Baseball scoring the Eephus Way

My friend Craig Merrigan alerted me to a funding opportunity on Kickstarter for a new baseball scoring system called the Eephus League of Baseball Minutiae. I paid my money, specified my t-shirt size, and a few days ago the three scorebooks I ordered arrived in a padded envelope.

These are elegant little black books — think Moleskine — with an orange belly band, and a back flap pocket with some little Win/Lose/Night/Day stickers, a handy scoring cheat sheet, and a big set of illustrated instructions. The target market for this scoring system is the novice scorer who wants to learn the venerable shorthand system of keeping track of a baseball game through the cryptic chicken scratches, symbols and abbreviations familiar to true baseball junkies.

I gave the system a whirl and scored a televised game — Red Sox at Cleveland — with a pencil in hand and my iPad set up to display the pitches through MLB 2011 — the one app I would take with me on a desert island.

The Eephus system is very basic but kind of cute. There’s even a space to write down what you had to eat at the game. But there isn’t a whole lot in the detail department, especially for stats geeks like me who obsess about pitch counts and need to be able to note AB-R-H-PO-A-E-2B-3B-HR-SB-Sac-HP-BB-SO and RBIs for each player. The fact the Eephus score card lacked an Error column or even an RBI column will consign the remaining two books to gift status. But the system is a great introduction to scoring, and the form factor is very nice as it will fit into a back pocket very easily.

I remain a fan of C.S. Peterson’s Scoremaster books – big 8×11″ spiral bound notebooks with a lot of room to sprawl and mark up, but need to give the publisher behind the Eephus League a huge thumbs up for making an important part of baseball fan-dom accessible to the tyro in need of a little style to go with their $8 beer. And they write a pretty darn good baseball blog too.

A scorecard, an iPad, the Red Sox, and all is right with the world

Mandatory Life Preservers

Update: Bill died in committee.

The Massachusetts Legislature is considering a bill to make the wearing of lifejackets mandatory at all times for anyone operating, or aboard a boat under 20′ in length. This isn’t the first time the general assembly has taken on the issue – the last a few years back with a Cape legislator, in reaction to the drowning deaths of some kayakers — and it probably won’t be the last.

I’m opposed for practical reasons. First, lifejackets can be cumbersome and interfere with good seamanship, especially for people engaged in more strenuous aquatic activities such as racing small sailboats or rowing a racing scull. I realize Coast Guardsmen wear them as part of their standard operating uniform, but asking the public to obey is going to lead to a phenomenon of false security. Second, the law already makes it mandatory that a PFD be aboard all motorboats, and many yacht clubs enforce the same rule for sailboats in their fleets. Third, wearing a life jacket will not necessarily prevent an on the water tragedy and could lead to a false sense of security when many small boats should remain on their moorings on the beach and not venture out in adverse conditions at all.

The issue is not whether or not life jackets save lives. The issue is whether or not bad sailors know when when to take risks or not. I learned an important lesson covering the waterfront in San Francisco in the early 1980s for Soundings, the national boating newspaper: most drowning victims fished out by the Coast Guard were found with their flies down — e.g. fisherman taking a leak. Would a life jacket have prevented them from falling overboard? No. Would it have kept them above water while their boat sailed away from them?

Some make the analogy between seatbelts or motorcycle helmets. Point taken — motorcycle helmets have long been a contentious issue among bikers — but as the survivor of a nasty car-meets-bicycle accident who survived thanks to a helmet, I may praise their efficacy but would not necessarily support a law requiring their use. There is a libertarian philosophy which says every man for himself and life is full of risks. I don’t need the government telling me how to protect myself unless the lack of that protection causes a public inconvenience or cost.

I wrote my state representative, David Viera, and expressed my opposition to the House Bill 646. He replied and said he opposed it as well.