ABS Challenge System Adopted by MLB for 2026

[mvp 78]

22 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I don't see anything I said as being related to that situation.

If all the MLB umps disappear and a replaced willy nilly, there will be problems that you don't forsee just because you have a bone to pick about the k zone that is shown on your tv. 

[moonslav59]

21 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If all the MLB umps disappear and a replaced willy nilly, there will be problems that you don't forsee just because you have a bone to pick about the k zone that is shown on your tv. 

I don't think they will strike over not losing their jobs calling pitches. It's not a reason to call a strike.

I'm not seeing how it matters, since it's unrelated to any possible strike.

I also dont see how an NFL lock out is related to a nonexistent MLB ump stike.

 

[mvp 78]

8 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I don't think they will strike over not losing their jobs calling pitches. It's not a reason to call a strike.

I'm not seeing how it matters, since it's unrelated to any possible strike.

I also dont see how an NFL lock out is related to a nonexistent MLB ump stike.

 

Significant changes to umpiring may need to be approved by the union, so it's not entirely unrelated. I'm not sure Manfred could force it or even wants to. I think they are happy with the AAA challenge system as they use MiLB as a testing ground for their nonsense. Full robo isn't a reasonable expectation anytime soon. 

The NFL lockout is related because you said nobody would care if MLB umps went on strike. 

[moonslav59]

2 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Significant changes to umpiring may need to be approved by the union, so it's not entirely unrelated. I'm not sure Manfred could force it or even wants to. I think they are happy with the AAA challenge system as they use MiLB as a testing ground for their nonsense. Full robo isn't a reasonable expectation anytime soon. 

The NFL lockout is related because you said nobody would care if MLB umps went on strike. 

I said nobody would be on the striking MLB umps side.

When the NFL umps were locked out, it's a different situation.

I do not think the challenge system will force a striuke, since nobody is losing their jobs over it. If they do strike over it, I doubt anybody takes their side. That's different than saying they'd be fine with bozo replacements. (I'm also not sure the replacements could be much worse.)

 

[Kimmi]

I guess I'm in a very small minority, but I am not a fan of MLB instituting the ABS challenge system. 

The randomness of baseball is a very, very beautiful thing.  Don't mess with it.

[moonslav59]

58 minutes ago, Kimmi said:

I guess I'm in a very small minority, but I am not a fan of MLB instituting the ABS challenge system. 

The randomness of baseball is a very, very beautiful thing.  Don't mess with it.

Randomly getting screwed is not something I like about the  game. I don't enjoy the Sox winning on a bad call, either.

"Hey we got screwed, tonight!"

"It's okay: it all evens out over a season."

[mvp 78]

14 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Randomly getting screwed is not something I like about the  game. I don't enjoy the Sox winning on a bad call, either.

"Hey we got screwed, tonight!"

"It's okay: it all evens out over a season."

If MLB took out the live k zone (that isn't real), I think you'd be less upset. 

[moonslav59]

18 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

If MLB took out the live k zone (that isn't real), I think you'd be less upset. 

I doubt it, but it does make it easier to spot inconsistencies.

[drewski6]

22 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Significant changes to umpiring may need to be approved by the union, so it's not entirely unrelated. I'm not sure Manfred could force it or even wants to. I think they are happy with the AAA challenge system as they use MiLB as a testing ground for their nonsense. Full robo isn't a reasonable expectation anytime soon. 

The NFL lockout is related because you said nobody would care if MLB umps went on strike. 

Not what he said.

[mvp 78]

On 9/25/2025 at 8:18 AM, moonslav59 said:

Let 'em. There will never be a strike so unsupported by the public in the history of strikes.

Not what he said? 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

If MLB took out the live k zone (that isn't real), I think you'd be less upset. 

You mean the fake outline rectangle that's the same size and in the same place on my screen no matter how tall or short the batter or if his stance is standing straight or bending at the waist?

[mvp 78]

5 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

You mean the fake outline rectangle that's the same size and in the same place on my screen no matter how tall or short the batter or if his stance is standing straight or bending at the waist?

[drewski6]

26 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Not what he said? 

correct.
what he said,: There will never be a strike so unsupported by the public in the history of strikes.

What you imply he said:  The NFL lockout is related because you said nobody would care if MLB umps went on strike. 

Unsupported could mean disinterest but it more likely means alignment with the other side.

When someone says I dont support your decision, it does not usually mean I dont care about your decision. It usually means I care and your decision is bad.

MLB: Robo umps it is
Umps: We striking
MLB: good, easier to get you outta here
Public: I care about getting it right / wrong more than I care about the umps losing their job to tech.  Im not happy umps lost their jobs, but this happens in many industries.  Change is needed and people who have made their livings off the old way rebel.  I get it , Id fight for my job too but the umps are in the wrong here.

The NFL strike, people (sports fans) cared.  But it went more like this:

NFL: Refs arent getting raises or we arent paying refs as much and refs need to renegotiate
(I forget if it was a lockout or strike but whatever)
Public: These scam refs stink. Just work out a deal, will you

The difference is not whether or not the public cares.  The difference is that in Moons hypothetical, he is saying the public will dismiss the umps grievances. With the NFL the public (at least a large portion) was not arguing against the refs grievances/arguments.  In fact, a lot of voices took their side.


 

[drewski6]

"I do not support your decision" = trying to get someone to rethink or simply clarify/make-known that you do not agree with their decision

It does not mean , I dont care.  In fact, I would argue that the person saying the quote cares.  When a friend told me he was giving up on sobriety and going back to the bottle after struggling with alcoholism and I say I dont support your decision, it does not mean I do not care. Its not quite the opposite, but it almost is.  I do care and thats why I am trying to tell him hes making a bad decision

 

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

If MLB took out the live k zone (that isn't real), I think you'd be less upset. 

I like it, personally, but mainly because it highlights how often major league pitchers can dot the lines.

[Bellhorn04]

13 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

correct.
what he said,: There will never be a strike so unsupported by the public in the history of strikes.

What you imply he said:  The NFL lockout is related because you said nobody would care if MLB umps went on strike. 

Unsupported could mean disinterest but it more likely means alignment with the other side.

When someone says I dont support your decision, it does not usually mean I dont care about your decision. It usually means I care and your decision is bad.

MLB: Robo umps it is
Umps: We striking
MLB: good, easier to get you outta here
Public: I care about getting it right / wrong more than I care about the umps losing their job to tech.  Im not happy umps lost their jobs, but this happens in many industries.  Change is needed and people who have made their livings off the old way rebel.  I get it , Id fight for my job too but the umps are in the wrong here.

The NFL strike, people (sports fans) cared.  But it went more like this:

NFL: Refs arent getting raises or we arent paying refs as much and refs need to renegotiate
(I forget if it was a lockout or strike but whatever)
Public: These scam refs stink. Just work out a deal, will you

The difference is not whether or not the public cares.  The difference is that in Moons hypothetical, he is saying the public will dismiss the umps grievances. With the NFL the public (at least a large portion) was not arguing against the refs grievances/arguments.  In fact, a lot of voices took their side.


 

I'm with MVP.  Nobody wants to see inferior officiating in major league sports.  As soon as people see it in action, all the other issues go out the window.

[drewski6]

3 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm with MVP.  Nobody wants to see inferior officiating in major league sports.  As soon as people see it in action, all the other issues go out the window.

Thats what Moon is saying, not what MVP is saying.

Moon is saying people will care more about getting the call right than umps keeping their jobs, and if umps fight against robo - its a losing battle

MVP: A good parallel is the NFL strike.

I disagree with both (and you), I like when umps make mistakes.  Adds a little RNG into the mix.  Adds a little chance and randomness.  This is why OG donkey kong was so popular back in the day.  Because you could lose based on nothing but bad luck, so you needed both luck and skill to get a really really high score.

But I also dont think the NFL ref saga is a super clean comparable.

I would support the umps and I supported the refs, but for different reasons. I support the umps because I like the randomness and inconsistencies.  I like a little chance sprinkled in.  And Im turned off when people blame the umps/refs, jsut comes off as sour grapes to me and excuse making.

I supported the refs because the NFL is too profit driven.  I mean be over 50% profit driven, but not 100% profit driven. Pay the refs.

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm with MVP.  Nobody wants to see inferior officiating in major league sports.  As soon as people see it in action, all the other issues go out the window.

I'm fine with the AAA challenge system or full robo k zone. I'm not fine with umps going on strike and the public wouldn't be either. I simply gave a real life example of the public showing support to the typically hated NFL referees 10+ years ago. If something similar happened in MLB, we'd see the same fallout IMO. 

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I welcome an entire robo ump system for balls, strikes and especially check-the-check. 

If analytics can somehow establish an official bat angle (for instance 45 degrees) and line in the sand -- let's call it the front of the plate -- that can't be crossed, as measured by the same electronic eyes that measure the strike zone, then the concept of a true check-swing will return to baseball.

I honestly think such a system will eliminate literally half the wrong calls of "he went" from a baseline ump slanted 90 feet away -- and the majors will double the .300 batters overnight.

And offense has always been what fans crave most, and why the MLB has juiced players and baseballs over the decades...

[drewski6]

14 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I'm fine with the AAA challenge system or full robo k zone. I'm not fine with umps going on strike and the public wouldn't be either. I simply gave a real life example of the public showing support to the typically hated NFL referees 10+ years ago. If something similar happened in MLB, we'd see the same fallout IMO. 

Curious: when you say not fine with umps going on strike, are you saying that you would pull your support for robo k zone if it got that far or are you saying that you would disagree with the umps choosing to strike.

[mvp 78]

10 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Curious: when you say not fine with umps going on strike, are you saying that you would pull your support for robo k zone if it got that far or are you saying that you would disagree with the umps choosing to strike.

Umps are fine with AAA system. If they aren't ok with full robo and would strike against it, then no full robo or there would need to be concessions from ownership. I support the union. It's just a hypothetical. My only point is that the public would be more supportive of umpires in the event of a strike/lockout than moon believes. Seemed like a straightforward argument to me. 

[mvp 78]

25 minutes ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

I welcome an entire robo ump system for balls, strikes and especially check-the-check. 

If analytics can somehow establish an official bat angle (for instance 45 degrees) and line in the sand -- let's call it the front of the plate -- that can't be crossed, as measured by the same electronic eyes that measure the strike zone, then the concept of a true check-swing will return to baseball.

I honestly think such a system will eliminate literally half the wrong calls of "he went" from a baseline ump slanted 90 feet away -- and the majors will double the .300 batters overnight.

And offense has always been what fans crave most, and why the MLB has juiced players and baseballs over the decades...

No way does that change the amount of .300 hitters materially. The problem with BA in 2025 is about hitter approach. There are only 7 hitters above .300 in '25. In '17, there were 25 hitters over .300. That's almost a 75% decrease in under 10 years.  

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

21 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

No way does that change the amount of .300 hitters materially. The problem with BA in 2025 is about hitter approach. There are only 7 hitters above .300 in '25. In '17, there were 25 hitters over .300. That's almost a 75% decrease in under 10 years.  

True check swings resulting in ball calls would extend at bats, and since pitchers will no longer get strike calls for making batters flinch, they'll be forced to throw more pitches in the zone.

If that doesn't increase contact rates, it will certainly mean higher pitch counts for pitchers, which could also lead to fatigue and more mistake pitches that big league hitters take downtown.

Plus, higher pitch counts that lead to tired arms also means an increased workload for relievers, whose arms would also wear out quicker. It can have a trickle downtown effect.

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, Bellhorn04 said:

I'm with MVP.  Nobody wants to see inferior officiating in major league sports.  As soon as people see it in action, all the other issues go out the window.

That's a different issue than saying nobody will support the umps for striking over this challenge system.

I don't want replacement umps, either.

[oldtimer]

On 9/26/2025 at 11:01 AM, drewski6 said:

Curious: when you say not fine with umps going on strike, are you saying that you would pull your support for robo k zone if it got that far or are you saying that you would disagree with the umps choosing to strike.

The ABS system is an admission that the technology assisted strike zone is more accurate than the umpires calls and will be used as the authority when a challange is made. I believe going to a full reliance on the automated system now would be the best idea, although MLBB is conservative and has not gone there for 2026.

[SPLENDIDSPLINTER]

On 9/26/2025 at 9:58 AM, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

You mean the fake outline rectangle that's the same size and in the same place on my screen no matter how tall or short the batter or if his stance is standing straight or bending at the waist?

Well, there's still the inside and outside pitches. That doesn't change because of the batter's size.

[oldtimer]

Tonight in game two, thme umpire missed quite a few calls both strikes and misses and ffor both sides. I would argue the misses had an effect on the game. And this ump did a fairly  good job.