GD Stance

[tibear]

T,

By sitting on the inside corner and being nice and high I'm able to see the entire strike zone. Granted, by being on the inside corner, I'm not able to see exactly where the outside corner is because my eyes are on the other side of the plate, but at least I see the pitch all the way across the strikezone and simply have to guess about the outside corner.

I like the GDS because of the stability it gives you and I guess it works for you being that far from the catcher. However, if I saw an umpire that far from catcher, I would question the strikezone. Of course, I wouldn't say anything because you'd toss me but inside I would be thinking, "How can you call something when you can't see ball cross the plate?"

Perhaps with enough experience you can extrapolate where the ball is going without actually seeing it. If it works for you, great.

[Tim C]

tibear:

I'm sorry as I just don't understand "why" you think I cannot see the ball.

You actually get a "longer" look at a pitch and that is one of the +'s of the stance.

See I am on the inside corner . . . "slot" . . . I am solid (head height the same every time) and I can look "down" and see the whole plate.

Also I ask you to remember that I am not the only person using this stance. While it is my picture in this thread many, many others use the stance successfully.

"However, if I saw an umpire that far from catcher, I would question the strikezone."

This is the EXACT reason that I am considering going back to the traditional stance. tiBear it is the same with any "new and coming thing" when people first saw the horseless carraige they scoffed and said it would never work . . . maybe this stance is the "horseless carriage" of umpiring.

If I give up the stance it will be ONLY because it cannot be "sold" to the coaching and evaluator masses.

Thanks for your points.

Regards,

[tibear]

T,

I think you misunderstood my position on the GDS.

I also use the stance, exactly as you do BUT I'm much closer to the catcher and higher so I can see the entire zone. From this location, on virtually every pitch, except for the ones where the catcher jumps up, I can see the pitch from the release right into the glove of the catcher.

From looking at the picture, I find it hard to believe you can "look "down" and see the whole plate." unless the catcher is setting up on the outside corner.

If the catcher is setting up inside can you really see the plate or are you going with the "I know where the plate is" theory?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by tibear

I also use the stance, exactly as you do BUT I'm much closer to the catcher and higher so I can see the entire zone.

You're not using the Gerry Davis stance. Sorry, no cigar.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by tibear

T,

I think you misunderstood my position on the GDS.

I also use the stance, exactly as you do BUT I'm much closer to the catcher and higher so I can see the entire zone. From this location, on virtually every pitch, except for the ones where the catcher jumps up, I can see the pitch from the release right into the glove of the catcher.

From looking at the picture, I find it hard to believe you can "look "down" and see the whole plate." unless the catcher is setting up on the outside corner.

If the catcher is setting up inside can you really see the plate or are you going with the "I know where the plate is" theory?

Trying explain or teach the GD stance in a post is not possible. I began to experiment with the the stance in the hope of prolonging the use of the knees I was born with (I'm a wimp when it comes to going under the knife). After reading articles and looking at photos I set out to master the stance....I had some problems It wasn't until I worked with an umpire who had used the stance for several season that I was taught the proper way to use the GD stance. It made ALL of the difference in the world......I'm now a 'true believer' in the stance.

It's true that some coaches/evaluators may view the GD stance with skepticism at first but if you have a good consistant strike zone their fears will soon disappear.

[lagunaump]

I have tried the GDS a couple of times and I find that the catcher's head blocks my view of the outside of the plate. I like the fact that I have more time to see the ball, but just feel uncomfortable that I can't see part of the plate.
Any suggestions?

[Tim C]

AS you are aware Davis teaches the stance to be from 3' to 4' back from F2. If you have problems his suggestion is always: "Go Deeper, go even farther back."

When you work higher -- and I am considerably higher -- you look down and see the dish (true catchers that work REALLY close to the dish can obstruct parts of the plate at time -- but from the normal slot you are also blocked).

And yes, I get comments often about being so deep -- those however usually come from the true experts -- the lady in the fourth row on the third base side.

Regards,

[PFISTO]

Well I must say that from the pics Tc does seem to be a long way back as I also use the GD SYSTEM and I also do not setup that far back. As we all know the F2 could at times be a real headace in blocking pitch view, but over the course of the game I feel I am more consistent with my calls using the GD but not that far back.

[Arnold A.]

Looking at the pictures of Tim C., that is where I set up using the GD.

The instructors in the GD urge students to err on the side of getting further back. Take your stance where you believe you should be and then take a step back.

BTW, a coach questioned the distance factor last year, I told him that the fans behind the backstop are further away than I am and they haven't missed a call yet!

[mcrowder]

Originally Posted by PFISTO

Well I must say that from the pics Tc does seem to be a long way back as I also use the GD SYSTEM and I also do not setup that far back. As we all know the F2 could at times be a real headace in blocking pitch view, but over the course of the game I feel I am more consistent with my calls using the GD but not that far back.

Then you're doing it wrong, and eliminating the main benefit you gain from this stance.

[3appleshigh]

For the record, and I think Tee just doesn't wish to say, but I do believe he has actually had his stance evaluated by Gerrry Davis, and told his positioning is spot on. So I think GD might be right on the mechanics of his very own stance.

[tibear]

Originally Posted by 3appleshigh

For the record, and I think Tee just doesn't wish to say, but I do believe he has actually had his stance evaluated by Gerrry Davis, and told his positioning is spot on. So I think GD might be right on the mechanics of his very own stance.

I don't think anyone is saying that T is doing the GDS wrong, we're simply questioning the positioning. Just because GD says it is right doesn't mean that improvements can't be made to the stance.

[ozzy6900]

I've been using the GDS for about 3 years and I get the same crap from other umpires (who do not use the GDS) and our evaluation people (who refuse to use the GDS). Personally, I couldn't care less what anyone else thinks about the GDS.

1. It is comfortable for me.

2. I have never been more consistent in over 20 years.

3. My timing is much better.

4. Most important - I get a longer look at the pitch (as Tee stated).

I've had a couple of coaches in HS have a comment about setting up farther back than other umpires. When they have a wise remark, I just tell them to ask their catcher how I'm doing! Never another word!

So Tee, who gives a rat's rear end what anyone else thinks? Hell, I'm old enough to retire and D1 or MiLB umpiring is just not in my future anymore!

[LLPA13UmpDan]

ok then, that means if i ever get new shins im going to ask for bright pink ones?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by LLPA13UmpDan

ok then, that means if i ever get new shins im going to ask for bright pink ones?

Seems like they's be a perfect fit you you.