10
June

Dice-ecting the Six

66-1Following up on my last article on luck in APBA, I’m going to take a quick look at the ‘66’ and more precisely the ‘6’ dice roll. 

We all want to roll the ‘66’ in APBA, of course.  It transcends all APBA games and it epitomizes the game itself.  The APBA Company even named a game after the dice roll.  But do we really want to roll a single ‘6’?  My guess is that we do given the ultimate result of the ‘66’ but it’s interesting how the dice rolls compared to the results are laid out.  I’m sure it wasn’t a coincidence but a plan on the Company’s part. 

While the ‘66’ dice roll is always the #1 best result in 99.99% of situations,  what about the other dice rolls with a white ‘6’?

Put in the context of APBA baseball:

  • 16- almost always a grounder to short unless he’s a freeswinger in which case it’s a K
  • 26- usually a K or maybe even a double play
  • 36- if you’re lucky, a player might have a 14- walk, otherwise it’s a 33- popout
  • 46- again, this tends to lean toward the K
  • 56- if he’s Pujols, it’s a 14-walk but if he’s human, count on a 34-popout

On the other end of things, what happens if the red die shows a red ‘6’ and the white die is spinning?  You’ better be hoping for a another ‘6’. 

Usually, the ‘sixty numbers’ aren’t quite as predictable.  The 65 is always a 35 and this year, the 61 is the elusive 12.  The 63 is the second 31 (if not, just a 30 or 32).  The 62 and 64 are up in the air used to fill in the extra 13s, funny numbers and occasional walks. 

The point being, APBA is genius in making the 66 the coveted number but at the same time, that is only time you want to see that number ‘6’.

They even take it a step further with the white ‘5’.  We all know the white ‘5’ means something pretty good in APBA.  But the only time it’s a sure automatic out??

With the red ‘6’…

5 comments

26
March

Revisions of the Basic Playing Boards for the APBA Baseball Game by F.A. ‘Dusty’ Welsh

ialjunesat 007I read with interest a post on the APBA forums about the revisions that the APBA baseball boards have gone throughout the years.  The original post was in 2004 but forum readers are so interested in the topic that they have been discussing the the same topic to this day.

The original poster was F.A. ‘Dusty’ Welsh who did some extensive research on all the changes the boards went through in APBA’s glorious history and posted his results.  So I asked Dusty if he would be willing to summarize his findings for an article here on The APBA Blog.  Lucky for us, he agreed.  Here is what he has to say… –tbz

The APBA playing boards for the basic baseball game have undergone multiple revisions since the original 1951 version. However, the number of versions that exist, as well as the time of their introduction, was not known. Thus began a quest to document all of the revisions in the basic game boards.

The first step was to obtain early versions of the boards, or copies of them. Because no dates were printed on the early boards, complete games were needed to identify their vintage. With the help of many individuals in the APBA community, most, if not all, versions of the basic game boards have been tracked down (Table 1). In some cases, the vintage was deduced by comparing the play results with those in versions of known vintage. Revisions of the boards were frequent during the 1950s; no fewer than ten were produced in this decade. I began with the assumption that there was a one-to-one correspondence between card seasons and board versions, but this assumption proved to be incorrect. Complete games containing the 1952 season cards have been found with two different versions of the boards, and a third version may have been used with this same season. Similarly, more than one version of the boards has been associated with other card seasons. Presumably, whenever the game company’s supply of boards ran low, a new batch of boards was printed, sometimes incorporating revisions in the play results.

Finding the different versions of the boards was fascinating to me, but identifying the changes in play results between different versions was tedious. This was my method. First, Xerox copies were made for each version, reducing the size of the playing boards to 8×11 for convenience. Second, the play results between two consecutive versions were compared, highlighting any alterations on the later version. In this manner, I marched through the 22 versions, highlighting any revisions. Details of the changes in play results were compiled in separate files, too long for this blog. Many of these files can be found on the Delphi website, APBA between the lines, post #16001. If there is sufficient interest, more details of the different versions can be posted on this blog site.

Finally there may still be additional versions yet undiscovered. In fact, the investigation was thought to be complete several years ago when a new version surfaced (version 5). More recently, another new version was discovered (version 10a). So, this is still a work in progress.

 

Chronology of the APBA Board Revisions

1 1950 Patterned after National Pastime boards;
Addition of pitching and fielding grades;
Two large boards (14” x 22”) and large game box
2 1951 Several errors changed to outs;
Some play results switched between fielding grades
3 1952 Reassignment of outs on play results 8, 9, and 10
4 1952 Addition of hit-and-run to sacrifice booklet (runner on first only);
Elimination of “batter takes second on throw” on play result 7 with runners on first and third
5 1952 Hit-by-pitch changed to error on play result 23 with bases empty;
Double play changed to fielder’s choice on play result 12 with runner on first
6 1953-1954 Ball and strike counts added to play results 10 and 11 on stolen bases
7 1954-1955 Four smaller boards (14” x 11”) and smaller game box;
Addition of optional pitching rules (grade reduction after 6 ER/3 IP)
8 1956-1958 Addition of pitching (W,X,Y,Z) and running symbols (F,S);
Optional base coaching (playing it safe); optional fielding rules;
Hit-and-run with runners on first and third added to sacrifice booklet;
New font; several revisions in play results unrelated to new symbols
9 1959 X and Y added to play results 27, 33, and 34 with bases empty;
Several play results switched between fielding grades
10a 1959-1960 Addition of large letters “A”, “B”, “C”, and “D” to boards;
Daggers used to denote extra-base hit on double-column cards
10b 1960-1962 Grade reduction after 5 ER in 3 IP;
Play result 22 with runner on first changed to hit-by-pitch
11 1963-1966 Alteration of two fielding plays with two outs
12 1967-1976 New font; changes in sacrifice fly balls
13 1977-1984 Addition of play result 14* and 42 to boards (previously on cards)
14 1985-1994 © 1986 printed on boards; thinner cardboard stock in later years
15 1995-1998 Color-coded play results; radio-style descriptions of play results;
Addition of ZZ pitching rating; © 1986 and © 1995 printed on boards;
Outfielder assists on extra-base hits varied with pitching grade; fly out to centerfield on play results 30 and 32 with two out and bases empty;
Omission of infield rating
16 1999 First booklet; brown cover; premier edition (APBA 2000); tabs used for different base situations; © 2000 printed on back of booklet
17 2000-2001 50th Anniversary edition (APBA 2001); restoration of infield rating;
© 2001 printed on back of booklet
18 2002-2004 First “66” booklet; traditional descriptions of play results; play result 12 with bases empty a grounder to thirdbaseman; ZZ-ball added to several base-situations; © 2003 printed on back of booklet
19 2005-2006 New K and R strikeout symbols; optional scorer’s rule to adjust errors by season; © 2006 printed on back of booklet
20 2007 New artwork on cover; no changes in play results; © 2007
21 2008-2010 A few typographical omissions corrected; © 2009
22 2011-present No known changes in play results; © 2011

 

Thanks to Dusty for his work and willingness to share it.  Fantastic stuff!

4 comments

18
March

These have nothing to do with APBA…

…but maybe you’ll find them interesting, anyway.

1.  Over at The Baseball Zealot, I interviewed Chicago-based baseball artist Grant Smith.  He’s got some great baseball paintings and even sold some of them to Johnny Damon (he writes about it in the interview).  If you want to check his work out here is his website

.

2.  This is more of a commentary than anything and it’s tangentially related to the game of APBA.

I ran across this review of Carcassonne on Boing Boing.  Mark Frauenfelder claims it’s the the only “board game I can stand”.  He goes on to say that “I don’t like playing board games” and that he’s surprised that I like playing Carcassonne so much”.

So, where am I going with this?  He then says (in parenthesis) that “I’ve never played the physical board game of Carcassonne”.  He was referring to the computer version of the board game all along and never played the actual board game.

I’m not picking on Frauenfelder.   I happen to respect him a lot.  But I do think this might be a generational or perhaps even a technological gap that many people who see themselves playing a computer version of a “real” board game and don’t make the disconnect between the two.

Comments?

2 comments

8
July

APBA vs Strat-o-Matic: my reasons I stayed

Every so often I get an email asking me to compare APBA to Strat-o-Matic, APBA’s major competitor.  I’m not about to ask a man to change his religion and in the same vein, I would extend the same courtesy when it comes to his favorite baseball simulation game, as much of a fan I am of APBA. 

That said, Bruce Marcinczyk and I have been corresponding over email about the virtues (and perhaps the inadequacies) of both games.  Thanks to Bruce for inspiring this article.

apbawagner While I won’t waste my virtual breath by saying that the APBA sports gaming system is better (everything is so subjective), I can say that certain sports board game engines are more suited for some and their competitors are suited for others. 

And the interesting thing is, the reasons why the APBA model works for me has little to with complex statistics comparisons.  Mostly they are practical reasons. 

Before I go on, here’s my disclaimer… I’ve played Strat-o-Matic enough games to know how it’s played but not enough to be an expert.  If any Strat fan reads this and still totally disagrees with what I say in this article, flame away. 

 

My reasons for staying with APBA:

 

1.  Rhythm/Pace of Play

This is a big reason for me.  This assumes you are either playing solo or have two managers who know the boards pretty well.  If so, the dice rollin’ gets into sort of a cadence and not only can you get a few games in a short period of time, you and your opponent might be able to trash talk as well. 

PS this doesn’t work when one manager knows the boards well and the other is a beginner at APBA.  It almost works best if two beginners learn the game together unless you have a very patient teacher (“Strikeout.  It’s a strikeout!  I promise you every 13 is a strikeout!  Don’t bother looking it up!”  *fingers tapping*)

 

2.  Cards are easy to “Read”

This seems like a piddly thing but for some reason, it matters to me.  In APBA, all the numbers are where they’re “supposed” to be (usually).  The best result is at 66, the next best at 11 etc.  The result at 45 is almost always a 14, you know where I’m going with this. 

The point is that I can look at an APBA baseball card and within 10 seconds, I could give you a good sense of what that card should hit in a full season (assuming average pitching). 

On the same note, a good dice roll is a good dice roll and vice-versa in APBA.  I can count on getting a similar result with Ryan Zimmerman as well as Eric Hinske with a dice roll of 44. 

Like I said, it seems small but we (ok, maybe I) like to root for certain numbers to come up.  It just makes it easier if you know what those numbers are on a consistent basis.

 

3.  APBA is more Accurate

Again assuming MLB average pitching, APBA hitters tend to be more accurate (I’m talking accurate not necessarily realistic.  see below) to their real life stats.  Now when you’re in a 10-team league like I am where pitching is incredibly heavy, you can throw that out the window.  But overall, APBA tends to recreate stats better in my opinion. 

 

4.  The APBA Game Engine is very modifiable

The game of APBA is immensely customizable.  Like the game but don’t care for one or two of its features?  Change it! 

These days when we are getting away from from the do-it-yourself culture and are told we need to have everything force fed to us, the idea of getting a game AND CHANGING THE RULES is foreign to most people.  But this is one of the best reasons I like the game of APBA dice baseball. 

Don’t particularly care for the way handles the unusual numbers or error results?  Then implement a randomized charts like the Unusual Play Chart or Error Chart.  APBA’s pitching system not specific enough for you?  Well there’s always the Master Game but you could also implement recognized and tested systems like the Coxx Pitching system, too.

To be fair, I’m sure Strat-o-Matic most likely has modifications to its game as well.  I’m just not as familiar with the game.

 

 

Am I bashing the Strat-o-Matic game?

 

Not at all.

As I said, I’ve played the game (at least 20 or so games) enough to get an idea of how it is played.  I found it fun and as near I could tell, it was realistic and accurate. 

But I came back to APBA for the reasons I explained above but mostly… because it was the game I grew up with.

In the midst of writing this, I spoke to Brando, one of our managers in the IAL.  Despite being in our APBA league, Brando enjoys Strat and finds a lot of advantages in the game.

It does incorporate some facets of baseball that APBA does not such as L/R matchups, increased fielding/range ratings, and more specific pitchers ratings.  To put it simply, Strat wins the “realism” (as opposed to accuracy) battle (though I am sure there are some arguments to contrary). 

I could go on about the other features of Strat but one, I’m not really qualified and two, it’s not really the focus of this blog. 

I’d love to hear comments on this article especially from APBA fans who have played Strat-o-Matic.  What was your impression of the game and why did you come back to APBA. 

 

66s!

40 comments