Kansas City Royals1–2

4th in AL CentralWC RANK: 9

Kansas City Royals. Full ABS challenge profile, from turning points to review usage and game-state swings.

Historical Stream

Schedule

Schedule Flow

Last 7D Last 30D Season All

Games

Challenges

Successful

Failed

Success Rate

48.9%

Season Tempo

Challenge Trajectory

Review Profile

Challenge Usage

Early (1-3)

Middle (4-6)

Late (7-9)

Offensive Approach

Team Challenge Map

33%6 CHL

50%2 CHL

50%4 CHL

17%6 CHL

50%2 CHL

38%8 CHL

71%7 CHL

67%9 CHL

Pitch locations challenged (all sides)

Trend Overview

Aggression Profile

Hitter's Eye

Challenge Rhythm Map

Challenge Pulse

Offensive

Defensive

33%

25%

100%

33%

100%

67%

50%

—

50%

Inning Efficiency

Challenge Timing

Challenge Value Matrix

High-Pressure Share

RISP <2 Outs

36%

Avg ELI

47.6

Smart Count Gain

-0.9

Most Productive Window

Bases Loaded • Hitter Ahead across 2 tracked challenges

This team is using more of its challenges before the later or tighter spots arrive.

Highest-Value Spot

Runner On • Hitter Ahead

1 tracked reviews with avg ELI 61.0 and +0.000 RE. This callout follows value and leverage, not pure usage volume.

Pitcher Ahead

Even Count

Hitter Ahead

Full Count

Bases Empty

Runner On

RISP, <2 Outs

RISP, 2 Outs

Bases Loaded

Cells show where this team tends to use challenges. Darker cells indicate higher estimated leverage in this sample.

Challenge Value Matrix

Review Value Summary

Challenge Results

MEDIUM confidence

High-Value Window Share

45%

Low-Value Window Share

41%

Best Review Window

Runner On • Pitcher Ahead

What This Means

This team has been turning a larger share of similar challenge windows into stronger review results.

Model Challenge Rate 52%Model Hold Rate 48%High-Leverage EV Share 45%Best Window EV +0.74%

Decision Windows

Where They Challenge Well Or Poorly

6 positive windows6 negative windows1 neutral windows

Best Challenge Window

Bases Loaded • Even Count

2 reviews tracked, but this window still needs a larger trusted sample before it becomes a hard decision read.

2 challenges+0.63% expected+3.59% realized

Shakiest Challenge Window

Bases Loaded • Hitter Ahead

2 reviews tracked, but this window still needs a larger trusted sample before it becomes a hard decision read.

2 challenges-2.96% expected-7.33% realized

Strong Challenge Windows

Bases Loaded • Even Count

2 challenges · 100% higher-value · 50% lower-value

+2.96%

+0.63% expected+3.59% realized50% challenge50% hold

Runner On • Pitcher Ahead

1 challenges · 100% higher-value · 0% lower-value

+0.98%

+0.74% expected+1.72% realized100% challenge0% hold

Runner On • Even Count

7 challenges · 57% higher-value · 43% lower-value

+0.61%

+0.38% expected+0.99% realized57% challenge43% hold

RISP, <2 Outs • Hitter Ahead

4 challenges · 50% higher-value · 25% lower-value

+0.60%

+0.66% expected+1.26% realized75% challenge25% hold

Riskier Challenge Windows

Bases Loaded • Hitter Ahead

2 challenges · 0% higher-value · 50% lower-value

-4.37%

-2.96% expected-7.33% realized50% challenge50% hold

Bases Empty • Full Count

2 challenges · 0% higher-value · 0% lower-value

-0.66%

+0.45% expected-0.21% realized100% challenge0% hold

Bases Empty • Even Count

6 challenges · 17% higher-value · 33% lower-value

-0.28%

+0.63% expected+0.35% realized67% challenge33% hold

Bases Empty • Hitter Ahead

6 challenges · 33% higher-value · 33% lower-value

-0.19%

+0.37% expected+0.18% realized67% challenge33% hold

Decision Summary

Decision Window Board

Challenge Timing

Leverage / Burn Share

High-Leverage Share7%

Early Burn Share18%

Big Spot Usage36%

Challenge Payoff

-0.9

This club has done its best realized challenge work in bases loaded • hitter ahead.

Officiating History

Umpire Matchup Matrix

Pete Talkington6 Challenges

Overturned

3/6

50%

Jen Pawol5 Challenges

Overturned

1/5

20%

Malachi Moore4 Challenges

Overturned

2/4

50%

Club Review Pattern

ABS Archetype

Team style identity will appear once challenge samples stabilize.

Timing Efficiency

Umpire Matrix

Challenge Style