ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
I prefer the suicide steal. You'd better have that one figured out with your batter ahead of time, or you might end up with a face full of bat.
Or a interference with the catcher call.
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
I prefer the suicide steal. You'd better have that one figured out with your batter ahead of time, or you might end up with a face full of bat.
The great Yogi Berra said that baseball is 90% mental and the other half is physical.ORIGINAL: JocMeister
Haha, I really don´t understand half of this! [:D]
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
I love baseball but I don't understand half of it.
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
I prefer the suicide steal. You'd better have that one figured out with your batter ahead of time, or you might end up with a face full of bat.
Or a interference with the catcher call.
I thought the base runner had to avoid the fielder? Dunno. Remember lots of World Series controversy is all.ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
I prefer the suicide steal. You'd better have that one figured out with your batter ahead of time, or you might end up with a face full of bat.
Or a interference with the catcher call.
Only if you collide on purpose... the onus is on the catcher nowadays anyway.
ORIGINAL: witpqs
I thought the base runner had to avoid the fielder? Dunno. Remember lots of World Series controversy is all.ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
Or a interference with the catcher call.
Only if you collide on purpose... the onus is on the catcher nowadays anyway.
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: witpqs
I thought the base runner had to avoid the fielder? Dunno. Remember lots of World Series controversy is all.ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
Only if you collide on purpose... the onus is on the catcher nowadays anyway.
The catcher is now obligated to provide a free path to the plate, unless moving to catch the ball (supposedly thrown in from the field) takes him into the path of the runner.
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: witpqs
I thought the base runner had to avoid the fielder? Dunno. Remember lots of World Series controversy is all.
The catcher is now obligated to provide a free path to the plate, unless moving to catch the ball (supposedly thrown in from the field) takes him into the path of the runner.
My point was on the hitter interfering with the catcher's ability to get to the incoming runner.
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
Ah. I guess I should have specified whether left-handed or right-handed hitter.
I've actually considered doing it against some of the pitchers in my league. Almost everybody throws from the windup in certain situations with a runner on third, and my team is about 75% left-handed or switch hitters, including myself (gotta love Japanese baseball players). We don't use signals at all, but I would definitely want one for this situation. I really don't want a face full of bat.
ORIGINAL: traskott
Good AAR, been reading it for 2 days and it's very interesting!. Good luck in Dacca
ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
Ah. I guess I should have specified whether left-handed or right-handed hitter.
I've actually considered doing it against some of the pitchers in my league. Almost everybody throws from the windup in certain situations with a runner on third, and my team is about 75% left-handed or switch hitters, including myself (gotta love Japanese baseball players). We don't use signals at all, but I would definitely want one for this situation. I really don't want a face full of bat.
As only about 10% of humans are left-handed many/most who show up for baseball are steered into pitching if they have an interest. And as I'm an AL guy they don't bat, so I see relatively fewer left-handed hitters than you do. I've never looked at stats on switch-hitting between the leagues.
ORIGINAL: poodlebrain
The north will become a tar baby for the Japanese when you are successful at Dacca, and pose a threat to Chittagong. A fighting withdrawal without secure supply lines won't be much fun.
You can try and suck more of his forces north as you try to withdraw from Ledo.
Ground combat at Ledo (65,38)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 38247 troops, 489 guns, 192 vehicles, Assault Value = 839
Defending force 11712 troops, 78 guns, 41 vehicles, Assault Value = 221
Japanese adjusted assault: 408
Allied adjusted defense: 65
Japanese assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 0)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Ledo !!!
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
491 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
5637 casualties reported
Squads: 211 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 232 destroyed, 17 disabled
Engineers: 30 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 28 (28 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 41 (40 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 9
Units destroyed 3