Good article. Just wanted to mention that maximum fielding in APBA -- then as now -- is 50 points, not 45: 9 in the outfield, 2 for the pitcher, 9 for the catcher, and 5-9-10-6 on the infield. (I'm guessing you left out first base.) One change between 1951 and the time that advanced fielding system came in: 1b-1, 2b-4,3b-2 and ss-5 ratings were added for players who had never played the position, and the 1951 paragraph about default ratings was changed accordingly. (On very rare occasions, players were actually carded with a 3B-2 or SS-5 rating, leading to questions as to whether they were typos.)
What I don't like about the fielding system is that the C, 1B and P are completely ignored. They have no fielding outcomes for themselves. If Greg Maddux has a 2, so what? The boards will say "E-1" regardless...You could give Johnny Bench a '5' or a '9' and it won't matter if the team stays in Fielding 2 as a result. His rating means nothing more than contributing to the Team Total. Same with Keith Hernandez. Give him a 2 if you want, the 5 he may deserve means nothing if it keeps the team in Fielding 2 or Fielding 1 or whatever the editor is trying to get the Team into (Fielding 1, 2 or 3). And I surmise that that's what they do, start with the Team first, grade the individual OF, 3B, SS and 2B then adjust the 1B, C and P's ratings as you would to get the team into F1, 2 or 3.
It's actually even worse if you look at how the original boards were designed.
There was no individual fielding component. That means that having a 10 at shortstop doesn't necessarily block anything if the rest of the infield stinks. It also means that having a 1 in the outfield means nothing if the rest of the fielders add up to a high enough total to hit fielding 1.
Most of the long term APBA fans will point out that the purpose of the system was never to accurately replicate fielding. Seitz was trying to control the number of base runners that pitchers were giving up. The truth is that APBA's original fielding system is just an extension of the pitching system.
If it's any consolation, Hal Richman didn't include ANY fielding system with the 1961 version of Strat-O-Matic baseball.
You didn't mention the gradual increase in a pitcher's grade after five, six, or seven shutout innings, depending on starting grade. Some took that as a pitcher getting stronger as the game went on. I always considered it a reward for an exceptional performance. It was also easy to tweak the pitching grades depending on actual performance. For example, a twenty-game winner with a high ERA and a B grade could be tweaked by making him a C every other start. You could use that system with defensive ratings as well if you were so inclined, without adding bothersome dice rolls.
The reason why I didn't mention that gradual increase is because that "optional" pitching rule wasn't actually a part of the game in 1951. It didn't come around until 1956 or so.
Similarly, there was no rule for lowering the pitcher's grade back in 1951.
Excellent article. I played my first season of APBA in 1960 (1959 cards) . What I liked about the game was its simplicity and the speed of play. A friend of mine stopped playing APBA in 1961
and started playing Big League Manager and he raved about the game. He stated that there was nothing to the APBA game and liked the complexity of BLM. He moved away & we lost touch.
Good article. Just wanted to mention that maximum fielding in APBA -- then as now -- is 50 points, not 45: 9 in the outfield, 2 for the pitcher, 9 for the catcher, and 5-9-10-6 on the infield. (I'm guessing you left out first base.) One change between 1951 and the time that advanced fielding system came in: 1b-1, 2b-4,3b-2 and ss-5 ratings were added for players who had never played the position, and the 1951 paragraph about default ratings was changed accordingly. (On very rare occasions, players were actually carded with a 3B-2 or SS-5 rating, leading to questions as to whether they were typos.)
Yeah - I think I left out first base in my calculations.
Thanks for the information!
What I don't like about the fielding system is that the C, 1B and P are completely ignored. They have no fielding outcomes for themselves. If Greg Maddux has a 2, so what? The boards will say "E-1" regardless...You could give Johnny Bench a '5' or a '9' and it won't matter if the team stays in Fielding 2 as a result. His rating means nothing more than contributing to the Team Total. Same with Keith Hernandez. Give him a 2 if you want, the 5 he may deserve means nothing if it keeps the team in Fielding 2 or Fielding 1 or whatever the editor is trying to get the Team into (Fielding 1, 2 or 3). And I surmise that that's what they do, start with the Team first, grade the individual OF, 3B, SS and 2B then adjust the 1B, C and P's ratings as you would to get the team into F1, 2 or 3.
It's actually even worse if you look at how the original boards were designed.
There was no individual fielding component. That means that having a 10 at shortstop doesn't necessarily block anything if the rest of the infield stinks. It also means that having a 1 in the outfield means nothing if the rest of the fielders add up to a high enough total to hit fielding 1.
Most of the long term APBA fans will point out that the purpose of the system was never to accurately replicate fielding. Seitz was trying to control the number of base runners that pitchers were giving up. The truth is that APBA's original fielding system is just an extension of the pitching system.
If it's any consolation, Hal Richman didn't include ANY fielding system with the 1961 version of Strat-O-Matic baseball.
You didn't mention the gradual increase in a pitcher's grade after five, six, or seven shutout innings, depending on starting grade. Some took that as a pitcher getting stronger as the game went on. I always considered it a reward for an exceptional performance. It was also easy to tweak the pitching grades depending on actual performance. For example, a twenty-game winner with a high ERA and a B grade could be tweaked by making him a C every other start. You could use that system with defensive ratings as well if you were so inclined, without adding bothersome dice rolls.
The reason why I didn't mention that gradual increase is because that "optional" pitching rule wasn't actually a part of the game in 1951. It didn't come around until 1956 or so.
Similarly, there was no rule for lowering the pitcher's grade back in 1951.
Enjoyed this article. Thanks.
Excellent article. I played my first season of APBA in 1960 (1959 cards) . What I liked about the game was its simplicity and the speed of play. A friend of mine stopped playing APBA in 1961
and started playing Big League Manager and he raved about the game. He stated that there was nothing to the APBA game and liked the complexity of BLM. He moved away & we lost touch.