I suppose this could just be bad luck, but since I began tracking it, the last five times a CPU runner took off in a situation that I judged as making little sense (in other words, a situation that should have resulted in a clear out and the runner being showcased on a "what was he thinking?" ESPN special), he was safe because of an errant throw/bad dig four out of the five times. In the same period of time, the amount of times I've had an errant throw/bad dig in a situation where the runner decided to hold? Twice, despite the far larger quantity of opportunities. I will note that I'm only using plays at home for this data, although I've observed the same thing happen at other bases.
I thought I'd check with others about this; any data I produce represents such a small sample size that it could just be really bad luck. That being said, if it's not bad luck, it has to be one of two things - 1) that the presence of a runner testing the defense reduces fielding attributes significantly or 2) that the CPU calculates the outcome before making the decision. #2 seems unlikely, as I don't think that's how the game's algorithms work. That leaves the theory of fielding attributes being decimated by runners testing the defense, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense either. Anyone else have any input?
Comment