The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 16, 2005, 12:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,474
You don't VARY your head height in the GD stance...

However, your head height is significantly higher in the GD stance than it is in the heel-toe, hide behind the catcher stance.

And physics is the wrong term... geometry would be more correct.

Imagine, if you will, heel-toe stance, close to the catcher, nose on the inside edge (unless the catcher wants to be there), eyes at the top of the individual batter's zone (again, unless the catcher wants to be there or hold his glove there). Now think of the angles...

High inside pitch in the zone: there is no angle the pitch is coming straight for your eyes. If you can not flinch, this pitch is easy to judge - up/down, in/out. It is either above or below your eye and left or right of your nose. Simple.

Low inside pitch in the zone: It is still inline with your nose and the edge of the plate. But, now there is a significant "down" angle from horizontal view at your eyes to the ball as it crosses the plate (30-45 degrees?) because you are close to the plate. As an umpire you must now judge the distance from your eyes to that ball. Does that distance place the ball below the zone or still in it? The catcher's method can add clues to assist in your judgement. Additionally, distance judgement requires the use of both eyes - you can't accurately judge distance with one eye. So were both eyes on the ball? Did a bar from your mask partially block your vision? Did the catcher move in front of one of your eyes? Yes, because you are closer to the catcher you are more occluded and protected from the incoming pitch but you are also more likely to have your vision occluded and not be able to see the full flight of the ball. Hence it is more plausible to make incorrect judgements because you got blocked out and did receive the full set of information.

High outside pitch in the zone: pitch is still level with your eyes at the top of the zone. But the decision of in and out of the zone (over the plate or not) requires the same visual acuity as for the down-and-in pitch (20 degree angle?). Both eyes on the ball is still required, perhaps a slightly less significant angle, and the actions of the catcher are often less patent for an outside pitch (mitt swipes across the zone and swings beyond the zone). For the umpire it is just as difficult to judge and perhaps more difficult to sell because the catchers actions don't allow a solid "frame."

Low outside pitch in the zone: double the angles (20 degrees out and 30 degrees down) and the location of the catch is nearly always through or behind the catcher from your visual vantage point - the ball goes out of sight! Way difficult to do a good job here. Dare I say guess? As umpires we can act all kinds of confident and be assured the we are doing the best we can for judging that pitch. But I'm betting that for many of them you feel the decision was an educated guess. And that you may justify your call based upon the catcher's actions rather than the ball's location, which you couldn't discern.

My understanding of the GD Stance is that you are significantly farther back from the plate and you place your head above the zone. Head placement is in the same place every time, looking down into zone and independent of the batter's height. This is how I do it. I feel it offers consistency.

This distance away from the plate changes several things:

The angles for judging distance and ball location are less significant - you are more in-line with the flight of the ball. It is easier to judge location when you are closer to in-line with the flight of the ball - just like the high inside pitch.

The distance also gets you farther away from the catcher. Yes, the catcher doesn't block as much of the area in front of you. Perhaps you will get hit by more wild pitches or foul balls - perhaps fewer, as Tim pointed out, because the ball has more time to expand away from you. Who knows? I was working the GD Stance and took two nasty shots last week - thigh/groin area and left bicepts; both glanced off of the handle end of the bat.

But the catcher doesn't block as much visual area either. You now can see the batter and immediately see whether the ball nicked him or not. You can see his check swings without worrying about the catcher rising up in front your eyes or putting his mitt in your face.

All in all, for me, the stance is far superior. It offers a more consistent view of the pitch and therefore more consistent strike/ball judgements. It also offers a vastly improved view of the other elements of the game. It is the quickest and most significant improvement I have made in my umpiring since I began... in 1980.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 16, 2005, 12:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 555
Re: Kaliix:

Tee,
Your probably right. Not that that means a thing. I can see why umpires like the Davis stance. It just didn't work for me. There are pro's and con's to it, just like there are to everything in life. And that was all I was trying to point out.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tim C
Two points:

Something whicih has no value to the thread first:

I think the percentage of MLB umpires that use the Davis stance is probably equal to the percentage of MLB umires that wear the hockey helmet.

The point being is that both are minorities.

Second point, is that as you move deeper with the Davis stance you must work with a higher head height.

You say physics I say "angle" . . . as you move more deep you, by neccessity, need to work higher to compensate.

Look for my upcoming article on this website about other difficulties I have face when working the Davis Stance.
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old Mon May 16, 2005, 09:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 446
Thumbs up FIRST TIME....

I had a PONY game tonight..used the GD system for the first time tonight. I'm hooked. The closest I came to getting hit tonight was some dirt that came out of the catcher's glove into my mask. I did have one problem, and that was with the shorter players (a couple of the kids were no taller than 4'6"-4'9"). Suggestions?
__________________
I know God would never give me more than I could handle, I just wish he wouldn't trust me so much.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 01:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,772
Re: FIRST TIME....

Quote:
Originally posted by tmp44
I had a PONY game tonight..used the GD system for the first time tonight. I'm hooked. The closest I came to getting hit tonight was some dirt that came out of the catcher's glove into my mask. I did have one problem, and that was with the shorter players (a couple of the kids were no taller than 4'6"-4'9"). Suggestions?
what was the problem? calling the high pitch or the low pitch.

i found that when I first started using the Davis stance, (or I guess its actually a variation that I picked up from watching some of the pros) I had a little problem with calling the high pitch too high.

But after a summer of work, I got it down and now its as consistent as it was when I had my knee stance.

Thanks
David
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 07:23am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 446
Re: Re: FIRST TIME....

Quote:
Originally posted by David B
Quote:
Originally posted by tmp44
I had a PONY game tonight..used the GD system for the first time tonight. I'm hooked. The closest I came to getting hit tonight was some dirt that came out of the catcher's glove into my mask. I did have one problem, and that was with the shorter players (a couple of the kids were no taller than 4'6"-4'9"). Suggestions?
what was the problem? calling the high pitch or the low pitch.

i found that when I first started using the Davis stance, (or I guess its actually a variation that I picked up from watching some of the pros) I had a little problem with calling the high pitch too high.

But after a summer of work, I got it down and now its as consistent as it was when I had my knee stance.

Thanks
David
With the shorter batters, my eye level was already above the strike zone and I just didn't feel comfortable in getting the low pitch (which with these kids would be just off the ground). Maybe after a few more games I'll get used to it?
__________________
I know God would never give me more than I could handle, I just wish he wouldn't trust me so much.
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 08:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 335
had a district game last night, 8-1 in second. Losing catcher would not stay down. I told him he needed to get lower and stay out of my view. He could not adjust. So I did. I thought, how about trying the GD. I got about 3 feet behind catcher, spread my legs (LOL) and gave it a try. It felt weird to be that far back, but the angle was amazing. Tracking the ball seemed easier. I did not see the whole plate, but felt I saw the pitches fine. Need to work with it some more to get a better view of plate, but I liked it. I tried what must of been a version of the GD last year, but I was only 18" to 2' behind catcher. The added distance gave me a new perspective.
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 08:53am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 555
I am trying to understand. I have you and Tee telling me you move your head height up if you move back and I have DTTB saying that your head height should not change.

Now I am confused, which one is it?

Quote:
Originally posted by GarthB
""Assuming you lock in at the same head height each time, backing up will not help you see more of the plate." That is what I was referring to....

Really???

You vary your head height in the Gerry Davis stance.

I did not know that."


Now it appears you're choosing to not understand.

When I said you are not referring to the GD stance I was referring to your comment about keeping your head at the same postion as you back up. In the GD stance, you are further back and your head is higher then in the heel/toe stance. This way, contrary to your first position to Carl, one CAN see the plate better.

I'll take a page from Tee's book here. I'm done with this thread. Read Carl's dissertation at officiating.com or wait for Tee's column.





__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 09:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,729
Simply,

A disagreement.

As I go deeper I move higher . . . it is imparative that you do this or you lose sight of the outside corner.

All I can say is that I have used the stance since 1999. I work pretty high quality of high school baseball in my area and I DO change my head height when I am forced to work deeper. I do not move my head height UNLESS I go deeper (this may last a batter or two, never more).

Tony can intone what he wants . . . I do what is TAUGHT by the Davis clinicians.
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 10:05am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 1,772
Re: Simply,

Quote:
Originally posted by Tim C
A disagreement.

As I go deeper I move higher . . . it is imparative that you do this or you lose sight of the outside corner.

All I can say is that I have used the stance since 1999. I work pretty high quality of high school baseball in my area and I DO change my head height when I am forced to work deeper. I do not move my head height UNLESS I go deeper (this may last a batter or two, never more).

Tony can intone what he wants . . . I do what is TAUGHT by the Davis clinicians.
I agree with Tee. We have few catcher's who really like to crowd the plate, they are almost always close to BI, and I find that with them as I move closer to the plate that my head height goes lower.

That gives the same angle on the high pitch that you have from further back (even if its only a few feet) with your head higher.

And I'm talking very good high school baseball and college guys, not small ball.

Thanks
David
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 17, 2005, 10:18am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 555
Re: Simply,

Okay, that at least makes sense. If you move farther back, you stand upright a little more, thus raising your head height. Thanks Tee.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tim C
A disagreement.

As I go deeper I move higher . . . it is imparative that you do this or you lose sight of the outside corner.

All I can say is that I have used the stance since 1999. I work pretty high quality of high school baseball in my area and I DO change my head height when I am forced to work deeper. I do not move my head height UNLESS I go deeper (this may last a batter or two, never more).

Tony can intone what he wants . . . I do what is TAUGHT by the Davis clinicians.
__________________
Well I am certainly wiser than this man. It is only too likely that neither of us has any knowledge to boast of; but he thinks that he knows something which he does not know, whereas I am quite conscious of my ignorance. At any rate it seems that I am wiser than he is to this small extent, that I do not think that I know what I do not know. ~Socrates
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1