WHAT MAKES STRAT-O-MATIC THE BEST?

Why should you play Strat-O-Matic computer baseball and what makes it better tha
n the competition? These are questions that many people have asked and in this
short essay we're going to try to answer these questions.
First off, let us state our position (and the position of many people who play o
ur game): Strat-O-Matic is the most statistically accurate and most realistic r
epresentation of baseball on the market.
Now how does one go about proving this. Well, the first part (the most statisti
cally accurate simulation on the market) is quite easy. Does this mean that Str
at-O-Matic's game generates the exact, or near exact batting averages for all pl
ayers? No, this is not what we mean. Nobody we know would want to play a game
where every player's batting average came out exactly correct. If you are inter
ested in that you really want to be using an electronic baseball encyclopedia in
stead of playing a baseball simulation. What we mean by statistical accuracy is
how much variance there is from a player's real life and replay totals.
And how does one prove the second part of our statement (that Strat-O-Matic is t
he most realistic representation of baseball on the market)? That will take a l
ittle looking into, and we're confident once you start looking, you're going to
like what you see.
STATISTICAL ACCURACY
Just about every baseball simulation that hits the market is advertised with the
claim that it is "the most statistically accurate game ever developed". We at
Strat-O-Matic sometimes laugh amongst ourselves when a new game comes out becaus
e the claim is so often used that it has become a cliché.
So what is the story with statistical accuracy? The truth is that there is an e
xpected (and measurable) range of statistical variation that you should see when
you run a baseball simulation. Anyone who has taken an entry level course on s
tatistics and probability would know about Standard Deviation and could easily c
ompute what that range should be.
If a computer simulation is performing better then that range then it is "rigged
" so that the replay "comes out the way that it should". Certain events would
not occur because of a random generated outcome but because the batter was "behi
nd his pace" and needed a little "help" to catch up. A few computer baseball ga
mes have come and gone that use this fallacious method of generating outcomes.
They are not popular because gamers instinctively know when a model is not provi
ding enough variation. After all, what is the point of starting a replay if you
already know what every batter is going to hit?
Strat-O-Matic is as accurate or more accurate than any simulation that uses a tr
uly random model. That is because when you run a Strat-O-Matic replay you will
see a distribution of variance that is perfectly in line with what you should re
ceive in a truly random model. For any given number of real-life at-bats and av
erage you can compute the expected statistical variance you should see if you ra
n many replay. Strat-O-Matic hits that mark perfectly. However, it is importan
t to note that not every game out there does.
When preparing this article we tested other simulations for statistical accuracy
. We ran three replays with each of the following products. Here is a chart of
the most accurate of the three 1996 replays using both of these products:

1996 AL AVG. 1996 AL E.R.A. 1996 NL AVG. 1996 NL

E.R.A.
ACTUAL .277 4.99 .262
4.21
Strat-O-Matic .278 5.05 .261
4.20
Competitor "DM" .278 4.95 .264
4.22
Competitor "AP" * .259 4.36 .244
3.77
*Note: Competitor "AP" offers add-on tools that might improve statistical accura
cy. These tools were not used for this test.
Since the Strat-O-Matic and "DM" competitor were so close we decided to perform
a detailed study of these two games. In this study we compared the replay total
s of all batters who had 400 or more at-bats with their real-life batting averag
es and home run percentages. There were 172 batters who fell into this category
and here is the result of the comparison:

Average batting average error Average hr % err

or
Strat-O-Matic .015 .007
Competitor "DM" .016 .007
So the average batter (with 400 or more at-bats) varied by sixteen points from t
heir actual batting average using DM and fifteen points using Strat-O-Matic. Cl
early both games are excellent at reproducing statistics and are in the expected
range of statistical deviation. However there are other games available that,
despite the claims, are not nearly as accurate.
At this point a very important point should be made. And that is that you can't
recreate what you can't rate. What do we mean by this? It's very simple. For
seasons prior to the mid 1980's there does not exist sufficient statistical dat
a to properly rate the players for a baseball simulation. Specifically, there e
xists no lefty/righty breakdown of the data. So what does a game company do to
overcome this serious problem?
Well, if you're Strat-O-Matic you roll up your sleeves, sharpen your pencils and
get down to the excruciatingly difficult task of extracting out the lefty/right
y statistics from each and every box score for the season we are rating. Just h
ow difficult is this work? Well, it takes about one man year of labor to accomp
lish.
And how do our competitors handle the same dilemma? Do they attempt to match th
e standard for accuracy that Strat-O-Matic has set? Of course not - it's too mu
ch work for them! Instead, they take the raw statistics from that season and p
ass it through a program. Voila! Ten seconds later they have their so-called "
lefty/righty statistics" (based upon some simplistic formula) and it's time for
another coffee break! This, as you are about to learn, is just one of the many
ways that Strat-O-Matic blows away the competition.
In order to be able to offer every season since 1901 Strat-O-Matic also offers t
hese "inferior"
style disks. They are similar to what our competitors create and they are far i
nferior to the
premium disks that we are describing here. And we are forthright about what the
y are and price
them accordingly. This allows our customers to play with any season since 1901
(the year the
American League came into existence) while we go about the business of doing the
se seasons the
proper way.

REALISM
Perhaps one of the silliest arguments offered by Strat-O-Matic's competitors is
that because the Strat-O-Matic computer game is tied directly to the board game
it's realism is gravely limited. Specifically they talk of the 50/50 model of t
he board game and that the computer game cannot "move forward" because of it's t
ies to the board game. As we shall shortly see both of these arguments are desi
gned to attack what actually is the strength of Strat-O-Matic's game.
I DIDN'T KNOW THEY MADE DICE THAT BIG
While Strat-O-Matic uses a unique dice referral system to generate its results e
very other computer game on the market uses a method that for simplicity sake we
'll call the "Thousand-sided die method." Simply put these other games start wi
th a player's batting average and adjust it based upon the pitcher he is facing
and other factors. Then they roll their "Thousand-sided die" and determine the
result. In reality it's a bit more complicated than that, but we're just talkin
g in generalities here.
As a simple example let's say a batter who hits .250 is at the plate. Now let's
say the pitcher he is facing holds opposing batters to 10 points below the leag
ue average. So now we're going to adjust the batter's average to .240. There a
re many other factors at play (such as ballpark effects) but we'll ignore those
for purposes of this example. Now it's time to roll that Thousand-Sided die. I
f it comes up 1 to 240 the batter will get a base hit but if it comes up a 241 t
o 1000 then that's an out. (We're ignoring walks, hbp, etc. for simplicity sake
here). That, in a nutshell, is how every other computer game works.
But Strat-O-Matic's system is drastically different. All adjustments are an int
egral part of the Strat-O-Matic player cards and are accessed by a specific meth
od of rolling 3 dice. The method employed uses one white die and two red dice.
If the white die is a 1,2 or 3 then you read the result from the batters' cards
and if it's 4, 5 or 6 you read the results from the pitcher's card. Because of
this some people have dubbed this method the "50/50" system because half of the
time the results are coming from the batter's card and half of the time from th
e pitcher's card.
It is on this point that some people have a complete breakdown in their ability
to think logically. They reason (with the help of a competitor of ours who, one
would hope, knows better) that since half of the time the result comes on the b
atter's card that, when the result does come from a batter's card, it doesn't ma
tter which pitcher is on the mound. Think about that for a moment. And compare
it in your mind to the "Thousand-sided die" method. If 1000 comes up on the di
e does it matter who was on the mound? Does it matter if 900 comes up, or 800 or
700? (Of course not, in all these cases it's bad news for the batter no matter
who is pitching). In the same way, does it matter which pitcher is on the moun
d if a 1 comes up?
The simple fact is whether you are using the "Thousand-sided die" method or the
"50/50" method when a particular batter faces a particular pitcher in a particul
ar situation there is a precise and predefined chance of every possible outcome
occurring. For instance in a given batter-pitcher matchup the batter might have
a 15% chance for a single, 5%chance for a double, 1%chance for triple and 3% ch
ance for a homerun. Which pitcher is on the mound clearly alters these percenta
ges in either model. Once you understand that in both models the chances for an
y given outcome are affected by the pitcher on the mound you will realize that i
t does not matter which mechanism is used to generate a random number and read t
he play result.
I SEE A PATTERN DEVELOPING HERE
Now that the fallacy of the alleged problem with the "50/50" method has been exp
osed let us continue on and examine a little more deeply the differences between
the two methods. Strat-O-Matic's system is unique in both the computer game an
d board game industry in that it uses different patterns for each batter and pit
cher. What does having patterns buy you? Uniqueness and realism.
You see, in Strat-O-Matic, batters and pitchers are unique due to these patterns
. When you use the "Thousand-sided die" method, players are very similar indeed
. Too similar, in fact. For instance if you roll a 1 on your "Thousand-sided d
ie" every batter is going to get a hit. But in Strat-O-Matic a given roll does
not generate the same result for all batters. For one batter it might generate
a strikeout, for another the exact same roll might generate a walk and for yet a
nother it might be a homerun!
Strat-O-Matic is the only game that uses patterns. It is also the only game whe
re "playing a hunch" actually can work for you! In Strat-O-Matic, unlike every
other game, sometimes using an inferior player will give you a better result. O
f course this doesn't happen all the time, otherwise the "inferior player" would
become the "superior player". It just happens enough to be realistic. Isn't i
t true that sometimes the mediocre player rises to the occasion and can actually
outplay the superstar? Of course it's true -- but don't expect to find that re
ality in other baseball simulations. The use of patterns in Strat-O-Matic compu
ter baseball means that "playing a hunch" can actually work for you!
In addition, the use of patterns adds the element of "second guessing" into the
game. Let's say you need a clutch hit and you've got to decide which batter yo
u want to pinch hit with. It comes down to two players and finally you make you
r choice. You hold your breath, click the mouse and that bum proceeds to strike
out for you thus ending your last chance to make the playoffs! Well, if you da
re, you can look at the other player's card and see what he would have done with
that pitch -- imagine if it would have been a game winning homerun! This "seco
nd guessing" adds a great deal to the agony and ecstasy of playing the game, and
it's not available in other games because they do not use patterns.
REPEAT SOMETHING OFTEN ENOUGH AND ...
The other silly claim that is sometimes made regarding Strat-O-Matic is that sin
ce it is tied to the board game that this somehow holds back the computer game.
Besides being false this statement belies the fact that by tying the computer g
ame to the board game we are tying it to the best board game system ever develop
ed. Talk about trying to turn a positive into a negative!
Now if someone has never played our game they might believe that our computer ga
me is held back in some way by our board game. But anyone who has played our co
mputer game should know better. You see our computer game has a separate set of
"maximized" rules that are not available in the board game. Many things that s
imply cannot be included in the board game are covered by these maximized rules.
For instance some pitchers tend to allow more hits with runners on base (thus
hurting their e.r.a.) while other pitchers seem to "clamp down" with runners on
base. This ability is reflected in the computer game only, via the maximized ru
les. It is one of the many maximized rules we have added to the game in recent
years.
We are continuing to develop and implement new maximized rules that will be avai
lable for your enjoyment in the future. Strat-O-Matic's computer game is in no
way held back by the board game but in fact is greatly enhanced by the research
and development that it inherits from the board game.
I KNOW I'M GOING FAST, THE SPEEDOMETER SAYS SO
I hope you don't mind, but I'd like to switch gears here. Let us imagine that y
ou are driving on the expressway and you suddenly notice that your car seems to
be going very slowly. You glance down at the speedometer but it says you're cru
ising along at 65 mph. Then you look around and the scenery seems to be crawlin
g by slowly. Other cars are passing you at perhaps twice your speed. But your
speedometer keeps on saying you're holding steady at 65 mph. At this point woul
dn't you start questioning the speedometer based upon your observations of the p
hysical reality?
Well, there is a great parallel here with the trouble our competitors have in th
e area of rating fielding abilities. You see when it comes to rating fielding a
bility they develop their own "speedometers" which are simply mathematical formu
lae utilizing fielding statistics. Or they use someone else's "speedometer" whi
ch might include range or zone factors. Once they have settled on which "speedo
meter" they are going to use they never question it again. Whatever that speedo
meter reads becomes, in their minds, the physical reality of the situation. But
, unfortunately for them, the speedometer that they use can be wrong just as oft
en as it is right. Imagine that -- imagine if the speedometer in your car was w
rong just as often as it was right!
You see the people who work at Strat-O-Matic have been developing fielding ratin
gs for over 35 years. Believe us, we have tried every speedometer out there. W
e have tried them individually. We have tried them in concert. We have tried d
eveloping our own. And after years of trying we have come to the sad conclusion
that none of them are close to giving you a true feel for a player's fielding a
bility. Now why do I say "the sad conclusion"? I'll tell you why -- because un
like every other company out there we don't accept mediocrity when it comes to r
ating our players. So instead of using a faulty speedometer we opt to spend mo
nths of research in order to give you accurate fielding ratings. It's slow and
painful research that keeps us burning the midnight oil. And it saddens our spo
uses greatly!
It's research that demands we spend countless hours reading scouting reports and
newspaper accounts, sifting through boxscores, interviewing experts, comparing
results and, yes looking at every statistical speedometer on the market (includi
ng some of our own). We have found that this is the only way you can consistent
ly get good results when rating players' fielding abilities.
Now some people want to argue that Strat-O-Matic is wrong in this area, that we
should just use the range rating or zone rating since these reflect the reality
of the situation. Of course they completely ignore the fact that sometimes the
range rating indicates that a player is great in the field while at the same ti
me the zone rating indicates that he stinks! And, getting back to our analogy,
it is sort of like arguing that you shouldn't worry about your car's speedometer
. If it says you're going 65 you are going 65 mph. Forget the physical world t
hat the speedometer is trying to measure -- that's meaningless. The reality is
the speedometer.
An example will be necessary to explain this more clearly. Omar Vizquel has out
standing range and ability at short stop. Only those who have never seen the ma
n play shortstop could possibly argue that he does not have great range and fiel
ding ability. Yet the speedometers that our competitors use rates Omar Vizquel
as an AVERAGE FIELDER!!! Now isn't this a ridiculous thing? Aren't they sittin
g in their car staring at the speedometer and insisting that they are traveling
at 65 mph, when in fact they are barely moving at all? Do you really want to pl
ay a game that starts with the premise that Omar Vizquel is a mediocre fielder?
Think of this in terms of a player's true worth. Let's say you have a light hit
ting but great fielding shortstop. Now this man has value -- he is an outstandi
ng shortstop. But let's say a game rates this guy as a poor fielding shortstop
(and this often happens with our competitors' games). Now, based upon this faul
ty rating, what value does this shortstop have? Little if any. So, you see, th
is is a very important area we are concerned with here. This mistake has taken
a player who could be considered a commodity in real life baseball, and turned h
im into a minor league reject. That is one reason why accurate fielding ratings
are so important. And Strat-O-Matic is the only company dedicated enough to sp
end the time to give you the accuracy that you demand and deserve.
Now, let us take a detailed look at this problem. We'll try to draft a team of
great defensive players from 2002 using the Strat-O-Matic game and one of our co
mpetitors who we'll call "DM".
POSITION PLAYER 2002 SOM RATING 2002 "DM" RATING
Catcher Bengie Molina Outstanding Fair
First Baseman J.T. Snow Outstanding Average
Second Baseman Brett Boone Outstanding Average
Short Stop Omar Vizquel Outstanding Average
Third Baseman Eric Chavez Outstanding Very Good
Left Fielder Darren Lewis Outstanding Average
Center Fielder Jim Edmonds Outstanding Average
Right Fielder Larry Walker Outstanding Very Good
Looking at this list one can quickly determine that if you put together this tea
m in real-life they might be the greatest defensive team off all time. Imagine
having a gold-glover at every position! Similarly, the Strat-O-Matic version of
this defensive unit is going to be just as outstanding. However, using competi
tor DM this team would be a mediocre defensive team - and anyone who knows baseb
all can easily see just how ridiculous this is.
Even Atlanta's Andruw Jones and Minnesota's Torii Hunter don't get the top ratin
g in the DM game! Is Andruw Jones really only slightly better than Chipper Jone
s in the outfield?! And is Doug Glanville really a below average fielder? Come
on!!!
Having such an unrealistic rating system detracts so badly from this competitors
product that it can make playing their game a pointless exercise. In this case
it's sort of like starting up an F-14 flight simulator that you discover handle
s more like a Sopwith Camel once you get it off the ground!
A similar list can be developed with any of our competitors products because no
other company spends the time and effort to give you accurate fielding ratings t
he way that Strat-O-Matic does. It would probably be better off if they didn't
bother trying to rate players defensively than to offer a fatally flawed system
like the one you see exposed above.
Perhaps Peter Gammons said it best when in the April 27th, 1997 issue of Basebal
l America he said "Maybe the computer people should watch Roberto Alomar instead
of running programs. Alomar is the best defensive second baseman of the modern
era. He makes the most brilliant, far-ranging and creative plays to his right
of any second baseman. Yet some computer printout says he doesn't get to enough
balls to his right. Who does? Wil Cordero? There never has been a valid way
to evaluate range statistically."
HOW DOES YOUR GAME RATE?
It's a good question. Just how does the game you're currently playing rate thei
r players? You see Strat-O-Matic issues realistic ratings for many more things
besides fielding range. Amongst the many categories that we individually resear
ch and rate are:
* Bunting ability - Jay Bell in one of the best bunters in baseball. If you des
perately needed a sacrifice bunt to be laid down it's hard to think of another p
layer you'd want up at bat instead of Bell. But his role changed in recent year
s and he hasn't been asked to bunt as much. As a result other games rated Bell
as an Average or Poor bunter! That's because they rely solely on statistics whe
n doing their ratings, and they do not account for the fact that Bell is still a
great bunter when he's called upon to do the job. Strat-O-Matic gives Bell it'
s top rating because his ability to bunt hasn't diminished, only the number of t
imes he's asked to bunt has. If you, as manager, want to bunt with Bell more fr
equently than his real life manager did you can, and you'll get very realistic r
esults from doing so with our game.
* Hit and run ability - Many games don't bother rating players for this ability
but it is an important ability that should be rated in all games. Hitting for a
high average does not necessarily make you good at executing a hit and run, so
exactly how do these other games decide who is good at the hit and run and who's
lousy? Strat-O-Matic's rating is based upon detailed research (not just mathem
atical formula) so that you'll see a realistic portrayal of this skill when play
ing our game.
* Baserunning ability - Just having blazing speed doesn't make you a good baseru
nner. Instinct, baseball smarts and major league experience all go a long way t
owards the making of a good baserunner. Other games rate players based upon tra
ditional speed categories such as stolen bases and triples. That's good for gen
eralities, but systems like that break down when you get into specific cases. F
or instance, one of the best baserunners in the game is Paul Molitor. He was ch
osen as such in the August 1996 issue of Baseball America, and only the most cas
ual fan wouldn't realize that Molitor is a great base runner. Yet our competito
rs like to rate Molitor as an average baserunner just because he doesn't hit a t
on of triples or steal 50 bases. Another case where Strat-O-Matic will issue a
superior rating that more accurately defines a player's abilities.
* Throwing arm - Sometimes players with terrible throwing arms can lead the leag
ue in outfield assists. That's because "everybody and their mother" is running
on them, so sooner or later they're bound to get some assists. Of course their
high assist total belies the fact that they hurt their team countless times by n
ot being able to prevent a runner from scoring or advancing the extra base. Str
at-O-Matic takes these factors into account when developing our throwing ratings
.
* Lefty/righty adjustments - Louis Polonia hit .526 vs. left-handed pitching in
19 at-bats during 1996. Some of our competitors don't even bother rating player
s for lefty/righty ability so in their games Polonia will be given some kind of
a "platoon rating" which has no basis in reality and actually makes him a better
hitter against right-handed pitching! Not very realistic. Other competitors g
o awry just as far in the opposite direction and simply rate Polonia to hit .526
against lefties! Now isn't that realistic - to have a player on your bench who
you know is going to hit .526 if your opponent dares bring in a lefty? Of cour
se it's not - no major league manager ever has that kind of advantage (if they d
id you'd never see a left-handed pitcher come in against that team). So what to
do with this situation? Clearly some common sense is in order. What Strat-O-Ma
tic does in cases like this is research the batter's past three seasons and make
an adjustment to his lefty/righty balance based upon the man's actual ability.
Of course this, like all of the other ratings that we do, takes time and effort
. And that's why the only place you'll find a realistic lefty/righty ratings is
in the Strat-O-Matic game. Note: certain players do not have enough history or
current season at-bats
for this adjustment to be properly done. These players appear in a seperate fil
e on the
Strat-O-Matic disk and can be merged into the main group of players with a simpl
e click of the
mouse. It is your decision if you wish to play with these players or not. If y
ou do use them
we recommend that you comply as closely as possible to their actual usage vs. le
fties and
righties. All of these players have insignificant numbers of at-bats or innings
 pitched, typically below 30 at-bats and 25 innings pitched.

* Pull/opposite field hitting. We rate our players on many other factors such a
s groundball/flyball ratio and pull/opposite field hitting. Surprisingly some b
atters differ in their tendency to pull the ball on the ground vs. their tendenc
y to pull the ball in the air. Strat-O-Matic rates these players properly so if
they have a tendency to pull the ball on the ground but drive it in the air the
other way they will be properly represented in our game.
CAN YOU LOOK AT THE GAME MODEL?
What exactly is the model that the game you are playing is based upon? Let's sa
y I told you I designed the greatest baseball board game in the world, but for s
ome reason I didn't want to show it to you. You say, "but how can I play it if
you don't show it to me". So I propose a way to do this. You're the Yankees an
d I'm the Braves. Now you sit in the living room and I'll sit at the kitchen ta
ble. Whenever a batter comes up I'll tell you who's at the plate and then I'll
yell out to you what he did. Perhaps I'll call out "strikeout" or "Double!". W
hatever the case may be, for your team or mine, don't worry about it, I'll tell
you what happened.
Now you're sitting in the living room and it's the bottom of the ninth. I've go
t the tying run on first with two outs. Up steps Ryan Klesko and suddenly, from
the other room, you hear me scream out "There's a long fly ball, it's way back
there, Williams goes back to the wall, he leaps, he's got it! No... it pops ou
t of his glove ... and OVER THE FENCE and the BRAVES WIN, THE BRAVES WIN!!!"
Now maybe you're the most trusting soul on earth. And maybe you believe that th
e board game I developed generated that exact outcome, and you just sit there on
the living room couch and shrug your shoulders and say "okay, let's play again.
" But that's not likely to happen. More likely, you're going to bolt into the
kitchen and demand that I show you just exactly where and how, using my board ga
me, that result could occur. And when you do that, suppose I quickly fold up al
l my charts and cards and say to you "no, I'm the only one allowed to look at th
ese things." What would you think then?
Well, that is exactly what happens with every other computer baseball game on th
e market. They have developed some hidden statistical model. You don't really
know what's going on behind the scenes. Perhaps some batter is ahead of the pac
e of homeruns that he's "supposed to hit." Maybe that statistical model turns o
ff all possibilities of him hitting a homerun. Yet you, not knowing this, go to
the bench and use him when you desperately need a homerun. Is that realistic,
that some player who hit 20 homeruns last year can't slam one out in a given at-
bat because he's ahead of his pace? Of course it's not, but how do you know tha
t kind of silliness is not going on unless you can see the model the game is bas
ed upon? In a computer game that means seeing the source code, something that I
'd venture to guess you're not going to see anytime soon. So with all other com
puter games you're not sitting at the kitchen table -- you're in the other room.
And from where you're sitting you can't see whether or not I'm telling you the
truth. Whether or not I'm "adjusting" the results so that "things work out."
Now at Strat-O-Matic we don't banish you to another room. We invite to come joi
n us at the kitchen table and play the game with us. Our computer game is a fai
thful reproduction of the board game (in fact, you can even use the dice with ou
r computer game, if you'd like)! Come see how your choice of a pinch hitter rea
lly did make a difference. Come experience the pain when your ace reliever blow
s the game that, had you only had a little more confidence in your starter, you
could have won. Find out which fielders really are great and which ones have le
ss range than a dog on a leash! We lay it all out on the table for you so that
you can see it for yourself.
WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT
"I think the beauty of this game is watching the good pitcher going against the
good hitter." Davey Johnson, manager Baltimore Orioles. (Sporting News Interne
t site, August 15th, 1997)
Baseball is all about having fun, about good times and great memories; it's all
about teams and managers and players and coaches and umpires and fans. But these
things are the framework built around that which is the game of baseball. What
baseball is really about, at it's very core, is the battle that plays out every
time a batter steps into the box to face the opposing pitcher. One of these tw
o men is going to get the better of the other. More than anything else that's w
hat the game of baseball comes down to. And, as you would expect, that's exactl
y what Strat-O-Matic comes down to. Every time the Strat-O-Matic dice are rolle
d one man is going to impose his will on the other man - it's just that simple a
nd direct.
When you play a Strat-O-Matic game you are simulating the most exciting head-to-
head battle in sports.
And, importantly, you are simulating all the nuances of it with accurate and det
ailed ratings. Not some watered down version featuring poor or missing ratings.
Not some silly contrivance based solely upon numbers. Not a simplistic model
that doesn't even recognize true lefty/righty ability. Not some "rigged" model
that has already figured out what "should happen next". But a detailed and high
ly researched simulation that brings into play all of the major factors one thin
ks of when watching the real thing.
In Strat-O-Matic the batters and pitchers are mirror images of their real-life c
ounterparts. They hit just like the real thing. They pitch just like the real
thing. And they field just like the real thing. At every point where the decis
ion has to be made, do we take the short cut or do we do the additional work for
the sake of realism, Strat-O-Matic does the right thing. What other game can m
ake that claim?
THE GAME SUMMARY
We have seen that Strat-O-Matic computer baseball is the most statistically accu
rate and most realistic representation of baseball on the market. And in the pr
ocess we have shown how we are the only computer game that allows you access to
the underlying simulation, so that you can examine it for yourself. We are the
only company that takes realism seriously enough to spend the proper amount of t
ime needed to deliver you a realistic rating system. And on top of this we offe
r a state-of-the-art interface running native on 32-bit processors on both the I
BM and Macintosh platforms. We invite you to try our product and see for yourse
lf why for 37 years people have been proud to call themselves "Strat-O-Matic Fan
atics."
In summary, let us submit to you that the true measure of a baseball simulation
might best be summed up with the following test: Does every player in the simul
ation perform statistically like he does in real life and does he have approxima
tely the same value in the simulation that he has in real life? If so then that
truly is a good simulation of baseball, one that generates results that might p
ossibly occur in a real life season. It's a tough standard to stack yourself up
against. You've got to properly rate every player in numerous categories inclu
ding hitting, fielding, baserunning, bunting, hit and run, stealing, throwing, c
lutch ability, etc. You've got to rate every pitcher in many categories includi
ng what he gives up (singles, doubles, triples, home runs, walks, strikeouts, do
uble play grounders, etc.) You've got to rate the stadiums properly for ballpar
k and weather effects. And you can't take any short cuts - each rating must pro
perly describe the real-life ability or you fall short of the standard. Well, a
s you probably realize now, there is only one baseball simulation that even dare
 claim it can measure up to that tough a standard. And, we're proud to say, tha
t game is called "Strat-O-Matic Baseball" - truly the most statistically accurat
e and most realistic representation of baseball on the market.