The Official Forum - View Single Post

bkbjones · #47 (**permalink**) Thu Oct 27, 2005, 11:05am

Quote:

Originally posted by David Emerling

Quote:

Originally posted by RPatrino
I appreciate your "scientific" approach David, but the real "evidence" really should come from those who actually use the system. I have used the GD for about the same amount of time as Tee, with very similar results. I have been hit only ONCE on the hands or arms since 2000. I am still hit occasionally on the mask or chest protector, which happens regardless of stance or technique used.

Before GD I used any number of stances and was hit on the arms or hands, on average, once a week or more. I guess you would say I was "in the cone". I say the "cone of pain". Even Bill Nye the Science Guy would agree that was compelling evidence.

My evidence suggest that I never again return to the cone of pain, thanks for your input, but I'm staying GD.

BP

My point was never to emphasize that the GD stance should not be used because of the enhanced chances of getting hit. In fact, I think the huge gain in accuracy of calling balls & strikes far outweighs the miniscule increase in the chance of being hit due to the more erect posture associated with the GD stance.

I experimented with the GD stance only once and liked it very much. What I *didn't* like was some of the comments I could heard from fans noticing and murmuring about how far back I was standing. It was a very low level game - just a bunch of 13-yr-olds so I really didn't care.

I didn't get hit once while in the GD stance. But, on the other hand, I don't ever recall getting whacked at all that season. So I'm not sure what kind of database that provides.

Listen, I don't want to argue the point. It's really rather pointless, in my opinion. But it just seems that whenever discussions of the GD stance come up, somebody always seems to mention that it's "safer" or "more dangerous" or something along these lines. I was just pointing out that a more erect stance is going to provide a larger target and subtend a larger "cone" thus, statistically, increasing you odds of getting hit. Whether those statistics play out for any one individual is hard to say or predict.

If you flipped a coin 10 times and it came up heads each time would you conclude that you have a 2-headed coin?

David Emerling
Memphis, TN

No, but I would say that if it's a 13-year-old game and you're most worried about what the fans are saying, the only cone you should be subtending is an ice cream cone from a truck with tinny speakers while wearing a funky hat.