• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Daily GSR - Gold/Silver/Ratio Thread

Tinbox

YOU GET NOTHING! YOU LOSE, GOOD DAY SIR!
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
3,603
Likes
1,839
Guess will not be accepted with out an explanation. Just like third grade math, you got to show your work.
A pitcher can lick his fingers 4 times, giving the batter a walk, then throw 1 pitch for a double play, then another pitch to complete the inning. So potentially 18 pitches in a game.

Edit: It could actually be 9, since you could lick your fingers 8 times, then get a triple play. Edit: It could actually be zero because you could lick your fingers 12 times and then pick off all the players.

Edit: Both of my edit answers can't be correct, because if you lick your fingers with a player on base then they get to advance, so they'd score before they be gotten out.

Nvm: They could lick their fingers 4 times, pick off the guy at first, then lick their fingers 4 times and pick off the guy at first ect all game. So potentially 0 pitches.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
I am referring to MLB rules. As far as batting out of order. Pitches still must be thrown for the batter to be out, in fact if you bat out of order, you are not out unless the at bat is completed and the other team catches it. If you bat out of order and the at bat is not complete, the correct batter will assume the current count with no infraction occuring. So zero is not the answer.

Curm, 27 is not the answer either.
Okay, okay... the answer is still zero (for a single team) for MLB... 1 total for both teams combined. Tinbox was on the right track, but neglected to consider pick-offs of baserunners.

Outs can be recorded for the batter stepping from one batters box to the other while the pitcher is set. Balls can be called for the pitcher going to his mouth or delaying the game with the bases unoccupied.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
I assume that after the second finger lick, the pitcher will be ejected from the game.
Zero is still correct. I don't think there's a requirement to eject he pitcher... and subsequent pitchers could do the same... not to mention other means of recording an out without a pitch.

What I was wrong on was the 1-pitch combined. It's still zero (I forgot about runners advancing/scoring without a pitch).
 

Rusty Shackelford

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
6,120
Likes
4,233
Location
Northern most Southern State
The question was the minimum pitches A PITCHER has to throw in a complete 9 inning game.:p

there is no requirement for a runner to "leadoff" which negates the pick off play. nice try.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
The question was the minimum pitches A PITCHER has to throw in a complete 9 inning game.:p
Well now, that depends on when he enters that 9-inning game... but it's still zero!

Careful with your wording, eh. ;)

But, how about giving us your secret number and explanation now?
 

Rusty Shackelford

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
6,120
Likes
4,233
Location
Northern most Southern State
The answer is 25 pitches.

3 ground ball outs, fly outs in 8 perfect innings, then as the Visiting pitcher, a solo walk off homer run in the bottom of 9. Losing pitcher, poor guy.
 

Rusty Shackelford

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
6,120
Likes
4,233
Location
Northern most Southern State
Wayyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I edited my initial question to included a probability of actually happening to erase the improbably events you bring up ;).
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
Wayyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I edited my initial question to included a probability of actually happening to erase the improbably events you bring up ;).
First of all, changing the rules is bad form. Unusual stuff happens all the time. Ruling it out doesn't make this much of a challenge.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521

Rusty Shackelford

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
6,120
Likes
4,233
Location
Northern most Southern State
First of all, changing the rules is bad form. Unusual stuff happens all the time. Ruling it out doesn't make this much of a challenge.
You sir are correct, but 27 batters switching batters box position with set pitcher 81 times in a row is not unusual, it is intentional and voids the spirit of the game.

and as far as changing the rules???? Obama does it all the time!!
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
You sir are correct, but 27 batters switching batters box position with set pitcher 81 times in a row is not unusual, it is intentional and voids the spirit of the game.

and as far as changing the rules???? Obama does it all the time!!
It only takes one of those uncommon occurrences to undo your 25 pitch minimum. And, BTW, how realistic are 24 one-pitch/one-out plate appearances in one game?

Here we were, scrambling around looking up obscure rules to try to figure out what hidden knowledge or great insight you were about to impart on us. All the while, you were merely proposing a simple math/logic brain-teaser like the "frog in the well" puzzle.

Pishaw! Surely you can do better, trusty Rusty.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
12,275
Likes
6,182
It only takes one of those uncommon occurrences to undo your 25 pitch minimum. And, BTW, how realistic are 24 one-pitch/one-out plate appearances in one game?

Here we were, scrambling around looking up obscure rules to try to figure out what hidden knowledge or great insight you were about to impart on us. All the while, you were merely proposing a simple math/logic brain-teaser like the "frog in the well" puzzle.

Pishaw! Surely you can do better, trusty Rusty.
Give him a break Curm. He's a Reds fan. :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
Well, since Greg Maddox is retired...
I guess it would take that kind of a pitcher, wouldn't it. Maddox didn't rely on blowing it by 'em and racking up record breaking numbers of K's. He was happy enough to let 'em put it in-play, as long as they had to do so on his terms... THE master at throwing the ground-ball-out pitch.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,267
Likes
2,521
You sir are correct, but 27 batters switching batters box position with set pitcher 81 times in a row is not unusual, it is intentional and voids the spirit of the game.

and as far as changing the rules???? Obama does it all the time!!
BTW, you're mistaken on this. The box switch draws an out, not just a strike. It only takes once in an AB.

Oh, and surely (don't call me Shirley) you don't really wish to be compared to... you know WHO! DO you?

Edit: If anyone has a chance of drawing multiple box-switch outs, it'll be this guy... up-and-coming switch-pitcher Pat Venditte (though his either-handed ability prompted a rule change in the Minors already):

Pat Venditte.jpg

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=4145587
 
Last edited:

smooth

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,734
Likes
4,679
Being short term bearish. I think you're right. 70 may still be within grasp. Almost 2 years now with no real strength in the metals. I kicked myself for not trading at 68:1 (because of a 70:1 target) but maybe I can do better at some point?? Could 75 be the new target looking forward? We'll see.
Good luck out there fellows
 

savvydon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
2,235
Likes
1,694
Being short term bearish. I think you're right. 70 may still be within grasp. Almost 2 years now with no real strength in the metals. I kicked myself for not trading at 68:1 (because of a 70:1 target) but maybe I can do better at some point?? Could 75 be the new target looking forward? We'll see.
Good luck out there fellows
I'm not seeing 75. Despite the misery of the past month or two we only made it from about 58 to 62, because gold is getting hammered right there with silver. When the end game (aka bottom) comes I see silver getting a final wash - even so I think 70 is a stretch. Strap in, we still have some road work ahead...
 

Tinbox

YOU GET NOTHING! YOU LOSE, GOOD DAY SIR!
Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Jun 15, 2011
Messages
3,603
Likes
1,839
Gold oil ratio has been cut in nearly half since it topped at around 24 in 2009, down to 12 and change now.
 

Silver Buck

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
2,377
Likes
1,475
Location
Western Shores of Lake Erie
Whelp, finished the year at 61+:1 and didn't hit that magical 16:1 (nor 30:1) 'by the holidays', again.

Any bold predictions for this year?

Anyone expecting to do any swapping?
 

andial

use default title
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
10,534
Likes
10,862

Irons

Deep Sixed
Mother Lode
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
25,769
Likes
39,173
Whelp, finished the year at 61+:1 and didn't hit that magical 16:1 (nor 30:1) 'by the holidays', again.

Any bold predictions for this year?

Anyone expecting to do any swapping?
It will go to the other end of the chart now so high 70's to mid 80's to one.

View attachment 53011
 

smooth

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,734
Likes
4,679

Zed

Size doesn't count!
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
11,655
Likes
9,060
Location
Springfield
On my chart the monthy GSR looks overbought and in similar condition to the other points at which the balance started to favor silver... this should mean its very close to rally time.