Douglas Whaley. Law professor, gay rights advocate, atheist, heart transplant recipient, actor, director, novelist, playwright, bridge player, husband, father, cat owner, storyteller. Much humor and, since the writer is a teacher, advice on many topics.
It’s Time for Baseball’s Robot Umpire To Call All the Balls and Strikes
Yes, robots are taking over more and more jobs these days,
and we—the luddites—mightily protest in vain.
But there are some tasks, important to us, where robots will do things
much better than humans ever can, and for such tasks we should welcome the
efficiency these mechanical helpers bring.
Using AI to replace the job of baseball’s home plate umpire
to call pitches as balls or strikes is an obvious example.
I am a major baseball fan, watching close to a hundred games
a year (almost all of them being my beloved Cubbies—see Related Posts below).In recent years most televised games show us
a graphic of the strike zone and whether, according to the computer, the pitched
ball actually touched it or not.The real
life umpire cannot see this graphic and continues to call balls and strikes in
the old fashioned way: giving his best estimate of whether the ball was
actually in the strike zone.Professional umpires are trained well and they are pretty good at
getting it right.But the AI umpire is always
perfect at getting it right and its embarrassing how often the umpire is simply
wrong (sometimes dramatically so).I
estimate the live umpire gets the call wrong about 12% of the time.In baseball that’s a lot of mistaken calls.
When an umpire is wrong you can bet that he hears about it
after the game from many sources: the offended baseball player (whether batter
or pitcher), disgusted fans, his employer, friends, family, or, worst of all,
watching a video of the game and actually seeing how bad his call was.
There has been a movement underway, which I’m joining now,
to have AI umpires call all balls and strikes.Just recently one of the minor leagues has been experimenting with doing
this and the results are positive.See http://www.wfmj.com/story/40774097/robot-umpires-debut-in-independent-atlantic-league.This experiment determined that the artificial
umpire called more strikes in the upper part of the strike zone than human
umpires are comfortable doing, and that the strike zone seems bigger to
everyone playing because if even a sliver of the ball touches it a strike call
results.In this experiment the human
umpire was wearing an ear piece and instantly heard the robotic decision.It was his duty to then announce the result
aloud.The human umpire can only
overrule the AI umpire if something strange happened like the ball was pitched
badly, bounced in front of the plate, and then crossed the strike zone (being
called a strike by the robot umpire when the rule books would not do that).
The strike zone varies with each batter based on his
height.As to height the zone goes from
the middle of his knees up to most of his belly (“nipples to knees” is the joking
way of explaining this).The professional
players are all measured for this to ensure accuracy, or, if no measurement has yet been
taken of a new player, the standard strike zone for a man of his height is substituted.The size of home plate is the horizontal
measurement of the strike zone (see below).
The AI umpire makes a 3D measurement of the plate and the
height of the player to create the artificial strike zone.If the ball touches any portion of the strike
zone so created a strike is called.On
television most broadcasts only show a rectangle of the strike zone viewed from
the front and an image of a circle where the ball went as it was pitched into
or out of the rectangle.Normally this
rectangle is added to the screen off to the side of the actual players at home
plate, but on some (bad) broadcasts the rectangle is put right over home plate
where it is harder to see because the image is obscured by the three players in
the picture.The best use of the AI
umpire in on ESPN where the entire 3D image is often shown.
When I began asking very experienced baseball viewers
whether they favored taking the human umpire out of the strike zone decision in
favor of the AI calling the game, I received diverse answers.Those who chose to stay with the current
system had explanations like “it’s always been part of the game, and players
have to get used to the vagaries of the different umpires.”“Wouldn’t that favor older players who
happened to be good at this over newer ones or those who are bad at remembering
whether particular umpires have large or small strike zones?” I asked.“Yes, but that’s always the case: some
players are just better at understanding the game than others.”
Hmm.After the experiment
with the AI umpire in a minor league game mentioned in the link above most of
the players, both pitchers and batters, liked the use of the AI umpire over a
real one and said they wished it was done all the time.
I’m with them.When I’m
watching a game and I see bad calls being made that critically affect the
outcome of the game I’m annoyed that the obvious fix isn’t implemented now.Baseball games should be decided by what
actually happened and not by merely guessing.
. Since I graduated from law school in 1968 I've always had some sort of legal practice which varied from extensive in the early years, to these days when I'm retired and mostly just doing consulting work for a hefty fee. In this period I've written a lot of letters threatening legal action on behalf of my client (or, on the rare occasion, myself—see Related Posts below). In the classroom I've passed on my advice on how to create an effective letter, and now I offer it to you, blog reader. A letter threatening legal action almost always discombobulates a recipient who is not him/herself routinely involved in legal actions. I tell my law students that in their coming practices they will often receive such letters (or nowadays even emails), and they will calmly evaluate what to do about them depending on the legal issues involved and the wisdom of litigating them. But the non-legal recipient of such a letter i
Having a dispute with a creditor? One way to win it (and fast) is to send that creditor a "payment in full" check [hereafter "PIFC"] and end it things in your favor. How does this bit of legal magic work? Read on. It's always been the law that if you and I have an existing contract, either one of us can propose a modification to that contract, and if we both agree, the contract changes accordingly. There are technical names for this. Say, for instance, that I owe you an undisputed amount of $500. I send you an email and ask if you would take my horse Dobbins is settlement of the debt, and you reply in the affirmative. My offer of something different than what was originally owed (the horse for the money) is called the offer of an "accord." Your agreement to take Dobbins is the "satisfaction." Thus an "accord and satisfaction" in our law is nothing more than a fancy name for a modification agreement. I no longer owe you $500; I
. For the last few years I have been crossing the country giving lectures on what I now call the "Golden Rule of Mortgage Foreclosures," which is that such foreclosures cannot proceed without production of the original promissory note signed at the closing. A symposium at Western State University Law School last year at which I gave the keynote address turned into a law review article on point, and that law review article is reprinted below in full. The correct citation for the printed version is 39 W. St. U. L. Rev. 313 (2012). As subsequent developments occur I will add them in red to the original article below. Any corrections or suggestions may be sent to me at email@example.com . ------------------------------------- Mortgage Foreclosures, Promissory Notes, and the Uniform Commercial Code By Douglas J. Whaley * Introduction As is true of many things in life the Uniform Comme