Gerry Davis Mechanics

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Justme

But I still haven't heard a good reason to move your head rather than follow the ball to the F2 with your eyes.

Maybe you should try reading... how about out of your peripheral vision?

An umpire (IMO) who claims he can use the GD stance with a batter at the front of the box, and hence the catcher moving up to right behind the plate, and still see the entire plate, the ball crossing the plate (esp low) and the ball enter the catcher's glove without moving his head is, let's just say, not very self-aware.

Either that, or he doesn't care about calls at the plate beyond ball and strike (such as D3K). After all, the the batter swings (up in the box, before the ball crosses the plate) and the ball dives into the dirt, how do you know if the catcher caught or trapped the ball?

Or maybe you are calling the zone next to the batter instead of over the plate.

I don't care what stance you use; as I said, I was pointing out that the "camera" analogy was bogus. It is more important to keep the object you are trying to track in your field of view than it is to worry about slight head movement.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Maybe you should try reading... how about out of your peripheral vision?

My peripheral vision is great but it sounds like you might need to have yours checked if you're saying that you lose the ball that goes across the plate. Wait, don't get mad....

Originally Posted by Dakota

An umpire (IMO) who claims he can use the GD stance with a batter at the front of the box, and hence the catcher moving up to right behind the plate, and still see the entire plate, the ball crossing the plate (esp low) and the ball enter the catcher's glove without moving his head is, let's just say, not very self-aware.

I guess that this statement is coming from an expert in the GD Stance? It's working great for me. Not a single strike zone complaint in my short softball career. Maybe softball coaches are just easy going. When F2 moves forward I move forward. I have always liked it when F2 setups close to the plate.

Originally Posted by Dakota

Either that, or he doesn't care about calls at the plate beyond ball and strike (such as D3K). After all, the the batter swings (up in the box, before the ball crosses the plate) and the ball dives into the dirt, how do you know if the catcher caught or trapped the ball?

I watch the ball, even after the batter swings, especially when she is in the front part of the box. I can see if F2 catches the ball or not, maybe it's Justme

Originally Posted by Dakota

Or maybe you are calling the zone next to the batter instead of over the plate.

I was told that I can't do that in softball, fun to do in baseball though

Originally Posted by Dakota

I don't care what stance you use; as I said, I was pointing out that the "camera" analogy was bogus. It is more important to keep the object you are trying to track in your field of view than it is to worry about slight head movement.

Slight head movement????? As in turning it to one side or going from straight ahead to looking down?

After the pitch reaches the catcher's mitt then I move. I'm up and indicating strike (assuming for the sake of this post that it's a strike). If the ball was trapped I see it. A really good sign is that F2's mitt is turned down and I see that when the ball arrives.

Maybe I just haven't yet had right situation to change my beliefs. Until then I refuse to go over to the dark side

[Dakota]

I'm not trying to convince you of anything JM. Do what you want. You're set in your (erroneous) beliefs.

However, remember your high school geometry?

How deep is the plate?
How tall is your typical SB catcher when in the crouch?
Now, imaging this catcher jam up behind the plate.
How tall do you have to be to see the entire plate while in your stance 3,4,+ (whatever variation you use) feet behind the catcher?

One of two things... if you think you can see the entire plate,

You aren't really using the GD stance, or
You are kidding yourself (don't get mad).

[mick]

Originally Posted by Dakota

...remember your high school geometry?

How deep is the plate?
How tall is your typical SB catcher when in the crouch?
Now, imaging this catcher jam up behind the plate.
How tall do you have to be to see the entire plate while in your stance 3,4,+ (whatever variation you use) feet behind the catcher?

One of two things... if you think you can see the entire plate,

You aren't really using the GD stance, or
You are kidding yourself (don't get mad).

Tom,
I use the GD system and I do not disagree with anything you are saying about the low outside pitch, but that disappearing [in front of the catcher's right shoulder] pitch can still be called because it is extemely easy to see the path of the pitch.
The front outside of the plate is very visible, because part of the system is that I sit up higher than chin-to-top-of-helmet behind the catcher. And eventhough, as you profess and as I agree, the outside back of the plate can be partially hidden, I do know where that corner is, cuz it ain't movin'.

But what I may lose on that back corner [and I still have a 50-50 chance of gettin' it right ] I feel that I have a much better command of all the other pitches in my outside zone. By watching the ball from the pitcher's hand to that back outside corner, it is effortless to determine where the pitch entered the zone and to interpolate the track of the ball.

Backing off the catcher never made much to me sense either. Again, I agree, you lose more of the plate than if you are up close, but as I back up, I sit a little higher and I get a longer [time] track of the pitch in return for seeing less plate. But again, the plate hasn't moved and strike zone remains clear.

The less fatigue thing is huge! Often, I would have to really mentally bare down in the 4th-6th inning, before the excitement of the 7th got my juices flowing for increased concentration. With that more upright stance and better look, a lot less energy (mental and physical) is consumed and the sharper I am in the last half.

2-3 years ago, I was really, really comfortable in the slot, but I felt I was losing [thus guessing] too many outside pitches, so I experimented. The "new" system, for me, is almost like sitting in an armchair and watching the balls and strikes on a TV screen.

It suits me. And like I said before, ..."great view!"
mick

[BretMan]

I've now had the chance to experiment with the GD stance in several baseball games- won't be doing any fastpitch softball for a few more weeks- and will agree 100% with the reduced fatigue factor.

What the Gerry Davis stance really reminds me of is that illustration shown in the back of the ASA "Umpire Edition" rule book that demonstrates the correct stance for slow pitch softball!

[Justme]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I'm not trying to convince you of anything JM. Do what you want. You're set in your (erroneous) beliefs.

However, remember your high school geometry?

How deep is the plate?
How tall is your typical SB catcher when in the crouch?
Now, imaging this catcher jam up behind the plate.
How tall do you have to be to see the entire plate while in your stance 3,4,+ (whatever variation you use) feet behind the catcher?

One of two things... if you think you can see the entire plate,

You aren't really using the GD stance, or
You are kidding yourself (don't get mad).

Dakota;

I do not get mad, I enjoy the banter....hearing other umpires opinions is helpful, regardless of whether or not it's accurate

I have found that softball umpires tend not to like the GD stance while it is becoming more widely used in baseball, especially by us ‘older’ umpires. My knees just won’t hold up for a long game using the more traditional stances and I’ve tried them all over the years.

I guess that I have used the GD stance so much that I know longer have the limitations that you mentioned, or I have learned to work around them. I can see where if the catcher crowded over the plate it would be difficult to see the outside corner but I still have a good visual (in my mind) of where it is. Like Mick says “the plate doesn’t move.”

The overall view of the strike zone that is afforded by the GD stance far outweighs, IMHO, any of the ‘faults’ that are said to the associated with it. As I’m sure you know, this stance, like anything you try new, needs to be learned properly (not just by reading about it) and practiced.

[IRISHMAFIA]

2-3 years ago, I was really, really comfortable in the slot, but I felt I was losing [thus guessing] too many outside pitches, so I experimented. The "new" system, for me, is almost like sitting in an armchair and watching the balls and strikes on a TV screen.

Mick,

If you were in the slot and not seeing the outside pitches, is it possible you were not set up in a heel-toe, toe-heel position?

What the Gerry Davis stance really reminds me of is that illustration shown in the back of the ASA "Umpire Edition" rule book that demonstrates the correct stance for slow pitch softball!

Brett,

The book illustration exaggerates the FP set position. The ASA stance is basically the same for both games, just that you may need to drop a little lower to see a higher pitch in the SP game come through the strike zone.

Now, some you FP only guys are probably thinking how ridiculous, you don't drop to a set position for SP. Well, yeah, you do and be a better umpire for it.

[IRISHMAFIA]

“the plate doesn’t move.”

No, but the batter, ball and catcher do and not necessarily after the ball passes the plate. The ball is the primary focal point. You cannot have a call without the ball. Which, IMO, means the umpire needs to know where that ball is all the time, not just when it approaches the plate. And if someone believes that is 100% attainable without moving one's head to track the ball, more power to you 'cause I don't think it is possible to do that and have full view of the strike zone.

[mick]

Quote:

2-3 years ago, I was really, really comfortable in the slot, but I felt I was losing [thus guessing] too many outside pitches, so I experimented. The "new" system, for me, is almost like sitting in an armchair and watching the balls and strikes on a TV screen.

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Mick,

If you were in the slot and not seeing the outside pitches, is it possible you were not set up in a heel-toe, toe-heel position?

Hi Mike,
I felt that I was seeing the pitches just great! I could see the pop into the mitt.
I was in tight and up close... just shy of personal.

What I was uncomfortable with was the pitch location on the edge of my outside zone, particularly the letter high, breaking-away ball, but generally all the strikes in my outside zone.

By setting higher and deeper, that outside zone opened-up for me, in large part because my nose [now lined up with the inside edge of the plate, regardless of the catcher] was easily 6" closer to the outside zone, and I could clearly see the pitcher's release (to track the ball) without any visual blocking by a wiggly batter or antsy catcher.

mick