So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.
-
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@IIJACKINTHBOXII said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@eatyum said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
I'm not buying this at all. You can see your perfects in the analysis and, at least in showdown, i go 2-5 a lot more than i go 4-5 or 5-5, which you would have had to consistently been doing. PP grounders are definitely under .500 with how the game plays right now.
You are going off memory, which can be faulty. I'd encourage you to do something similar and jot down every time it happens. I did so in an excel spreadsheet. The way it "seems", isn't always reality.
No, I'm saying I don't believe your numbers. You're either fudging them to come to a pre-determined conclusion or just making them up entirely.
Unless there's massive DDA in this game (which is entirely possible) and it has ID'd you as a terrible player, nobody is getting close to these numbers.
Now, if you were to have gotten this data from publicly available videos on twitch, it would be a different story.
Why don’t you do it and see for yourself?
Because I'm not the one posting outlandish, unverifiable data as fact. And I don't care enough to.
This is the most 'Merica train of thought:
"You're wrong, despite documenting your evidence and I don't care enough to produce verifiable data to counter your verifiable data. But you're fudging the numbers. Oh also, I'm right and you're wrong. Did I mention I don't care?"
You can easily verify someone's claims of P/P by going through their box scores in their game history. Until you do that, just stop talking.
LOL!
The only "evidence" is the initial post from a notorious SDS white knight (ie. heavy bias). There's literally no verifiable data to back up the claims.
It's the equivalent of a Huffpost or Breitbart story predicated entirely on anonymous sources.
If the "Merica train of thought" = reading past the headline then... zing? I guess?
There literally is. Perfect perfects are literally called out in the box score for every game. Like this.
So since you're going to go out of your way to call someone a liar, why not do your own research? Why not prove it? If the box score isn't a reliable source, what is?
You don't understand what verifiable means, at least not in this context.
-
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@IIJACKINTHBOXII said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@eatyum said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
I'm not buying this at all. You can see your perfects in the analysis and, at least in showdown, i go 2-5 a lot more than i go 4-5 or 5-5, which you would have had to consistently been doing. PP grounders are definitely under .500 with how the game plays right now.
You are going off memory, which can be faulty. I'd encourage you to do something similar and jot down every time it happens. I did so in an excel spreadsheet. The way it "seems", isn't always reality.
No, I'm saying I don't believe your numbers. You're either fudging them to come to a pre-determined conclusion or just making them up entirely.
Unless there's massive DDA in this game (which is entirely possible) and it has ID'd you as a terrible player, nobody is getting close to these numbers.
Now, if you were to have gotten this data from publicly available videos on twitch, it would be a different story.
Why don’t you do it and see for yourself?
Because I'm not the one posting outlandish, unverifiable data as fact. And I don't care enough to.
This is the most 'Merica train of thought:
"You're wrong, despite documenting your evidence and I don't care enough to produce verifiable data to counter your verifiable data. But you're fudging the numbers. Oh also, I'm right and you're wrong. Did I mention I don't care?"
You can easily verify someone's claims of P/P by going through their box scores in their game history. Until you do that, just stop talking.
LOL!
The only "evidence" is the initial post from a notorious SDS white knight (ie. heavy bias). There's literally no verifiable data to back up the claims.
It's the equivalent of a Huffpost or Breitbart story predicated entirely on anonymous sources.
If the "Merica train of thought" = reading past the headline then... zing? I guess?
There literally is. Perfect perfects are literally called out in the box score for every game. Like this.
So since you're going to go out of your way to call someone a liar, why not do your own research? Why not prove it? If the box score isn't a reliable source, what is?
You don't understand what verifiable means, at least not in this context.
You don't understand the premise of debate. If you're going to dispute someone else's claims, you need to have evidence to back it up. You don't have any of that, so I gave you the reliable source you claim is missing.
-
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@LankyRyan said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@IIJACKINTHBOXII said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@eatyum said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
@Hoofartid said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
I'm not buying this at all. You can see your perfects in the analysis and, at least in showdown, i go 2-5 a lot more than i go 4-5 or 5-5, which you would have had to consistently been doing. PP grounders are definitely under .500 with how the game plays right now.
You are going off memory, which can be faulty. I'd encourage you to do something similar and jot down every time it happens. I did so in an excel spreadsheet. The way it "seems", isn't always reality.
No, I'm saying I don't believe your numbers. You're either fudging them to come to a pre-determined conclusion or just making them up entirely.
Unless there's massive DDA in this game (which is entirely possible) and it has ID'd you as a terrible player, nobody is getting close to these numbers.
Now, if you were to have gotten this data from publicly available videos on twitch, it would be a different story.
Why don’t you do it and see for yourself?
Because I'm not the one posting outlandish, unverifiable data as fact. And I don't care enough to.
This is the most 'Merica train of thought:
"You're wrong, despite documenting your evidence and I don't care enough to produce verifiable data to counter your verifiable data. But you're fudging the numbers. Oh also, I'm right and you're wrong. Did I mention I don't care?"
You can easily verify someone's claims of P/P by going through their box scores in their game history. Until you do that, just stop talking.
LOL!
The only "evidence" is the initial post from a notorious SDS white knight (ie. heavy bias). There's literally no verifiable data to back up the claims.
It's the equivalent of a Huffpost or Breitbart story predicated entirely on anonymous sources.
If the "Merica train of thought" = reading past the headline then... zing? I guess?
There literally is. Perfect perfects are literally called out in the box score for every game. Like this.
So since you're going to go out of your way to call someone a liar, why not do your own research? Why not prove it? If the box score isn't a reliable source, what is?
You don't understand what verifiable means, at least not in this context.
You really don't know what anything means, all you do is call someone a liar for liking the game
-
PCI feedback is a sham anyway. I hit a no doubt nuke last night on good/good and the ball wasn't even touching my contact area on the feedback, it was above it.
-
At first I thought the OP had pretty high success rate so I went through my game log and found my results to compare. To my shock my results were very similar. All my results were on All-star and almost all were events or BR games.
80+ power- 41/45 .911 average 15 HR
Below 80- 20/24 .833 average 12 HR
Total- 61/69 .884 average 27 HRIt definetly isn't that high on showndowns or any other offline mode so I think that is impacting our memories.
-
@indiansfan44 said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
At first I thought the OP had pretty high success rate so I went through my game log and found my results to compare. To my shock my results were very similar. All my results were on All-star and almost all were events or BR games.
80+ power- 41/45 .911 average 15 HR
Below 80- 20/24 .833 average 12 HR
Total- 61/69 .884 average 27 HRIt definetly isn't that high on showndowns or any other offline mode so I think that is impacting our memories.
I did one for showdowns in a a post called “The truth about showdown”. The results are lower than these, but still much higher than I would have thought before.
-
@indiansfan44 said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
At first I thought the OP had pretty high success rate so I went through my game log and found my results to compare. To my shock my results were very similar. All my results were on All-star and almost all were events or BR games.
80+ power- 41/45 .911 average 15 HR
Below 80- 20/24 .833 average 12 HR
Total- 61/69 .884 average 27 HRIt definetly isn't that high on showndowns or any other offline mode so I think that is impacting our memories.
Thank you for taking the time to actually verify information before posting an opinion, too many people just assume it's "too high" and just say I made it up. I think a lot of people would be surprised if they added up their perfects.
-
Human perception can be quite inaccurate.
-
@eatyum said in So I tracked my perfect/perfects over the last two weeks.:
I did this to try and see how well the actual stats compared to what my mind thought they were.
First I'll note the limitations.
I did not differentiate between perfect/perfect groundballs, liners etc. The reason I did this because we all know the graphic that SDS showed from the beta, it didn't differentiate either, so I stuck to that format. I did however put it in two groups, hitters with 80+ power, and hitters with 79 power or less.
55 also may not be the best sample size + most of this was gotten in the event, since I only played a couple ranked games.
Results:
80+ power - 47 perfect/perfects, 44 hits, 22 home runs, good for a .936 AVG
Below 80 power - 12 perfect/perfects, 8 hits, 3 home runs, .667 average.Total: 59 achieved, 52 hits, .881 average, 25 home runs
I definitely did not think it was that high for me, shows I had a major disconnect between what I thought was happening, and what actually was.
You should of tracked your Good/Okay. You were probably near 1.000 batting average with 80 homeruns
-
A admin locked this topic on
