HSM...sorry, I've got to ask ?

[bluehair]

I didn't want to hijack Tee's newest HSM post, but I did have a related question:

Originally posted by Tim C
BTW -- All four suppliers I talked to thought it was funny as heck that umpires rave about the "extended vision" of the mask.

Tee, What did the four suppliers think was funny about "extended vision" perception? Do they consider this a myth or insignificant (or something else)?

[LDUB]

The extended vision to the sides does nothing to aid an umpire. In my mask, I can see both of the base coaches and the pitcher at the same time. What else do I need to see?

Nick and others have stated many times that better peripheral vision is one of the reasons a helmet is superior to a mask. I'm not denying that the helmets give you better peripheral vision. But the truth is there is nothing over there that one needs to see.

[Tim C]

All four suppliers made the comment that the extended vision is silly since an umpire can see everything he needs to see with a normal mask. The "excuse" of "better vision" commonly means that the umpire will no longer remove the mask (helmet) as has been the rule for decades (See Gary Cederstrom) when making calls other than balls and strikes.

The biggest selling point so far has been to umpires that work in a very confinded space where a foul ball can strike an overhead or near placed screen and send that ball back quickly and hit the umpire.

I am going to reserve personal comment on the vision issue until I do my "six game" tryout next spring.

But I will add the following:

Vic Braden is a leading tennis instructor. Vic has done research that shows non-professional tennis players play their best when:

1) The are trying out new equipment or,
2) When they are playing after a long layoff.

The reasoning is that players have no preconcieved idea of "playing well" so they are more relaxed and free with the tennis swing.

Wearing a helmet is much like this. On first blush, when you wear it the first time, you have a "different" view (notice no value judgment as to if the view is "better" or not) and you notice it. As time wears on the helmet wearing umpire accepts this as a value.

I am beginng to believe, not unlike what Nick Rego has posted, that we will all be wearing helmets in the future.

The difference is, as I see it, that it will be a forced change by lack of masks being available rather than an issue of either safety or added vision.

Another important note is that Leter's Upstate now has available a new helmet for 2006, made by All-Star, that will retail between $60 and $70 which is the helmet that many umpires will move to at change time.

Tee

[Edited by Tim C on Nov 23rd, 2005 at 02:19 PM]

[bluehair]

I can appreciate the recognition that "new" can distort one's perception. But I have a measurable value to this new view.

I never thought that the horizontal view improvement was significant. I always thought that the vertical view improvement was the significant improvement. By bringing the front of the bars closer to your eyes, you increase the vertical vision angle (wrt. eye pivot point) That, IMO, is the vision value-added.

I've measured the vertical view of each mask against a batter. With a normal stance (without moving my head), I can see from batters front foot to the top of his head, with HSM. With cap/conventional mask, I see batter from his shoulders (upper bar/cap) to front knee (lower bar). I can see his front foot under the bar, but it is not a continuous view. My "perception" is that this is a significant view improvement.

I "perceive" that on balls hit straight down (where it might hit a batter's leg/foot), I have a better (unobstructed) view. When balls are hit staight up I "perceive" that I can maintain/continue vision of the ball a split second longer which improves my judgement of where the ball is heading with HSM.

As Tee points out, these are an individual's perceptions and may be a distortion of reality (I came of age in the 70's and have some experience with distorted reality). But since my observations are measurable, I think they have validity.

Obviously, your perception of my perception (or the value of it) may differ. And fortunately we have a choice and I think that thought conventional mask may become harder to find, they will be available throughout our lifetimes.

[briancurtin]

Originally posted by bluehair
I've measured the vertical view of each mask against a batter. With a normal stance (without moving my head), I can see from batters front foot to the top of his head, with HSM. With cap/conventional mask, I see batter from his shoulders (upper bar/cap) to front knee (lower bar). I can see his front foot under the bar, but it is not a continuous view. My "perception" is that this is a significant view improvement.

i believe that you would get this better view, but why do you need it? i still fail to see why. i havent worked in maybe two months, but i remember being able to see everything i needed. being able to see the batters helmet isnt necessary. i can see the top of the zone and the bottom of the zone, as well as enough slack on the top and bottom to do my job well. maybe this has to do with the GD stance and being backed off the plate that i have a taller view, but this is starting to fall into the horizontal view situation where i dont need to see planes flying above and what color belt the catcher has.

But since my observations are measurable, I think they have validity.

your observations are valid, but i just dont see the need for the supposed benefits. you can in fact see more of a vertical range, ill buy that, but what for? i dont need to keep tracking a ball that i know is going over the batters head. i do keep tracking, but once its out of my visible range the batter must be out of his mind to still even be looking at it.

[GarthB]

The primary intended, designed and provable benefit of a helmet is safety. The were not intended to improve vision and has been pointed out, even some manufacturers believe claims to the contrary are, at best, silly.

I have never had an issue with those umpires who felt, either due to the environment or their habits, they needed additional protection.

Many of us do not need additional protection, but the economics of production may make that a moot point. Too bad. It not only will remove a useful and trusted tool, it will, to the unlearned, give the perception that many gadget lovers are really visionaries.

As Tee points out, this change is not driven by the umpire market. The umpire market is too small to demand the protection of the marketplace. Our tools are only affordable because they began life, and in many intances, still exist more profitably, as tools for others.

Our plate shoes, for example, began as industrial safetywear and many of them can be found sold under other names for use in that arena. Our masks began as a catcher's tool and there are far more catchers than umpires. I knew the first time I saw a catcher wear a hockey mask that the umpire mask was doomed.

Life will go on. One will still be able to hear the "ping" of the bat and fielders will still play hard grounders off the carpet. But when it comes down to it. It will still take three outs to retire the side and the team with the most runs will win. Even puffed-up, self-proclaimed internet "visionaries" will be unable to change that.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally posted by Tim C
All four suppliers made the comment that the extended vision is silly since an umpire can see everything he needs to see with a normal mask. The "excuse" of "better vision" commonly means that the umpire will no longer remove the mask (helmet) as has been the rule for decades (See Gary Cederstrom) when making calls other than balls and strikes.

Gary Cederstrom not withstanding, speaking for myself, as well as other umpires I have observed, removing the helmet is no problem whatsoever. We remove it for all the same plays as when a normal mask is used. As soon as a ball is hit, my first natural reaction is to get that thing off my head. It comes right off slick as can be, just use the same "outward then upward" motion you would with a mask. There are umpires so lazy as to leave their regular masks on their heads during plays. I have even seen major league umpires call plays at the plate while wearing their masks. What's up with that?

The biggest selling point so far has been to umpires that work in a very confinded space where a foul ball can strike an overhead or near placed screen and send that ball back quickly and hit the umpire.

This is a legitimate value in the HSM, as I took one off the top of the head at a yard with an overhanging "rec center" style screen.

[Sal Giaco]

Originally posted by GarthB
The primary intended, designed and provable benefit of a helmet is safety...

While safety was a concern, I think neck problems were one of the main reasons the HSM came about. Actually, Rich Rieker, former MLB Umpire and now a supervisor, was one of the first to try it out because of some spinal/vertebre issues he had. The HSM evenly distributes the weight of the mask on the center/top of your head rather than the front side. There's no doubt that the mask is safer, especially on those long backswings which clip catchers as well as umpire.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by Sal Giaco

While safety was a concern, I think neck problems were one of the main reasons the HSM came about. Actually, Rich Rieker, former MLB Umpire and now a supervisor, was one of the first to try it out because of some spinal/vertebre issues he had. The

The helmet was introduced prior to Rieker's issues or experimentation.

[3appleshigh]

Was the first, being up in Toronto, he saw many a hockey goalie and thought it could be converted to baseball, he worked with a company and they produced the All-Star mask, He started wearing it and it has quite quickly caught on. It is a much safer option, as well as reducing the strain on the neck.

The larger view is an improvement, it is not important or nessessary, but it is an improvement. Since much if not all of what we do is based on site why not consider an option that improves it? Just saying I don't need it is not simply a good enough reason to shrug off the idea of the mask as stupid for any sane individual. However what we often deal with here are egomaniacal Umpires rather than sane individuals. People with a nobody's going to tell me I'm worng, or that some thing is better that what I choose to wear, I am all knowing and all seeing. There are actually people on here who will QUIT the profession simply out of SPITE. If what you say is true that the helmet is no better than the mask, tell me why it is worse. Why is it so bad that were you unable to get what you have been used to that you then need to never again put the blue shirt on and call a game. Who are the silly ones now?

[GarthB]

Originally posted by 3appleshigh
Was the first, being up in Toronto, he saw many a hockey goalie and thought it could be converted to baseball, he worked with a company and they produced the All-Star mask, He started wearing it and it has quite quickly caught on. It is a much safer option, as well as reducing the strain on the neck.

The larger view is an improvement, it is not important or nessessary, but it is an improvement. Since much if not all of what we do is based on site why not consider an option that improves it? Just saying I don't need it is not simply a good enough reason to shrug off the idea of the mask as stupid for any sane individual. However what we often deal with here are egomaniacal Umpires rather than sane individuals. People with a nobody's going to tell me I'm worng, or that some thing is better that what I choose to wear, I am all knowing and all seeing. There are actually people on here who will QUIT the profession simply out of SPITE. If what you say is true that the helmet is no better than the mask, tell me why it is worse. Why is it so bad that were you unable to get what you have been used to that you then need to never again put the blue shirt on and call a game. Who are the silly ones now?

I haven't the foggiest notion to whom you are making your comments. I've seen no one make the comments you are attributing to whomever and I've never heard of anyone threatening to quit over this issue.

Since you didn't address your comments to anyone, I'll answer.

I tried a helmet for three plate appearances and did not like it. It was heavier than my mask, hotter than my mask, and despite claims by others, not as easy to take off and put back on as my maske before and after plays. Also, I saw no advantage to any perception of improved viewing area. I gave it away and went back to my mask.

I have never argued the additional protection a helmet provides. I have stated that I don't need it. I don't work fields with overhead screens and I don't flinch or turn my head on fouls wild pitches or passed balls. I take all shots straight on and have never been injured by doing so. My mask has flown off my head on an extremely hard foul, but that it as it should be. I never felt it leaving.

In short, I've tried the helmet and I don't care for it. I'm sorry if that offends anyone. I prefer the protection, feel, convenience and look of my mask. So, shoot me.

I have never told anyone they should not wear a helmet. I would only ask that the helmet police please stop telling me TO wear one. Please.

Who are the silly ones now? Those who rush out and buy anything based on it being the latest, newest, shiniest, most popular item.

"Gee, Dad, EVERYONE is getting one."

If you feel you need added protection, buy a helmet. I don't care. But, again, please just leave me out of it.

Thank you.

[Edited by GarthB on Nov 23rd, 2005 at 07:36 PM]

[3appleshigh]

Great, I personally think 3 games is not really giving it a chance but I will say at least you have tried it, (the Quiter is on the other thread by the way,) and I have yet to read a thread that tells anyone to wear one, I see most helmet guys have to get defensive as they are told that they are stupid and silly to wear one, also that there is no good reason to either (with little to no regard that there is no good reason NOT to). They are then told why by some guy who proudly claims that he hasn't nor would he ever wear one. Infact Helmet users are activly told not to wear one, I believe in the freedom of choice, I also believe that are you to express an opinion at least have tried the product, I see you have.

I find my helmet to be intensly cooler, weight no real factor either way, and much easier to put on and take off, but I never worked long and hard to perfect the proper removal of the old school mask. In fact inregard to the coolness, I worked a double header 12pm and 3pm in august this year plate then base, and had zero head sweat on the plate and went through two hats on base, so for me the wool hat just sucks the sweat out of my head, but the breeze in my helmet (with coolmax lining) was fantastic.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Garth, since the post was not adressed to anybody in particular, why did you take it so personally? I could wear a mask or a helmet, without getting mad either way. I don't think anybody is trying to force helmets down your throat here, Garth. Like I said before, my helmet gives me such great vision that I can see Uranus! And I may switch back to a mask, because believe it or not folks, helmets make you sweat more!

Even with Coolmax, 3appleshigh. I work in 80 to 100 degree heat all season, and the sweat just pours off my head with the helmet. A hat does a better job of absorbing sweat. With a regular mask, I never had to towel off between innings.

Garth, while you are very fortunate not to have to work with overhead fencing, here we cover over 80 high schools, and there are many that have such fences. Many have them because their ballfields butt up against neighborhoods, and they were insisted on by the residents. Others play their home games at municipal recreation centers, where overhead screens are standard fare. Most youth ball fields use these type of fences come to think of it.

I wouldn't worry too much about the availability of regular masks in the future. Companies like +POS, Gerry Davis, and Honigs won't let the mask become extinct.

[GarthB]

Originally posted by SanDiegoSteve
Garth, since the post was not adressed to anybody in particular, why did you take it so personally? I could wear a mask or a helmet, without getting mad either way. I don't think anybody is trying to force helmets down your throat here, Garth. Like I said before, my helmet gives me such great vision that I can see Uranus! And I may switch back to a mask, because believe it or not folks, helmets make you sweat more!

Even with Coolmax, 3appleshigh. I work in 80 to 100 degree heat all season, and the sweat just pours off my head with the helmet. A hat does a better job of absorbing sweat. With a regular mask, I never had to towel off between innings.

Garth, while you are very fortunate not to have to work with overhead fencing, here we cover over 80 high schools, and there are many that have such fences. Many have them because their ballfields butt up against neighborhoods, and they were insisted on by the residents. Others play their home games at municipal recreation centers, where overhead screens are standard fare. Most youth ball fields use these type of fences come to think of it.

I wouldn't worry too much about the availability of regular masks in the future. Companies like +POS, Gerry Davis, and Honigs won't let the mask become extinct.

I didn't take the post personally. I was responding to two years worth of never ending proselytizing, constant chirping and false accusations regarding my experience with helmets and the wrongly assumed reasons why I don't wear one.

I was responding to two years worth of Johnny One-Notes and outright fabrications about helmets. (I'll put my mask on the balance scale opposite any umpire helmet on the market and it will be my mask riding high.)

It is tiresome. I don't worry about not having a mask. I'll be in this business for about ten more years. I'll have my masks.

I knew and admitted to all a couple of years ago that one day just as the inside protector replaced the raft, the helmet would replace the mask. Just because I prefer not to wear one, I'm blind to reality.

I do not do youth ball and those are the only fields I know that have overhanging screens. I know how to take a foul ball. I have the protection and comfort I like.

[jicecone]

"Garth. Like I said before, my helmet gives me such great vision that I can see Uranus!"

And who knows, that may truly be one of Garth's better features but, I'm sure he would rather you watch the strike zone, when working with him.

Just couldn't resist that one.