Ball Four, in the dirt

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

All it takes is one small blemish, scuff or cut. Those dastardly pitchers don't need any more help, they will use any advantage they can get...

Ohhhh - so that explains the greatness of Bob Gibson and Sandy Koufax. They had the advantage of scuffed baseballs. Because I know they didn't swap baseballs out like that in those days.

[TussAgee11]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

Ohhhh - so that explains the greatness of Bob Gibson and Sandy Koufax. They had the advantage of scuffed baseballs. Because I know they didn't swap baseballs out like that in those days.

Perhaps a higher mound explains it a heck of alot better.
---------------------

On a side note, some basic math. 12 dozen balls X $120 per dozen X 162 games a year X (32 teams / 2) = about 3.7 million a year for balls based on open market price.

MLB just contracts Rawlings, correct? It's not up to each team to buy balls for the year, is it?

[David Emerling]

Originally Posted by TussAgee11

Perhaps a higher mound explains it a heck of alot better.

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 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.

[ozzy6900]

Originally Posted by David Emerling

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.

Oh-oooooo! The rising fastball has surfaced again!

[Kevin Finnerty]

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.

[realistic]

Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty

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.

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.

[Kevin Finnerty]

Originally Posted by realistic

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.

REALISTIC?!? That's a laugh.

You're judgmental, naive and exceptionally rude. You are far from realistic. You should be ashamed of what you just said about my son. (Cheating rat??) Perhaps you're shameless, also. We'll see.

No, it's not cheating. No, it's not doing anything or applying anything illegal to the baseball. It's about schools with limited budgets using baseballs that you or I wouldn't allow. The umpires don't throw them out because they aren't vigilant or don't have an unlimited supply. The kid uses what he's given and knows how to use it. It's effing gamesmanship and little more.

[nopachunts]

Originally Posted by realistic

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

Hold on big boy. Cheating is strong language. The pitcher is merely using what God has given him. Just because knowing what to do with what you have been given doesn't make you a cheater.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by realistic

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.

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.