Save Rule Needs to Be Removed/Modified for Historical Play

Vajracchedika · 11-24-2003, 02:45 PM

One of the lingering problems in historical play is that many relief pitchers end up with far too many saves, even if users tweak the era settings. If they have to tweak too far in order to reduce saves, they end up increasing complete games too much for starters.

Here is an easy solution. The actual history of the save rule should be applied to historical play. For seasons before 1960, when the save rule was first unofficially introduced by The Sporting News, there should be no saves. Quite simply, saves were not invented until 1960, and all those save numbers you see in the record books for seasons before that year have been calculated after the fact.

But the change of the rule over time should also be implemented. Here is the progression, as it should also be implemented in the game, along with any other rules changes that took place in history.

1960 - first save rule unofficially developed in The Sporting News. To earn a save, a reliever had to come in with the tying or winning run on base or at the plate and finish the game with the lead.

1961 - The standard for a save was changed to allow a reliever to earn a save while protecting a two-run lead. I believe that this tossed out the requirement for the tying or winning run to be on base or at the plate.

1969 - Major League Baseball officially adopted the save as part of its official scoring rules. Until this time, only The Sporting News had maintained this statistic. I am not sure, but I believe that this is when the three-run lead became the standard for protecting a lead.

1974 - The save rule was amended so that no save is awarded unless the tying or winning run is on base or at the plate, or the pitcher pitches three effective innings.

1975 - The save rule is refined again to award a save if the tying or winning run is on deck while the pitcher is protecting the three-run lead. The rule has remained the same ever since.

Now this isn't the total solution. Something still has to be done to eliminate the use of a closer entirely, perhaps for seasons before 1970. Before that time, the best reliever on a team came into the game in the 7th or 8th inning to protect a lead and shut down the opposition. He came in when there was a rally, and didn't necessarily finish the game. There was no 'closer' to speak of until the 1970's, when, partly due to the advent of the save rule, managers started to use their top relievers at the end of the game.

So, in OOTP, teams should not even have a designated closer for seasons before 1970. Their top reliever should be put in the #1 middle relief spot, and perhaps the AI should be adjusted so that these top relievers are brought in at any point from the 7th inning onward when a lead is threatened.

Vajracchedika · 11-25-2003, 12:20 AM

Any comment from the OOTP crew?

nestajones · 11-25-2003, 01:17 AM

I disagree that there should be no saves counted before 1960. saves did exist, even if no one knew what they were or cared or thought about them. rbi and strikeouts and caught stealings weren't counted at various times, should they be left out too? if you personally want to ignore the stat, do so.

as far as the changing save rules...interesting point, and i did not realize the rule had been adjusted so many times. but w/ no knowledge of computers or programming, i'd imagine this would be very difficult to put in.

in my historical league, currently in 1911, my save totals have been ok. my league leaders and my league's total saves are probably a bit higher than in reality, but not egregiously so.

i do agree that it would be nice if the "closer" spot did not exist for the earlier years, and if the AI used relievers differently (rather than just less) than it does in later years.

Vajracchedika · 11-25-2003, 01:43 AM

Well, all of this could be optional. But we should have the option to either disable saves or enforce the proper rules. And, most importantly, relievers need to be handled by the AI much more realistically for historical seasons.

nestajones · 11-25-2003, 02:38 AM

i really don't see the point in disabling the counting of saves. if you only want to count that stats that were in use at various times, you'll lose about 90% of the page for 1901. just don't look at them if it's so important to you.

i looked at my league history again. my save totals have actually been pretty good, closer to true life than i remembered.

more important than the save is the reliever usage in general. what i think is key would be a way to have the AI use pitchers in both starting and relief roles. now, only the "spot starter" does that. the best starters in my league NEVER relieve, which is extremely inaccurate. they all did in real life, and more than 10 games in relief for an ace starter was not uncommon. (of course, there were also more offdays and doubleheaders, whereas i'm just using a computer-generated schedule which more resembles a 21st century schedule, so that would affect things.)

Le Grande Orange · 11-25-2003, 04:20 AM

If we're talking about better historical fidelity, I'd rather first see support for different roster sizes. The active player limit has not always been 25; it'd be nice to try out the earlier eras' limits such as 23 or even 21.

Even better would be to include the early season roster expansion that was common for many years. This meant that teams would open the season with 35 or even 40 players; after 30 days the teams would have to trim down to 25 (or whatever the limit was at that time).

Including these two would most certainly make things more historically correct, not to mention simply interesting in terms of playing the game.

holyroller · 11-25-2003, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Le Grande Orange
If we're talking about better historical fidelity, I'd rather first see support for different roster sizes. The active player limit has not always been 25; it'd be nice to try out the earlier eras' limits such as 23 or even 21.

Here here!

asamford · 11-25-2003, 05:45 AM

if nothing else, it would definitely be a challenge to operate with the 24 man rosters of the 80's, or be able to try out a 26 or 27 man roster like has been proposed but turned down in several bargaining agreements.

flexible roster limits for all!! here here!! cheerio!

Skipaway · 11-25-2003, 08:31 AM

Nice hijack.

As nestajones said, it's not about how saves are counted. RC is relatively new history-wise, and it got various versions of formulae, but I don't see the point of disabling RC for earlier eras.

The game just hasn't developed well enough in historical accuracy. I'd guess it's not high on the priority list also.

Cowboys3356 · 11-25-2003, 12:05 PM

Yes removing saves is a foolish idea considering that there are MANY other things that already need to be fixed.

Eugene Church · 11-25-2003, 12:50 PM

Vaj, you are correct that the game gives too many saves for a pre-1970 league and tweaking the use of pitchers in the team strategies is a trade off...slow down the use of relief pitchers and it increases complete games for the starters.

As I told you in a previous thread, you need to understand...and accept the fact that this game is designed for MODERN DAY BASEBALL. It may be a programming impossiblity to make a game for all the eras of the game.

It took me a while to accept that the game is made for Modern Day Baseball. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. The game has to be marketed for the most customers possible.

I prefer 1920-1950 baseball.
I play solo...all teams are controlled by me...only the minors are enabled...nothing else...no finances, trades, injury,etc.

Read "4 starters/4 relievers" a thread by Eugene Church. This explains in detail my efforts to use starters as relievers and relievers as starters. Note that 8 man staffs didn't work out...I had to add another pitcher to keep the AI from using position players in relief.

I use 21 man rosters...9 pitchers and 12 position players.
This was an attempt to get rid of "double switches" and too many subs in the game. Setting most players to "never pinch hit for this player" really helped.

I set "pull starter" to the quickest setting in "team strategies" and "pull relief picher" to the slowest setting.
I set "favor lefty/righty" to the less setting...all the way to the left.
I set "pinch hit" and "pinch run" to the less setting...all the way to the left.

In "advanced league setup" I set "pinch hitting" to "seldom" and "use reliever" to "not often"...other settings are normal.

I use starters in the "set up" and "closer" relief positions.
I use spot starter in the 4th middle relief positon.
These starters are also listed in the starter slots.

I adjust the pitcher rotation each month during the season based solely on stats. I try not to look at the ratings. If a starter is not effective, then I switch him with one of the middle relievers, if they have been effective.

Using this in my last league, each team totalled 12-24 saves a season...Christy Mathewson led with 9... and my box scores looked liked a 1920 to 1960 box scores where regulars played the whole game with few substitutions caused by the "double switch" mechanism of Modern Baseball.

Usually 8 of the 9 pitchers would have a starts...and starters would relieve 5-15 times a year.

Complete games were accurate with starters finishing 40% to 70% of their starts.

This is how I got around two of things I most dislike about the game.

Other parts of the game that really need improvement....more variety in play-by-play text...and inclusion of many normal, everyday plays that are currently missing in the game (no dropped throws and some players never catch foul flies just to name a few).

OOTPB is still a very fine game and worth every penny it cost.

One must just learn to live with its imperfections until Marcus perfects it and make the game customizeable for all of us, so we get what we each desire.

You will enjoy the game more if you don't expect it to be perfect.

dangarion · 11-25-2003, 02:23 PM

I'm confused. Every 1901-1921 League I have ever done I have no more then 10 saves as the season high. So I'm not sure where this high amount of saves you get are coming from.

Besides the fact that removing the stat itself makes no sense. A save is a save, period. Removing the statistical catagory does not remove the fact that a save has occured. The reliever still came in at the appropriate time and still did what was needed for an "official" save.

Vajracchedika · 11-25-2003, 04:02 PM

If the game was designed for modern day baseball, then why are historical era factors included? It is designed for both modern day and historical play. The problem is that there has not been enough done for historical play. And I do not agree that 'this is just the way it is' and I have to accept it.

Most of the features that have been added to this series have come from gamers' suggestions. All we have to do is emphasize the historical play issues and make sure that Markus is aware that we want the game modified to resolve them. Many people, and I would dare say that the majority of OOTP players, use the game at least partially for solo or league historical play. If all of us pool together and communicate our needs properly, I'm sure that Markus will address them.

It is relatively easy to add the functionality to customize roster sizes, to not have a closer designated, and to make a lot of the other changes. I mean, the roster size issue is no different than modifying the number of amateur draft rounds. It should be something on the league setup menu. Assigning a closer could also be something that is toggled in the league setup. If you click "No" the AI will simply not assign a closer and will instead use the best reliever in the #1 middle relief spot.

Now, the game engine might have to be changed slightly as well, but that isn't a huge undertaking. I know enough about coding to feel virtually certain that there are not thousands of lines of code that govern when a manager would bring in a reliever for a 'closing' situation. In fact, you wouldn't need to modify the existing code. You'd just need to create a second code stream, to be activated if the closers are toggled to "No." In that case, when the game enters the seventh inning, the AI will now recognize that the best reliever should be brought in if there is a rally and the lead is threatened, even if it's not the end of the game. And that pitcher might be removed once the rally is stopped, and someone else might finish the game. The current code for closer usage could be kept as is, but it would be activated when closers are toggled to "Yes."

Basically, the different code streams would be activated depending on the closers setting and the inning of the game.

Henry · 11-25-2003, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vajracchedika
Now, the game engine might have to be changed slightly as well, but that isn't a huge undertaking. I know enough about coding to feel virtually certain that there are not thousands of lines of code that govern when a manager would bring in a reliever for a 'closing' situation.

If you have been following the discussions on this board for any length of time, you would already know that the game engine is to be "replaced" in Version 6, due this coming Spring. Until that game engine is complete and stable, other changes in the way it is used to represent other eras will have to wait.

Henry

Vajracchedika · 11-25-2003, 05:54 PM

Well, the time to implement changes to a game engine is when a new one is in development. If it new engine is just supposed to duplicate the old one, then why even bother to create it? New engines are designed to implement changes, and especially those that wouldn't be possible under the old coding. That's why Markus is working on the new engine. He feels that there need to be improvements to the game. And those improvements can include the historical features that we've been discussing. Otherwise, we'll all be waiting around for OOTP 10 to finally see more accurate historical play.

Henry · 11-25-2003, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Henry
Until that game engine is complete and stable, other changes in the way it is used to represent other eras will have to wait.
Henry

If Markus completes the game engine design in time to add additional features, I'm sure he will.

Henry

Skipaway · 11-25-2003, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vajracchedika
Well, the time to implement changes to a game engine is when a new one is in development. If it new engine is just supposed to duplicate the old one, then why even bother to create it? New engines are designed to implement changes, and especially those that wouldn't be possible under the old coding. That's why Markus is working on the new engine. He feels that there need to be improvements to the game. And those improvements can include the historical features that we've been discussing. Otherwise, we'll all be waiting around for OOTP 10 to finally see more accurate historical play.

I believe the most important change would be about generating more accurate results of each plays. The interaction between ratings and play results, with DIPS ideas.

That got almost nothing to do with the historical features, which are mostly about roster handling and customizable team/league setttings.

Jason Moyer · 11-26-2003, 03:38 AM

How about the fair/foul bunting rule for 19th century leagues? Or underhand pitching? 8 balls to a walk? Etc.

I don't mean to diminish the idea of having historical adjustments made for scoring, but if further historical modifications are made I'd prefer if they were in areas that actually affected the mechanics of the game. Adjustable roster sizes, for instance. Or different models of relief pitcher usage as opposed to a simple frequency toggle.

Jason

Le Grande Orange · 11-26-2003, 07:44 PM

And doubleheaders. Don't forget those. They were a BIG part of the baseball season for many, many years (and I'm talking about scheduled twin bills; if you add in those created due to postponements there are even more).

In the 1960's, for example, some teams were scheduled to play 15 or more in a season.

11-25-2003, 08:31 AM	#9
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	Nice hijack. As nestajones said, it's not about how saves are counted. RC is relatively new history-wise, and it got various versions of formulae, but I don't see the point of disabling RC for earlier eras. The game just hasn't developed well enough in historical accuracy. I'd guess it's not high on the priority list also. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

11-25-2003, 12:50 PM	#11
Eugene Church Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 36,069	Vaj, you are correct that the game gives too many saves for a pre-1970 league and tweaking the use of pitchers in the team strategies is a trade off...slow down the use of relief pitchers and it increases complete games for the starters. As I told you in a previous thread, you need to understand...and accept the fact that this game is designed for MODERN DAY BASEBALL. It may be a programming impossiblity to make a game for all the eras of the game. It took me a while to accept that the game is made for Modern Day Baseball. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. The game has to be marketed for the most customers possible. I prefer 1920-1950 baseball. I play solo...all teams are controlled by me...only the minors are enabled...nothing else...no finances, trades, injury,etc. Read "4 starters/4 relievers" a thread by Eugene Church. This explains in detail my efforts to use starters as relievers and relievers as starters. Note that 8 man staffs didn't work out...I had to add another pitcher to keep the AI from using position players in relief. I use 21 man rosters...9 pitchers and 12 position players. This was an attempt to get rid of "double switches" and too many subs in the game. Setting most players to "never pinch hit for this player" really helped. I set "pull starter" to the quickest setting in "team strategies" and "pull relief picher" to the slowest setting. I set "favor lefty/righty" to the less setting...all the way to the left. I set "pinch hit" and "pinch run" to the less setting...all the way to the left. In "advanced league setup" I set "pinch hitting" to "seldom" and "use reliever" to "not often"...other settings are normal. I use starters in the "set up" and "closer" relief positions. I use spot starter in the 4th middle relief positon. These starters are also listed in the starter slots. I adjust the pitcher rotation each month during the season based solely on stats. I try not to look at the ratings. If a starter is not effective, then I switch him with one of the middle relievers, if they have been effective. Using this in my last league, each team totalled 12-24 saves a season...Christy Mathewson led with 9... and my box scores looked liked a 1920 to 1960 box scores where regulars played the whole game with few substitutions caused by the "double switch" mechanism of Modern Baseball. Usually 8 of the 9 pitchers would have a starts...and starters would relieve 5-15 times a year. Complete games were accurate with starters finishing 40% to 70% of their starts. This is how I got around two of things I most dislike about the game. Other parts of the game that really need improvement....more variety in play-by-play text...and inclusion of many normal, everyday plays that are currently missing in the game (no dropped throws and some players never catch foul flies just to name a few). OOTPB is still a very fine game and worth every penny it cost. One must just learn to live with its imperfections until Marcus perfects it and make the game customizeable for all of us, so we get what we each desire. You will enjoy the game more if you don't expect it to be perfect. Last edited by Eugene Church; 11-25-2003 at 01:07 PM.

11-25-2003, 02:23 PM	#12
dangarion All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Orange, CA Posts: 569	I'm confused. Every 1901-1921 League I have ever done I have no more then 10 saves as the season high. So I'm not sure where this high amount of saves you get are coming from. Besides the fact that removing the stat itself makes no sense. A save is a save, period. Removing the statistical catagory does not remove the fact that a save has occured. The reliever still came in at the appropriate time and still did what was needed for an "official" save. __________________ DanGarion GM - Los Angeles Dodgers The Peanuts and Cracker Jack Baseball League PCJBL! Last edited by dangarion; 11-25-2003 at 02:25 PM.

11-26-2003, 03:38 AM	#18
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,088	How about the fair/foul bunting rule for 19th century leagues? Or underhand pitching? 8 balls to a walk? Etc. I don't mean to diminish the idea of having historical adjustments made for scoring, but if further historical modifications are made I'd prefer if they were in areas that actually affected the mechanics of the game. Adjustable roster sizes, for instance. Or different models of relief pitcher usage as opposed to a simple frequency toggle. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech Last edited by Jason Moyer; 11-26-2003 at 03:41 AM.

11-24-2003, 02:45 PM	#1
Vajracchedika Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 36	Save Rule Needs to Be Removed/Modified for Historical Play One of the lingering problems in historical play is that many relief pitchers end up with far too many saves, even if users tweak the era settings. If they have to tweak too far in order to reduce saves, they end up increasing complete games too much for starters. Here is an easy solution. The actual history of the save rule should be applied to historical play. For seasons before 1960, when the save rule was first <i>unofficially</i> introduced by <i>The Sporting News</i>, there should be no saves. Quite simply, saves were not invented until 1960, and all those save numbers you see in the record books for seasons before that year have been calculated after the fact. But the change of the rule over time should also be implemented. Here is the progression, as it should also be implemented in the game, along with any other rules changes that took place in history. 1960 - first save rule unofficially developed in <i>The Sporting News</i>. To earn a save, a reliever had to come in with the tying or winning run on base or at the plate and finish the game with the lead. 1961 - The standard for a save was changed to allow a reliever to earn a save while protecting a two-run lead. I believe that this tossed out the requirement for the tying or winning run to be on base or at the plate. 1969 - Major League Baseball officially adopted the save as part of its official scoring rules. Until this time, only <i>The Sporting News<i> had maintained this statistic. I am not sure, but I believe that this is when the three-run lead became the standard for protecting a lead. 1974 - The save rule was amended so that no save is awarded unless the tying or winning run is on base or at the plate, or the pitcher pitches three effective innings. 1975 - The save rule is refined again to award a save if the tying or winning run is on deck while the pitcher is protecting the three-run lead. The rule has remained the same ever since. Now this isn't the total solution. Something still has to be done to eliminate the use of a closer entirely, perhaps for seasons before 1970. Before that time, the best reliever on a team came into the game in the 7th or 8th inning to protect a lead and shut down the opposition. He came in when there was a rally, and didn't necessarily finish the game. There was no 'closer' to speak of until the 1970's, when, partly due to the advent of the save rule, managers started to use their top relievers at the end of the game. So, in OOTP, teams should not even have a designated closer for seasons before 1970. Their top reliever should be put in the #1 middle relief spot, and perhaps the AI should be adjusted so that these top relievers are brought in at any point from the 7th inning onward when a lead is threatened.

11-25-2003, 12:20 AM	#2
Vajracchedika Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 36	Any comment from the OOTP crew?

11-25-2003, 01:17 AM	#3
nestajones Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 174	I disagree that there should be no saves counted before 1960. saves did exist, even if no one knew what they were or cared or thought about them. rbi and strikeouts and caught stealings weren't counted at various times, should they be left out too? if you personally want to ignore the stat, do so. as far as the changing save rules...interesting point, and i did not realize the rule had been adjusted so many times. but w/ no knowledge of computers or programming, i'd imagine this would be very difficult to put in. in my historical league, currently in 1911, my save totals have been ok. my league leaders and my league's total saves are probably a bit higher than in reality, but not egregiously so. i do agree that it would be nice if the "closer" spot did not exist for the earlier years, and if the AI used relievers differently (rather than just less) than it does in later years.

11-25-2003, 01:43 AM	#4
Vajracchedika Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 36	Well, all of this could be optional. But we should have the option to either disable saves or enforce the proper rules. And, most importantly, relievers need to be handled by the AI much more realistically for historical seasons.

11-25-2003, 02:38 AM	#5
nestajones Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 174	i really don't see the point in disabling the counting of saves. if you only want to count that stats that were in use at various times, you'll lose about 90% of the page for 1901. just don't look at them if it's so important to you. i looked at my league history again. my save totals have actually been pretty good, closer to true life than i remembered. more important than the save is the reliever usage in general. what i think is key would be a way to have the AI use pitchers in both starting and relief roles. now, only the "spot starter" does that. the best starters in my league NEVER relieve, which is extremely inaccurate. they all did in real life, and more than 10 games in relief for an ace starter was not uncommon. (of course, there were also more offdays and doubleheaders, whereas i'm just using a computer-generated schedule which more resembles a 21st century schedule, so that would affect things.)

11-25-2003, 04:20 AM	#6
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Up There Posts: 15,644	If we're talking about better historical fidelity, I'd rather first see support for different roster sizes. The active player limit has not always been 25; it'd be nice to try out the earlier eras' limits such as 23 or even 21. Even better would be to include the early season roster expansion that was common for many years. This meant that teams would open the season with 35 or even 40 players; after 30 days the teams would have to trim down to 25 (or whatever the limit was at that time). Including these two would most certainly make things more historically correct, not to mention simply interesting in terms of playing the game.

11-25-2003, 05:45 AM	#8
asamford Banned Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Snellville, Georgia Posts: 1,769	if nothing else, it would definitely be a challenge to operate with the 24 man rosters of the 80's, or be able to try out a 26 or 27 man roster like has been proposed but turned down in several bargaining agreements. flexible roster limits for all!! here here!! cheerio!

11-25-2003, 12:05 PM	#10
Cowboys3356 All Star Starter Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,572	Yes removing saves is a foolish idea considering that there are MANY other things that already need to be fixed.

11-25-2003, 04:02 PM	#13
Vajracchedika Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 36	If the game was designed for modern day baseball, then why are historical era factors included? It is designed for both modern day and historical play. The problem is that there has not been enough done for historical play. And I do not agree that 'this is just the way it is' and I have to accept it. Most of the features that have been added to this series have come from gamers' suggestions. All we have to do is emphasize the historical play issues and make sure that Markus is aware that we want the game modified to resolve them. Many people, and I would dare say that the majority of OOTP players, use the game at least partially for solo or league historical play. If all of us pool together and communicate our needs properly, I'm sure that Markus will address them. It is relatively easy to add the functionality to customize roster sizes, to not have a closer designated, and to make a lot of the other changes. I mean, the roster size issue is no different than modifying the number of amateur draft rounds. It should be something on the league setup menu. Assigning a closer could also be something that is toggled in the league setup. If you click "No" the AI will simply not assign a closer and will instead use the best reliever in the #1 middle relief spot. Now, the game engine might have to be changed slightly as well, but that isn't a huge undertaking. I know enough about coding to feel virtually certain that there are not thousands of lines of code that govern when a manager would bring in a reliever for a 'closing' situation. In fact, you wouldn't need to modify the existing code. You'd just need to create a second code stream, to be activated if the closers are toggled to "No." In that case, when the game enters the seventh inning, the AI will now recognize that the best reliever should be brought in if there is a rally and the lead is threatened, even if it's not the end of the game. And that pitcher might be removed once the rally is stopped, and someone else might finish the game. The current code for closer usage could be kept as is, but it would be activated when closers are toggled to "Yes." Basically, the different code streams would be activated depending on the closers setting and the inning of the game.

11-25-2003, 05:54 PM	#15
Vajracchedika Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 36	Well, the time to implement changes to a game engine is when a new one is in development. If it new engine is just supposed to duplicate the old one, then why even bother to create it? New engines are designed to implement changes, and especially those that wouldn't be possible under the old coding. That's why Markus is working on the new engine. He feels that there need to be improvements to the game. And those improvements can include the historical features that we've been discussing. Otherwise, we'll all be waiting around for OOTP 10 to finally see more accurate historical play.

11-26-2003, 07:44 PM	#19
Le Grande Orange Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Up There Posts: 15,644	And doubleheaders. Don't forget those. They were a BIG part of the baseball season for many, many years (and I'm talking about scheduled twin bills; if you add in those created due to postponements there are even more). In the 1960's, for example, some teams were scheduled to play 15 or more in a season.