I have --somewhere, can't find them now -- photocopies of Van Beek batting and pitching cards for members of a mid-1960s Angels team. (I heard a speculation at least that he used them to apply, unsuccessfully, for a patent.) Strat-o-matic was out by then, of course, but I'm pretty sure their ads didn't describe the game engine at all; he'd have needed to follow up with the company or run into someone who had the game to know they had separate batting and pitching cards.
It would be great if you could locate them, even if it's only a few cards. That would be fascinating, and would refute a lot of what I just said, haha.
I do know from Glen Guzzo's book that Hal Richman had prototypes of Strat going back to the late 1950s. I actually need to read that book again (it's sitting on my shelf) and make sure I get my facts straight.
Yes. It used two 8-sided dice, numbered 0 to 7. The numbers 00 through 37 were found on batters cards and 40 through 77 on pitchers cards. Pitchers also had grades (I, II, III, IV) which were similar to APBA in how they stopped some hits. There were control, strikeout, wild and homer ratings for pitchers as well. There was a stolen base system and a hit & run and bunt for a base hit or sacrifice booklet as well. I would love to do a full replay using these cards to see how accurate the game was statistically. It seemed pretty good to my 13-15 year old self. If you pick one of these games up the editions before 1978 or 1979 is the way to go. They made a big change in that year and it ruined the game. You can find a pretty good writeup online about the game if you google it.
Yeah - I'm planning on more posts along these lines, and have written another one that will be out in a few weeks. This one was kind of a surprise bonus post, haha.
I played a quick 1950 World Series with the original APBA cards and a copy of the original boards. I've also got the reprinted first edition of Strat sitting in the basement, ready to go - I should have a bit to say about that in the coming weeks as well. That should get us rolling on to other games to help us better figure out ways to compare.
I really think that both APBA and Strat excel in their simplicity. However, there are a couple of recent games that I think could give them a run for their money.
I have a "homemade" NP set that was made solely to test Staffa 's pitching system. I just included a third d6 and rolled them all together, ignoring the pitching die if it wasn't needed. It seemed to work pretty well.
Those Van Beek cards from the '70's were probably a copy of the idea from Longball, a game from Ashburn Industries. That's the game I first played before moving to APBA.
I had no problem with Basic grade, although I have been been interested in in Bill Stafford's
pitching sytem
I play basic APBA all the time and have no
problem with the pitcher grading system ⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️⚾️
I have --somewhere, can't find them now -- photocopies of Van Beek batting and pitching cards for members of a mid-1960s Angels team. (I heard a speculation at least that he used them to apply, unsuccessfully, for a patent.) Strat-o-matic was out by then, of course, but I'm pretty sure their ads didn't describe the game engine at all; he'd have needed to follow up with the company or run into someone who had the game to know they had separate batting and pitching cards.
It would be great if you could locate them, even if it's only a few cards. That would be fascinating, and would refute a lot of what I just said, haha.
I do know from Glen Guzzo's book that Hal Richman had prototypes of Strat going back to the late 1950s. I actually need to read that book again (it's sitting on my shelf) and make sure I get my facts straight.
Yes. It used two 8-sided dice, numbered 0 to 7. The numbers 00 through 37 were found on batters cards and 40 through 77 on pitchers cards. Pitchers also had grades (I, II, III, IV) which were similar to APBA in how they stopped some hits. There were control, strikeout, wild and homer ratings for pitchers as well. There was a stolen base system and a hit & run and bunt for a base hit or sacrifice booklet as well. I would love to do a full replay using these cards to see how accurate the game was statistically. It seemed pretty good to my 13-15 year old self. If you pick one of these games up the editions before 1978 or 1979 is the way to go. They made a big change in that year and it ruined the game. You can find a pretty good writeup online about the game if you google it.
Thomas Meade, what game are you talking about?
Very interesting read. There's a reason APBA and SOM have stood the test of time. It'll be interesting to get your take on the games, favorites, etc.
Yeah - I'm planning on more posts along these lines, and have written another one that will be out in a few weeks. This one was kind of a surprise bonus post, haha.
I played a quick 1950 World Series with the original APBA cards and a copy of the original boards. I've also got the reprinted first edition of Strat sitting in the basement, ready to go - I should have a bit to say about that in the coming weeks as well. That should get us rolling on to other games to help us better figure out ways to compare.
I really think that both APBA and Strat excel in their simplicity. However, there are a couple of recent games that I think could give them a run for their money.
I have a "homemade" NP set that was made solely to test Staffa 's pitching system. I just included a third d6 and rolled them all together, ignoring the pitching die if it wasn't needed. It seemed to work pretty well.
Yeah, I think that approach makes sense.
It's kind of like the age-old Strat-O-Matic question: do you roll the 20 sided die with the other 3, or do you wait?
Those Van Beek cards from the '70's were probably a copy of the idea from Longball, a game from Ashburn Industries. That's the game I first played before moving to APBA.
I've seen advertisements for the game, though I've never seen any cards. Did it use that kind of split system?
I was originally going to send this post out a few weeks from now, haha. Here's a bonus post for you!