Quote:
Originally posted by Kaliix
I tried using the Davis stance last year and after about half the season, I went back to the heel to toe.
The Davis stance can be easier on the body. You are supported well in the stance. You lock in at a consistent height, which is a definite plus. You see the plate from the same position every time.
Here's what I didn't like. You stay in the same position and are having to look a foot and a half across the plate to call the outside corner. The farther back you stand, the less you see of the plate, particularly on the outside corner. The farther back you stand, the less you see of the catchers glove, particularly on the low pitch on the outside corner. When you use the Davis stance, you don't move with the catcher and are much more prone to being hit. Because you are well supported with the arms is the same reason that it is going to hurt bad when you get hit there.
I feel being able to move with the catcher gives me a better look at where he is expecting the pitch. If he is sitting on the outside corner, then I get to sit on the corner with him and use every available piece of information to call the pitch, including where the glove moves on the catch. To me that is better than being back three feet, being screened by the catcher so I don't really see his glove catch the ball and having to look across a foot and a half and three extra feet back to call the corner.
Being right on the corner and being able to see the glove is more important to me than seeing the ball on a plane longer a smidge longer. Three feet works out to about 5% of the distance.
I'd would rather be over the plate and actually see the corner and the glove and be protected by the catchers body. Only my opinion after trying the Davis stance and switching back. Your mileage may vary...
|
I don't plan to argue after this post, for it's been my position that
your position is never altered by anything so mundane as the facts. But....
1. If you really tried the GD and now claim you couldn't see the plate, etc., how do you answer hundreds of posts by umpires who take the opposite point of view?
2. I think that, without actually realizing what you were doing, you provided us the real reason you're sticking with the antiquated, on-its-way-out heel/toe: "I'd rather ... be protected by the catchers [sic] body." We have all seen those umpires who like to hide behind the catcher.
Listen, they still make balloons, you know.
Have a nice summer.