Hitting for a Cycle..whats the big deal

[drcy]

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by drcy

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

If you already have two Yahtzees and need a straight...

[drcy]

A home run is a home run is a home run, but when a ball goes over the fence via bouncing off of Jose Canseco's head, now that's special.

[Runscott]

After last year's debacle regarding what constituted a 'catch', and the debacle years back where they tried to call high strikes accurately...oh yes, and the 'designated hitter' debacle, here's what I propose for MLB's next major rule screw-up:

• if the ball hits any part of a player or his glove while any part of the player's body is touching the field, then the ball is treated as if it hit the field.
• if the ball touches any part of the player or his glove, and NO part of his body is in contact with the field, then the ball is treated as if it is still in the air.

Under this proposed new rule, the ball off Jose's head would only be a HR if he were in the air when it hit his head; otherwise it would be a ground rule double.

[packs]

If we're going to mess with rules we might as well try to make the game more like it was when we were kids. I say we institute the three fouls and you're out rule and remove the catcher entirely.

While we're at it, I'd be in favor of the peg equaling an out.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

If we're going to mess with rules we might as well try to make the game more like it was when we were kids. I say we institute the three fouls and you're out rule and remove the catcher entirely.

While we're at it, I'd be in favor of the peg equaling an out.

Yeah baseball never changes the rules.., pitcher can fake throw to third and then throw to first now....baseball didn't change the way plays at the plate pertaining how catcher is positioned, ., instant replay wasn't started to overturned calls on the field.....I guess they not mess with the rules already...

there was a no hitter yesterday, no big deal

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by drcy

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

yeah you said that better than I was trying to say it..people been attacking my example of staying on third if hit a home run for the cycle..but the issue of staying for a single versus a double must of happened I thought, and it appears there was an issue of that in reality...not hard to think that that would happen.......and as far has numerology, they need a HBP and a walk as well for a full cycle...heck maybe getting on base on a K and on a catcher interference.(which may mean by error)..that's 7 ways to get on base...any other ways?


Also Kelly Gruber said this when all he needed was a singe for the cycle April 16, 1989...to even consider this shows you how silly the cycle is and how hitting 2 homers and 2 doubles is much better

“That was the toughest at bat I can remember having. Anytime you have to come up there looking for a single, there’s extra pressure. Do I go for two if I have the chance? Or do I stay on first and look silly?”

[packs]

I never understood the allure of the perfect game. The fans want to see homers and doubles. Not fly outs and grounders. So why don't the pitchers stop being so selfish and let a guy get some licks? It's what people want and it's good for everyone's stats.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

I never understood the allure of the perfect game. The fans want to see homers and doubles. Not fly outs and grounders. So why don't the pitchers stop being so selfish and let a guy get some licks? It's what people want and it's good for everyone's stats.

Right but its not like the Pitcher can do 'something less' to get a perfect game.....even for a 'no-hitter' the pitcher can throw wildly un purpose on a close play at first to maybe get an 'error' and preserve the no-hitter...they can also on a 3-0 count just throw ball 4 to not let the hitter get some good swings in that are more likely to get a hit..... a Perfect game is light years better than a no hitter...plus its more of a team stat cause other players on defense cant commit an error...

[packs]

Yeah but they're so annoying. I don't want to sit through a game where no one gets a hit. And for the money I'm paying, I want more than just 27 guys coming up to the plate. Plus I gotta read about it the next day.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

Yeah but they're so annoying. I don't want to sit through a game where no one gets a hit. And for the money I'm paying, I want more than just 27 guys coming up to the plate. Plus I gotta read about it the next day.

the other team can score 15 runs..that would take care of the scoring issue...it not like its 0-0 both pitchers pitch a perfect game..


In addition Perfect games in the NL since the advent of the DH really a lesser feat than a perfect game in the AL that has A--Rod etc as a hitter instead of a pitcher hitting .040

[packs]

Is a perfect game really perfect if the other team makes an error? I say NO. History is wrong.