Speed of softball pitch

[prekowski]

In some leagues, they play ASA rules with a mat and not a strike zone. I know ASA book was written with strike zone in mind, but mat ball fits in with it fairly well. For those of you that never heard of mat ball, it is an approximate 24 inch wide by 40 inch long mat that is put down to cover the plate with the front of the mat concentric with the front of the plate, and the center of the plate centered laterally with the center of the mat. And if the ball has the correct arc, 6 ft to 10 ft, and it hits the mat, it is a strike. The issue is related to the speed of the ball. Under R6CG, the umpire has discretion to call a pitch being too fast. The book also says under R6CH it has to have a perceptible arc and attain the height of 6 ft to 10 ft. By definition, an arc is something shaped like a curve. Therefore, an object that travels approximately 50 ft, is released from approximately 3 ft above ground surface (abgs), attains the height of 6 ft abgs, drops down to 0 ft abgs to hit an area that is 24 inch by 40 inch, by definition, has followed an arc. That is objectively indisputable. By the laws of physics, an object that is to travel a distance of approximately 50 ft to 53.33 ft and is to approximately follow an arc path from 3ft abgs, to 6 ft abgs to 0 ft abgs and hit that 2 ft by 3.33 ft area, it has to travel within a narrow range of speed. Any speed above or below that required range will result in the object hitting the ground either prior to or after the required distance. Now the only factors that can be variables that could affect this mechanical law of motion is wind speed and ball rotation (i.e. spin on the ball). First with regard to spin, at the speed the object is travelling, and the amount of spin that can be attained by the human hand, the amount the object will vary from that calculated path is negligible (i.e. a machine could put an amount of spin on the ball without changing the velocity of the ball and cause a significant variance from the calculated path from a human hand thrown ball). With regard to wind, more wind will require more speed to achieve that same path and less wind accordingly will require less speed.
So the issue is, if a ball is pitched under the scenario described above, released by the human hand from 3 ft abgs attains a height of 6 ft abgs, descends to hit the mat at a distance between 50 and 53.33 ft, is it possible for that pitch to have traveled too fast for slowpitch softball pitched under ASA requirements? Note, I did not ask is it possible for an umpire who has total discretion to call it too fast, I am asking about a pitch that has met all the specified requirements of a pitch by ASA, is it possible that the ball was pitched too fast. If the answer is yes, please elaborate on how that conclusion is reached. I will disregard an answer that says by ASA rule, it is totally up to ump to make that judgment.

[Linknblue]

I put on a demonstration of slowpitch pitch heights a few years ago to show new/stubborn umpires what legal pitches actually look like. 10' was easy....but the 6' pitch proved something like you're saying. It ain't physically possible that we observed for a pitch to touch the 6' height and be too fast. It simply has to be a certain speed or it won't hit the mat. You slow the speed you miss in front, you speed up and it misses long. We didn't have anything to measure the actual speed but it surely wasn't too fast to catch batters off guard.

Now if you are calling a zone, the pitch can be faster because the ball has to pass thru a zone irrespective of where it lands.....it can land 4 feet long and still be a strike. I can see where "speed" can be an issue....not from a hitting standpoint though.

I'm with you, the excessive speed thing in ASA doesn't make a lot of sense....at least to me.

[jmkupka]

Simple motion physics... With a Y distance of 6', and an X distance of 53', there is one and only one velocity that will complete that equation. Nothing faster is possible, except on a planet with a greater gravitational pull.

If I could remember the equation itself, I could rattle off that velocity number in a heartbeat, but it's been a while

[prekowski]

Linknblue. That is interesting because I did the exact same thing, I built a rig that was 6 ft to 10 ft with PVC and then experimented with it to see how high those pitches really are. I proved that it was nearly impossible to throw a pitch lower than 6 ft and have it hit the mat without it being an extremely high velocity. I was an umpire at the time so in addition to using it for my own education, I wanted to show umpires of our league who had a tendency to call 6 to 7 ft pitches illegal. I have since gone back to playing and it is the same umpires minus me. They still are terrible at allowing 6 ft to 7 ft pitches without calling them illegal. It is because other pitches who have not perfected the pitch height like I have never pitch at the lower limits, so the umpires call them illegal because it is not the norm. It frustrates me to no end since I am now a pitcher who practices both ends of the strike zone, high and low and have become proficient at it by hours of practice. Furthermore, on the backstop there is a horizontal bar that is 6 ft high. I am 6 ft 2. When I release the ball and am trying to pitch to the lower limit, I watch the ball and if I can see the bar under the ball, I know for a fact it is at least 6 ft high. I called an umpire out to the mound before the game when I was practice pitching and asked him to just watch and see what I see, i.e. if you can see the bar under the ball, it has to be over 6 ft. This umpire proceeded to tell me, that it does not matter about the height even if it hits above 6 ft, because I will call it illegal because it is too fast which is my prerogative to call. How can you even argue with someone who has that kind of logic?

[SNIPERBBB]

Ship your guys here, id love to have them. Our guys here wont enforce the 6 ft minimum. Balls that barely reach the waist are called legal an alarming amount of time. The mat is the most evil device ever to be instituted. The only time they are to be used is if you have to pull clueless people out of the stands to umpire.

[prekowski]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Ship your guys here, id love to have them. Our guys here wont enforce the 6 ft minimum. Balls that barely reach the waist are called legal an alarming amount of time. The mat is the most evil device ever to be instituted. The only time they are to be used is if you have to pull clueless people out of the stands to umpire.

I cant possibly know how accurate your guys are at determining the lower limit (6 ft). What I can tell you is, that from a batters perspective, when you have a 6 ft pitch, about 97 out of a 100 batters will complain that pitch is too low. And those 3 out of a hundred who say no it is not too low are probably pitchers who have put in the time to determine how high a 6 ft pitch actually is. When I was practice pitching, I took two string lines on either side of the plate and ran them from the 6 ft height at pitchers rubber and tied it to the backstop so the lines when very taught were close to 6 ft between plate and rubber (plus or minus an inch) and demonstrated it to many guys and they were astounded at how low a pitch really was that was just above the string.

With regard to mat versus strike zone, be careful what you ask for. If you have guys that are bad calling mat ball when all you leave to judgment by the ump is one dimension (the vertical dimension i.e. height) and you put them calling strike zone where they have to make a judgment in 3 dimensions (vertical, horizontal and depth) then you are going to have a nightmare. That is the good thing about mat ball, it gives the batter much more ability to determine what is going to be called a strike because in the one area of judgment, the batter is told verbally by the ump if it is illegal, while the pitch is in flight, and the other two dimensions are cut and dry as it is either going to hit the mat or it isn't.
I am the first to admit umpires are human and subject to mistake just like everybody else and their judgment is not always going to be right (remember I was an ump too and know that as well as anybody) but when you have umpires that get paid to do their job, and they don't make the effort to try and improve their ability to judge by practice, and continue to make the same mistakes over and over, then they are deserving of criticism.
To some umpires, at least the ones I have experienced, their attitude is "my word is the law, even if I am not so good at interpreting the law and if you don't like my interpretation of the law", they will yell "QUIT RESISTING" as they beat you into submission.

[prekowski]

Originally Posted by jmkupka

Simple motion physics... With a Y distance of 6', and an X distance of 53', there is one and only one velocity that will complete that equation. Nothing faster is possible, except on a planet with a greater gravitational pull.

If I could remember the equation itself, I could rattle off that velocity number in a heartbeat, but it's been a while

JMK, I happen to be an engineer myself and am well versed in the mechanics of motion, its equations and curves as determined by the forces applied, and as you say, it is not just an opinion, it is an exact science that can not possibly be argued against. But it comes down to the universal response " don't confuse the issue with facts, it is a judgment call I am empowered to make, and you cant argue against it".

[BlueDevilRef]

Any ball that lands on the plate around here is a ball. Or was when I played adult tee ball.

All this sounds like a lot of conjecture for nada. It's slo pitch, hit the fricking ball over the fence and go have a beer.

[Tru_in_Blu]

We have a mix of leagues in slow pitch where some use the mat and some don't.

The first season we went to a mat in one league, hitting the mat was a strike, but hitting the plate was a ball. There was a lot of confusion when a ball landed on the part of the mat that touches the plate.

After a few games of chaos, it was decided that a ball hitting any part of the plate and/or mat would be a strike. The mat by itself was a pretty small target.

Thinking about t-ball, don't they typically place the stand directly on top of the plate?

Slight hi-jack while I have all these engineers and scientists mulling around this string....

We do a modified league and every couple of years the question comes up about pitch height because some pitchers throw loopy, slow pitches. A team this week complained that their opponent's pitcher was basically throwing slow pitch pitches so they thought there must be some rule about not being able to do that. We know there is no restriction.

The question I have is if a pitcher is throwing like that and the batter stands all the way to the front of the batter's box, could that type of pitch EVER be called a strike?

I'm looking for the "scientific explanation" here, not the "in my judgment" explanation. Not sure if I'll even understand the "scientific explanation", but just thought I'd pose the question.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

Slight hi-jack while I have all these engineers and scientists mulling around this string....

We do a modified league and every couple of years the question comes up about pitch height because some pitchers throw loopy, slow pitches. A team this week complained that their opponent's pitcher was basically throwing slow pitch pitches so they thought there must be some rule about not being able to do that. We know there is no restriction.

The question I have is if a pitcher is throwing like that and the batter stands all the way to the front of the batter's box, could that type of pitch EVER be called a strike?

I'm looking for the "scientific explanation" here, not the "in my judgment" explanation. Not sure if I'll even understand the "scientific explanation", but just thought I'd pose the question.

The science is actually pretty simple. It doesn't matter if a batter stands in the front of the box or the back of the box, the strike zone is the space over home plate. Surely you don't think the zone moves back and forth with the batters, there is a consistent distance from the pitcher's plate to the plate that pitchers pitch to.

So ignore where the ball is when it passes the batter in front (or back); a strike can be over the head in the front of the box (or below the knee in the back of the box), as long as it crosses some part of the plate at an appropriate height.

[Tru_in_Blu]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

The science is actually pretty simple. It doesn't matter if a batter stands in the front of the box or the back of the box, the strike zone is the space over home plate. Surely you don't think the zone moves back and forth with the batters, there is a consistent distance from the pitcher's plate to the plate that pitchers pitch to.

So ignore where the ball is when it passes the batter in front (or back); a strike can be over the head in the front of the box (or below the knee in the back of the box), as long as it crosses some part of the plate at an appropriate height.

I worded that poorly. Yes the strike zone is over the plate.

In a modified-pitch game, the strike zone is armpits to top of the knees. In slow pitch, it's the front knee to the back shoulder.

So can a pitcher throwing a 10 to 12 foot arc pitch manage to throw a pitch that would be ruled a fast pitch strike? I.E. could it manage to cross the plate at a height that would be at or below the armpits? Clearly, if the ball hits the plate, it's a ball.

Not sure what the average distance is between the armpit and top of the shoulder. Maybe 6 inches?

I find calling those type of pitches from the guys that throw slow, loopy pitches more difficult than from pitchers who can generate a little speed. The loopy pitch crosses the plate at eye-level and ends up in the catcher's glove about belt high. And the pitchers are whining to get that call because of where it ended up.

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Tru_in_Blu

I worded that poorly. Yes the strike zone is over the plate.

In a modified-pitch game, the strike zone is armpits to top of the knees. In slow pitch, it's the front knee to the back shoulder.

So can a pitcher throwing a 10 to 12 foot arc pitch manage to throw a pitch that would be ruled a fast pitch strike? I.E. could it manage to cross the plate at a height that would be at or below the armpits? Clearly, if the ball hits the plate, it's a ball.

Not sure what the average distance is between the armpit and top of the shoulder. Maybe 6 inches?

I find calling those type of pitches from the guys that throw slow, loopy pitches more difficult than from pitchers who can generate a little speed. The loopy pitch crosses the plate at eye-level and ends up in the catcher's glove about belt high. And the pitchers are whining to get that call because of where it ended up.

For what it is worth, practically any pitch that is a slow pitch strike (because it actually passed thru that zone, not because of where it landed, as called by many, if not most, and to completely exclude "mat-ball" definitions) is almost assuredly a strike in fast pitch. Only the highest (deep) pitches DON'T also pass thru the fastpitch, and thus modified, strike zone, passing the plate above the armpit.

As you have mentioned, the only slow pitch strike that isn't also a fast pitch and modified strike is the pitch crossing the plate between the top of the shoulder and the bottom of the armpit. They don't have to want that "slowpitch" strike, but it as much a strike as the intended changeup from a true modified or fastpitch pitcher that cuts thru the same zone.