I have variable stuff turned ON while using my custom datafile and I don't think I have experienced any odd things happening - at least not anything major. Though I would think that it would affect certain datafiles considering how extensively they have been modified. mvp baseball 2005 variable stuff
*Download ○○○ https://cinurl.com/2zMGDB <https://cinurl.com/2zMGDB>* oh i play with kumala datafile final, it's was suggested to turn off variable stuff using that datafile. i found players sometimes make really stupid decisions in fielding or baserunning with variable stuff turned on using that datafile. (of course it could be just me :alright: lol) its variable stuff, which i thought encompassed like a pitchers performance in general...sometimes you get shelled, sometimes your pitchers are ON...you also get typical games too. the pitch speed varies anyway The explanation given in the link above by MarkB is "It means your pitchers can have good days and bad days. If a guy regularly throws 90mph, he'll maybe hit 92mph or 93mph with better control on a good day, or dip to 87mph or 88mph with bad control on a bad day." The need to account for interactions between these variables may not be immediately apparent given that more movement and velocity often lead to a higher quality pitch. However, there are particular instances where certain pitches break that handy rule of thumb. For example, more velocity on breaking balls often comes with a tradeoff in glove side action. A sinker that gains vertical break usually drops in effectiveness, whereas a generic four-seamer that gains vertical break gets an uptick in effectiveness. When developing offerings in the offseason, the ability for an athlete and coach to use Stuff+ to immediately summarize a 79-mph slider with more movement against an 83-mph gyro-esque slider is quite valuable. Perhaps the deviation in stuff+ between the 2 offerings is large enough to settle on one of the offerings with minimal bandwidth allocation towards improving or changing on particular pitch. Chapman is well regarded for having perhaps the most electric arm the world has ever seen. Of the top 10 graded fastballs this season, he owned 8 of them. His 101.5+ mph throws are outrageous outliers, as they are thrown 4 miles per hour harder than 95th percentile four-seam velocity (97.6). In the example above, these hurlers deviate significantly in how they obtain their near league average four-seam fastballs. Bard is among the league leaders in spin and fastball velocity, but suffers from significant inadvertent cut at release. The result is a pitch that is left with rather unremarkable movement characteristics relative to competing fastballs across the league. Fiers has thrown 51% heaters across his 10-year major league career despite averaging 89.4 miles per hour. He obtains significant total movement on his heater, giving him a heater that ranks around league average when he cranks it up into the low 90s. We have moved on from fastballs and are now onto the breaking ball pitch groupings. Cutters, Sliders, and Curveballs are lumped together and evaluated simply off of their ball flight and release characteristics. Thus, the Cutter is highly contextual, with the maximization of stuff not necessarily being the highest priority. That being said, hurlers who are developing or fine tuning a cutter may be curious as to whether or not their pitch plays best when leaning into a Shane Greene sweeper type cutter or sticking with the back spinner that Eovaldi throws. This is where Stuff+ comes in handy, as very slight manipulations can turn a Cutter with a stuff+ of 75 into one that is 100 without it just becoming a slider. So many takeaways. Firstly, genius is gifted and accident. Underdogs make a good case study -they sometimes bloom late or no one made a bet on them. Writing is that way, transitions of seasons. Secondly, productivity is in resting, re-fuelling to recreate. And thirdly- ChatGPT may be able to organzie our thoughts but it will be still not be able to write humanistic touch. All our writings and research resonate even with data with a storytelling and kindness behind it . The current world situation is an example- rationalists, thinkers, political figures, everyone whose got a sight of compassion, a voice and pen to truth- is speaking up in global context. Leaving here a thought- we are all a hit away- may it not be a one hit wonder but a wanderings of wonder realm. Be that last marking in a timeline. I\u2019ve linked to work by organizational psychologist Adam Grant in several recent posts, like this one about director Christopher Nolan\u2019s reading habits, or this one about why it matters what we post on social media after atrocities. I link to Adam\u2019s work regularly because he is the rare combination of very prolific and very interesting. Plus, we have some significant areas of overlapping interest. For instance: how to get better at stuff; how to enjoy stuff; and how to enjoy getting better at stuff. Rather than more links, today I\u2019ve got Adam himself, on the occasion of the publication of his new book, Hidden Potential: The Science of Achieving Greater Things. Our conversation starts below the hot-off-the-presses book cover \uD83D\uDC47. *David Epstein:* I want to start with my favorite story in the book: Evelyn Glennie, the Scottish percussionist who was deemed not pro-musician material by the Royal Academy of Music, which rejected her, less than a decade before she became, as you write, \u201Cthe world\u2019s first full-time percussion soloist,\u201D and then a three-time Grammy winner. Also, she\u2019s \u201Cprofoundly deaf\u201D! The story itself is just great, but it\u2019s also emblematic of several lines of research in the book. For example: early on, you note research that has found that (in a wide range of domains) most prodigies don\u2019t become elite performers, and most elite performers weren\u2019t prodigies. (Since I know my audience, I\u2019ll note here that the studies finding this pattern in sports just keep piling up.) In some areas, like sculpting, \u201Cnot even one [high achiever] was identified as having special abilities by elementary school art teachers.\u201D And yet, we\u2019re obsessed with precocity. And I get it; who doesn\u2019t like a head start, or to see a young person do something amazing? But perhaps that obsession gets in the way of better developmental thinking for more people. Based on your research for this book, can you tell us how we should think about precocity in the larger scheme of developing potential? *Adam Grant:* Many people believe that if you\u2019re not precocious, it\u2019s a sign that you lack potential. But potential is not about where you start \u2014 it\u2019s a matter of how far you\u2019ll travel. And the latest science reveals that we shouldn\u2019t mistake speed for aptitude. Our rate of learning is driven by motivation and opportunity, not just ability. Think of all the late bloomers who weren\u2019t lucky enough to stumble on a passion, or to have a parent, teacher, or coach early on who recognized and developed their hidden potential. This doesn\u2019t mean we should ignore \u201Cgifted\u201D students. We need to think differently about how we nurture their potential too. Empirically, the rate of child prodigies becoming adult geniuses is surprisingly low. I suspect one of the reasons is that they learn to excel at other people\u2019s crafts but not to develop their own. Mastering Mozart\u2019s melodies doesn\u2019t prepare you to write your own original symphonies. Memorizing thousands of digits of pi does little to train your mind to come up with your own Pythagorean theorem. And the easier a new skill comes to you, the less experience you have with facing failure. This is a lesson that chess grandmaster Maurice Ashley drove home for me: the people who struggle early often build the character skills to excel later. We need to start investing in character skills sooner. *DE:* One more question from the Evelyn Glennie section. Because Glennie is deaf, she had to find nontraditional ways to learn, like using different parts of her body to feel vibrations that correspond to different pitches. She and her teacher were constantly trying different ways to do that, and different ways to do everything, really. As you write: \u201CContinually varying the task and raising the bar made learning a joy.\u201D I\u2019ve long been fascinated by this issue of variable practice. Mixing things up constantly might seem counterintuitive, but it turns out to be better for learning. But I had never heard the term \u201Cboreout\u201D that you use, which is apparently an actual term in psychology. You note that \u201Cburnout\u201D is the emotional exhaustion from being overloaded, whereas boreout is the \u201Cemotional deadening you feel when you\u2019re understimulated.\u201D When Glennie is getting bored, she\u2019ll start bouncing between instruments. \u201CThere is absolutely no routine,\u201D she told you. Do you think, even for people who might be spending most of the day in front of a computer, that there are ways to incorporate some of the benefits of variable practice? *AG:* As someone who spends most of the day in front of a computer, I hope so! Time management fads haven\u2019t seemed to do much good, but I think we can all improve at timing management. You can try varying the order of your tasks. If you have a task that\u2019s boring but important, you don\u2019t want to do it right after your favorite project. In our research, Jihae Shin and I found that this sequence can hurt your performance in the dull task. It creates a contrast effect: when it follows a fascinating task, the dreaded task becomes even more excruciating. Goodbye flow, hello boreout. You\u2019re better off scheduling the dull task after a moderately interesting one, which can give a little energy boost. *DE:* Ok, I can\u2019t get away from the Evelyn Glennie chapter. I\u2019m looking at that section right this second \u2014 while thinking about blazing a trail of development that avoids both burnout and boreout \u2014 and the book Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother just sprang to mind. 4a15465005 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nikola-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/nikola-discuss/38a4ddfc-d02d-4ba6-87ef-af11aa1e7555n%40googlegroups.com.
