Would someone be good enough to describe/define the Gerry Davis stance for me? Several posters say they prefer it, so I want to try it.

I tried the slot but could not get used to it. In that position, I simply cannot see the pitches right, especially on the outside, so I have consistently worked "over the top." That may be because I started with the outside balloon protector, which pretty much dictated the "over the top" position.

Go here. http://childress.officiating.com/ There are two articles about the Gerry Davis stance by Mr. Childress under Working the Plate.

The Stance
 

Your standing approximately 1 to 1.5 arm's lengths behind the catcher. Your feet are planted wider than shoulder width (when I experimented with the stance, I was about 8 inches more than shoulder width on each side). You keep your head straight forward, and put your hands on your knees.

In general, umpires like the stance because it gives you a good "still" view of the zone with nearly zero movement on your part (due to the hands on knees). The stance is quite similar to the one knee, in that you get the same 'look.'

Why my exposure to the Gerry Davis stance was only experimental?

I felt that it changed my strike zone (enough for coaches and players to notice in some cases). I also could not get the outside or low pitches the same; possible due to my neglect to really learn all aspects of the stance. Furthermore, I was hit with a substantial amount of foul balls because I was a greater distance from the catcher. I did a two-week study of the stance, and was hit with more foul balls on my hands/arms that I had in the previous four seasons.

I would NOT suggest this stance, however there are advantages.

Re: The Stance
 

yes, it is because of your neglect to learn about the stance, so your recommendation to not use the stance holds no water at all. im not even sure why you made it in the first place.

Re: The Stance
 

How many games during the two week study? I started using GD system at the end of the HS season in 2004 and did about 100 plate games that summer and fall. That was my evaluation period.

A senior umpire in our association tried it for PART OF AN INNING, said he felt detached from the game and for that reason, he would recommend that it not be used by any umpire in the association.

The Davis System
 

I have used the Davis system for about 3 years now, since being introduced to it by Gerry at a clinic. This is trully a "system" as opposed to just a stance. There are several keys to making it work.

1) You must work the slot in the GD System, there is no option. Besides, who doesn't work the slot anyway? Remember there is a difference between positioning and stances. If you try to use the slot with a balloon you will not see the low or outside pitches. Get rid of the balloon (highly recommended), or work over the top.
2) With the GD System, you must work higher and farther back from the catcher. This attracts the attention both of coaches and observers. They will get used to it.
3) The GD system puts your head at a consistant height from the first pitch to the last, because your arms don't change length during a game!!
4) This system provides a rock solid lock in mechanism for your head. If the hands on knee set works so well on the bases, why not the plate? Plus the fatigue factor is very nearly eliminated, you are consistant from beginning to end.
5) A hint if you have neck pain after the first game or two. Be sure to "drop your seat" as the pitcher is just about to release the ball. This does two things, it prevents that pain and it also brings the eyes up and allows a better look at the pitch. We have enough "pains in the neck" during the game, we don't want to give ourselves one.

Why do the coaches seem to notice your strike zone? Thats simple, because you have such a good view of the zone that you are calling strikes that you missed before.

As for UmpAndy getting hit by foul balls, its not because of being too far back. There are more than likely mechanical reasons, and a good evaluator, partner or clinic instructor will find out and fix it. I have found since using the GD System, I DO NOT GET HIT, period! Probably twice in 4 years. This is probably because I am doing higher level ball, but also because I am not moving around so much.

Sorry for the long post, but this is a subject that is near and dear to my heart.

Bob P.

Re: Re: The Stance
 

I cannot disagree with you there; maybe my neglect to actually learn and study the stance did have an effect on why it did not appeal to me. However, it was not simply the low/outside pitches, it was being hit so much.

Now, the only question I have (and it is a QUESTION, rather than an implication), how come few Major League Umpires use the Gerry Davis stance if it is so beneficial? AGAIN... that's a question, and a serious answer is greatly appreciated.

UmpAndy, don't worry, I'm a gentleman poster. Not like some around here who will jump your butt for asking a question. I understand you are asking a serious question.

First, why don't many MLB umps seem to be switching to the GD? Well, there are a few, and there seems to be a few that switch every season. Remember, these guy are AT the top, they aren't struggling to get there. They have little incentive to change something that has worked very well for them in the past. There are only two stances that MLB umps use, a box or a variant of that, or the scissors. Only two or three are using the knee.

So, for a long answer to a short question, if a MLB ump feels that he needs to "fix" his current plate approach, he may look at the GD. I think once they go GD they don't go back.

B. Patrino

I think as guys keep working with Gerry more of them convert. In the last two years at least Mark Carlson and Doug Eddings have switched, and I'm sure there are more I can't think of.

Thanks!
 

That's all I was looking for, and it does make sense. In other words, why would something that is not universal become universal overnight? Another example of this is the hockey masks (I know everyone hates this one). But, it isn't that the mask is neither good nor bad, but it is that these umpires have never worked with a different mask, and have no reason to change at this point in their career.

Thanks.

I was admiring the plate umpire's perfection of the Gerry Davis system last night in the final game of the NL series. Rock solid lock on every pitch, and he looked so comfortable. Then it dawned on me - it's Gerry Davis...

tee hee.

I was impressed with the solidity of the low strike, especially with Oswald painting the knee (if I can say that).

Davis, Barrett, and Rapuano love to work the knees when they are working the plate.

Ed and Ted work the same stance- and it is not the knee.

mbyron- In my first few years of umpiring I had a lot of problems with pitches near the knees. I switched to the GD and I can say that it has helped my sight of the knees incredibly...I get almost no cr@p about it anymore. I guess my point is that I can attest to your point from experience.

One problem I have seen from many umpires I work with is that they only call strikes where the ball is above the knee. The zone goes to the hollow beneath the knee, and any part of the ball can go through that line. So a ball that can appear to be below the knee can be a strike. Every coach who has seen me work will tell his players that I will call a low strike so be swinging. I guess they are right.