Gerry Davis Mechanics

[tcblue13]

I read an article linked from the Baseball forum and was wondering what the thought is about these mechanics and their relation to fastpitch?

[BretMan]

tcblue,

I posed this same question here about a month ago, on a thread discussing plate mechanics. No one responded (except for one person that, judging from his response, had no idea what the GD system was).

I have experimented with this stance and there are pros and cons- just like with any other stance. I've used it in some scrimmage games and practices, but when it comes to "real" games I tend to go back to what I am familiar with and has worked for me in the past. One less thing to worry about, I guess.

Aside from the post I mentioned above, I have never seen any discussion of this stance on any of the numerous softball boards I frequent, nor have I ever seen this stance used in any fastpitch softball games.

So, I'm still up in the air on this one and might try it some more this spring. Maybe I'm just an old dog and it's a new trick!

[Justme]

Originally Posted by tcblue13

I read an article linked from the Baseball forum and was wondering what the thought is about these mechanics and their relation to fastpitch?

I am in my second season using the GD stance for baseball (after many, many years of using the slot). I’m also in my first year doing HS softball and I use the GD stance. I personally find that it gives me a better view of the plate (especially the outside corners) and the ball all the way to F2’s mitt. It also is less stressful on my worn out knees.

Here’s a portion of some information that I found on Officiating.com explaining the GD Stance. I do not remember who wrote it so I’ll apologize to the author in advance.

Assume the Set position:

Spread your legs much wider than your shoulders
Lean over and put both hands on your knees
Don’t push down on your shin guards

Get comfortable:

Rest you weight on your knees
Lock and tuck your elbows
Just before the time of the pitch drop your seat about 4”

See the plate:

Put you nose on the inside corner and keep it there
Move if the batter or catcher blocks your view of the pitcher’s release point
Work an arms length (about 3’) behind the catcher

[AtlUmpSteve]

The GD stance has several weaknesses in softball, in my opinion. The first is that it leaves the umpire's head very high looking down through the zone, forcing a judgment on the top of the zone, and making the judgment more difficult at the knees; compared to setting your eyes at the top of the zone, and making anything above your eyes a ball, and anything below your eyes a possible strike. That can be overlooked with consistency, but it still requires more judgment than necessary.

The second issue is much more problematic. In the softball game, the batter is most often in the front of the batters box, and the catcher then moves up to a point almost directly behind the plate. If you, as an umpire, set up 3' behind the catcher, the last time you will see the ball is 3' in front of the plate, because the catcher's body will take that space in front of her away from you. This is not an issue in baseball, when batters universally stand in the back of a box that is 4' behind the plate; it is a huge and insurmountable problem when the batter is 4' in front of the plate.

If you claim to see the ball across the plate into the catchers glove with that stance with the catcher directly behind home plate, you are only fooling yourself.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

The GD stance has several weaknesses in softball, in my opinion. The first is that it leaves the umpire's head very high looking down through the zone, forcing a judgment on the top of the zone, and making the judgment more difficult at the knees; compared to setting your eyes at the top of the zone, and making anything above your eyes a ball, and anything below your eyes a possible strike. That can be overlooked with consistency, but it still requires more judgment than necessary.

The second issue is much more problematic. In the softball game, the batter is most often in the front of the batters box, and the catcher then moves up to a point almost directly behind the plate. If you, as an umpire, set up 3' behind the catcher, the last time you will see the ball is 3' in front of the plate, because the catcher's body will take that space in front of her away from you. This is not an issue in baseball, when batters universally stand in the back of a box that is 4' behind the plate; it is a huge and insurmountable problem when the batter is 4' in front of the plate.

If you claim to see the ball across the plate into the catchers glove with that stance with the catcher directly behind home plate, you are only fooling yourself.

I have not experienced the problems with the upper & lower zone you write about. I watch the ball and easily see where it goes in the GD stance. In fact as I said before, I get a better (longer) view of the ball. I have found the GD stance to be the best stance I have used in 30 years of umpiring.

I could go into a long, but probably futile, discussion with you on the how your experiences with the GD stance are probably due to you not knowing how to work the stance properly.

Just MHO

[AtlUmpSteve]

Originally Posted by Justme

I have not experienced the problems with the upper & lower zone you write about. I watch the ball and easily see where it goes in the GD stance. In fact as I said before, I get a better (longer) view of the ball. I have found the GD stance to be the best stance I have used in 30 years of umpiring.

I could go into a long, but probably futile, discussion with you on the how your experiences with the GD stance are probably due to you not knowing how to work the stance properly.

Just MHO

My experiences are as an evaluator; I have never personally tried the GD stance. But, I have evaluated and worked with numerous top baseball umpires who have attempted to use the same stance in softball, and that has exposed the weaknesses. For that reason, I have to reject your supposition, as my working the stance isn't a factor.

The upper and lower zone issues can be, as I said, overcome. But, as a technique for teaching the masses, the other method (eyes at the top of the zone) creates more consistency with less judgment involved.

A drop ball pitcher is especially effective with a GD stance plate umpire; all batters move up to hit the drop while it is up, but the ball consistently will drop before the plate with the PU never seeing it drop off the knees.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

My experiences are as an evaluator; I have never personally tried the GD stance. But, I have evaluated and worked with numerous top baseball umpires who have attempted to use the same stance in softball, and that has exposed the weaknesses. For that reason, I have to reject your supposition, as my working the stance isn't a factor.

The upper and lower zone issues can be, as I said, overcome. But, as a technique for teaching the masses, the other method (eyes at the top of the zone) creates more consistency with less judgment involved.

A drop ball pitcher is especially effective with a GD stance plate umpire; all batters move up to hit the drop while it is up, but the ball consistently will drop before the plate with the PU never seeing it drop off the knees.

I had a feeling that we would never agree :-)

[Greg Fox]

I have used the Gerry Davis stance in both softball and baseball for the past 2 seasons. I do not have any trouble seeing the both sides of the plate and have no more trouble judging a low pitch when the batter is all the way forward in the box than in the heel and toe stance. It has helped me be more consistant primarily because I am set well ahead of the pitch.

[bkbjones]

Last year (in a futile attempt to work after I injured my knee) I used the Gerry Davis stance.

I ditched it for one good reason.

If you are using the GD stance you are having to make an additional judgement: at the top of the zone.

Using the softball stance the way we teach everyone, you don't have to make a judgement. If your eyes are set at the top of the zone, you don't have to judge: if your eyes go up to track the ball through the zone, it's high.

[RPatrino]

There is one major advantage to using the GD system. Your head height NEVER varies, you get the same look for every batter and every pitch. You have a consistent LOCK IN on every pitch. Therefore you are much more consistent then when you move your head for every batter depending on where the top of the strike zone is. The one major problem I see when doing softball and baseball, is the movement of the head while tracking the pitch.

The "judgment" issues you speak of are insignificant, the top of the strike zone is the top of the strike zone, and if the ball passes within that area its a strike.

Almost universally, evaluators do not like the GD. They will always say something like..."gee, you were really consistent today, and you called a great zone. But lose that crazy stance".

Bob P.

[bkbjones]

1. I don't move my head, unless it is a very slight movement. I almost always track with my eyes. If my head is moving it usually means I am doing something wrong somewhere, or a simple case of anal-cranial inversion on my part (not true of everyone, but for me it is).

2. Most every batter is a different height. Why not make it easy and lock at the top of each batter's strike zone.

3. I'm damned consistent...a heckuva lot more than the baseball umpire I helped evaluate last night who was using GD (and not using it well).

4. I think the GD don right is an excellent baseball mechanic. But, IMHO, it is not right for fastpitch.

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally Posted by RPatrino

There is one major advantage to using the GD system. Your head height NEVER varies, you get the same look for every batter and every pitch. You have a consistent LOCK IN on every pitch. Therefore you are much more consistent then when you move your head for every batter depending on where the top of the strike zone is. The one major problem I see when doing softball and baseball, is the movement of the head while tracking the pitch.

The "judgment" issues you speak of are insignificant, the top of the strike zone is the top of the strike zone, and if the ball passes within that area its a strike.

Almost universally, evaluators do not like the GD. They will always say something like..."gee, you were really consistent today, and you called a great zone. But lose that crazy stance".

Bob P.

Well, I don't see being "locked in" as a good thing for any umpire. The strike zone consistantly changes as does the catcher's positioning.

There is no problem with moving one's head to track the ball. Worked well for me 40 years ago when I started doing baseball and still does in softball. Turning or moving the upper body would be another story.

[mcrowder]

I have used GD since learning of it, as I have a bad back, and this stance REALLY helps on the back.

However, it has come with a price in softball. And I believe AtlUmp has nailed it when he says the difference is due to the catcher being MUCH farther back in baseball. Essentially, the spot you stand (as compared to the plate) in baseball without GD and in softball WITH GD is nearly identical. There's no catcher in your way for the low outside pitch in baseball, plus the angle of the pitch makes it easier to track with GD than the angle of a softball pitch.

My zone at the lower outside is probably slightly worse with GD than it used to be.

I disagree with those that say there is more trouble calling the high strike with GD - I have simply not had that experience. I'd also say that my consistency in all but the lower outside corner has improved since switching.

[Justme]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Well, I don't see being "locked in" as a good thing for any umpire. The strike zone consistantly changes as does the catcher's positioning.

There is no problem with moving one's head to track the ball. Worked well for me 40 years ago when I started doing baseball and still does in softball. Turning or moving the upper body would be another story.

Do you really don't think that not being 'locked in' prior to the pitch is a good thing? An umpire should be locked in and not moving at the time of the pitch.

I have never heard anyone say that it's okay to move your head when tracking the ball. Keep your head still and track the ball with your eyes is what I have always been told. If this is a softball thing I'll have to admit that I have very little experience but I do not see why it would be different than baseball.

Those of us who work the GD stance (properly) have no problem with the strike zone, regardless of the size of the batter or where F2 sets up. I have no problem with any portion of the zone, high/low or in/out. I have brought my GD stance with me as a fill-in HS softball umpire this season and while some comments have been made as to where I'm setting up no complaints have come from coaches or evaluators as to my strike zone and my consistency.

Of course in HS/college/adult baseball I see more and more umpires using the GD stance. But that’s a story for another forum

[JFA67]

I have been out of baseball for many years and didn't hear about the GD system until recently. Does anyone have a link to reference materail on it? Thanks.