Natural Stance
 

How do you guys determine what a batter's natural stance is? The reason I ask is because last year I had an immediate positive turnaround in my batting when I went into a crouch. It helped me get my legs, arms and torso into the swing, rather than it just being all wrists. It also helped me see the ball better and cover the outside corner of the plate.

How can one say that this is not my natural stance? When my batting average goes up immediatly after assuming this stance, it's hard to argue that it's not natural for me. Yet I have had pitches called strikes at my head because of it. What do you guys think?

Also, as an umpire I sometimes get fooled by the batter ducking when a high strike comes in, thus making it look like the pitch was high when it in fact wasn't. I've missed a few of these, not sure if there is any way I can correct this.

I think I will call any reasonable stance that you take.

Learn to set your zone before the pitch and to enlarge it when the B ducks. Assume he is trying to squeeze his zone and your enlarging it will signal to him to quit that BS.

Is Natural Stance Old Stance's brother?

If your "crouch" is such that pitches at the level of your head can be plausibly called strikes "because of it" [the "crouch"], then it sure as he!! isn't A "natural stance", however "natural" it may feel to you.

When I have a batter that assumes an exagerated "crouch" at the plate, I am forced to improvise the top end of my strike zone. I am likely to choose what I THINK a batter of the same aproximate size might be expected to swing at standing "normally". If forced to articulate how I judged a "natural" batting stance for that [crouching] batter, I might find myself referencing those "natural" warm-up swings he took while standing straight up and getting set in the BB.

And, BTW, it's a judgment call, so STFU and swing the bat.

Do you hit from this crouch or do you straighten up?

Easy way to correct:
If a ball is over the plate and the batter ducks, STRIKE.

Works every time

Just like the batter who walks out of the box as soon as the ball is released and its near the outside corner. STRIKE!

I do not appreciate being spoken to that way. Saying that "it's a judgement call" is just a way to hide the fact that you do not in fact know the rule. And why did you put me on your ignore list? Might I add that I do swing from my crouch, and it is natural for me.

Ah ha, now this makes more sense. I swing from my crouched stance, so the umpire should be calling based on the way I stand in my stance.

Of course he knows the rule. And no matter how you slice it, it is a judgment call. He's right about one thing in particular that's been left unsaid. You need to leave your player hat at the door when you discuss items of interest with a large group of umpires.


Tim.

Are you an umpire or are you a rat, rat?

Crouching Moron.....Hidden Brain Cells
 

A crouch is not a "natural" batting stance, IMHO. Other than Pete Rose, I can't remember ever seeing anyone swing from a crouch. And I'm betting you're not him.

Rickey Henderson

You are right. Rickey once told me "Rickey swings from a crouch". :D

[quote=canadaump6]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by tcarilli
The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball..

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Has everyone stopped calling you a liar yet? :D It's rare but I have had several players who assumed very low head positions and when striding, kept that same vertical position, that is they hit in a crouch. One led an adult league in hitting, he must have been 5"6" standing. His zone was such that curve balls which struck the dirt before caught were often strikes. I got heat from opposing coaches, "not his natural stance" or whatever; what they were actually P.Oed about was his OBP, something like .750, it was absurd, he was a leadoff, of course. Hit with power, very talented, exceptionally fast, maneged the team and they were perennial winners.

If you crouch enough, to where your knees and waist are on the same plane, its possible for your zone to be about 6 inches or so. I think all umpires would do the right thing and give the pitcher some leeway on the ones at your letters. Where's he supposed to throw it? The ball is a bit thicker than a piece of paper.

Natural stance means natural athletic standing in my opinion. Hunched over perhaps a tad, knees slightly bent. Thats your strike zone, even if you go into crouching tiger mode.

When umpires begin to determine how a batter should position vertically in the box, they are entering an area that they do not belong. What's the big deal? When I question why umpires take such hard-minded approaches, it is usually because they can't get low enough to remain protected by F2. Tuff titties. :p

Nice. Eloquently ended. Punctuates your argument exactly.

If there is one thing about athletes, natural is completely individual.

Why so? I would think we should encourage not discourage players to speak their piece here. Adjust.

I look at your practice swings. If you don't crouch there, then guess what?

So if a batter lies down in the box, we can only call a strike if the ball is rolled to the plate? :rolleyes:

Ball/Strike is a judgement call. Swing the bat, Twirly Tornado.

Tough
Wrong again, rat-breath: just cheese to go with your whine. The RULE is: what your "natural stance", ie: when you are prepared to strike at a pitch, IS A JUDGMENT CALL.
I haven't [yet].

More sense to you, perhaps, but your interpretation of tcarilli's cite is wrong, beside being self-serving. See comments [mine and others above] about "exagerated" crouches. I have seen players come to the plate, take a couple "loosening" swings, then settle into a "batting crouch" such that they can touch their elbows to their knees: more often than not, they have no intention whatever of swinging the bat at ANYTHING - they are there to draw a walk. Well, I for one am not gonna reduce the "window" for strikes to the literal size of a letterbox.

You assume warmups always equal to natural motions? Think about this. :eek:

Think about this - when a batter steps into the box and does his part of the "dance", 99% of them will be swinging in that plane. For the 1% that decide to crouch when F1 releases, TS on them! By the way, I didn't attain a 398 average in MiLB by changing my swing plane when F1 delivered. :D

Regards

Maybe you could've hit .400 if you had!:D

Then the batter should warmup in a crouch, enter the box the same and stay that way the entire time at bat. Can he walk to/fro the dugout erect? :(

"Stance", remember?

Then you would call his crouch if he took practice swings in one then came to the plate erect? :confused:

Well, it seems to me like people are saying a lot of different things on this subject matter. Some are saying they will call based on however the batter swings. Some will assume the same stance for every batter which they deem to be natural and call the high strike based on that stance. .

A lot of different opinions and interpretations. What is the general consensus?

What makes you think there is one?

Here's my take: the further your batting stance is from "normal," the less likely you are to have the rule-book zone applied.

That umpires need to get rid of this stoopid "stand normal" mentality and call the SZ.

first of all, and most important, i think the player should figure out the umpires strike zone, that zone is really the only one that matters, right? second, anyone who has been hit, at least a couple dozen times, while working the bases has zero credibility.