How to move to view pitch

[briancurtin]

Originally Posted by bossman72

Sounds to me like this is a non-issue for all you GD'ers out there (i still don't know how you guys see the plate from so far back- then you work high to compensate for that and i don't know how you see low pitches. i guess i gotta try it for myself).

try it some time. it just works, you'll see how it all comes together

[lmathews19]

Is there some site or something I can get on that explains the GD stance? I read what you guys write about it and how great it is and everything, but I don't exactly know what it is. When I was taught my stance, I wasn't given an official name for it (though i think it might be the heel-toe), so if I see it described then I might realize that I already do it.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by lmathews19

Is there some site or something I can get on that explains the GD stance? I read what you guys write about it and how great it is and everything, but I don't exactly know what it is. When I was taught my stance, I wasn't given an official name for it (though i think it might be the heel-toe), so if I see it described then I might realize that I already do it.

The heel-toe and the GD are two different stances.

The GD (Gerry Davis) stance can be found illustrated at:
http://childress.officiating.com/?d=...vis+Part+I.pdf

and

http://childress.officiating.com/?d=...is+Part+II.pdf

[pdxblue]

I am not a fan of the GD stance at all. All the guys that I see trying it are terribly inconsistent on their low strike, and tend to not give the high strike too often.

I use a modified GD stance. I am MUCH closer to the catcher, and do not work that high (which is dangerous! you are more apt to get hit by foul tips working that high....yes, I have tried the GD, and didn't like being that much of a target). I get my chin to the top of the catchers helmet (roughly).

Working three feet behind the catcher just doesn't work. Again, everybody I see calling from that far back usually has a major inconsistency in their strike zone, and it REALLY calls attention to itself! I hear coaches complain all the time about the local guys that use the GD, about how they are "too far back to call the low pitch right" is what I hear most often.

Oh well, those that use the GD are convinced that they are doing everything good. Whatever gets them through a game I guess.

[pdxblue]

The GD stance is also totally discouraged in the NCAA umpiring standards.

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/cham...PreviewState=0

[DG]

Originally Posted by pdxblue

The GD stance is also totally discouraged in the NCAA umpiring standards.

http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/cham...PreviewState=0

How do you get this perception from the document. GD is best for absolutely locking in on a pitch, the first item listed on the document.

[cbfoulds]

Originally Posted by pdxblue

I am not a fan of the GD stance at all. All the guys that I see trying it are terribly inconsistent on their low strike, and tend to not give the high strike too often.

I use a modified GD stance. I am MUCH closer to the catcher, and do not work that high (which is dangerous! you are more apt to get hit by foul tips working that high....yes, I have tried the GD, and didn't like being that much of a target). I get my chin to the top of the catchers helmet (roughly).

Working three feet behind the catcher just doesn't work. Again, everybody I see calling from that far back usually has a major inconsistency in their strike zone, and it REALLY calls attention to itself! I hear coaches complain all the time about the local guys that use the GD, about how they are "too far back to call the low pitch right" is what I hear most often.

Oh well, those that use the GD are convinced that they are doing everything good. Whatever gets them through a game I guess.

If you are inconsistent in GD, you are gonna be inconsistent w/ the box or scissors. The dead-rock-solid lock-in gives you the OPPORTUNITY for an absolutely consistent "look" at every pitch. If you can't call the up/down consistently in GD, the problem is YOU, not your stance.

Oh, yeah: NOBODY doing GD has EVER been hit by a "foul tip" nor in any other stance, for that matter. Foul balls, maybe .... but I've been doing Davis for 2 years now, including time behind some pretty lame catchers, and the only times I've been drilled were pitches that'd hit me no matter what stance I was in ... only difference w/ the stance is WHERE they hit me. Most of what I've been hit by gets the middle plate of my hardshell CP: where it not for the loud THWOCK!!! I'd not know anything had happened.

Originally Posted by GD

How do you get this perception from the document. GD is best for absolutely locking in on a pitch, the first item listed on the document.

Well, in fairness to pdx: the last bullet point [does not set up too high or deep] COULD be a shot at GD, although GD seems to hit for every other one of the bullets in the evaluation standard.

[Dave Hensley]

If you're getting hit by foul balls a lot, you're almost surely not in a good slot position. When the foul balls are whizzing by your ear but missing you, then you're in the slot.

[pdxblue]

Sorry, I have just seen far too many guys missing a LOT of low pitches when they set up that high and that far back.

Move closer to the catcher and a bit lower, THEN you got a good thing going!

There is a reason the GD is NOT taught in the pro schools and camps taught by professional umpires. While it may make you "stable", it is still setting you up in a lousy position to call pitches. There are still times when "proximity" is a good thing, and the closer I can get to the plate is MUCH better for calling balls and strikes.

[LMan]

How do you reconcile (on that chart):

"Maintains the same strike zone throughout the game"

and

"Has a grasp of how the zone may be adjusted in a lopsided game"?

..in the same evaluation paragraph?

[pdxblue]

Originally Posted by LMan

How do you reconcile (on that chart):

"Maintains the same strike zone throughout the game"

and

"Has a grasp of how the zone may be adjusted in a lopsided game"?

..in the same evaluation paragraph?

Well, if the game is not lopsided, and you maintain the same strike zone throughout the game, you have done well.

If the game is lopsided, and you adjusted your zone in a way that kept things moving along, you have done well.

Is this such a hard concept to understand? I don't get what part of that you don't understand. It seemed VERY obvious to me the first time I read it.

I don't know of ANY higher level (at least college level) umpires who DON'T adjust their zone to be a bit bigger in lopsided games. It is a perfectly acceptable practice, and is obviously endorsed by the NCAA.

I would be a fool to call a "rule book" strike zone in a game that is 20-3. I am expanding that zone to get out of their a bit quicker. Nobody is complaining!

[LMan]

I understand the concept perfectly well, I was more or less poking at the apparent contradiction on the form, two paragraphs apart. I take my humor where I can get it

Just shows again that you cannot effectively manage a game by going strictly by the rules and nothing but. There is accepted usage, tradition, etc to consider as well if you want to be more than a barely-adequate umpire.

[RPatrino]

PDX, I'll continue to use the GD. Most of the umpires I work with are now converting to it as well. That is not a coincidence that is irrelevant. I work with NCAA umpires, by the way, who are also seeing an increasing number of GD converts.

I use results to measure success or failure, and my personal results tell me that the GD has made a great improvement in my game.

[pdxblue]

Originally Posted by LMan

I understand the concept perfectly well, I was more or less poking at the apparent contradiction on the form, two paragraphs apart.

Maybe I am missing something, but there does not seem to be any contradiction. They want you to call a consistent zone innings 1-9. IF the game becomes lopsided, they want you to be able to "adjust" your zone.

Just because "consistent zone innings 1-9" comes first does not mean that is cast in stone.