How MLB’s and T-Mobile’s ABS Challenge System Corrects Strike Calls in Seconds


Baseball can be a game of physics and statistics, so I was surprised during a recent major league game in Seattle when a technical measurement sent the crowd into a tizzy.

In the May 1 matchup, Kansas City Royals pitcher Cole Ragans threw a fastball to hitter Leo Rivas of the Seattle Mariners toward the bottom-left corner of the strike zone. The umpire called a strike, putting Rivas out — until Rivas tapped his helmet twice.

That gesture activated an Automatic Ball-Strike, or ABS, challenge to review the pitch, which must be triggered within seconds of the ball being caught. 

All eyes turned to the big screen to watch an animation of the pitch. It showed, empirically, that the ball did nick the corner of the strike zone, confirming that the umpire had made the correct call, much to the groaning disappointment of the crowd.

ABS is the product of a joint collaboration between Major League Baseball and T-Mobile. The technology got called up to the majors this season after more than 7,000 games of testing in the minor leagues. The system is now used in all 29 MLB stadiums in the US (the Toronto Blue Jays’ ballfield hasn’t deployed ABS because T-Mobile is not licensed to operate in Canada).

A big screen at a baseball stadium showing a replay of a pitch that was challenged.

When an ABS challenge is made, baseball fans see the results on the big screen within seconds.

Jeff Carlson/CNET

Speaking at T-Mobile Park in Seattle before that early May game, John Stanton, owner and chairman of the Seattle Mariners (and founder of VoiceStream Wireless, which became T-Mobile), explained that the challenge system was developed after a new TV technology changed how people experienced the game.

Unlike fans in the stadium relying on umpire calls behind the plate, viewers at home could plainly see whether pitches were balls or strikes, thanks to a visible box for the strike zone on television. 

“It became apparent when there was a bad call. And the umpires were embarrassed by it, and we were in a situation where it undermined some of the credibility of baseball,” Stanton said. “It was important to find a way to fix that.”

How the ABS system calls strikes and balls

Behind the scenes — or rather, surrounding the park — are 12 Hawk-Eye cameras pointed at the pitching mound and home plate to track pitcher handoffs and ball movement. 

Cameras mounted on a pole in a stadium.

Cameras at T-Mobile Field in Seattle capture data about every pitch as part of the Automatic Ball-Strike challenge system.

T-Mobile

They communicate over a private T-Mobile 5G network within the park using Ericsson Dot radios, easily-overlooked finned discs the size of dinner plates mounted in various locations, including each team’s dugout and the press box above home plate. The network uses T-Mobile’s licensed N41 (2.5 GHz) spectrum to minimize interference.

Baseball dugout with a circular radio affixed to the back wall.

The round Ericsson Dot radio in the corner of the Mariners dugout is part of the Automatic Ball-Strike system.

Jeff Carlson/CNET

Also key to the network is low latency, which averages around 2.3 milliseconds, according to a LinkedIn post by T-Mobile’s John Saw, president of technology and chief technology officer.

The ABS system analyzes the pitch, builds an animation of where the ball landed in the strike zone and projects it onto the big screen for the stadium’s fans to see. T-Mobile’s internal goal is a 17-second turnaround from when the player taps their head. Stanton said that, in practice, it happens within 15.4 seconds on average.

Although one could argue that the animation of the pitch crossing the plate and appearing in a zoomed-in representation of the strike zone isn’t technically necessary, it’s surely more compelling for the audience than a simple binary decision over whether it’s a strike. The lead-up to the call can feel as dramatic for the crowd as waiting to see if an outfielder will catch a high fly ball.

Big screen at a stadium during a baseball game showing the Auto Ball Strike system in action.

The ABS system catches pitches that are right on the edge of the strike zone.

Jeff Carlson/CNET

“When there’s a call made, the fans, the umpires and the players all find out at exactly the same time,” said Stanton, creating “that hold‑your‑breath dynamic that’s particularly special.”

MLB maintains a video record of all of the ABS challenges at the MLB Film Room, but fans can head to the league’s official ABS website to dig deeper into how the tech is affecting teams and players this year. Front and center are stats showing that, currently, 53% of calls have been overturned by an ABS challenge at this point in the season. 

While that ostensibly suggests that umpires are missing calls, players are only requesting reviews of the most uncertain situations — and anyone who’s seen an ABS result knows how these pitches often barely nick the edge of the strike zone. 

screenshot of a website showing ABS statistics.

MLB’s Baseball Savant site tracks every ABS challenge made.

MLB/Screenshot by Jeff Carlson/CNET

Is instant data ruining the spirit of the game?

What about baseball purists who see this as an encroachment of technology on a game that relies on the eyes and judgments of players and skilled umpires? I would have expected fans who think ABS is dampening the heart of the game to push back harder against even more Moneyball-style embrace of data over tradition.

T-Mobile’s Amy Azzi, vice president of sponsorships for sports, entertainment and hospitality, said that sentiment was their biggest point of nervousness. But MLB shared statistics with T-Mobile showing that 91% of respondents said ABS improved the game overall, and 76% said it improved the game experience. 

“This stadium just lights up when a call is overturned, or it becomes a rally moment for the crowd,” Azzi said.

Each team gets two ABS challenges during a game. If a challenge is overturned, the team that made it loses one of its challenges. If it’s upheld, the team keeps the challenge and can use it again later. So if a team challenges two calls it thinks were strikes, and the ABS system confirms they were strikes, the team can still make further challenges until they lose them.

ABS is also adding another strategic element to the game. Jerry Dipito, president of baseball operations for the Mariners, said that the team is learning that patience matters. 

“We always value patience and thoughtfulness among our players,” Dipito said, noting that’s even more important today with this technological option. “We just need to flip the switch at the right time on an ABS challenge to affect the outcome of a game.”

Even with precision ABS technology, it still doesn’t remove the human factor. Dipito gave an example of a game against the Minnesota Twins, who he said have been aggressive in using ABS challenges. They’d run out of their challenges in the sixth inning, and when it got to the ninth, Seattle threw two pitches that would have been identified as balls if a challenge were available.

However, Mariners catcher Cal Raleigh framed the pitch as a strike, something he’s historically been very good at, Dipito noted. 

“[Raleigh] effectively flipped the game in our favor because he made it look like a strike,” he said.

Although the Mariners eventually lost the early May game 7-to-6, it was still exciting to watch in person, with five home runs, four ABS calls and a home-team comeback that almost prevailed. At the end of the night, despite all the data and statistics, it’s still the experience that matters.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


I was watching a Ford truck commercial—you know, the kind that airs during Monday Night Football—and the theme was how good solid blue-collar Americans who own small welding businesses and wear plaid flannel shirts always give 100%. Cue Bob Seger, “Like a Rock.”

Oh wait, that was Chevy. But you get the idea.

Anyway, Ford has obviously gone soft. Anyone who follows sports or business figures on social media knows that giving 100% is for losers. Winners give 110% every day. I know this from watching Shark Tank and that Michael Jordan documentary.

This idea is not limited to athletes and self-made billionaires. There’s another group that really likes to say that you need to exert the maximum possible effort, stretching yourself to the limit, every time, all the time.

The 110% mentality in law practice

Lawyers, of course. Especially in the BigLaw world. It’s a standard part of the culture.

Just ask that prominent “law-bro” recruiter who’s always giving cringey advice. Or that firm that billed a bazillion hours on the Twitter lawsuit.

I chalk up this 110% rhetoric mainly to marketing. It’s the image law firms want to sell to their clients, and also to their associates. They want clients to think they go all out, all the time, and they want associates to feel guilty when they don’t bill as many hours as humanly possible.

I’ve always been kind of skeptical about this idea. For starters, I just don’t think it’s realistic to demand maximum effort, 25 billable hours a day, for days on end. Anybody who has worked in a law firm knows this just doesn’t really happen.

I mean, we’re talking about practice. Not a game . . .

But lately I’ve been thinking about a different objection to the “always be grinding” mentality in law firm culture: does it actually result in better performance?

I hypothesize that lawyers and other professionals might actually perform at a higher level if they ditch the 110% approach.

To test this hypothesis, I did an experiment.

My scientific experiment

I went to the park to test how far I could kick a soccer ball. But here’s the key: I did it two ways.

First, I thought about kicking the ball as hard as I possibly could.

Second, I relaxed and thought about kicking the ball hard, but not as hard as I could.

To keep it scientific, I repeated the experiment multiple times. I mean, like at least three times.

I don’t even need to tell you what happened.

Yes, of course, I got more distance with the second approach. Maybe not every single time, but definitely most of the time.

The same experiment works with driving a golf ball off the tee. If you play golf at all, you already know this. When you walk up to the tee box thinking “I’m going to smack the crap out of this ball,” the result is almost always bad. Unless you are John Daly. But I digress.

The point is that the experiment illustrates a principle well known to sports psychologists, the “85 Percent Rule.”

The 85 Percent Rule

Here’s what people who coach elite athletes already know. Let’s say you tell a world-class sprinter to run the 100-meter dash at 85% effort. Often that results in a faster time than trying to run at 100% effort.

Now, of course, this isn’t a highly scientific theory, and you can quibble with the details. But that’s not the point.

The point is that athletes often get better results when they don’t try as hard as they possibly can.

What gives? Why is that?

The theory is that when elite athletes concentrate on exerting the maximum possible effort, they tense up, and their performance suffers. When they think about giving 85%, they relax and perform better.

Could the same principle hold true for lawyers, and other professionals?

Anecdotal evidence and my own personal experience suggest the answer may be yes.

Do the most effective lawyers give 110 percent?

Have you ever watched a lawyer in the courtroom who just seems to be trying too hard? It can be hard to watch. They’re going all out to try to persuade the judge or jury to go their way, but instead they just sound desperate, or overly aggressive.

And don’t get me started on law firms over-working a file.

On the other hand, think about the most persuasive lawyers you have seen in action. Did they seem like they were straining to exert themselves as much as humanly possible? Or did they seem relaxed and confident?

You don’t even have to say anything, I already know what the best lawyers are like.

Like a rock.

______________________

Zach Wolfe (zach@zachwolfelaw.com) is a Texas trial lawyer who handles non-compete and trade secret litigation at Zach Wolfe Law Firm (zachwolfelaw.com). Thomson Reuters has named him a Texas Super Lawyer® for Business Litigation every year since 2020.

These are his opinions, not the opinions of his firm or clients, so don’t cite part of this post against him in an actual case. Every case is different, so don’t rely on this post as legal advice for your case.



Source link