alexeth on July 13, 2010, 07:26 pm
I reviewed the instructions on the site and was sad to see some stuff missing. It's also missing from my printed book, so I guess it's been a while since I read them. I liked the old explanation of the logic of the leading single letter (generally) indicating someone reached while a number was an out. When I was first starting, that thought guided what I should write even when I wasn't sure. It also made writing "W" make a lot more sense and it was easier to give up "BB" on that logic (as well as 1B, 2B, etc). I thought I recalled some Project Scoresheet examples of locating hits, which I ignored then, but a link of explanations might be useful. Not that I want to learn PS, but it's like studying Latin can help with English, learning PS can help with RSS.
I have drifted into writing the play first then assigning blame.
e.g. 12FC for a play at the plate instead of FC12 as noted in instructions (see boxes 17 & 18 of sample home sheet loaded 5/26/10).
Here's an example from yesterday that was tough on space to write.
Runner on first. Pickoff attempt by catcher thrown past 1st base into right field thrown back in and miscaught by 2nd baseman picked up by ss and thrown to 3rd baseman and misses, rattling over to the catcher where things stop. Runner advances a base each on the 1st two errors, but no more, so 2 errors recorded.
In the upper right part of the box I wrote: 29465. Then put wrote an "E" under the "2" and under the "4" with boxes around them (boxes joining the "E" with their position), with subscript "t" and "c" with the appropriate "E"s. I then darkened the baselines from first to 3rd.
That's not easy to type, but it's easy (almost) to write. I suppose it would strictly be:
Personally what I do with a pencil is different than what I can type, and being able to reconstruct afterwards is the important thing. Besides, this is a during at-bat activity, so writing in the corners, not in the catalyst bed.
Oh, another thing, I also write the play even if it's a hit. So, S 85 would be a single to center thrown in to 3B. I generally write them smaller than out-plays, but I like to see what happened even if a hit was made. It's also just in case something bad happens I don't lose the thread, like a S 8E5.24(B-2) if the 3B misses the catch and the catcher tries to recover with a play at 2nd. Of course, that's another question as I look at it, S.8E5.24(B-2) or S.8E5(B-2)24 or ...?
There also seems inconsistency in what to set off by parenthesis. In one example it's base movement, and in another it's the reason for the base movement. In fact both are in this example from the instructions:
While I'm on it, there's also the mixing of whether base movement should be noted in the box, or on the diamond. I do it on the diamond, not in the box. Though I can see sometimes it's more clear if noted directly. (from examples S.Bx2(92646) cirle runner on 2B, when it might also be S.3-H.Bx2(92646). Or the example FC2/SH.3-H(E6/TH1) underline runner on 3B is a bit redundant with the text (redundency is not bad, I have it all over the place as checks against losing information). By the way, does "TH1" mean the pitcher was covering the bag at 1B? It looked funny being the number for 1B also, as I'd expect 2nd baseman to be covering, but I don't know.
As I think about it now, i'm probably writing that as E2t6, circling the runner on 3rd for the score, writing "SH", or "SAC" or "bunt" etc. somewhere where it fits.
In practice, I'm following the ball first. Then catching runner movement 2nd (the results of which is usually still on the field after the play) and finally any other notes that finish things up. And if it's still goofy, writing something down in the white space to explain the most recent episode of insanity.
I suppose scorers will do whatever they want, but a consistent starting point would be a useful thing in the instructions.
Re-reading this make it seem critical, I really hope it's useful feedback. I just love the system and know how I use it and am listening for ways I might change or offering what I do in case it's useful for changes or practice.
I liked baseball, and Reisner scoring helped me learn and love baseball all the more. I think I have reached a point of learning so much about baseball that I realize I'll never know much about baseball--and I love it!
I have been scoring games for more than 50 years and have gone back and forth with traditional and Retrosheet methods. But I think your system is going to be the one I stick with.
— Philip Humbaugh, Wilmington, North Carolina
Your cart is empty.