Kccitystar

September 18, 2006: The 4+1 Game The Dodgers and Padres entered mid-September of 2006 locked in a heated battle for control of the National League West. San Diego had held the edge for much of the stretch run, while Los Angeles kept finding ways to hang around. By the time they met at Dodger Stadium on September 18, 2006, the Padres were clinging to a 1.5 game lead in the division. You had 55,000 settled in for what they expected would be another tense contest with playoff implications hanging in the balance. For most of the night, it seemed like the Padres would bury the Dodgers. Jake Peavy gave San Diego a strong start, and by the middle innings the Padres held a comfortable 9–5 lead. With Trevor Hoffman, the all-time saves leader, waiting in the bullpen, Los Angeles fans began filing toward the exits. Then came one of the most surreal half-innings in baseball history. With one out in the bottom of the ninth, Jeff Kent stepped in against Jon Adkins. He launched a solo home run to left. The crowd roared, but the Padres still led 9–6. Next came J.D. Drew, who crushed another blast to right. Now it was 9–7. Excitement grew, but a lot of folks assumed it was a last gasp. But it wasn’t. Russell Martin came up and drilled the very next pitch over the wall in left. Three consecutive home runs! Dodger Stadium's shaking at this point. Padres manager Bruce Bochy brought in Trevor Hoffman to stop the bleeding. On his second pitch, Marlon Anderson reached out and lifted a fly ball that just cleared the fence in right. Four batters, four home runs, game tied 9–9. In the span of just seven pitches, the Dodgers had pulled off the unthinkable. Vin Scully, calling the game on television, simply said: “Believe it or not, four consecutive home runs, and the Dodgers have tied it up again!” Fans who had already left the ballpark scrambled back inside to witness the madness. The Padres recovered briefly in the top of the 10th, scratching across a run to retake a 10–9 lead. But destiny wasn’t finished with Los Angeles. In the bottom half, with one on and one out, Nomar Garciaparra stepped to the plate. Already with a homer earlier in the game, Garciaparra drilled a towering drive deep into the left-field pavilion. Walkoff. Dodgers win 11–10. The final line: 5 HRs in two innings, capped by a walk-off, in a game critical to the NL West race that season. The victory became a turning point for the Dodgers’ playoff push. They ultimately settled for the Wild Card, but the comeback embodied the spirit of that 2006 Dodger team. For the fans, it became something of a touchstone of Dodger lore, remembered simply as the “4+1 Game.”

I refuse

It didn't take me 6 months into a new season to put 2 and 2 together like Sherman did. I made this analysis right after the World Series ended: https://www.mvpmods.com/forums/topic/67121-official-yankee-fan-thread/page/30/#findComment-712165 The Yankees have been stuck in the same time loop for years: pounding bad pitching in the spring, slump through the summer, and then scrape into October hoping for magic. It’s baked into their DNA now, so they will favor power over precision, processes over feel. When the weather heats up and playoff-caliber arms show up, their lack of situational sharpness gets exposed. Good teams grind wins by executing the little things, like hitting behind runners, taking the extra base, throwing to the right bag, etc. while the Yankees’ obsession with “lanes” and rigid matchups turns the lineup into a roulette wheel, killing the human aspect of baseball, the rhythm and routine, in the months when it matters most. By August, their hitters are still ‘finding it’ instead of refining it, entering October with spring-training chemistry. That’s how you end up in the postseason with no feel for counts, no timing window locked in, and nothing but over-swings, bad pitch recognition, and weak contact to show for it. Their miltaristic-like process may have gotten them there, but that’s exactly the problem and it's frustrating as a fan to see: They constantly measure any season’s success by the fact that their process worked, not whether the result did. So in their eyes, why bother making changes?

Are you playing it with a refresh rate above 60hz? I think a lot of games from that era don't play nice with higher refresh rates or newer graphics cards. I've had a freesync monitor at 180hz with a newer AMD card and it's always giving me framerate problems and some glitching here and there.

1. sponsors on the uniforms 2. new uniforms every year 3. retail on-field uniforms are unaffordable 4. getting into the sport is unaffordable (go ask a dad how much a BBCOR certified bat costs or how much a Rawlings Heart of The Hide glove costs) 5. The Sacramento A's 6. The Rays somehow not working out a long term solution with staying in Tampa or even repairing Tropicana Field 7. Rob Manfred still remaining comissioner 8. The impending lockout I can go on and on

the NBA2k11ModTool should open it with no problem, but the issue is that it uses a really old version of JDK (java) that is no longer supported

I don't own 2K11, are the textures similar?

My understanding is that the resolution changer mod only changes the internal resolution of the game but does not make the game widescreen. The UI elements including portraits and player models are still scaled to 4:3 resolution still.

You're right, maybe it's in there

It's programmed into the game and can't be changed

is this the unclemo?

That stuff is unfortunately hardcoded

Ubuntu images are easy to grab (yay for open source) but a Windows 7 iso may be tricky these days.

No that's what I meant, virtualize Ubuntu instead and give that a shot, or Windows 7 instead of XP SP3

You would have better luck running MVP 2005 on Ubuntu using WINE than a virtualized instance of Windows XP, I feel.

Vibration doesn't work because the 360 controller, or even most modern controllers now use a completely different type of input (XInput) from what existed at the time on PC (DInput). The controller being able to work itself is a complete hack of the controller.cfg file.

I should double check my copy. I haven't played MVP in years, because I think my Disc 2 is cracked. Or maybe it was Disc 1.....

The stuff I need to catch up on while I'm offline, holy hell. Glad to see you back on Y4L. Just try to take things easy at least for this season!

I think the glasses were intended for Eric Gagne on the stock roster

I don't know what game this is referring to since you posted this on the mvpmods.com category

This has gotten flagged as a virus by a handful of members of the community both publicly and in DMs so I will not vouch for this solution in the meantime. From my understanding, basically instead of a cracked executable, this spoofs the SafeDisc driver on Windows 10/11 so MVP can validate the disc check. The game would eventually load and work like it used to on Windows 7 and XP. This solution might work but is not one I'd recommend given that it includes DLLs that might flag your machine's AV for suspicious behavior. Sometimes, it isn't the files themselves that are bad, but the mechanisms the files in the utility uses that fit the profile of a virus or malware that flag your AV as being suspicious. It's why we took Reditor II down. Pretty much, the utility itself was a freemium app from the start, and it was designed with a mechanism that would phone home back to the author's server to validate a key if you had paid for the app. Since that's a vector for potentially trojan horsing a virus or something bad, any AV app flags it as malware now. It was converted into a free app as part of the last update for it, but the mechanism was never removed. The existing crack for MVP is just for the launch copy, stutters and bugs and all, but the longshot solution for a lot of people is to have someone crack the Patch 5 executable and I will hold hope until that day comes.

Un-archived the thread as there is revived interest in the project. Play ball!

It's likely that the licensing agreements are region-specific between Konami, the NPB and the individual teams. Another thing to consider is that expanding the distribution of these games internationally would require Konami to renegotiate or extend their existing licenses to include additional regions. That process can be complex and costly, as it involves securing approvals from various stakeholders. One thing I also realize from following the NPB on and off is that certain teams or leagues might have reservations about releasing their likenesses or branding outside Japan, since they wouldn't have as much control over their brand and there might be differences in market dynamics. For instance, the Central League (CL) teams within NPB are particularly Japan-centric and may not prioritize international engagement, which could influence their stance on global licensing. Unlike the MLB, the NPB teams are owned by companies, so the baseball team is a significant part of their corporate brand and public relations strategy. It's really just a mixed variety of factors (financial, technical and cultural) that keep the game in Japan and southeast asian markets rather than Konami straight up refusing. Now, convincing Konami to leverage their eBaseball Engine (It's basically Unreal Engine 5 with optimizations related to baseball specific things) for companies to license or even use is a different conversation

I'll tell you why Boone is unlikely to be fired every postseason exit, and this is just my hot take: Aaron Boone is just following the organizational philosophy to the letter. The org/analytics team have their processes, their "lanes", and their "systems". The problem and flaw with this philosophy is that these things are way too rigid for baseball, and the organization has shown time and time again that they are not willing to adapt to real-time variables, or as people say, the intangibles. The Yankees’ system is designed to minimize the impact of human intuition and natural player instincts in favor of a process that can be consistently defended by numbers that you can repeat and get the same result every time. The problem is that refusal to account for these real-time variables means that the team is frequently blindsided when situations do not unfold as projected by the data. If you view team decisions and situations through a "process" lens, you can become just as detached from reality as Cashman. The entire view of the organization is that as long as that game decision that you made was driven by the analytics and data that you had, or that we (as the organization) gave you, then the outcome is just the outcome, and not just the result of a "mistake" that you made. It's easier to defend failures as "bad luck" or "outliers", rather than as signals that the process that got you to that result might need a significant overhaul. It's how EVERYONE avoids accountability up and down the organization. Throughout the years seeing the Boone-era Yanks play, my newfound understanding of how heavy-handed the organization's data driven approach was made every baffling Boone decision click for me. A great example is how Boone handles slumping players. A data-driven perspective might show that in the long run, a specific player is expected to rebound based on historical averages and underlying metrics. Even though this can be true, it doesn't look at immediate factors like fatigue, psychological struggles, or adjustments opponents have made that require timely, human intervention. The rigidity to “trust the process” means these nuances are ignored, and decisions that should be flexible become formulaic. All of these things require some level of situational awareness, as they have always been factors that play into the outcome of the games. The worst part about this philosophy is how it allows both Boone and Cashman to deflect blame. When decisions don’t lead to wins, they can be justified by pointing to the data that informed them. This shields Boone from criticism since he’s merely executing a plan based on data, and it insulates the front office by framing failures as outliers or the result of bad luck. This cycle of justifying losses with analytics and variance discourages the organization to look introspectively at what they are doing wrong. They never reach a point where they question whether the overarching strategy is flawed; instead, they simply tweak the process without re-examining its premise. If you look at how the Yankees lost Game 1 of the World Series, following it through as a series of "processes" and "lanes", it looks completely defensible on paper because the data says so/suggests as such. In actual reality it ignored literally all of the game context any manager who still had a feel for the game would have adapted to: Taking Cole out early. This was probably driven by pitch counts and matchup data. On paper, it sounds like the best move, but in doing so, it ignores literally all of the on-field stuff you see as a manager, like the flow of the game. You can see that Cole has momentum. You can see that he isn't tired and that he's locked in on the mound. He says he feels great. The Dodgers aren't hitting him as hard. By being so rigid with processes and not willing to adapt to what you see on the field, you disrupt all of the momentum Cole had all game, and your decision is going to put pressure on the bullpen to perform to get 9 high-leverage outs. Using Cortes, who did not pitch off a mound since September 18, again, driven by the data regarding his good numbers against lefties. It ended up giving the Dodgers the game. It ignored every real-time variable, like the long layoff, the fact that it was a high leverage situation, and the fact that Tim Hill was probably your most effective lefthander in the bullpen throughout the playoffs. Defensive alignments: They're all influenced by data and analytics that tell you where you should stand on the field based on batted ball data and the hitter's tendencies. If you rely solely on that data, you're not taking into account game momentum, or how a team is approaching their at-bats for that situation or for that specific game, or how likely a player's hitting tendencies might not align with aggregated data. Now you have players thinking too much on where they "should" be on the field and not using their situational awareness to respond naturally to a play as it unfolds. The worst part about all of this is that the Yankees would never consider the overall philosophy as systemically not effective. Teams that consistently contend for championships don’t abandon analytics but instead use them as part of a holistic strategy that considers the human side of the game. The Yankees’ unwillingness to adapt to real-time variables or acknowledge that their process might need a fundamental change is why we keep having early exits in the playoffs when we're able to contend. As long as Boone follows the process, his job is safe, and the organization won’t consider these failures as reflective of deeper issues within their strategic approach.

This game is not available in the US. These are the only countries where the game is available: