Since this is such a hot topic in the coach release thread, I decided to start a new one. I agree with the numbers that the chances of scoring with a runner on first with no out is greater than a runner on second with one out, but I believe this is the wrong comparison. You start with the first situation, the second situation is just one possible outcome. Some of the possible outcomes of runner on first, no out (bunt and no bunt) are: 1. Strike/pop/fly out, runner on first one out 2. Throw runner out at second, runner on first one out 3. Double play 4. Runner on second, one out 5. Error or hit, everyone safe. Now, eveyone would rather have #5 happen, but we all know that it's not always going to happen. I believe it is acceptable to bunt if, as a manager, you are willing to give up the chance of having #5 happen to avoid having #3 happen. This can be employed whenever you feel the batter has a good chance of grounding out, including pitchers or slow hitters that tend to hit a lot of ground balls. I know outs are the most precious thing in baseball, and you shouldn't just go throw them away willy nilly. However, if used occasionally, I think the bunt can be a useful offensive weapon. I'm sure if you ran just the pure numbers, you would find the optimal place to put your fielders are the "normal" positions we are all used to, but you could see the Brewers were able to put their fielders in different positions to great extent in certain situations. I think if you study the exact situation and not just general situations throughout history, you can find times to do different things (like play with a shift or bunt a runner over).