More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think)

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> PureSim Baseball >> More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think)

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 8:09:14 AM

Godzilla Blitz2

Posts: 20
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

Sorry, but a search didn't turn up the answers, and I can't seem to find them in the manual either...

1. What does the "up arrow", "minus sign", and "down arrow" sign signify beside potential?

2. I've noticed that some green bars on player cards are bright green instead of dark green. Why the difference?

Edit: I think I've figured out that bright green is higher than dark green.

As always, thanks in advance.

< Message edited by Godzilla Blitz2 -- 6/8/2006 8:15:18 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 11:32:08 AM

jono

Posts: 180
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

I believe that the up arrow means that his skills probably haven't reached their peak yet, the minus sign means that his skills have probably pretty much peaked and the down arrow means he's probably past his prime.

(in reply to Godzilla Blitz2)

Post #: 2

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 2:54:30 PM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

I've been meaning to ask the same question about the arrows. I thought at first that they were just generic, and every player had them at the same age go in the same direction. I think I saw a 25 year old the other day though who had a flat line, which would be tremendous if it's true.

I've been trying to find a way to make sure the minor leaguers are at the right level and if this works in that way - then I guess it's built in.

(in reply to jono)

Post #: 3

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 5:28:56 PM

Godzilla Blitz2

Posts: 20
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jono

I believe that the up arrow means that his skills probably haven't reached their peak yet, the minus sign means that his skills have probably pretty much peaked and the down arrow means he's probably past his prime.

That's what I was thinking at first as well, but some of my players with the minus sign (I assumed the minus is neutral) have potential still in the green range (4 on a scale of 1 to 5). If they had peaked, shouldn't they be close to one? And my second baseman has a red potential of 1 (again, using a 1 to 5 scale), but has an up arrow beside his potential.

So I started to wonder if perhaps the arrows and minus sign are telling you which direction the potential rating is going. Going back to my secondbaseman, for example, perhaps I can expect his potential rating to increase the following year?

Then I started thinking of other possibilities and got really confused.

(in reply to jono)

Post #: 4

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 6:31:39 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

THe way the characteristcs are "realtive" makes it even more potentially mystifying.

If you look at ti as functions on "averages" then a guy who has 90 potential but a down arrow can make a little sense. For the most part a guy like that has "topped out" realative to the "hidden max" stats in general, but there may be one area where he can still makea "big gain".

Where I see this the most is in Eye with batters and Control with pitchers. Often you get guys with 80+ COntact and power but only 60 Eye, or similar things with pitchers with Stuff and Velocity "maxed out" but still maturing in COntrol. The 90 potential with "Down arrow" (from what I can gather - Shaun can correct me) is that its likely two of the three stats have maxed and are poised to drop, (hence the "down arrow on average" - but he can still make a "big gain" in eye or control, hence he still has a "high potential". I've seen it happen with Stuff and contact but not as often. Much rarer in Velocity and power, which tend to make a single "take off" jump early in a top prospects apprenticeship, but level off and die from there.

So a hitter with 90 contact, 80 power and 60 eye with 90 potential and down arrow will likely be maybe an 75 contact, 65 power, 90 Eye guy a few years down the road. When ALL his characteristics have "maxed" then you see the "fall off the cliff" when a guy goes suddenly from 80 green arrow or yellow line to 10 potential with down arrow in a single season. Those guys will start seeing a fall off across the board. Good trade bait to try to get prospects with.

Given that this is all "relative to the top guys in the league" things can get "snakey" when you get into the stratosphere. You can have a guy with 90 stuff and 80 potential and up arrow GO DOWN - not becasue he actually "got worse" but because a couple guys with 90 potential WENT UP MORE, lowering his "relative status" not by getting worse, but by getting better at a slower rate.

This is an aspect of teh game I originally didn't like, but that I have really warmed up to over time, and can see the engine side advantages it must have. An elegant desing choice Shaun !!

< Message edited by Paul Vebber -- 6/8/2006 6:37:53 PM >

(in reply to Godzilla Blitz2)

Post #: 5

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 8:39:45 PM

Godzilla Blitz2

Posts: 20
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

My head just blew up.

:)

I think I'm going to let your post sink in for a bit. I think I got it, but I'm not all the way there yet. Thanks for the help, though!

(in reply to Paul Vebber)

Post #: 6

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 9:24:58 PM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

Paul's answer doesn't quite match my understanding.

My understanding is that the players are not individually rated for 'max' in any category... but rather that the different categories each have a different growth/decay function.

The first key thing to understand is that each has four different 'modes' of development:
a. Growth - guy hasn't reached his prime and is improving
b. Maintain - guy has reached his prime, but is holding steady
c. Slow decay - age is starting to set in, but the year-over-year change isn't too bad
d. Rapid decline - the 'he fell off the cliff' experience.

Second, I believe each player is rated for what age he will move from a.) to b.), from b.) to c.), and from c.) to d.) - possibly even in each category.

For example, 'Hands' has no growth period, is in 'maintain' mode until about age 27 or so, starts a slow decay around 26-28, and goes into rapid decline in the mid-thirties (for most players). Contact, on the other hand, has a growth period, 'maintain' mode doesn't typically start until the late twenties, 'slow decline' doesn't start until after 30, and 'rapid decline' might stave off for any number of years.

I think the 'arrows' give you a feeling for where on the curve he is for the main stats: Stuff, Velocity, Control | Contact, Power, Eye. "Green" = 'growth stage'. "Yellow" = 'maintenance mode'. "Red" = 'in decline'. (I don't know that there is a way to tell the difference between slow decline and rapid decline other than by observation.)

The Potential rating equates to how *much* the ratings that are growing, will grow. (However, that's also influenced by what level of majors/minors he's playing at, how much playing time he's seeing, and which rating it is - Power seems to move relatively similarly to Contact, but the size-of-increase is smaller.)

So, some of our 'confusing examples':

Potential = 90, Green arrow up, but he LOST ability last year! -- This player is in 'growth' mode for most or all of his ratings, but was playing at the wrong level of the system, or didn't get enough playing time last year.

Potential = 1, Green arrow up -- This player is in 'growth mode' for most of his ratings, but due to his low potential, is unlikely to grow very much.

Potential = 90, Yellow arrow -- This player is in 'maintenance mode' for most or all of his stats. As Paul suggests, one or more of his attributes may be improving, and the potentials would still affect that growth. In general, for most stats, the '90' is irrelevant: he'll be holding steady.

Potential = 80, Red arrow -- **at a guess**, this might be a guy in slow decline? Or possibly, a player in 'decline' mode for most of his stats, for whom at least one has still not peaked?

Potential = 10, Red arrow -- in decline or rapid decline.

...

Though the 'relative' thing is, in general, true, I've found that its best not to get too caught up in hoping that it is the case.

My guys in 'maintain' mode rarely show a modification of more than 1 point in either direction; I figure that indicates the shift in the T-scale, rather than shifts in their ability.

A high-potential player whom I brought up to the big leagues too early (age 23) batted .315 his rookie year. However, he showed a decline - perhaps 5-8 points in most categories - the following year. I hoped that was 'T-scale shift', not him declining, so I kept him in the bigs, where he hit an unspectacular but respectable .277. Fine, I thought, even if I was off by one year, he should get better this time... he dropped another 5-8 points in every major category... and proceded to bat .232.

This is one aspect of the system I don't quite like - I'd have liked that .315 to 'validate' the fact that he was at the right level. If he'd gone .232 and then posted a decline, that makes sense to me - overwhelmed, making too many changes to his mechanic, and taking hits to his self-confidence, he got worse... but after going .315 and being a candidate for 'rookie of the year', it seemed an overly dramatic slump to me. (That said, there IS a sophmore slump, and I could imagine that over two years, he's gotten way away from the things that were making him successful as a rookie.)

I've got a real dilemna on my hands about what to do with him next year - his potential is still green, and I'd hate to have played him at the big-league level two years where he should have been at AAA, and then further hurt his development by dropping him to AAA when he needed big-league playing time!

Oof.

...

I consider a player who goes to 'yellow' too young (24, 25), but still has high potential, to be the best trade bait: I've lost confidence that he's going to improve dramatically, but the AI will still trade for him.

On the other hand, the AI isn't giving me a great return for those 'off the cliff' guys - it feels like it knows as well as I do just how much he's declining. (They are good for bumping a 'We almost have a deal' into a 'Excellent proposal!', however.) A lot of times, I'll hold onto them as 'experienced backups' until their contract expires; I try to keep older players' contracts short enough when they're over 32 that I don't get stuck holding on to a guy who isn't any good.

(in reply to Godzilla Blitz2)

Post #: 7

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/8/2006 11:26:31 PM

Godzilla Blitz2

Posts: 20
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

Ah...I think I'm getting it now.

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Amaroq. Very helpful.

I probably should have figured this out before I signed a half dozen free agents to long-term contracts with my organization, but oh, well. We'll do better next season!

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 8

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 12:02:38 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

I defer to Amoraq ;)

He's been at this longer than I!

On the "over teh Cliff guys" I've found a big difference if they match an AI teams "areas of need" than if they don't. One of my trade strategies is to take an over the hill guy "shop to all teams" and see who give me the most options for him. That team is likely to be abnormally interested in him. Then I got to that team and work try to work a multiplayer dea that includes my over the hill guy, and one of the "one for one" trades for him, but add other guys to get a better prospect, then paly with subtracting guys out (sometimes including the guy I started with shopping, and can often get a "four for two" that gets me 2 "excellet" prospects for one of my decent prosects and 3 guys wha are either "over teh hill", stagenet prospects or long shots.

IT will be interesting to how Shauns lates tweak to the AI trade logic will affect this, but I was really able to make hay with it up till now. Particularly in like May or early June when good guys can be statistically down and the AI seemingly more likely to trade for them. My trade for John Mayberry (who could be the best hitter in the league for the next 5 years) in the Summer of '69 league being a prime example.

(in reply to Godzilla Blitz2)

Post #: 9

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 12:29:54 AM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

The first key thing to understand is that each has four different 'modes' of development:
a. Growth - guy hasn't reached his prime and is improving
b. Maintain - guy has reached his prime, but is holding steady
c. Slow decay - age is starting to set in, but the year-over-year change isn't too bad
d. Rapid decline - the 'he fell off the cliff' experience.

Second, I believe each player is rated for what age he will move from a.) to b.), from b.) to c.), and from c.) to d.) - possibly even in each category.

This is clearly true. My question is does those arrows give me an idea what random numbers each player pulled for peak/decline/cliff?

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 10

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 12:54:58 AM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

I think so, yes, as I said about two paragraphs below what you quote. I think "green" = growth, "Yellow" = maintain, "Red" = decline - but I'm not sure how to tell the difference between slow and rapid decline.

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 11

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 1:39:21 AM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

You expect me to read all of it?

pfffff.

I now realize that I didn't really get my question across. The key age is the peak age, since the development in the minors is based off how far away a player is from their peak. I see that we can discern after a player goes past his peak, but the key is how can we tell beforehand.

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 12

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 2:49:50 AM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

Ah - I don't think we can, I think that's one of the compromises Shaun made (potential gives us *some* insight, but 'peak age' is hidden, so we can't tell exactly what level of the minors to put a guy at, or how good he will become).

In practice, you can get some glimpses by considering how much/little the guy is improving at given levels of the minors.

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 13

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 4:40:45 AM

XCom

Posts: 193
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

I think this dovetails into the discussion in the other thread. Not knowing the peak age is key to not knowing the ceiling of a player. This makes knowing the potential not the "whole story" when it comes to player career development. Very cool.

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 14

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 5:38:44 AM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

It's actually fun to try and pick it out when they are mid career, but some way to sniff out the peak age when they are 19-20 would be nice.

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 15

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/9/2006 9:24:12 AM

Godzilla Blitz2

Posts: 20
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline

I like the idea that the peaks are unknown. Makes it more challenging.

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 16

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 1:58:09 AM

kingwanabee

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/27/2004
Status: offline

Amaroq-
Thank-you for your explanation on this. It's too bad this is not explained at all in the manual, (at least I can't find anything). A couple more questions:
1) What does the blue color mean? Rapid growth?
2) If a player has a high potential rating and his other ratings are already in line with regular major league ratings, are you saying that the player will lose ratings points by playing at the major league level because he needs to max out his potential in the minors first?

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 17

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 2:09:38 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lynchjm24

It's actually fun to try and pick it out when they are mid career, but some way to sniff out the peak age when they are 19-20 would be nice.

Jim, you're begging the question. That's what the "potential" rating is for. Now, if you're suggesting that a team's budget could be increased for "player development", yeah, but this only gives a human player a bigger advantage aginst the AI. That's the last thing most of us would want.

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 18

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 3:14:47 AM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

quote:

Amaroq-
Thank-you for your explanation on this. It's too bad this is not explained at all in the manual, (at least I can't find anything). A couple more questions:
1) What does the blue color mean? Rapid growth?
2) If a player has a high potential rating and his other ratings are already in line with regular major league ratings, are you saying that the player will lose ratings points by playing at the major league level because he needs to max out his potential in the minors first?

Thank you!

I give full permission to Matrix and Shaun to re-use part or all of my posts, modifying in whatever way required, in the manual if they desire.

1) blue color? Where are you seeing that?

2) No, I am not saying 'players must max out their potential in the minors before being promoted.'

Players in the 'growth' stage experience growth when they play at the 'right' level for their development. They stagnate or even decline when played at the 'wrong' level.

You can observe this by experiement: take an 18-year-old with tremendous potential. Put him at A. Leave him there indefinitely. He will develop for a while, then he will stagnate and decline, despite having a green up-arrow which indicates that he should still be in 'growth' mode. This would correlate to a player needing more of a challenge to at all improve, and even developing lazy/bad habits due to the low level of competition.

Similarly, take an 18-year-old with tremendous potential. Put him in the big-league club. Play him there every day. At first, he will get *worse*.. This would correlate to a young kid getting overwhelmed - losing confidence, changing his mechanic too frequently, etc - by being forced to play well beyond his ability. Eventually, he should turn it around, and should eventually start getting better - but it may be 'too late' for him to even overcome the harm that was done earlier in his career.

To get the optimum development from a player, you want to bring him up through A, AA, and AAA naturally, promoting him to the major leagues - where he should continue to improve from the ratings he'd had at AAA.

...

What would make sense to some people is for the correct level to be based on current skill. If that were the case, my big-league-average young player would have continued to develop when I promoted him to the majors.

He did not - which would lend credence to lynchjm24's theory that "The key age is the peak age, since the development in the minors is based off how far away a player is from their peak." In that scenario, my guy, who was only 23 or so, might have had a 'peak age' of 28; the game decides that a guy 5 years from his peak would do well at AA or AAA, say, and sees that I have him in the bigs, and 'penalizes' me for promoting him 'too early' by causing the slight ratings slump.

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 19

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 3:43:37 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Hands often has a blue color. I've not figured that out either...

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 20

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 6:10:00 AM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Godzilla Blitz2

I like the idea that the peaks are unknown. Makes it more challenging.

This becomes the issue.

You lose some of the 'coolness' of the aging model. If you can't figure out that a player is going to peak at 23 (I played with the XML to have 2% of players peak at that age), then you'll never be able to develop them correctly, because you won't put them at the right minor league levels and they won't ever reach their ratings peak.

So the aging model allows for some cool career curves that would have a player peak at 23, but not to start to slow decline until 37 (in my league it should happen once every 4,000 players or so). However because of the way the players develop, you won't ever actually see it happen because you won't have the player who peaks at age 23 in the minors by age 21 for them to reach their ratings potential - because you always are going to play the percentages and have a 21 year old player in A or AA - because if his peak is 27, that is where he needs to be at age 21.

This leads me to the conclusion that not being able to discern a players peak beforehand actually takes away one of the best things about the peak/decline/cliff model, most obviously the player who peaks at a young age will rarely develop correctly.

(in reply to Godzilla Blitz2)

Post #: 21

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 6:12:42 AM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaroq

He did not - which would lend credence to lynchjm24's theory that "The key age is the peak age, since the development in the minors is based off how far away a player is from their peak." In that scenario, my guy, who was only 23 or so, might have had a 'peak age' of 28; the game decides that a guy 5 years from his peak would do well at AA or AAA, say, and sees that I have him in the bigs, and 'penalizes' me for promoting him 'too early' by causing the slight ratings slump.

I'm pretty sure this isn't a theory. You can see right in the XML what level a player should be at realitive to his peak age. For example if a player is 6 or more years from his peak he should be at A. If he is 4-5 years from his peak AA. From 2-3 years AAA. 1 year and from peak on he should be in the majors. You can change those ranges (I did in my league, so that players should reach the majors as early as 3 years before their peak).

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 22

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 6:37:59 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

quote:

most obviously the player who peaks at a young age will rarely develop correctly.

I've not found that to be the cse if you keep a close eye on how players are performing. Obviously you can't optimize every player, but peak age is something you don't know in real life either.

BUt the gme does give you feedback through performance in the minors and guys who tear things up early become apparent in many cases.

THe "cool development arc" is a decent modl of real life, and the peak age of a "real person" is hard to dicern, so it means, like in real life you have to wahc closely, and follow your gut. (ie take chances). They will pan out enough to mae the develoment arc "shine" - but you guess wrong enough to keep the game challenging (and frustrating!)

< Message edited by Paul Vebber -- 6/10/2006 6:38:53 AM >

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 23

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 4:48:08 PM

kingwanabee

Posts: 103
Joined: 9/27/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaroq

1) blue color? Where are you seeing that?

I've searched my entire roster and the only place I see blue is in the hands ratings for both pitchers and position players. There is also a lighter shade of green that sometimes will show up in any rating. What does this signify?

Thanks again

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 24

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 5:01:51 PM

lynchjm24

Posts: 240
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber

quote:

most obviously the player who peaks at a young age will rarely develop correctly.

I've not found that to be the cse if you keep a close eye on how players are performing. Obviously you can't optimize every player, but peak age is something you don't know in real life either.

BUt the gme does give you feedback through performance in the minors and guys who tear things up early become apparent in many cases.

THe "cool development arc" is a decent modl of real life, and the peak age of a "real person" is hard to dicern, so it means, like in real life you have to wahc closely, and follow your gut. (ie take chances). They will pan out enough to mae the develoment arc "shine" - but you guess wrong enough to keep the game challenging (and frustrating!)

It's not that hard for you - what about the AI? Sure you might get a player right who peaks at age 23, the AI is probably not going to recognize it as well as you do.

In real life it isn't quite as important to know someone's peak age. They will continue to develop as long as they get challenged. I saw Joe Mauer when he spent 3 weeks in the Eastern League. You didn't need to be a trained scout to see it was time for him to go to AAA. In this game you can't 'see' anything, you can only hope that the stats you are making decisions on are based on something 'real' and just aren't variation from a few hundred at-bats.

I'm not asking for the game to tell me the player's peak age when I draft him, I'd just like the ability to sometimes be able to figure it out if I study him.

(in reply to Paul Vebber)

Post #: 25

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 5:20:36 PM

Cringer

Posts: 69
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline

Not sure if this has been said (too lazy to read all of this thread

) but I do not think the arrows are just a sign indicating development. I think it indicates (or in part indicates) if that players POTENTIAL is growing or shrinking.

A players Potential rating can increase and decrease over the years. Typically you will see the Potential decline as ratings decline, too. But I have seen cases of guys with a down arrow still have a ratings increase in other areas while he is still young. And the opposite, guys with up areas have ratings in other areas go down.

WOuld be nice to get a true explanation from Shawn as to what these arrows are to indicate. Or atleast word from him that it's a secret.

(in reply to lynchjm24)

Post #: 26

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 6:24:05 PM

DonBraswell

Posts: 384
Joined: 8/24/2005
From: Millbrook, Alabama
Status: offline

Paul Vebber " Hands often has a blue color. I've not figured that out either "

Blue in fielding means he is excellent at that position. Black is average and red is below average.

(in reply to Paul Vebber)

Post #: 27

RE: More Random Questions (Easier this time, I think) - 6/10/2006 6:25:59 PM

Cringer

Posts: 69
Joined: 6/5/2006
Status: offline

That is when looking at the defensive ratings screen for each position though. The blue rating on the main player card is somehow different. How I do not know. To me it seems it is only something pitchers will have.

(in reply to DonBraswell)

Post #: 28