Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

[Bullit]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I am truly not trying to be a jerk here and I hope you know me better, we have had some great baseball talks over the years.

But if this keeps happening, why aren't you making defensive moves to break it up. Pull in the 3rd baseman, shift your shortstop. Hold runner at first anything to break up the plan. I mean if you know they are going to do this and get a run why not try to stop it even if you give up the run anyway?

If I was playing against you and you never set up to protect the bunt, I would do it to you all day long.

[nomo17k]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

nomo, do you use autofielding?

All I'm posting is from CPU vs. CPU game watching, so no input from my own actions. I set most settings to "auto" to let AI do its thing.

[Bullit]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

OK well if its CPU to CPU my whole post is pretty pointless

[nomo17k]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I am truly not trying to be a jerk here and I hope you know me better, we have had some great baseball talks over the years.

But if this keeps happening, why aren't you making defensive moves to break it up. Pull in the 3rd baseman, shift your shortstop. Hold runner at first anything to break up the plan. I mean if you know they are going to do this and get a run why not try to stop it even if you give up the run anyway?

If I was playing against you and you never set up to protect the bunt, I would do it to you all day long.

As I wrote before, I only provide evidence from CPU vs. CPU games, so that my own ineptitude/skills do not affect things.

I don't disagree with you, but all I'm trying to do is how AI itself does not seem to employ optimal strategies to prevent all this from happening, which humans can exploit... unless they have their own "house rules" to not do so.

Personally, I feel all of these factors are affecting the issue: (1) bunt success rate intrinsically being higher, (2) bunts, including sacrifice (less so), safety bunting (maybe okay), and suicide squeezes (too often), seem to be attempted more than you would expect in real life, and (3) auto fielding does not guard against bunting in proper situations.

[nomo17k]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I feel as if I'm trolling at this point, but just illustrating that I'm not hallucinating by mentioning that I see so many squeeze plays.

This time, it's Matt Kemp hitting 3rd for the Padres (Bunt 35, Drug Bunt 25) getting at it... top of 8th, no outs, down one run in a 3-2 ball game:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3cNapQWUts4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[nomo17k]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

... and then the bot of 8th, one out, Michael McKenry (Bunt 38, Durg Bunt 26) squeezed in an insurance run to make it 5-3 for Colorado.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hp-LhR62KqE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The same view is not interesting, so I even switched around the view this time... some focus and blurring for dramatic effect as well.




Perhaps my copy of MLB 15 10th anniversary edition was drugged while on transport from Amazon?

[Ruffy]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I don't think the game is really meant to be played CPU vs CPU.

Maybe that is what is causing the extreme frequency of it occurring for you....only spit balling.

I have played 25 full games no pitch counts and haven't seen one. That being said I doubt the CPU was ever in position to try one possibly.

Certainly weird the AI would continually act that way against itself though...very interesting for sure.

[Bobhead]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

Nomo trolls again.

[redsox4evur]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

Russell,

I've seen the CPU do it before on legend mode.. The Red Sox too no less. They had Ortiz and their big power guys up and they bunted with Ortiz, i was very surprised.

The sad thing is Ortiz should try to bunt more IRL. Because of the shift. There is only the 3rd baseman on the left side of the infield. And if he can get enough power on it and down the line he has a guaranteed hit most of the time.

[Official_Mole]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

The sad thing is Ortiz should try to bunt more IRL. Because of the shift. There is only the 3rd baseman on the left side of the infield. And if he can get enough power on it and down the line he has a guaranteed hit most of the time.

I agree. IRL he should 100%.

I have the Redsox and he has been useless for me unless he gets a hit with guys on 2nd or 3rd.

[Bobhead]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I agree. IRL he should 100%.

I have the Redsox and he has been useless for me unless he gets a hit with guys on 2nd or 3rd.

Kinda ironic that your name is "Official Mole," you work for EA, and are here posting about The Show.

Not that I have any problems with it... or think it's a bad thing. I just think it's a humorous set of circumstances.

I would hope that when you are out doing actual mole things, you are a little more discreet! :wink:

[Hustle1man]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

Ive played 50 games and have seen 3 suicide squeezes and 2 safety squeezes. Only 1 suicde was succesful.

[capa]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

I've searched but I can't seem to find any stats for 2014 that show how many squeeze plays were attempted last year in MLB...real life I mean...

C

[Bullit]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

Link is to an interesting article and below that is an excerpt from that article.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/7/5587636/the-bases-loaded-bunt

I didn't really expect to find anything terribly egregious. A number of managers bunt too often, but they don't sacrifice with the bases loaded. This is less about strategy and more about wondering why teams don't deploy this tactic a little more often. It seems surprising that we only had four such bunts in 2013 despite the fact that it was a smashing success twice and a solid outcome a third time. Only Escobar really messes it up, and that's because the runner missed the sign. It probably would have worked otherwise.

With the bases loaded and one out, teams aren't typically looking for a bunt. Much like trying to beat the shift, teams might be able to deploy the bunt quite effectively here. If nothing else, doing it on occasion would keep the other team honest, drawing their corner infielders in and out of position.

You probably won't find many of these in 2014 (only 21 non-pitchers have done so since 2008), but as teams look for little chances to get ahead, bunting with the bases loaded might be a small way for teams to get a leg up.

[capa]

Re: Okay, we need to talk about AI suicide squeezes

Link is to an interesting article and below that is an excerpt from that article.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/4/7/5587636/the-bases-loaded-bunt

I didn't really expect to find anything terribly egregious. A number of managers bunt too often, but they don't sacrifice with the bases loaded. This is less about strategy and more about wondering why teams don't deploy this tactic a little more often. It seems surprising that we only had four such bunts in 2013 despite the fact that it was a smashing success twice and a solid outcome a third time. Only Escobar really messes it up, and that's because the runner missed the sign. It probably would have worked otherwise.

With the bases loaded and one out, teams aren't typically looking for a bunt. Much like trying to beat the shift, teams might be able to deploy the bunt quite effectively here. If nothing else, doing it on occasion would keep the other team honest, drawing their corner infielders in and out of position.

You probably won't find many of these in 2014 (only 21 non-pitchers have done so since 2008), but as teams look for little chances to get ahead, bunting with the bases loaded might be a small way for teams to get a leg up.

Does that say only tried 4 times in entire 2013 season?

C