Hi scorekeeper. I reviewed your pdf. I applaud your efforts, however I can't follow your math.

No problem Glenn, I have a lot of trouble following it myself.

The only thing I saw was where I said “rubber” when I meant “rubbed”. But I’m sure there are other things in there that I’m not seeing because I’m reading into it what I meant. But it’s no big deal because I’m sure you got the gist of it, and I’ll try to show the math.

As of this moment, I’m not trying to base the equation on anything other than what makes common sense to me. Not that I wouldn’t like some empirical evidence, but where would anyone get it? As far as I know, I’m the only one in the country with data of much depth for the HS level, and even if I had access to ML data, I’m not quite sure how I or anyone else would go about proving the 30th pitch in an inning was any more dangerous because of fatigue than the 10th. Believe me, I’d love to be able to go to a table someone had worked out based on scientifically acquired and proven data, but I don’t know where it would be.

I don’t know that it’s quite apples and oranges, but I don’t believe I ever compared what I was doing to what you guys had done. I think you know how much I’ve always supported the use of pitch counts to limit pitchers, but I’ve always felt there was something missing, which is a big reason there’s been so much pushback.

From what I understand, when y’all did your study, it was done on pure pitch counts without regard to whether it was say 50 pitches over 6 innings or 50 pitches in 1 inning, and that’s where I and so many others have a problem. All I’ve attempted to do was to quantify it in such a way that the 50 pitches in 1 inning wasn’t treated the same as 50 over 6 innings because it simply isn’t the same.

The math.

I store the additional pitches calculated for each at bat with the at bat record. After each at bat, the 1st thing I do is get the total number of calculated addition pitches for the pitcher who threw the at bat from the database donating all the at bats for the game.

Then I calculate the total number of pitches by adding together the additional pitch total, the number of balls, missed strikes, fouled strikes, called strikes, and BIP strikes.

I use those numbers to calculate the additional pitches for the current at bat by dividing the pitches in the at bat by the total pitches, multiplying it by the inning, then subtracting it from 1.

Here’s the actual formula from the code.

NCURRADPITSH = (1 - (NWHICHPITCH /NTOTALPITCHESH) * NINNINGCNTRFULL)

If the pitch was the 4th pitch of the at bat and there were 7 total pitches in the 1st inning, it would look like this. (1- (3/7) * 1) = 0.4286 additional pitches for the at bat.

After that, a check is made to see whether there were runners on base, where they were, what the umpire’s count was, and how many outs there were. That gives a point total that’s used to modify the previously computed additional pitches.

Here’s the actual formula from the code.

NAPITSNRUNNERSH = NCURRADPITSH * (RUNNERPTS*.1)

If the umpire’s count was 3-1 and a runner was on 1st with no outs, it would look like this.

0.4286 * (6 * .1) = 0.2571 Points from runner factor

To get the final number of pitches including the real pitches, the additional pitches, and the factor from runners, here’s the actual formula from the code.

NALLPITCHESH = NTOTALPITCHESH + NAPITSNRUNNERSH + NCURRADPITSH

7 + 0.4286 + 0.2571 = 7.6858 total pitches. I see both the REAL total pitches and the Real total pitches plus the additional pitches and the runner factor.

Once more. I’m not trying to say this method should be used and the ASMI guidelines ignored! I’m saying to look at the finalized number, and use that one to take into the ASMI guidelines, which if anything would actually get the pitcher to some ASMI number more quickly.