 If you take a look at the formulas for batting average and on-base percentage, we can see that the formula for batting average is actually contained within the OVP formula. What this means is that the vast majority of the time a player's on-base percentage will be higher than their batting average. Because if you cancel out batting average, then the walks and the times hit by a pitch will also cancel each other out, and so we are left with sacrifice flies. So we could have a higher batting average than on-base percentage, but only if there was a high number of sacrifice flies, or at least in comparison to the walks and times hit by a pitch. This has actually happened a few times. One case was in 1982 when a player named Phil Necro did it. Necro was a pitcher, so he didn't play every day, but in the games he did, he had 87 at bats, 17 hits, one of which was actually a home run. He never walked and he never was hit by a pitch, but the key stat here, though, was as we said a sacrifice fly. It was actually only one sacrifice fly the whole season, but in comparison to zero times he got walked or got hit by a pitch, it was enough. So for his average, 17 divided by 87 gives us 195 batting average, and for his OVP, 17 divided by 88 obviously gives us a lower number, 193. And so as counterintuitive as it might seem, we can in fact have a player with a higher batting average than on-base percentage, and sacrifice flies in comparison to the walks and times hit by a pitch are really the key here. That might make a good trivia question for someone. Thanks.