Why move pitching distance?
 

Ok, I have to ask.....it seemed like the majority of people out there we in support of moving the pitching distance to 43'. So I ask what is the reasoning for wanting to move this back???

Safety. It gives the pitcher .02 seconds more response time on a batted ball hit back to the circle.

From a pitchers parents point of view .. and not necessarily my own .. just echoing what others say .. part of it is safety, part is the flip flop back and forth between 40 and 43 from HS ball, part and probably most importantly is colleges want to see how girls can do from a college distance. Puts those who are not playing Gold travel at a disadvantage for recruiting. As we hear the 18A ASA Nationals are turning into a B tournament because it's assumed and probably correct that the best players are at the Gold level.

Aside from these, I think folks feel that the 43 foot game is a better game to watch - more hitting. Only the stud pitchers are really able to dominate from that level, girls have more time to see the ball, etc.

And one more thought: It will partially prevent some of the younger kids from moving up an age level. That would remain to be seen though.

The poster named for a non-tremolo Fender guitar pretty much covered all the bases on this topic. :D

Could never stand the tremolo bar. Drove me nuts. :)

Last year, ISF moved international competition to 43'. College coaches have been requesting that they be able to scout at 43', because it would be easier for them to see players playing at the collegiate distance. In kneejerk reaction, ASA made 18 Gold (only) 43', without realizing the secondary results. Those results include 1) college coaches now treating 18A as B, since it is easier for them to look at players playing at 43', 2) teams that can't compete at Gold trying to move up, just so that more college coaches will look at their players, 3) players on 18A teams that try to play some 43' exposure tournaments struggling at 40', too, as a result of changing back and forth, 4) open tournaments having trouble filling brackets with teams that play from the same distances, 5) field owners having issues with placing pitching plates, 6) pitchers pitching from 43' having issues with a 40' pitching plate on that field interfering with their natural drag, etc., etc.

It is impossible to think that 18 Gold will go backwards, now. To fix these issues requires others to move to that same distance. At a minimum, all 18U teams need to play from the same distance. Many 16U teams want to play up with the big dogs at exposure tournaments; to make that happen without the same issues, they need to play from the same distance. Some people think that 14U should also change to the same distance, which would almost guarantee that NFHS (high school) would change, too, since all their ages would be playing 43' in travel ball.

Hope this helps you understand the real issues. The result would be more offense; not more safety. Pitchers that have dominated at 40' are much less dominant at 43'. Batters gaining .02 seconds reaction time to hit the ball is much more valuable than pitchers gaining .02 reaction time to defend their bodies. NCAA statistics showed substantial increase in offense (earned runs) the year the rule changed.

The flip side; why NOT change the pitching distance to 43'? Because the players can't be effective from that distance? Because no one wants the college coaches to influence the ASA game? Because making the exposure and open tournaments easier to administer for the better needs of the teams isn't a good idea?

All these make sense, and you have also expressed some of the concerns / difficulties that I have thought through in my mind. I was thinking of where does it stop? Lower level rec teams have a hard time hitting the plate from 40 feet let alone 43!! And the whole travel vs NFHS, switching back and forth would be VERY difficult in my mind! I do understand that the upper level it is important for college scouts to see what they would be getting but I just have this fear of how it will snowball down to the lower levels. I also agree that the extra flight time of the ball give the batter more time to aim that ball at the pitcher just like it give the pitcher more time to recover, and it would seem to my simple mind that the batter is going to win that war most of the time :)

IF it could be tested and shown to improve batter averages, increase scoring, and make it more interesting to those other than SB fans and as in such increase exposure and TV time, I would even favor going to 46.

I, on the other hand, could not imagine owning a Strat without one.

I do love my Strat but it's been cased now for a bit as I've been lured over to a Tele. Funny how much difference there is between the two. I've got a 64 Princeton ( non reverb ) that I play it through. Great sound.

Talk about yer thread hijacks....we have not only changed the subject of this one, but have taken it entirely out of the realm of softball officiating! :D

My primary amp is a 62 Bassman, though it is in desperate need of a retubing right now. I have never owned a Tele, though I have played one or two. There is definitely a major difference there.

Nice amp.

http://www.ampwares.com/ffg/bassman_blonde_6G6-A.html

I play mostly at home now and I really love my Peavey Classic 30, I think I got it back in about 93 or so. I also have a '46 Gibson BR6. Cheap little amp but the tone is incredible, original Rola speaker.

If you haven't visited here you may enjoy it. Great forum for amp and vintage gear folks.

http://www.fenderforum.com/forum.html

Do they also discuss softball? :D :D :eek: ;)

:D
Only when somebody takes them off-topic.
:D