Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty
Thank you for being there. It's nice to know there is someone out there to rely on for the ultimate point of view.
For the record: I have caught with a Rawlings, an All-Star and an Easton and taken many high velocity blows. I have recently tested the Shock FX by being purposely drilled by college pitchers. I have taken straight blows to the grill with four different buckets and every single one of them offers a less jarring blow than any mask. The Shock FX is the most resilient of them all. Even a decent bucket offers a less jarring blow on straight shots to the face than any mask after years of personal testing. Everyone I have ever known to discuss the subject makes the same attestation. Every single one.
Luckily, I am blessed with an open-mindedness that doesn't cause me to doubt absolutely everything unless there is some $cientific $tudy to prove whatever point that the interested parties want proven. I am neither that naive, nor that gullible, nor that intractable.
Yeah, right, "currently no one knows which is safer," except all of us who have used both extensively for many years and dozens of blows. I'll continue to pretend that I know that a bucket is safer, while I continue to use a mask for umpiring
$cientific $tudy ...  |
Lighten up. His point is simple and apparently accurate...there has been no study to determine which is safer. There are plenty of conclusions based on individual observations and there is much anecdotal evidence.
Some will choose to accept that which is available as Gospel. Some will defer until they see reliable data.
Does anyone really care?