Pitching sessions

[flipthrower]

You're right Vicki, this isnt a perfect world.  We will always have the people with high ringer percentages that really cant throw that high.  We will always have people complaining that 30 footers shouldnt throw with 40 footers, the clays to wet, the clays to dry, he didnt turn the clay on his end, 70 or 65 yrs old, blah blah blah.  One thing is for sure, i have earned my short time in the NHPA and i feel i can voice my opinion freely.  Whether you like to admit it or not, the padding ringers subject is a fact.  Apparently it has been brought up before and it didnt go anywhere.  Maybe you dont think its happening, but criticizing me when i know otherwise isnt right.  The fact of the matter is, it is happening and people need to watch.  On to your reply.  What is wrong with thinking about different ways to keep score?  No one said we would be inputting our own scores with a hand held device.  Even if so, you would still need to watch your opponent.  Maybe we still would need someone sitting there and punching a couple of numbers, maybe not.  Maybe we could get rid of the score sheets and use a computer. These are just ideas and things to talk about to make our game better.  It is 2010, there are many possibilities out there if people look.  I think a lot of the problem with people these days is they dont want to admit there are problems that need corrected.  Maybe you think it is a "perfect world".  Just remember change is inevitable, sometimes you just have to deal with it. 
Vicki, i have a question for you....if i were to come up with a scoring device or different way to make it easier, would you quit?  I dont think you would because you love the game as much as i do.  You may not like it, but we have to deal with it.  Just like i am dealing with the subject you brought up about me.

Out for now.

[Arnold Crow]

     Vicki, I agree 110%!!  When I pitch in local tournaments and we can't find a scorekeeper, seems like I always get stuck with keeping the score.  Hardlly any opponent will volunteer to keep the score.  True it does break your concenstration of the game.  I don't think it would be a good idea at all for the pitchers to input the score into the computer network, needs to be someone who is not involved in the pitching process!!!  Nowadays I don't trust my own children!!! LOL
     Arnold Crow

[vicki]

Flipthrower,

I was not criticizing you.  I was merely pointing out the fact that you seem to be in favor of a system that will increase cheating, after you have been so outspoken on the subject of pitchers padding stats.  I just thought that rather strange.  If you will recall, I believe it was myself who first brought up the subject on this forum of pitchers padding ringers and this was on the world tournament level.  I am well aware of what has happened in the past decades and some of it before you were born.  I will not mention names because it is not my intention to tarnish reputations and some are well known names.  I think it was my post that eventually inspired you to make reference to the subject and things that are happening in this day and age.  I am also aware of that.  At no time have I ever denied that cheating is going on.  I do not know what gave you that idea.  That is what concerns me a great deal about asking pitchers to keep their own scores.

If you will cool down and read some of the former posts, you will see hand held devices mentioned and pitchers entering their own scores at each end of the court.  I believe that was one point of looking into new technology.  It was to eliminate having a scorekeeper.  The only way a scorekeeper can be eliminated is if the pitchers record their own scores.  I have given two good reasons in my previous post as to why pitchers should not be asked to keep their own scores.  

I don't know what makes you think I am against new technology.  I have used the computerized scorekeeping system at the Harris Arena several times myself.  They also use paper scoresheets, because those can be carried into the stat room and entered in the computer, but the monitor shows the score, the number of shoes, the ringers pitched by each player and their ringer percentages.  If those totals could be transferred to the computer doing the stats, there would be no need for paper.  Computerized scorekeeping has existed for years.  It is not new and I am not against it.  I think it is wireless technology that is being sought now, so that it can be used for outdoor locations.  I believe that would be something new, but would still not do away with someone having to record the stats for each inning.

Vicki

[Fred]

I can never foresee a time when courtside scorekeepers are not needed.  The scorekeeper acts as a judge on that court.  I was in a game that was tied 49 - 49, had first pitch and threw a ringer and a close shoe.  My opponent threw a ringer with his first shoe, but his second shoe nicked the platform and flopped over against the stake.  He said, "Ringer each, one point."  I protested and said the second shoe was a foul.  He shouted at me denying it was a foul shoe.  I asked the scorekeeper if it was a foul shoe or not.  He said it was a foul shoe.  All hell broke lose, but the scorekeeper's decision was final, and correct.  As far as I am concerned a scorekeeper is as much a part of the game as the two contestants.  An independent scorekeeper assures the integrity, and civility of a game.

[2ringer6]

While we are on the subject of ringer percentage...why not use a true ringer percentage by averaging all of ones tournaments and not just the ego trip of the three highest tournaments. This would be a true picture of how someone pitches. You don't see baseball players taking their three highest games in order to keep their average up. Any other sport where there is any kind of percentage/average keep is not done on the the three highest results.

[flipthrower]

Vicki.
Its all good.  I guess these forums get a little heated at times, theres nothing wrong with that.  I will still smile and say hello the next time i see you.  We have to make it easy for our employees on everything.  Automate this, automate that....i guess thats why it come to mind. 
As far as the other subject, you are correct, you did get me going on that.  Actually, i have not mentioned any names on here as well, and i will not.  Its a game, if someone wishes to do wrong, they will have to deal with it in the long run.
Sorry for how i came across (i think i have been reading too many of Cobblers posts )  Just kiddin Cobbler, just trying to break the ice!!

[cobbler]

2ringers6... I agree with you on averages... It should be an average for all recent tournaments... last ten or so, not just the three high.  I think the competition would be much better if it was done that way.  It's good now, but it could be even better and that would help a lot.  This topic has been brought up a bunch of times in other posts and I have never seen what I would call a really solid argument against this idea.  In my opinion, your way is the way to go for calculating ringer averages.  I hear arguments that people can pitch poorly due to weather conditions and so on and therefore, those averages shouldn't be counted in their stats.  Well, lots of people seem to also pitch good in bad conditions... should we not count their averages from those same tournaments just because the weather was bad that day? 

Isn't the goal of a system like we have here to create the most competitive atmosphere possible for the players invovled?  How does our current version of nat stats do that?  The fact is that our current system is not necessarily the best way... It is pretty much just a compromise to help standardize a bunch of different ways of computing ringer averages into one way that everyone could agree on.  This method got us started down the road of standardization and it has served us well for quite some time.  But we've discovered there are ways players can easily manipulate their averages using this system and that's not good.  A true average type system that you're talking about would make all those things much harder to do.  I believe it is time we took that next step and go to a system like you propose.  Are there any other sports or games that do anything like we do here in horseshoes?  I am curious to know... anyone?

[2ringer6]

You could start at the beginning of the year (January) and use the year ending average of the previous year as the beginning average to enter the first tournament each year and then start the average with the first tournament just as they do in baseball. You could also go from WT deadline to WT deadline.

[flipthrower]

i guess the only downfall to that would be the people that dont throw in 10 tournaments and the people that do throw in a lot would be penalized so to speak.  Right now there are a bunch of people that throw in a ton of tournaments.  Its unbelievable the amount of tournaments some members have and how much traveling they do.  Its pretty impressive and i admire them to be able to do that.  I always thought i could make 10 tournaments a year and it never pans out with me and my wifes schedule.  I wish there was a way to combine all the tournaments for averages, that would definitely cut out some BS.

[Dave]

For those of you who want to know if any other sport computes averages similar to what we do in the NHPA, I know of one, GOLF!. Like horseshoes, golfers have the option of becoming a member of their State or Region association. Once you are a member, your scores are posted to a handicap service. The vast majority of states and regions subscribe to a service called GHIN (Golf Handicap Information Network). Your state/region updates your GHIN at least monthly by listing the last 20 scores you have posted. Your handicap index is based upon the lowest 10 scores posted in the last 20 played. Even this system however has a weakness because sandbaggers who want to keep their handicap higher for local tournament play may not post a low score. Golf is an honor sport where players are expected to call penalties on themselves and post all their scores but many of the everyday players do not. 

[cobbler]

I'm going back to the electronic scoring concept here... I was talking with a good friend of mine, Steve Kuchcinski, and he pointed out that if we used a keypad to enter the scores, since there are so few possible scoring combinations, we could just program the ten keys necessary to cover all the scoring...  So, one key would be for "no score," another for "one point," another for "two points," another for "one ringer three," etc.  With Steve's idea, basically, scoring at each end would be a matter of two key strokes... one key to select the correct score and one to assign it to the right player... I love it!

Perhaps, with the addition of a keypad overlay and a game format button, it could easily be programmed to do count all games and maybe even league handicapped games... lots of possiblilities, right?

Thank-you Steve!