possibility that the batter dogged it on the way to first.

[BeachBum]

And the runner may have fallen asleep while standing on third base.

So much for realism. Thought this was supposed to be one of OOTP's strong points.

I just thought logically poor things like this should be pointed out when discovered. so they can be corrected.

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by BeachBum

And the runner may have fallen asleep while standing on third base.

So much for realism. Thought this was supposed to be one of OOTP's strong points.

I just thought logically poor things like this should be pointed out when discovered. so they can be corrected.

Logic isn't the problem here. You believe that a runner on 3rd will be to get home before the ball can be thrown from 2nd to 1st and then home to tag him out. Some runners might be able to do that (assuming they have excellent reflexes to get a jump when the SS throws to 1st). Some will regret trying. Most will be tackled by the 3rd base coach if they even flinch in that direction.

The only way to prove your point is not by an appeal to logic but by examining a bunch of game logs from RL games, to see how often the guy on 3rd advances on a GB hit to the P in a non-force situation or on the second throw in a DP attempt. If you see a lot of it, then you could present that evidence to Markus. I know it is rare on GBs hit to INF IRL (from collecting stats in the manner described), but not as rare as in OOTP, so I'd like to see that changed. GBs hit to the P are another matter.

[BobDylanRH]

Originally Posted by SteveP

Logic isn't the problem here. You believe that a runner on 3rd will be to get home before the ball can be thrown from 2nd to 1st and then home to tag him out. Some runners might be able to do that (assuming they have excellent reflexes to get a jump when the SS throws to 1st). Some will regret trying. Most will be tackled by the 3rd base coach if they even flinch in that direction.

The only way to prove your point is not by an appeal to logic but by examining a bunch of game logs from RL games, to see how often the guy on 3rd advances on a GB hit to the P in a non-force situation or on the second throw in a DP attempt. If you see a lot of it, then you could present that evidence to Markus. I know it is rare on GBs hit to INF IRL (from collecting stats in the manner described), but not as rare as in OOTP, so I'd like to see that changed. GBs hit to the P are another matter.

I'm going to jump in here. Even if the pitcher looks the runner back, if he turns and fires to 2nd, and they try and turn a double play at first base, the runner is going to go. Unless the fielder's are all Ozzie Smith's, the runner is going to score. You'd have to be quite awfully slow not to score on a DP turn - moreover, one that wasn't turned.

Even in a recent Cubs versus White Sox game Ryan Theriot scored on a very similar play. A ball was hit to a brought in infield. A ball was hit to the SS, the SS looked Theriot back to the base, he fired to first, Theriot still scored. This is a play that didn't even include a throw to 2nd base, let alone an attempt to turn over a double play.

The fact is simple: it'd take a turtle running down the third base line NOT to score on that play.

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by BobDylanRH

I'm going to jump in here. Even if the pitcher looks the runner back, if he turns and fires to 2nd, and they try and turn a double play at first base, the runner is going to go. Unless the fielder's are all Ozzie Smith's, the runner is going to score. You'd have to be quite awfully slow not to score on a DP turn - moreover, one that wasn't turned.

Even in a recent Cubs versus White Sox game Ryan Theriot scored on a very similar play. A ball was hit to a brought in infield. A ball was hit to the SS, the SS looked Theriot back to the base, he fired to first, Theriot still scored. This is a play that didn't even include a throw to 2nd base, let alone an attempt to turn over a double play.

The fact is simple: it'd take a turtle running down the third base line NOT to score on that play.

The situation here is a ball hit to the pitcher. I have already said that I think OOTP has it wrong on GBs hit to INFs.

[BobDylanRH]

Originally Posted by SteveP

The situation here is a ball hit to the pitcher. I have already said that I think OOTP has it wrong on GBs hit to INFs.

I understand that. A ball hit to the pitcher works into the runners favor even more. A pitcher as a longer throw to 2B than, say, a SS or a 2B. If there is no DP attempt, the runner not scoring makes sense.

The fact that the team tried to turn one over makes it utterly ridiculous that the runner didn't score. 99 times out of 100 that runner will score. I've played and watched the game long enough to know this.

If the runner out of the batters box could beat out the turn, but the runner going home couldn't, there is something seriously wrong with the make-up of that play. Something bizarre had to happen. Most baserunners could jog in from third on a situation like that, looked back to the base or not.

For that runner to stay put, the catcher would literally have to call that DP turn off and call the throw in from second to home plate. Or, at the very least, force whoever took that throw on 2B to look the runner on 3B back to the bag again.

[pstrickert]

Originally Posted by SteveP

The situation here is a ball hit to the pitcher. I have already said that I think OOTP has it wrong on GBs hit to INFs.

The code probably doesn't distinguish between a GB to INF and a GB to P. So, if the runner doesn't score on the former, he probably won't score on the latter. I may be wrong, but that's my guess. Until Markus tweaks the code (if he does), we'll probably have to use our imaginations to explain these types of play results.

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by pstrickert

The code probably doesn't distinguish between a GB to INF and a GB to P.

That is certainly possible. However, the code does make the distinction in other situations. For example, a hit to the pitcher when the bases are loaded and the INF are back, results in a play at the plate, but not otherwise usually. A SH hit with a man on second (non-force) to the pitcher results in a play at 3rd more often than when someone else takes it. Just some illustrations, but nothing definitive. My point is that a runner on 3rd isn't going to run on the hit when the GB is to the pitcher. The idea that the guy on 3rd will race into score because the pitcher decides to make a play somewhere else is purely a matter of conjecture.

[Nutlaw]

As we have seen no reply from the original poster in three days, this thread will be closed for housekeeping reasons. If you need any further assistance with this matter, please post once more in Tech Support with a link to this thread and we will do our best to help you figure out a solution.