Originally Posted by David Emerling (Post 623456)

That's an old baseball physics myth.

Robert K. Adair, Ph.D., in his excellent book, The Physics of Baseball, addresses many of these baseball myths - the "advantage" of the higher mound being one of them.

When the mound was lowered, the slope remained the same. In other words, the higher mounds were not any steeper than than the lower mounds.

The height of the pitcher's plate has been changed at times. If the slope in front is retained at 1 inch to 1 foot, the height is almost irrelevant to the pitcher-batter competition. A decrease (or increase) in height of 2 inches is then precisely equivalent to an increase (or decrease) in the height of the plate - and the strike zone - by 2 inches, and the effect is that of making the pitcher throw each pitch 2 inches higher (or lower). However, if the slope is changed and the pitcher's foot lands at a different height, the leverage of the pitcher will change, and that can affect the delivery.

It's all explained - just like the myth of the "rising" fastball.

On the other hand, the advantage of a scuffed baseball is real.

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty (Post 623485)

My son's a pitcher. Now that he's in college, the scuffs, cuts and mud packed in a seam all work much better with the higher speeds and better arm action of an older player.

He lives on the sinker, cutter and change-up (a splitter). When a guy chops a ball in front of the plate, and my son gets to keep using the same ball, I watch him check it, and if he notices that there's mud or dirt packed in the seam, he throws nothing but two-seamers, and they drop like stones. If there's a tear on a ball, if he wants it to break left, he positions the tear on the right, and vice-versa.

He never tears, scuffs or packs a ball, but if the umpire fails to check it or discard it, he just uses it. (I've almost never seen him ask for a different ball.) I learned that where-to-hold-the-tear-or-scuff thing from Don McMahon, an ex-MLB fireballing reliever, who used to coach for the Dodgers.

Originally Posted by realistic (Post 623504)

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat.

Originally Posted by realistic (Post 623504)

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice!

Originally Posted by eagle_12 (Post 623466)

This is MLB. That's the way they do it. Also it's a time saver in a sport that is trying to save time and make the experience more enjoyable.

If they changed there practices this is how it would go. Ball 4 in dirt. Catcher asks for a new ball. Ump says "I can't yet, ball's still live". Catcher waits for batter to disrobe (elbow armor, shin protector, batting gloves) and leave everything in a nice little pile at the plate and saunter down to first base. Catcher then returns the ball to pitcher. Ump calls time asks for the ball back. Catcher and Ump then dance a little to figure out the exchange of baseballs, catcher tosses his back, Ump tosses his to the dugout and misses, ball goes rolling down the railing. Then the pitcher rubs up the ball, walks around the mound a little, grabs some rosin, take a deep breath and then toes the rubber.

Current practice, Ball 4 in the dirt, quick exchange, ball back in pitchers hand before batter reaches first base, we're ready to play. No harm No foul.

I would think that if a MLB player/club tried to advance to second on a walk with or without a runner at 3rd, someones getting a Rawlings tattoo

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty (Post 623517)

The safety and anonymity of the Internet is essential for certain types of people to come out and say what they say.

As much as I'd like to see this Realistic guy say those words to mine or my son's face, it would never happen. He's one of those needs-safety-and-anonymity guys.

Originally Posted by David Emerling (Post 623518)

I agree with your analysis completely!

If you recall, my primary criticism was that the ball-swapping occurs in the first place. Yeah, I guess if they're going to swap the balls out every time - I guess they have no choice. What I propose is that they do have a choice.

You're probably right, this is a technical concession they have to make to keep the game moving. If you're not willing to make that concession, then you have to decide whether you want to delay the game in order to keep the ball live, or simply play a ball that just touched the ground <gasp!>.

Ooooo, does the itsy bitsy baseball have an itsy bitsy wittle skwatch on it? Well, we better getter a brand new one because that big bad pitcher can make it do somersaults and stop in mid-air if we don't. :D

Think how much faster it would be if the catcher simply threw the ball back to the pitcher.

Also, let's remember that the ball-swapping doesn't just occur on ball four in the dirt. It happens on all counts. For that reason, I would say that, in aggregate, ball-swapping slows the game down. How many times, in the course of a game, is there a ball-four-in-the-dirt compared to a ball in the dirt on any other count?

By the way, although it had great dramatic effect to hyperbolize a point, most players don't wear the armor you described and talk off for first rather expeditiously.

Hell, I remember watching Pete Rose draw a walk and I was never completely convinced that guy was going to stop. But, then again, that was back "in the day" where players found a way to play with a little dirt on the ball.

Originally Posted by realistic (Post 623504)

So you are saying that your son is a cheater, nice! And please don't say that if the umpire doesn't catch it, then it's legal cause it's not.

Let him throw one with alot of action with a cut ball(even if he didn't do it) and if someone catches him, he should be ejected because he is cheating. I wouldn't be so proud of a cheating rat.

Originally Posted by BigUmp56 (Post 623519)

Which is why you shouldn't concern yourself one bit with what he said. It was both classless and uncalled for, not to mention quite ignorant and self righteous.


Tim.

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve (Post 623523)

Manipulating a scuffed or muddy baseball is not prohibited by the rules, so I don't see how that is cheating. Pretty gutless comment, IMO.

Originally Posted by BigUmp56 (Post 623520)

Dave,

Unless you're having to pay for the baseballs, spend the time rubbing them up, or having to change them out everytime they hit the dirt, it's getting hard to understand why you're getting so worked up about it. If it bothers you this much you have a choice to not have to ever see it happen again.
Tim.

Originally Posted by David Emerling (Post 623529)

I think you're overestimating how "worked up" I am about it.

But thanks for your concern ... and your advice.

Originally Posted by David Emerling (Post 623518)

Think how much faster it would be if the catcher simply threw the ball back to the pitcher.