http://iscoresports.com/

While scoring and announcing for a game at the same time, I found a few things that would be very helpful:

1) Number of Ks/BBs for the current pitcher. There are constant requests for this information and I find myself either having to keep it on a paper or trying to remember.
2) Defensive Position of the current hitter to the right/left of the plate with his/her jersey number. This would make announcing much easier since we announce the jersey number and position along with the name.
3) In the list of what a batter did in earlier PAs, it would be very nice to give the F9/6-3 kind of description in parens after Flied Out or Grounded out.
4) Need to be able to record Blown Saves/Holds or at the very least have a field where this can be written and which is displayed in the box score.
5) Number of pitches pitched in the box score would be very helpful since managers must adhere to strict rules regarding pitch counts. It doesn't need to be a column- just listed for each pitcher in the free-form section where 2Bs, etc, are listed.
6) We don't use the pitch location and speed section of the screen. It seems to be a real waste of precious real estate on the screen- even on the iPad. It would be VERY nice to have a list of the lineup with maybe an "0-4" or "1-3 2B RBI" kind of thing next to the player's number and name. Or am I missing an easy way to get to this information so we can see quickly who is the hitting star of the game? It would be nice if there was a toggle to switch from Home/Visitor for this information.
7) Some scoring is very awkward and clumsy and the program just doesn't seem to help by disallowing things that just make no sense. (For example: when the batter hits a single and there's a button you can press that says "Advanced by batter". Of course he was advanced by the batter- he IS the batter. Another example: when a hit is recorded and there are buttons still for WP and BP. You can't have a wild pitch on a single. Things like that.) Other things like it being quite happen to record a SB where the runner at first isn't advanced to 2nd.
8) Dropped 3rd Strike- there are situations that I can't seem to get right. When the catcher tags the batter (or the batter gives himself up and walks to the dugout and the ump calls him out with/without a tag and without a play at first) the scoresheet has Kd but no play and the play-by-play description says "Dropped 3rd strike - Thrown out".
9) It would be much more intuitive if swiping the strike button with two strikes would just record a Ks instead of asking. If it's the first or second strike it records a swinging strike. Seems to follow that on the third strike it should do the same.

I guess that's about all. iScore is a great application and I'm looking forward to the next release. I just wish I had it when I was coaching my boys in Little League. Thanks for listening.

Thanks for the great suggestions. Several of these are already on our enhancement lists. Many are things we will likely start adding when we have "preferences" that will allow people to customize what they see. For example, showing the F9 or 6-3 in the previous PAs maybe not even make sense to some people (we have tried to avoid bringing "paper scorebook thinking" into the main scoring interface as much as possible), but allowing it as a settable preference might be a good way to go. Same with the idea of the pitch location being a "waste of space" --- some people use it religiously to record every pitch. So a preference to turn it off would be the way to go.

We also get asked about #9 a lot (stike 3, then being asked again about it). We need to ask what happened so we can record Dropped 3rd strikes... so while it seems like an extra step, it is really needed. Yes, we could just have one button that says "Strikeout" and not Strikout Looking vs Strikeout Swinging, but this is also a way that people start asking how to record strikes swinging. People sometimes do not realize you can record swinging strikes on every pitch, so this at least gets them thinking about it and asking. (Yes, they can read the documentation or watch the videos to learn this as well, but most people don't.)

Anyway, these are all good ideas as we continue to evolve the product. Thank you.

Thanks for the quick response.

Re: swinging strike 3 - I don't think that anyone swiping strike 3 would need to be asked about it being dropped any more than swiping ball four having to be asked if it was an intentional walk. If they don't know that you can swipe the strike for a swinging strike then it won't be a confusion. IMHO

Documentation? Interesting concept! . Thanks again.

FTMSupport wrote: For example, showing the F9 or 6-3 in the previous PAs maybe not even make sense to some people (we have(we have tried to avoid bringing "paper scorebook thinking" into the main scoring interface as much as possible), but allowing it as a settable preference might be a good way to go. .

The idea of a preference of course is great.. but I have not heard you say before "we have tried to avoid bringing "paper scorebook thinking" into the main scoring interface as much as possible"... I get it in general, but i think the core number recap should be considered in the main scoring app.. Why? avoid the traditional short hand, 6-3 out? the value is it is short and descriptive. It is part of baseball.. It is as core to scoring as anything. you have gone to great lengths to be pure in other areas to meet the MLB definition for stats and treatment. Why shy away from the core concept of number descriptors of past plays. it is part of the rule book. it is part of scoring, it is part of baseball.

In fact I miss it so much in the play by play recap, I type it into notes, number one reason i use notes, to record what will be posted on the scorebook. why? When folks watch the iscorecast (live or replay) they are amazed at how much more descriptive and valuable it is when i type in the notes, F9, or 6-4-3 DP etc. hit through left side, it is hard to see the ball placement on the graphics, and if you look away and are scrolling down the play by play to catch up, you need the 6-4-3 reference points to catch up quickly.

As a fairly experienced user and a fan of the app, and generally one who understands the target market you are trying to satisfy.. I would highly recommend rethinking the shy away from traditional scorebook thinking on this one... We need the experienced and passionate baseball folks to be on board as much as the casual folks.

thanks

Keeping the numbers / scorebook thinking out of the product has not been a mantra the way "score what you see" has been, but there are very few places we actually show the numbers. For the most part, when an english description can be used, we do that. Most of what you describe can be addressed in other ways... for example, the ball placement on the iScorecast can be improved with better animation (the HTML iScorecast does a bit better of a job at this even though the space is limited), the descriptions in the Flash-based iScorecast actually tells which positions / players handled the ball on various plays, etc. The shorthand notations used in paper scorekeeping are done that way so it can be captured on paper fast and in a small space --- we now capture much more information and would like to present it in more readable ways.

That being said, there are a few places we do use the numbers out of necessity or space restriction --- quick plays show the position numbers for quick entry of common plays (people that don't understand the notation don't have to use these), the numbers are shown as you tap the positions that touched the ball on outs, the printable scorecard of course shows the numbers.

We are really trying to simulate a TV broadcast when it comes to showing the details back to people though... you never see on TV "the last three times David Eckstein was at the plate, he hit into a FC6-4 followed by a F9, and then a 5-3". They might say he "reached on fielders choice, flew out to right, and grounded out to third". We do want to provide the detail, but we would like that detail to be clear whenever possible.

That being said, we think preferences is a way that can allow people that want shorthand notations to be displayed to have that without confusing the people that don't know those notations.

Preferences is something we have wanted to add for quite some time now, but there have been too many higher priority items that have not allowed us to spend time on optional items. There have been many requests in the forums where one person says "it would be great to have feature X", then another user responds saying "I don't want feature X, please don't let that effect me". Preferences are a way we can handle these scenarios.

I understand. But currently the "Ground out" that you get with a batter for what occurred his previous PA is just not enough- in english or in scoring-ese. When the scoreboard at MLB game has more than you do, something is wrong--- and there is no one-touch way of getting that information that I've found.

Re: What I see on TV- I'm not sure what broadcasts you're watching. I see, quite often, a one-line scoresheet with EXACTLY "9" or "6-4-3" in the scoring boxes. The casual viewer is confronted with this and, if they want, they can learn to understand what it means. If not- it's just static in the broadcast. At the MLB games they give "official scoring" on the scoreboard as information for newbies that are scoring. It says "F8" or "6-3". Like a baby learning to talk, you have to hear a lot of what you deem as jibberish before you start to understand. But you can't not show the info because some don't know what it means.

At the very least, the description should say "Groundout to shortstop" or "Groundout to SS" and not just ground out. IMHO. Sorry for extending this dialog past it's saturation point.

Personally, I would love to see the shorthand notation on the play-by-play. I'm with OTex in that to me the shorthand is just part of baseball. The casual fan might not know it, but anyone who really follows the game understands it and can mentally parse a lot of information from it.

I respectfully agree w / mepttitt

Preferences would allow this, and once turned on, your interface would show things this way and just be part of the app. So I don't think we are way off base here... just saying making it an option seems preferable in this case.

OhioTex wrote:
The idea of a preference of course is great..

Of course a preference setting makes the debate a mute point.. And is almost always a great compromise If it does not materially impact programing time/ cost....