Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2011 July 31

= July 31 =

2011 FIFA U-20 World Cup on television
Hello. Where exactly is the 2011 FIFA U-20 World Cup on television? (I have Dish Network.) Thanks,  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  22:20, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Have you tried Fox Soccer Channel or Fox Soccer Plus? If you can't find it on television you can watch it online here.  Ryan Vesey  Review me!  22:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I have tried both, and the link goes to a video that says “This match can only be viewed in certain territories. As we cannot confirm that you are within these territories, unfortuneately you will be unable to view our live footage.” Thanks anyway,  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  03:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You can enter your type of service and zip code information in this Dish Network page to access their "Real-Time Program Guide".--108.27.102.61 (talk) 22:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I've tried, it doesn't work.  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  03:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, just a reminder, but this question is still ❌.  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  00:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I changed the question title to no longer be incredibly useless. StuRat (talk) 04:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh...umm...(to be “blunt”) then do you mind to kindly help me with my question?  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  04:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey. This comment needs to be answered. I've waited a full 26 hours (sorry if I sound very blunt). Still can't find the channel.  An  editor since 10.28.2010.  05:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Have you considered that editors simply cannot find the answer to your question? Why don't you swing by yahoo answers and see if someone there can answer your question.  Ryan Vesey  Review me!  05:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, well nobody said anything, so I assumed I was being ignored. As for Yahoo! Answers, it's very unreliable, with answers from “selena gomez doesn't deserve to die” to “f**k off you terrorist c**t” to...well, you get the idea. --Since 10.28.2010 05:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Does this guide give you the answer? Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * All of the games are on espn3.com live (even if they're at the same time). You can also replay games you missed in their entirety. — Michael J 22:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Would 75 home runs be enough?
If I hit 75 homers in a season but struck out every other time at bat, would I be good enough to be the DH for an American League team? Thanks. Conrad Bunger (talk) 08:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's roughly one homer every other game. If your other at-bats were all strikeouts, you wouldn't last a week before you got benched. So the answer to your question is "No." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok that makes sense. But I wouldn't be hitting into double plays and hopefully would be driving in run; and suppose I always required 6 pitches to be struck out and hit my home runs on the 6th pitch. Wouldn't I tire the pitcher out as an added bonus?Conrad Bunger (talk) 18:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You would have to hit your home runs very frequently and early-on, since no one is going to know that you're going to hit 75 homers. If you played 6 games and had 3 homers and 27 strikeouts, unless you had the talent to become a pitcher you would find yourself back in the minors very quickly. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm ... 75 homers and runs, and how many RBI? What is this hypothetical DH's batting average? Above the dreaded Mendoza Line (.200 would require 375 plate appearances at bats)? Clarityfiend (talk) 22:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * To qualify for the batting title, you have to have something like 502 plate appearances (3.1 X 162). With 75 homers and at least 427 strikeouts, we're talking a batting average and/or on-base percentage of .149, although as I've said, you wouldn't be around long enough to get anywhere near those numbers. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The fourth and fifth best DHs of 2011 so far (associatedcontent.com/article/8230935/the_top_5_designated_hitters_in_the.html) drove in 35 and 38 runs in the first half of the season, the latter in 313 at bats! SuperSlugger would have about that many all by his lonesome, without even counting anybody on base at the time. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * How many of them have struck out every time they don't get a hit? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * More to the point: The most strikeouts in history were 223 by Mark Reynolds in 2009. If we take the hypothetical "home run or strike out every time" batter and apply the DH numbers of 38 runs (all homers) to 313 at bats, we get 275 strikeouts by the first of August.  The numbers get worse if any of those RBIs were multi-run homers; that would imply more strikeouts for less home runs.  In any possible assertion, someone who could hypothetically hit 75 homeruns and strike out for every other plate appearence is simply a worthless player; Bugs is correct in indicating such a person would never make it out of his first week in the Majors before being reassigned back down to the minors.  -- Jayron  32  03:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * From a practical standpoint, a batter who strikes out that often is obviously not good at making contact, and the probability of him hitting more than a small handful of homers (or any kind of hit, for that matter) is very low. Even the worst strikeout victims may be kept around because they are productive in other ways: drawing walks, getting base hits, driving in runs. Jim Thome comes to mind immediately. He strikes out a lot, but he also walks a lot because he's a feared hitter. A guy who strikes out all the time is going to be feared only by his own manager. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:31, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, but suppose, in addition to the 75 homers, at every at bat I fouled off so many that the pitcher used 15 pitches?Conrad Bunger (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * This is starting to become a rather absurd hypothetical. How could any of us know how a real-life manager react to such a bizarre hitting pattern?  And as it says up top, "The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events. Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead." &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 19:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, if what you did mostly was to strike out, you wouldn't get anywhere near your predicted 75 homers, because you would be dismissed. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:54, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * To use a more sabermetric approach to answer the question, you have to suppose the hitter would get around 4 plate appearances per game. If he plays 150 games and hits 75 homers, that would give him a batting line of .125/.125/.500. The .500 slugging percentage is not bad, but his OPS would be a mere .625, which is well below average and simply awful for a DH. As a result, he would be a drag on the whole team's offense: it's his abysmal on-base percentage that kills his value. The strikeouts, in a way, are irrelevant; if all his other outs were weak pop-ups, he'd be just as useless, making way too many outs in comparison with his positive contributions. The usual extreme players of this type are known as "three true outcomes" players; the difference is they usually draw enough walks to offset - to some extent - their low batting average. If you take out the walks, you don't have a useful player anymore. --Xuxl (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The original question was "would 75 be enough?" and clearly the answer is NO. And it's not so much the specific season total, it's the rate at which he hits them. 1 every other game is clearly not enough to make him valuable. But if he averages, say, 1 per game (a season total of 162), maybe that would be statistically good enough to justify his presence? Especially if his home runs tended to come in the latter innings and/or with men on base. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your answers. By the way I did not mean to be absurd. My later question involving 15 pitches per at bat was genuinely to learn more-how to gauge the importance of making a pitcher spend 60 pitches per game on a single player. These kind of silly, seemingly aimless, questions, when hashed out, can really advance a person's gestalt of baseball or whatever else one is discussing. I am not trying to turn it into a debate, it was just a follow up question. Also a follow up was how important the advantage of no double plays to a "homer or else strike out" hitter is.Conrad Bunger (talk) 04:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * One of the most important team stats is runs scored. There is a calculation used by the figger filberts (of which I am not one) called "runs created", which is supposed to be an important measure of a player's worth to his team on offense. That's an area that could be explored for this hypothesis. Here's another quandary: If the guy has such good bat control that he can foul off 15 straight pitches, why is he striking out so much? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think you guys are getting too fixated on esoteric measurements of a player's worth. Like IQ tests given to geniuses, they do a poor job for someone with such an improbable skill set. The ultimate goal is to score runs. I doubt very much that a manager would turn up his dainty nose on a player who could deliver that many RBIs. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * An important factor is when he hits them. If they all come in the first inning with no one one base, and he always strikes out in clutch situations, he's not likely to be seen as very useful. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So basically, all the HRs would have to come in the first half of the season for a manager to tolerate his massive amount of strikeouts. Googlemeister (talk) 13:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Identify instrumental
Greetings, I found this file on my computer and have no idea who it's by or what it's called. To my ear, it sounds Metallica-ish, but I can't be sure. I've looked through the instrumentals they've released but no luck so far. Can anyone help me out? Thanks in advance. Hasanclk (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You might want to try and run it through a music ID program, like the freeware program Tunatic. Take a look at our article on the software and see if that might help you. -- McDoob  AU  93  02:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)