The Numbers Are In . . .

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I thought Tim C reported that MiLB's study did NOT find this to be true -- that there was no difference (in, what I admit, is not a scientific study).

You could also make the argument that the HSM's are less safe in terms of heat, the extra weight (in the cases where the head / neck does get extended), loss of hearing acuity. etc.

It might be true that a scientific stuydy would find that they are safer -- that is, umpires wearing them suffer fewer (and / or less severe) injuries than umpires wearing traditional masks. But, to make a blanket statement that it's obvious is, imo, wrong.

I did a scientific study. I got drilled between the eyes wearing a titanium Wilson Shock effects HSM, and I barely registered a hit. I've been hit with a rock in the chin on a motorcycle helmet at 80 mph, a fullback's shoulder pads in the face guard of a football helmet, a high-80s fastball into a catcher's mask, a high-80s fastball into an All-Star steel catchers helmet, a low-90s fastball into a lightweight umpire mask, and a low-90s fastball into the Wilson. It doesn't even compare to the concussive effect of a similar shot to a regular mask. Not close. And whatever drop test, shock test or whatever test you want to do test says, the getting drilled in the middle of the face test is better.

Please read what I wrote about masks...you would see that I agree with the use of a traditional mask and the risks it poses. I was stating that a helmet is safer and by the very coverage and balanced protection it provides, it is safer! It is. With the floating cage, the Wilson is the safest. But I haven't made the switch because I'm traditional. I also depend heavily on skill and experience to avoid getting domed, or boxed, or clubbed, but I would never even begin to maintain that a mask is safer. Better for you, sure. Better for me too. Safer...no way.