text: Well, if both of you think there shouldn't be track roads in the baseball fields, no worries. Feel free to delete them, or I will at some point. As Freebeer can attest to I have a tendency to get carried away sometimes and it's likely this is one of those situation. 
  
  As far as the if the area of the sports complex should contain the woods or not, I won't get into a discussion about if the boundaries of things in OSM should be based on actual real world ones or what a county/city GIS place thinks the borders of something are. As there are varying opinions and it always seems to leads to an argument. Except to say OSM does go by the "on the ground rule" and in this case it's a leisure tag for a place where sports take place and in this case baseball isn't taking place in the surrounding woods. So....It's also worth mentioning that there is a clear barrier line around the outside of the sports complex that they seem to have intentionally put to there to delineate what is the sports versus what's not. And if you look closely there seems to be fencing along a lot of it. Even close to or in the woods. So, it would be wrong in IMHO to give map viewers the impression that the woods are part of sports complex when that doesn't seem to be the case. 
  
  Tags, I'm not sure what your talking about. If it's the use of leisure=sports_center + landuse=recreation_ground, I would note that the tag for landuse=recreation_ground says it's meant for "An open green space for general recreation." This place is neither "open" as its got fences and buildings everywhere, nor is it intended for "general" recreation. Since it only contains pitches for a specific sport. Therefore, that tag is wrong IMHO. Especially since the place has the words "sports complex" in it and using two tags to describe the same thing is bad tagging anyway. Per OSM's "One feature, one OSM element" rule. So, if it's between leisure=sports_complex or landuse=recreation_ground, which I think it is, the first one wins. 
  