Davis system
 

I have been using the Davis system (probably not perfectly) for almost a calendar year. Although I struggle with the top of my zone for some reason, it has cured most of my inconsistencies with the low strike. Recently, I worked with a very experienced umpire. When I asked him for a critique, his first comment was about how solid I was and that I never flinched a bit. He then followed that up with his concern that, since my arms were locked in, that I would sooner or later suffer a broken forearm. Since I have started using the Davis system, I have not been hit on the arm (although I expect to). I have only been nicked on the hand a couple of times. What are the responses of those who promote the Davis system to the concern of the exposed forearm.
Secondly, regarding my issues with the top of the zone. I have been told by two very good umpires to concentrate on getting my eyes down to the top of the zone. Using the Davis system, I really can't get there. Any suggestions, other than using the catcher's head to gauge the top of the zone, etc.
Thanks.

I personally have been hit much less in the arms since switching to the GD two years ago. Don't worry, your arms aren't that locked in. They will give if you get a direct hit, trust me.

The high part of the zone has nothing to do with the Catcher, unless it is a curve ball, which I will talk about in a moment.

Every time a batter steps into the box, you have to determine THAT batter's high side of the zone. It should be an imaginary line, half way between the belt and the top of the shoulders. Most of us use a line between the belt and the armpits, as the book high side is really kind of high to hit and looks like a Ball to the rest of the world. Try to find something on the batter's jersey, logo or button, that is close to the line that you can use.

Now, for those curve balls that come in high, and break down through the zone. If the catcher catches that pitch (unless you have really tall batter) above their chin, call it a ball. I personally feel that is the most difficult high strike to call consistently, unless you use the catch / catcher location. But that is just me.

I've used JD for a long time. Be sure to keep the elbows tucked in exposing only the "meaty" part of your arm. If you do get hit it will sting and bruise but you won't break any bones. Be sure your fingers are to the side of your knees just leaving your thumbs on your knees. My leg guards allow me to put my thumbs behind them thus protecting them. Never took a hit of any consequence in the hands.

Concerning the high strike narrow your stance for tall batters and widen your stance for short batters. I find that I can get my eyes level to the top of the strike zone. At any rate this works for me.

As Gordon, keep your forearms facing the pitcher, and any time you get hit, all that will happen is your arm will bend back towards you. Elbows towards you, forearms out.

Started using the GD earlier this year and was amazed at how more consistent I am, and my legs feel so much better even after a DH behind the dish.

However, to avoid the potential fouls to the arms (I do 12U thru HS), I drop my arms inside and let my hands hang in front of my crotch just as the pitch is released. My body is already locked from the basic GD, so nothing else moves, and it narrows my body a bit - something necessary when you are
6'2" and 250lbs like me and setting up behind sometimes much smaller catchers!!

Thanks
 

Some great responses for me. I appreciate the help.
O.T.

Fritz ...................
 

With due respect, your description of your stance is not The Gerry Davis system.

Agreed Keyman
 

Any significant change ba$tardi$es the stance and makes what is being used just a "personal" use stance and not the Davis Stance System.

Regards,

Yeah, it's a real ba$tard of a stance for sure. I call mine "The Ba$tardized Stance." Hey, I think I'll start a new craze!:rolleyes:

This has got me really confused here. Is it the GD® Stance? Or is it The Gerry Davis™ System? Or is it the Davis Stance System©?

Picture a G.I. taking a crap in a field latrine. There. That's the stance. Be sure to get your feet wide enough apart and keep your head steady there.

Folks, he didn't patent it, nor did he invent it. I have seen umpires use this same stance long before I saw Davis use it in the '80s.

Sorry, just feeling cynical today.

Golly,
 

Steve:

I am sorry but I do not remember any umpire setting up as Gerry teaches AND be from 3' to 4' back from the catcher. I'll be the first to call b/s -- no umpires EVER worked this precise stance in MLB.

When referenced at clinics it is billed as : The Gerry Davis Plate System.

I have never seen in print, other than Carl identifying it, as a "System".

Trust me from the clinic I attended Gerry did not use this stance in the 80's as you have stated. His introductions say he started working on it in 2000.

I believe the stance itself is now being used by about 8 MLB umpires if my memory holds correct. (Funny about the same number of guys that wear the HSM) . . . we have about five that use it in Portland and more convert each season (no matter the feeling of pdxblue).

Regards,

Yeah, fine whatever. Gerry Davis sure worked an extremely wide, squared up stance, with his hands braced above his knees when I used to watch his games back in the late 80s. It wasn't called the Gerry Davis stance back then. It was probably called the stance that Gerry Davis used.

I'm just having some fun anyway. No harm intended. I just find it a bit humorous how seriously y'all are about it, like it's some kind of cult. You guys continue on bringing your tithes and offerings to the Church of GD.

Now that's funny. Saying we're taking something too seriously.

Pot, Mr Kettle Black calling.:D

Oh, come on now. You guys are way past serious, and I'm just kidding around. On the other hand, I may be trying to be serious about something, only to be ridiculed with no humor involved. Big difference. Pot on one end, Kettle way off on the other side.

Tee, I did not specify MLB umpires in my post. I'd never seen MLB umpires work as wide as Gerry did. I was referring to local umpires who just happened to use that style of stance. I also didn't mean to imply that there was widespread (no pun intended) use of the stance, only a few. Perhaps it wasn't the exact stance taught today, but it was really close. You might even recognize the name of this one guy who has used the stance for many years.