ABS challenge or lack there of for M’s

Donn Beach
Posts: 19642
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: ABS challenge or lack there of for M’s

Post by Donn Beach » Sun Apr 12, 2026 10:48 pm

Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Sun Apr 12, 2026 6:37 pm
Since when does your height determine the strike zone? I don't think Rickey Henderson would agree with that...
Since the implementation of the abs system
2026 Automated System (ABS):
The strike zone is no longer subjective to a crouch or stance changes; it is fixed based on a player's measured standing height in spring training.

Strike Zone Calculation:
The top of the zone is 53.5% of the batter's height, and the bottom is 27%.

"Shrinking" Stance Strategy:
Because the ABS system sets the zone based on a fixed measurement, players can no longer create a lower strike zone by crouching down in the batter's box

User avatar
Sibelius Hindemith
Posts: 15662
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 3:09 am
Location: Seattle

Re: ABS challenge or lack there of for M’s

Post by Sibelius Hindemith » Mon Apr 13, 2026 2:05 am

That's my point, it's not consistent with the traditional understanding of what defines a strike zone. That points to the limitations of the automated system. And if they are going with the 17 inch width that narrows the zone because no ump ever observed that.

Donn Beach
Posts: 19642
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 1:06 am

Re: ABS challenge or lack there of for M’s

Post by Donn Beach » Mon Apr 13, 2026 2:34 am

Sibelius Hindemith wrote:
Mon Apr 13, 2026 2:05 am
That's my point, it's not consistent with the traditional understanding of what defines a strike zone. That points to the limitations of the automated system. And if they are going with the 17 inch width that narrows the zone because no ump ever observed that.
It's not but it seems to be working pretty well, basically you have two different strike zones operating now

Post Reply