Hitting According to the Count and Situation

Count and situation…

The better understanding a hitter has of pitching in general can help a lot.

Most pitchers will have their control pitch, their out pitch, and maybe a strike out pitch. Different situations pertain to the pitcher as well as the hitter. Finding out what these pitches are as soon as possible is a big advantage to a hitter. Often hitters know this before they even face a pitcher, especially at the MLB level. When a pitcher has three quality pitches he can command… you’re in trouble, but luckily not many of those types exist.

Usually a pitchers control pitch is the fastball. Thus a hitter should be thinking fastball in most counts. Some crafty guys will throw a slower speed fastball with a little sink on 2-0, 3-1 counts trying to get a ground ball. Knowing who does this can be a great advantage. Mike Boddiker made a living off the BP fastball with a little sink.

Knowing the pitcher is very important to a hitter and knowing the hitter is very important to a pitcher. IMO the pitcher is at an advantage when both have never seen each other.

Here is a philosophy that we might have used as a general guide. This is against most pitchers. Sometimes this could change. Example: pitcher has shown he starts most hitters with a curveball for a strike.

0-0 Look fastball
1-0 Look fastball
2-0 Look fastball
3-0 Look fastball
0-1 Look pitchers out pitch
0-2 Don’t chase
1-1 Look pitchers out pitch
1-2 Look pitchers K pitch
2-1 Look fastball
2-2 Look pitchers K pitch
3-1 Look fastball
3-2 Look fastball

This is very general and some might disagree, but there are 12 possible counts and at least 7 of them are fastball counts to a good hitter.

Whatever a pitchers best strike out pitch is… is what you’re likely to see with 2 strikes (could be FB, CB, SL, CH) This is the pitch he has with the best stuff! This is why some hitters will adjust to a 2 strike approach mentally and possibly physically. Often people talk about choking up, but I never liked that. Much prefer spreading out just a bit more. Some hitters even go less or no stride with 2 strikes on him. The mental approach can be to waste the best borderline pitches to thinking opposite field.

Pg,

I agree with a lot of what you say but here are a few points where I think differently.

On 1-1 and 2-2, (and we are discussing this in very general terms, because every pitcher is different) I do not generally look for the pitchers out pitch, because on 1-1 he doesn't want to get to 2-1 the same way he doesn't want to get to 3-2 from 2-2. I will usually look fastball for that reason in those counts but they are different because one count has two strikes. This takes me into my two strike approach...

My line of thinking here is that by the time I have reached two strikes I hope to have seen all that he can throw me. This being said, my approach will be to look for a fastball away and think about making contact up the middle/other way. Why look for a fastball away? Because I have to wait longer to hit a fastball away than a fastball in, and to hit any offspeed you have to wait. If I look for offspeed IMO I have no shot at hitting a fastball. This way I'm giving myself the opportunity to stay on offspeed while being able to catch up to fastballs.

You may ask what if he throws a fastball in? With two strikes you have to concede something, because you can't look for any pitch in any location.

As to choking up or spreading out with two strikes, I do both. The choking up part I got from reading The Science of Hitting by Ted Williams and from watching Barry Bonds everyday as a kid. Spreading out I developed in college, and when I hit a couple home runs on two strikes with that approach, I was sold. To me choking up gives you greater bat control and spreading out shortens my stride and allows me to see the ball just a bit longer. True, I am giving away some power, but like I said before, you have to concede something to the pitcher when you have two strikes.

As for my mental approach, I take a lot of pride in my two strike at-bats. I step out, take a deep breath, go through my same routine before every pitch, and tell myself that "this f***** is not going to strike me out." I am going to PUT THE BALL IN PLAY. I am going to make him get me out on a ball in play. There are a lot of holes out there, but its tough to find them if you don't put the ball in play. That comes back to the question of what about the inside pitch. I have put some really bad swings on inside fastballs with two strikes and I have broken many a bat that way, but I have also got my share of hits on those pitches. I could care less if it is a jam-shot, broken bat dinker over the third baseman's head, because a knock is a knock, and I know that I was able to get a hit because my approach was consistent and correct and I BATTLED WITH TWO STRIKES.

I get a lot of hits and a lot of walks using this approach. The two most important things to take from a two strike approach are MENTALITY and CONSISTENCY, in how you approach the at bat and how you stick with your gameplan of looking fastball away. You have to battle with two strikes, or the K's will pile up against you.

Great posts. I think another factor we need to think about is - Where am I hitting in the order? And does the pitcher know me and if he does what is my reputation or what is the book on me? I have seen good hitters struggle in showcase baseball because they are used to hitting in the 4 hole for example - and such they are used to being pitched a certain way. Now they are in the 8 hole and they are surprised or caught off balance by the way they are pitched. Understanding these types of things can go a long way imo.

Counts and how you approach the next pitch change by how you got in that count. You can say 1-0 look fastball. But what if that first pitch was a fb and your in the 4 hole? Is the pitcher going to try and throw another fb? He is probaly going to think Im sitting on that and now he is going to throw off speed for a strike. But lets say your in the 8 hole. Same situation. Is he going to take the chance of getting down 2-0 by throwing an off speed pitch to the 8 hole hitter? Probaly not so Im sitting on fb again. And then there are the number of outs and baserunners to consider.

Has the pitcher shown the ability to throw strikes with his off speed stuff? Has he doubled up with off speed pitches to other batters? Good hitters watch the game. They look for patterns and they look to see what the pitcher throws when he needs a strike , and out pitch etc etc.

In general, two strike routines don't work. The MLB batting average with two strikes isn't real good. What carries a hitter to two strikes puts him at the mercy of the pitcher.

One MLB hitting instructor commented..."if two strike routines work, use them in every count."

Over the course of a season, if you take your best swing at all counts you will be more successful than if you have a different approach with two strikes. Most hitters take thousands of swings at the end of a bat. Choking up is a different feel.

I'm not saying don't try to anticipate pitches, it increases your odds of getting a hit. I'm not saying don't take pitches the other way nor am I saying don't give up a part of the plate. I am focusing on spreading the legs and shortening the bat. Spreading the legs not only leads to double play balls, but the bat enters at a different angle into the hitting area.

baseballpapa,

There are definitely two schools of thought on this. It's my belief (I could be wrong) that most good hitters have a two strike approach that differs than their normal approach. Both mentally and physically.

The batting average with 2 strikes will always be much less than with 1 or 0 strikes. Your only out on strike three! You would have to chart the number of pitches that are swung and missed or taken for a strike on all counts to come up with any meaningful stat. I'm not sure but if we look at that stat, I'm thinking there will be fewer pitches missed or taken for a strike (strike 3) than any other count. There are also fewer balls hit well because of the different approach.

I disagree. First of all those stats are meaningless. Because you have no way of knowing who was using a two strike approach and who was not. It is very easy to get two strikes on you even when your using a great approach at the plate. For instance - First pitch deuce painted outside corner taken for a strike. 0-1 Second pitch fastball inside corner fouled off. 0-2 What have you done wrong to be in this 0-2 count? You did a good job taking the deuce. You took a nice cut on a fb you were looking for and just missed it. Now you have to battle your azz off. You go into "You are not going to put a K in that book besides my name mode". You find a way to put the ball in play. You widen up and shorten up. This approach works. It has worked for our players bigtime. Im all for looking to mash the heck out of the baseball untill we get two strikes. Then Im about making sure we make you make pitches and play defense. You have to have a tough mentality at the plate with two strikes. You have to take it personal imo.

Hey PGStaff,

I agree there are two schools of thought. Also, some hitters cannot or do not have a two strike routine because it didn't work for them.

I used to take a hard line against two strike routines. I'm in the middle now -- some can execute them and do better than if they didn't have a two strike routine, most hitters or at least a lot cannot. There is not enough time to make those adjustments.

Some don't either use it or wouldn't be improved by it. I would like to know the swing and miss stats with 2 strikes versus other counts, but I agree with Coach May, it may not mean much. I would think there are more or equal wiffs with 2 strikes because a pitcher had the ability to get the hitter there.

I still believe teaching all hitters 2 strike routines doesn't work. I also think only fast guys should even practice bunting for a base hit. In other words, it's different for different hitters. I'm not sure Manny even knows what the count is after 0-0. I've seen him take strike three and the umpire had to tell him he is out, and take ball four and have to be told he has first base.

If a hitter has less than 20% extra base hits to total hits and puts the ball in play more with a two strike routine, why not use the 2 strike routine earlier in the count? Also, do you really want Bonds or A-Rod with a guy on first taking a two strike approach by shortening up? Over the course of a season a power guy will do better by just looking for a pitch to drive in any count. All hitters have a greater chance of hitting into a double play if they take a shorter approach with a runner on first.

This is the meat and potatoes of the game from a hitting stand point.

The situations are many as are the approaches to each.

Starting with the probabilities and statistics garnered by the advanced scout, everything then falls to the batters talents, and as was stated, what is working for the pitcher that day.

Just the 'no runner', 'no out' scenario could be chapters depending on the batters ability to make contact and his propensity to strike out.

I may be wrong in this assumption, but this thread may be best presented without making reference to individual players and their talents. We can call them 'power guys', 'good contact hitters' or some generic term so as to address all players at any age.

.

I would have to ask myself, what job did I have when I came up to bat? What am I being paid to do? What is the game situation?

As a Coach, would I really want Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa, Ortiz, Bonds, etc., slapping a ball oppo in the beginning or middle of a game??? One swing and I could have a run.

As far as what pitch is swung and missed more often, I would have to say strike one. Lots of 0-1 hits and outs made before it ever gets to strike two.

As far as a hitter's normal routine, as someone said, good hitters watch the game to see what a pitcher is doing on all counts and looks for patterns. When you play a 162 game schedule it is possible to know how a pitcher has pitched you in the past, but in High School and younger, you don't have that luxury.

Is it possible to chart the other team's pitcher's pitches? Good thing for a not today Pitcher to do, ya think?

micmeister

Your final line is a key line-- we have our players watch the pitchers--our batters are continually discussing between themselveas the pitchers sequence of pitches--

From a players perspective, I always look fastball no matter what the count. When your patient at the plate you will always get at least 1 or 2 hittable fastballs.

Really funny

"I looked for the same pitch my whole career, a breaking ball. All of the time. I never worried about the fastball. They couldn't throw it past me, none of them."
Quote by Hank Aaron....

Beemax, can we get your comments on the above quote?

Why do you think Hank said this?....And, what do you think Hank was implying, as it goes against what most everyone on here is saying?

Bluedog there are guys that take that approach. Especially in HS. I have a couple of guys that can do just that and they absolutely rake. I also have guys that are blown away if they are not sitting on fb all the time. Different abilities mean different approaches. Everyone does not have the same skills at the plate.

Coach May, yes I agree........

I do think they would do better to work on getting better at hitting the fast stuff, though......

To become a great hitter, you gotta be able to hit speed........Then, and only then, should you learn how to hit offspeed, IMO.......

Bluedog I agree 100% with that statement. You must be able to hit the fastball in order to be a hitter. Here is the problem in HS. There are what I call threshold hitters. They can hit a fastball up to a certain velocity and then they are overmatched completely even when they are sitting fastball. It comes from playing inferior competition their whole life and then facing guys that over match them. The long swing and poor approach that was successfull against the lower level pitching will not allow them to have success against the better arms. I have seen pitchers sit at 83-85 and dominate 6 or 7 guys in a line up. What you try to do as a coach is teach guys a short swing that allows them to make contact. The fact is not everyone is capable of hitting a 90 mph fastball. And the fact is not everyone is capable of hitting a 85 mph fastball. So you learn to shorten the swing and make contact. I see these same pitchers that dominate with the mid 80's stuff get raked in the summer by line ups that have quality hitters 1-9. If you can not hit my fastball you wont get a chance to hit my offspeed. Why would I slow it down for you? Most hits against top flight pitchers in HS come from pitchers pitching down to the bat speed of the hitters.

Gamer Im glad you brought that up. I throw BP everyday. I mean at least 5 days a week sometimes 6 days a week. It is ridiculous how much better hitters kids become when they hit with wood. The flaws in the swing with metal are masked by the bat. The flaws in the swing with wood give you instant feedback. There is no doubt the more you hit with wood the better metal bat hitter you become. Swing the wood everyday. Hit the entire round of bp and all your t work soft toss etc with wood. Hit your last 5 or 6 swings only with metal. I will bet you those 5 or 6 swings will be so sweet. The ball will absolutely be mashed. Go back around and do the same thing with your metal bat. Get back in the cage with metal. Take 5 or 6 swings. They will not be nearly as clean and hit as sweet. Try it. Metal bats ruin hitters.

Baseballpapa,

I strongly disagree with the fact that two strike "routines" don't work.

Let me clear something up: I use the same "routine" before and after every pitch. My "approach" changes with each pitch. This "approach" is dictated by the pitcher, the count, the score, who's on base. IMO, if I took the same approach with two strikes as I took at 2-0, for example, my strikeouts would increase while my walks would decrease. Who is the MLB hitting instructor who you quoted?

You say choking up is a different feel...I completely agree. I feel that it gives me better bat control and as said before, I learned it from Ted Williams and Barry Bonds, so I'm going to stcik with it and teach it as well to others.

To quote you again "Spreading the legs not only leads to double play balls, but the bat enters at a different angle into the hitting area." Are you saying that if you spread out with two strikes, you will have more at bats with a runner on first and less than two out? (okay that was a joke) I'm guessing you are saying that more ground balls are hit when you spread out. Spreading out differs from guy to guy, so IMO you can't make a claim like that because "spreading out" means something different for each guy. For me, when i spread out, I am simply starting my stance where my stride ends with less than two strikes and I have no stride. So for you to say the bat enters a different angle into the hitting area when you spread out, i disagree again. I am in the same position I always am at the end of my stride, I just don't stride so I can see the ball that much better. My bat angle is the same.

BlueDog,

As to the Aaron quote, that obviously worked for him and is worth a try. I have tried it and been frozen by too many fastballs; I simply don't think I can hit with that approach. IMO, when Jake Peavey is on the mound throwing 95 mile an hour sinkers and nasty sliders, you better pick one or the other, because you can't sit on both pitches and react to both. If you want to try and sit slider and just react to the fastball, be my guest. I just know that for me, it doesn't work. Again, Aaron hit more homers than anyone (naturally), so I don't doubt that he used this approach. I just cant sit offspeed and react to the fastball.

quote:

"I looked for the same pitch my whole career, a breaking ball. All of the time. I never worried about the fastball. They couldn't throw it past me, none of them."
Quote by Hank Aaron....

Hank might have said this, but he didn't face Mariano Rivera. And I bet even old Hank would be looking for a fastball with the bases loaded and a 3-1 count. What ya think?

Hank Aaron

quote:

Guessing what the pitcher is going to throw is eighty percent of being a successful hitter. The other twenty percent is just execution.

quote:

"I looked for the same pitch my whole career, a breaking ball. All of the time. I never worried about the fastball. They couldn't throw it past me, none of them."
Quote by Hank Aaron....

If he always looked breaking ball, then why would he need to guess? One of these quotes are wrong... maybe both of them.

PG,

If I was facing Mariano Rivera, the situation and count pretty much go out of play because almost every pitch he throws is a cutter. As for my approach if I were to face him, I'm still working on that. If I ever make it to the show I just hope that he's retired I think Hank would be looking fastball as well 3-1 with the bases loaded, because I know I sure as hell would, but who knows?

quote:

Guessing what the pitcher is going to throw is eighty percent of being a successful hitter. The other twenty percent is just execution.

Did Hank say this?

Bluedog, He absolutely did say that. The two quotes are not conflicting to me. Also, it worked for him, doesn't mean it is a universal truth about hitting.

Beemax, I enjoy your posts, please keep them coming.

Here is my "support." Tom Robson coached the Mets and wrote "The Hitting Edge." His students included John Olerud, who wrote the forward. He also coached Piazza, Palmeiro, and I-Rod among others. On "Two-Strike Hitting" (p.66) he says the following (I'll shorten some of it)...
"The Major League average in 2002 with two strikes was .187. When hitters were 0-2, the average was only .159. It was .172 when 1-2, .189 when 2-2 and .226 when 3-2." [Papa note: Some say 3-2 is a "neutral" count, it is not neutral but is significantly below the MLB average BA.] Robson goes on to say..."traditionally, hitters have been taught to change their swings when they have two strikes. Suggestions such as choking up on the bat, widening out with no stride, moving closer to the plate, or crouching down to make the strike zone smaller are common. If a hitter thinks he can hit better doing some or all of these things, then he should hit that way every single time. The real culprit in the low average on a two-strike count is the mind."..."I do not like the strategy of changing mechanics with two strikes. What you can do is change your thinking."

Now he does talk about a different approach. He does take a different approach to the 2 strikes, but only to a degree.

Baseballpapa,

First, I also do enjoy your posts, thanks for the feedback.

I think that Hank's quotes are conflicting. I don't see how he can say he looked offspeed every pitch and guess...IMO that is a contradiction.

I completely respect Tom Robson and his opinion. He was a big leaguer and I'm sure he's a fine hitting instructor. However, I will again go back to Ted Williams, because I have more respect for him and his theories than anyone else. Ted was an advocate of choking up with two strikes because he felt it gave him that much more control of the bat. I feel that it diminishes my power a bit, but Barry Bonds doesn't feel that way, so he chokes up all the time. IMO Bonds and Williams are the two best hitters of all time, steroids aside. They combined power, patience, production and overall bat handling better than anyone ever has IMO. Here's a quick stat as well:

Ted Williams: 2021 career walks 709 carrer K's (most strikouts in one year-64 his rookie year)

Barry Bonds: 2556 career walks 1539 career K's (only struck out over 100 times once-102 K's his rookie year)

Ted Robson: 48 career MLB at-bats 5BB, 6K's

Again, I am not taking anything away from Robson, he was a big leaguer and I am not (I hope to be), but IMO The Science of Hitting is the single greatest hitting book ever written, and the Ted that wrote that book advocates choking up.

For me, it is a mental thing to choke up and widen out as well as physical. It reminds me to see the ball long, stay short, and BATTLE!

On all but 2 strike counts, a strike just changes the count. A hitter will go 1 for 1, 0 for 1 or 0 for 0, but will never strike out on those counts.

On all 2 strike counts, a swing and miss or a called strike makes the hitter 0 for 1.

The 3-2 count would naturally have the highest of all 2 strike batting averages. This of course is due to the pitcher having to throw a strike or the hitter goes 0 for 0 in that AB.

If we took the average number of strike outs of a major league hitter, and subtracted that from his (outs) we would have a completely different batting average. That would be the BA in all other counts that a strike out can not cause an out or 0 for 1 AB. If we give hitters 4 strikes, there 2 strike batting averages would be much higher.

I think most hitting coaches believe in some kind of 2 strike approach. Even if its no more than a mental approach rather than a physical approach.

I personally like the lesser or for some no stride (spread out) 2 strike approach that beemax says he uses. A hitter doesn’t have to change his swing with this approach. He explained why! The other disadvantage of 0-2, 1-2, and 2-2 is the hitter can not be as selective regarding location. So IMO spreading out allows more plate coverage and less power unless the ball is in the wheel house.

BTW, (everybody’s favorite) Jose Canseco would spread out and pick his stride foot up set it down and rip with 2 strikes.

I can’t answer why a hitter wouldn’t use this approach all the time other than it is based on being able to better handle 2 strike pitches.

If you have a good feel for what the pitcher wants to throw, sure it is an advantage against good pitchers......That will be a sometimes thing, though.....If the feel isn't there, don't try to guess.......

Great hitters are very good at two things, IMO....They can clear their mind and they can make late swing adjustments better than others.....If their feel is off, they can still hit the ball hard....

Being able to hit high speed would surely free you up more to guess on pitches.....

PG: I really wanted to see the response to the quotes more than I cared about supporting what I said. PG you could have added one more thing. What would the on-base % be for a hitter with a 3-2 count? I would image more hitters walk after a count with 3 balls than a count with less than 3 balls.

I used to teach my hitters to simply look for a pitch to drive and don't worry about count. I do believe that what gets them to 2 strikes is what puts them at such a disadvantage but your explanation is really good as to the BAs at 2 strikes, it is simply one more possibility of an out that less than 2 strikes don't have. Over the course of a season, if all my players were at the plate to drive what they could and let all others go by, we would score.

Beemax, I think any player that has ever been drafted or signed a pro contract is one of the best players of all time. I see a sea of kids on a little league field and think "only 9 are good enough to play much high school ball...to play professionally is amazing."

Choking up makes no sense to me. Why not get a shorter bat and use the knob for leverage (although not much leverage)? Also, most pitchers are aiming low and away when ahead in the count yet the hitter makes the bat shorter. The extra bat inside the hands cannot speed up the rotation and would have to cause some drag. The extra weight of the bat behind the hands would not contribute to much force when hitting the ball. It justs seems like a waste.

People miss a major point that I've made on this board before, the AVERAGE major league player has 33% of his hits result in extra-base hits. If you are an average runner and average on defense, you better match that. If you have a lot of foot speed you don't need to hit for so much power. Shortening the stroke doesn't give many this percentage and thus they play in another league.

This whole topic could get pretty deep and I hope it does.

The 2 strike approach is just one topic, but it is just part of the whole equation.

Please forgive if you disagree (and I already know some will disagree), but IMO a hitter needs to have a no strike approach just as much as a 2 strike approach. And even further, a 1-1, 2-1 approach, 3-1 approach and so on.

Then that’s still only part of it. The situation can change the approach no matter what the count. If a hitter is leading off an inning, or hitting with no runners on base and 2 outs, or hitting with a big run at 3B with less than 2 outs, or a runner at 2B with 0 outs and any number of situations.

So there may be times with 2 strikes where it would be well worth giving up the normal 2 strike approach in order to increase the chance for a HR or extra base hit. Just as a hitter might “look” for the pitch to pull (LH hitter) or hit the other way (RH hitter) in some situations.

And it is true that there are some hitters who do not change based on situation. These are usually the big bangers who hit tons of HRs. IMO There are only a few of those types in the Big Leagues. Everyone else to a certain extent is a situational hitter. That is because the most important thing is to win games at that level. If it were any other way, why are there situations where they have hitters sac bunt? BTW, there have been some outstanding power guys who were also good situational hitters. Guys who will go the other way when the situation/percentages calls for it. Being a situational hitter does not mean in the least a Punch and Judy type guy.

The other difference with 2 strikes we haven’t yet hit on is all about percentages. Anything that increases the chance of contact is much more important with 2 strikes. Being able to use the whole field becomes more important. 2 strikes does put a hitter in a more defensive mode because of the undeniable advantage the pitcher has with 2 strikes on a hitter, over less than 2 strike counts. With less than 2 strikes, the hitter can be more in an attack mode. This is all about playing the percentages, more than dealing with the mechanics of the swing.

Hey, these are just my opinions… Haven’t been offered any MLB hitting coach jobs lately. But this stuff is fun to talk about. Truth is, I enjoy reading what most everyone's opinions are.

I think most players cannot hit 33% extra-base hits and would therefore have to be more situational. I agree with you, I think most do have a different approach by position in batting order, situation of the game, etc. I trained my son when he was younger to be a two-hole hitter because he was small for his age. We worked bunting to both sides of the plate, ground balls to the right side, sac flys, etc. He developed so much power none of his select or high school coaches would bunt him. I told them he was the best bunter I ever coached, but they looked at me and laughed when I told them he could bunt for them.

One coach told me a homerun is often a rally killer. I agee. If your down late, and by a lot of runs, you need base runners. A solo shot does nothing but let you lose by one less run. This would require a different approach at the plate.

Routines that adjust are not a problem as long as they lead to runs. I do think, like in any sport, you can overadjust. I saw hitters this summer in one college league just trying not to K. That's what most of them do with 2 strikes, that's why most 2 strike routines don't work. Also, the numbers pretty much show that the 2 strike approach being used doesn't work.

There is another possibility. Two strike routines work in the minor leagues, but a greater percentage of those who don't use them get to the major leagues. I'm willing to bet this is probably true because of the focus on power.

I didn't mean... just trying to make contact. I really didn't even mean being a defensive hitter because that doesn't work. What I meant was that the 2 strike pitch is "more" of a defensive position than less than 2 strikes. The best pitchers prove this every time out. With 2 strikes sometimes a pitchers best pitch has to be fouled off to stay alive. If the pitcher makes a mistake and hits your spot... attack!

Most good hitters are not only looking for a certain pitch they are also looking for a certain location. With two strikes you do not have this luxury as a hitter.

I think that in some ways, most of the best hitters could be called situational hitters. That doesn't mean they don't hit for power. I'm also sure that some of the very best hit exactly the same way no matter what the situation is. Now, how do we determine for sure which is the best way to go about it?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
I didn't mean... just trying to make contact. I really didn't even mean being a defensive hitter because that doesn't work. What I meant was that the 2 strike pitch is "more" of a defensive position than less than 2 strikes. The best pitchers prove this every time out. With 2 strikes sometimes a pitchers best pitch has to be fouled off to stay alive. If the pitcher makes a mistake and hits your spot... attack!

Most good hitters are not only looking for a certain pitch they are also looking for a certain location. With two strikes you do not have this luxury as a hitter.

I think that in some ways, most of the best hitters could be called situational hitters. That doesn't mean they don't hit for power. I'm also sure that some of the very best hit exactly the same way no matter what the situation is. Now, how do we determine for sure which is the best way to go about it?

Your MLB contract decides how you go about it in the Majors. Below that, your Coach decides. What his philosophy is will dictate how you prepare your swing in the cage and how well you get that job done will determine if you play or not.

quote:

Your MLB contract decides how you go about it in the Majors.

mic,

Its probably just me, but what do you mean?

PG,

It's not just you...I'm trying to decipher that comment as well. My coach has never swung the bat for me with two strikes, and none of my friends in the big leagues have ever told me about their "two stike approach clause" in their contract.

I think he might be saying, if your swing got you to the Majors, then no one at that level is going to tell you to use a different (than what brought him to that level) approach in two strike situations.

But, on the way to getting at that level (minors), you're going to get the organizational philosophy.

Just trying to guess/interpret, not sure.

Well, if a MLB player's contract has incentives which revolve around homeruns, or slugging percentage, then presumably the player is more concerned with the long ball than with OBP or batting average or moving the runner. If so, the two strike approach would likely be "swing hard".

Why would a club want this approach? Because baseball is an entertainment business, and many fans aren't at the park to watch an intelligent approach to two strike hitting. Quite a few casual fans, the folks who occasionally come to games, are there for the spectacle, and don't much care who wins. We Giants fans can see this effect this year.

3Fingered,

P's me off when someone comes up with a valid point. Guess if they have a big incentive in my contract for hitting 40 HRs, I might be tempted to forget the 2 strike approach. Actually I wouldn't because IMO I think you are more likely to hit a HR with 2 strikes by using this approach. Simply because you will strike out less and have more chances to get a pitch (mistake) down the middle. The 2 strike approach doesn't mean you automatically can't hit one out of the park.

Also I think most incentives are geared towards winning and overall performance (ie. making the all star team, etc.) than simply hitting HRs. Can you imagine what it would be like if everyone on the roster had incentive clauses for hitting lots of HRs without any incentive for batting average? What do you mean move the runner up coach? My contract doesn't call for bunting? Why should I stop at third on a triple?

Great thread!

I just wanted to add what Chipper Jones said a few days ago when interviewed about the possibility of winning the NL Batting Crown. Especially the part about Edgar Renteria.

“What amazes me are the guys like the Hanley Ramirezes, the Chase Utleys, the Matt Holidays who are relatively new on the scene, being able to sustain that kind of offensive production at such a young age," Jones said. "I marvel at them because they're so far ahead of me at a younger age."

About Edger Renteria

"I hope if it doesn't come my way, it does his," Jones said. "I say this because he's sacrificed himself so many times for me and the team. He's given away an at-bat here and there so he can get a runner over to third with less than two outs, so that I can get an RBI, so the team can jump on top."

Jones said he tries to focus on the situation each at-bat, rather than worrying about upping his average with multihit games.

These next two nights were important for him since the Marlins are more likely to pitch to him than the Brewers or Phillies. "They're playing for their playoff lives," Jones said. "They're going to be trying like crazy to hit their spots and trying like crazy not to let guys like me beat them. That's one of the good things about having [Mark] Tex[eira] here, you don't want to come see me, you've got to go see him."

THop

quote:

Originally posted by 3FingeredGlove:
Well, if a MLB player's contract has incentives which revolve around homeruns, or slugging percentage, then presumably the player is more concerned with the long ball than with OBP or batting average or moving the runner. If so, the two strike approach would likely be "swing hard".

Why would a club want this approach? Because baseball is an entertainment business, and many fans aren't at the park to watch an intelligent approach to two strike hitting. Quite a few casual fans, the folks who occasionally come to games, are there for the spectacle, and don't much care who wins. We Giants fans can see this effect this year.

This is exactly what I mean. If you are in the Majors, you were hired for a reason. They do not want Bonds swinging just to make contact with two strikes, the fans came to see him hit HRs. Your contract will be laid out well enough that you can decipher what they want.

THop

Great post with the quotes from Chipper. IMO the most important thing said and most valid point to this thread was:

"Jones said he tried to focus on the SITUATION each at-bat, rather than worrying about upping his average with multihit games."

The thing about that approach is, if you go into each at-bat with a solid plan, (an approach to that at-bat based on what you have seen from the pitcher, what the situation is in the game, etc.) IMO you will hit your best. The numbers will take care of themselves with this approach.

Keep in mind that mechanics are out the window when you get into the batter's box. That is where all the hard work before and after games and during practice comes into play. You must rely on your muscle memory and go up to the plate with a solid mental approach. Don't get me wrong here, mechanics play a huge part in the swing, but you cannot think about your mechanics during your at-bat; if you do you will lose your focus on the job you have to accomplish.

The number of situations are endless but here is an example of one.

Runner on third base, less than two out, score tied late in the game.

Going up to the plate, what should be going through my head?
-Get a pitch up in the zone.
Why? Infield will be playing in and you want to get the ball in the air, if not a base hit to the outfield then a sac fly at the least.
-If I get a pitch up in the zone, what am I going to try and do with it.
Attack it! Hit it hard and get it airborne!

In this situation I will most likely be looking for a fastball up in the zone, but the pitch you look for always varies with the pitcher. If the guy throws a lot of first pitch breaking balls, then I might look for a breaking ball up first pitch, then go back to the fastball.

This year I hit significantly higher with runners on base. IMO this was because 99% of the time I knew exactly what my goal was with runners on (Move him from second to third with no outs, score him from third with less than two outs, etc.) and I knew what APPROACH I had to take to accomplish that goal. Many times when all you think about is "Okay, runner on second, nobody out, get a pitch to hit to right field and attack it," all of a sudden you have a base hit to right field and an RBI because you hit ACCORDING TO THE SITUATION. Your only goal was to get him to thrid and surprise! You ended up getting the job done and a little more because you took a winning hitter's approach and you didn't just think "Hit a home run." This is just a piece of the mental hitting puzzle, but hopefully you will see that behind each successful at bat and each good hitter is a sound and disciplined approach to each at bat. Just like Chipper Jones

beemax,

Refreshing to hear you say all of that. I totally agree with every word. Especially the terminology you use to describe it all!

I agree that solid (physical) swing mechanics are critical. But in my opinion, the mental side of hitting (base running and position play too) is just as, if not more important. Though it may be harder to prove on video, it exists and is very teachable. Even to teenagers.

In my opinion, an intelligent hitter with questionable swing mechanics will consistently out perform an ignorant hitter with perfect swing mechanics (regardless of level).

Please keep sharing your experiences on the mental and situational side (physical too). We need it bad. You offer a different perspective being a current professional player that will mean a lot to coaches and parents trying to prepare young players for their next level.

THop

What about a "C" student with high level mechanics.

I would hope that once a batter is in the box, good swing mechanics are what is in muscle memory. It should be second nature by that time requiring no thought.

While advancing the runner is the primary goal, I would have hoped that we would have started with the runner on first before proceeding with a runner on third scenario.

Sadly in pro ball, I have seen far too many batters hit up the middle with a runner on first. It is self defeating as both infielders are leaning to the middle for the double play when the ball is pitched.

Also with the runner going, I do not see batters hitting to the area that should be vacated by the cover man.

And probably the first line of offense to advance a runner is always the often forgotten art of bunting.

.

quote:

Originally posted by Chameleon:
What about a "C" student with high level mechanics.

It depends on his SAT and ACT scores as well.....and was he a C,C-, or C+ student? Was he in the Glee Club?....alot of factors to consider.

quote:

Originally posted by beemax:
THop

Great post with the quotes from Chipper. IMO the most important thing said and most valid point to this thread was:

"Jones said he tried to focus on the SITUATION each at-bat, rather than worrying about upping his average with multihit games."

The thing about that approach is, if you go into each at-bat with a solid plan, (an approach to that at-bat based on what you have seen from the pitcher, what the situation is in the game, etc.) IMO you will hit your best. The numbers will take care of themselves with this approach.

Keep in mind that mechanics are out the window when you get into the batter's box. That is where all the hard work before and after games and during practice comes into play. You must rely on your muscle memory and go up to the plate with a solid mental approach. Don't get me wrong here, mechanics play a huge part in the swing, but you cannot think about your mechanics during your at-bat; if you do you will lose your focus on the job you have to accomplish.

The number of situations are endless but here is an example of one.

Runner on third base, less than two out, score tied late in the game.

Going up to the plate, what should be going through my head?
-Get a pitch up in the zone.
Why? Infield will be playing in and you want to get the ball in the air, if not a base hit to the outfield then a sac fly at the least.
-If I get a pitch up in the zone, what am I going to try and do with it.
Attack it! Hit it hard and get it airborne!

In this situation I will most likely be looking for a fastball up in the zone, but the pitch you look for always varies with the pitcher. If the guy throws a lot of first pitch breaking balls, then I might look for a breaking ball up first pitch, then go back to the fastball.

This year I hit significantly higher with runners on base. IMO this was because 99% of the time I knew exactly what my goal was with runners on (Move him from second to third with no outs, score him from third with less than two outs, etc.) and I knew what APPROACH I had to take to accomplish that goal. Many times when all you think about is "Okay, runner on second, nobody out, get a pitch to hit to right field and attack it," all of a sudden you have a base hit to right field and an RBI because you hit ACCORDING TO THE SITUATION. Your only goal was to get him to thrid and surprise! You ended up getting the job done and a little more because you took a winning hitter's approach and you didn't just think "Hit a home run." This is just a piece of the mental hitting puzzle, but hopefully you will see that behind each successful at bat and each good hitter is a sound and disciplined approach to each at bat. Just like Chipper Jones

bump

Chameleon,

I think when we talk about major league hitters, the best all have high level mechanics and are "A" students-of the game, not in a classroom of course. IMO, when people talk about hitters who seem to be "dumb" when it comes to hitting, two players come to mind, Vlad Guerrero and Manny Ramirez. This is purely a result of how they present themselves on the field. Believe me, their approach is as good as any, even though they just look like they are up there flailing away at pitches.

You'll have to excuse me if I fail to pick up on your sarcasm, for I have only been posting on here for a few weeks. I am well aware of your reputaton on here and I respect you immensely.

Again I am not sure if you were serious or joking by asking "What about a "C" student with high level mechanics," (I know my brother was with his response ) but IMO mechanics only carry you so far. If a hitter can combine top-flight thinking with great mechanics, you will reach your potential as a hitter. Having top-flight mechanics, however, and poor thinking will only carry you so far, and vise versa.

I love talking mechanics and the mental game, and I think both deserve equal time on these forms.

quote:

Originally posted by beemax:
Chameleon,

I think when we talk about major league hitters, the best all have high level mechanics and are "A" students-of the game, not in a classroom of course. IMO, when people talk about hitters who seem to be "dumb" when it comes to hitting, two players come to mind, Vlad Guerrero and Manny Ramirez. This is purely a result of how they present themselves on the field. Believe me, their approach is as good as any, even though they just look like they are up there flailing away at pitches.

You'll have to excuse me if I fail to pick up on your sarcasm, for I have only been posting on here for a few weeks. I am well aware of your reputaton on here and I respect you immensely.

Again I am not sure if you were serious or joking by asking "What about a "C" student with high level mechanics," (I know my brother was with his response ) but IMO mechanics only carry you so far. If a hitter can combine top-flight thinking with great mechanics, you will reach your potential as a hitter. Having top-flight mechanics, however, and poor thinking will only carry you so far, and vise versa.

I love talking mechanics and the mental game, and I think both deserve equal time on these forms.

How about Yogi Berra and Larry Walker? How smart do you have to be to see the ball and hit it? Concentrate on the spin and take each pitch one at a time, not the at bat as a whole. There really aren't that many different game situations that would have you changing your swing or philosophy when you come to the plate. Yes, you can take it to an intelligent level as far as remembering what a certain Pitcher threw you on what count in what situation, but you really don't need to. If you can work on your concentration level and focus on the spin of the ball on each pitch, your mechanics and athletic ability will take care of the rest. Come to think of it, just the act of studying Pitchers' tendancies may be all about making certain hitters more confident, which in turn, increases their focus and that is the real "intelligence" in using that in hitting.

Intelligent hitter, good mechanics, good memory about pitches in the same situation to other hitters and you self, looking for fast ball or breaking pitch depending on the count. All this is good stuff but if you enter to the batting box with all that in mind probably you are going to fail.
I love the natural hitter, the one that stand at home plate and swing without thinking, the one that make contact with the ball and doesn't have a technical explanation how he did it.
I know that not everybody is a natural hitter, but I know that everybody could be one. Hundreds of propers made swings (repetition of good mechanics,thinking on different situations, no in the middle of the game, but in practice) will made a hitter get his best level of hitting that his own natural skills allow him. At this point his swing always will be to the point where the ball is, and at the time that the ball is at the contact point, for this reason this hitter rarely is fooled, and rarely pull an outside pitch, etc... Am I talking about perfection?...yes,.... the only way to be good doing something it is to reach at least half of the way when pursuing perfection.

quote:

Originally posted by Racab:
Intelligent hitter, good mechanics, good memory about pitches in the same situation to other hitters and you self, looking for fast ball or breaking pitch depending on the count. All this is good stuff but if you enter to the batting box with all that in mind probably you are going to fail.
I love the natural hitter, the one that stand at home plate and swing without thinking, the one that make contact with the ball and doesn't have a technical explanation how he did it.
I know that not everybody is a natural hitter, but I know that everybody could be one. Hundreds of propers made swings (repetition of good mechanics,thinking on different situations, no in the middle of the game, but in practice) will made a hitter get his best level of hitting that his own natural skills allow him. At this point his swing always will be to the point where the ball is, and at the time that the ball is at the contact point, for this reason this hitter rarely is fooled, and rarely pull an outside pitch, etc... Am I talking about perfection?...yes,.... the only way to be good doing something it is to reach at least half of the way when pursuing perfection.

I agree 100%! Nothing makes me madder than someone watching a called third strike right down the middle.

If I have a hitter who does not know his "job" every time he goes to the plate. He better completely tear it up or he won't be playing for long.

If a hitter with the winning run at 2B and no outs and no strikes is not looking for a pitch to go the other way (RHH) or a pitch to pull (LHH) then he really doesn't understand the game. This thinking is not done while he's swinging, it's done before he steps in the box. The pitchers will throw it inside to a RHH and try to get the ground ball/flyball to the left side in this situation.

Baseball is a thinking game. That includes the hitting part of it! Thinking is done before the mechanics ever get involved. I agree that anyone thinking about their mechanics while actually hitting is in big trouble.

Looking for certain pitches or certain locations is what 9 out of 10 good hitters do (IMO). That doesn't require any rocket science or even a lot of thinking. The situation CAN change what you should be "looking" for.

With runners on base I want my hitters to get at least "productive" outs, ie move the runner up a base.


I am with PG --the batter should know before he steps in to the box what he has to do

Mic,

How about Yogi Berra and Larry Walker? Don't get me wrong, some great hitters were more cerebral than others, but Yogi didn't play in 14 World Series by not thinking out there. Larry Walker wasn't a career .313 hitter by only "seeing the ball and hitting it." I'm not saying you need to be a rocket scientist to hit well, but you do need to pay attention, especially in pro ball, when you are facing the same pitchers multiple times throughout the year. I never said take the at bat as a whole; you need to take it one pitch at a time, but keeping in mind what the GOAL of the at bat is. I also never said to change your swing according to the situation. It is all about how you approach the at-bat and that is ever-changing according to the count and situation.

"Yes, you can take it to an intelligent level as far as remembering what a certain Pitcher threw you on what count in what situation, but you really don't need to. If you can work on your concentration level and focus on the spin of the ball on each pitch, your mechanics and athletic ability will take care of the rest."

Why don't you need to remember what a certain pitcher threw you? Don't you think that would help? If you hammered a 1-0 slider the at bat before, would you look for the same pitch in that count the next at-bat? Probably not. This is what I work on with my teammates day in and day out.

I do agree that studying pitchers tendenicies can make hitters more confident. The more I can learn about the pitcher, the better idea I have of what he will throw me later in the game. If I have a better idea of what he will throw, I will be able to take a confident, aggressive swing at a pitch that I am looking for.

I played with guys that have been "See it and hit it guys," but the higher up I go in pro ball, the more those guys get weeded out. IMO you cannot be a consistent, productive hitter by just relying on your physical abilities. Again, this is not rocket science, it is just baseball savvy; paying attention to the pitcher and the situations of the game.

Mic, have you ever played pro ball?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
If I have a hitter who does not know his "job" every time he goes to the plate. He better completely tear it up or he won't be playing for long.

If a hitter with the winning run at 2B and no outs and no strikes is not looking for a pitch to go the other way (RHH) or a pitch to pull (LHH) then he really doesn't understand the game. This thinking is not done while he's swinging, it's done before he steps in the box. The pitchers will throw it inside to a RHH and try to get the ground ball/flyball to the left side in this situation.

Baseball is a thinking game. That includes the hitting part of it! Thinking is done before the mechanics ever get involved. I agree that anyone thinking about their mechanics while actually hitting is in big trouble.

Looking for certain pitches or certain locations is what 9 out of 10 good hitters do (IMO). That doesn't require any rocket science or even a lot of thinking. The situation CAN change what you should be "looking" for.

I'm not talking about not looking for certain locations early in the count or even late in the count, but not certain types of pitches. You do not need to guess what type of pitch you are going to get. I also don't think it makes sense to try and hit an inside pitch to the opposite field just to hit behind a runner. A base hit is a base hit and an out is an out. I've seen many double plays on hit and runs because a RHH tried to take an inside pitch to right field and ended up hitting a flare to the second baseman. Why not rip that pitch to left field down the line or hit it out of the park? If you get the pitch, fine, do your job, but if you don't, do your job! Get a hit!

quote:

Originally posted by beemax:
Mic,

How about Yogi Berra and Larry Walker? Don't get me wrong, some great hitters were more cerebral than others, but Yogi didn't play in 14 World Series by not thinking out there. Larry Walker wasn't a career .313 hitter by only "seeing the ball and hitting it." I'm not saying you need to be a rocket scientist to hit well, but you do need to pay attention, especially in pro ball, when you are facing the same pitchers multiple times throughout the year. I never said take the at bat as a whole; you need to take it one pitch at a time, but keeping in mind what the GOAL of the at bat is. I also never said to change your swing according to the situation. It is all about how you approach the at-bat and that is ever-changing according to the count and situation.

"Yes, you can take it to an intelligent level as far as remembering what a certain Pitcher threw you on what count in what situation, but you really don't need to. If you can work on your concentration level and focus on the spin of the ball on each pitch, your mechanics and athletic ability will take care of the rest."

Why don't you need to remember what a certain pitcher threw you? Don't you think that would help? If you hammered a 1-0 slider the at bat before, would you look for the same pitch in that count the next at-bat? Probably not. This is what I work on with my teammates day in and day out.

I do agree that studying pitchers tendenicies can make hitters more confident. The more I can learn about the pitcher, the better idea I have of what he will throw me later in the game. If I have a better idea of what he will throw, I will be able to take a confident, aggressive swing at a pitch that I am looking for.

I played with guys that have been "See it and hit it guys," but the higher up I go in pro ball, the more those guys get weeded out. IMO you cannot be a consistent, productive hitter by just relying on your physical abilities. Again, this is not rocket science, it is just baseball savvy; paying attention to the pitcher and the situations of the game.

Mic, have you ever played pro ball?

Bee,

You should get the DVD "Hitters on hitting" and listen to Larry Walker's own words. Just because you play pro ball doesn't make you an expert on hitting. When you become a MLB hitter by practicing what you are preaching, then you will be an expert. You like Ted Williams. I like Ted Williams. He studied pitchers. You study pitchers. Tony Gwynn studied pitchers. Larry Walker didn't! Alphonso Soriano doesn't! Shoeless Joe Jackson didn't! Bottom line is, if it works for you, by all means do it! I'm just saying, you don't have to do it to be a very good hitter.

To those who believe guessing on pitches is the only way to be a successful hitter,

What do you do if you have 2 strikes, a runner on third, down by one run in the bottom of the ninth, two out, you are guessing breaking ball away (since that is what this Pitcher has thrown you in this situation before) and he throws you a 95mph fastball on the inside corner? Oh, and this is the final game of the season and is for the Pennant. Do you; A. Watch it go by for strike three, drop your head and as you are walking back to the dugout think to yourself, "oh well, I had a good year anyway." B. Take a half hearted swing as it goes by. C. Hit a weak ground ball to the right side. D. Rip a line drive down the left field line.

Another question. Do you not think that Pitchers are studying hitters and tracking what they have thrown you in the past?

What do you do in the above scenario if they bring in a closer that you haven't faced before??? Do you use one of your life lines and phone a friend??? No! You see it and hit it! The first good pitch you see, right? That's the big flaw in this philosophy. If you predicate your hitting ability on studying Pitchers past performance and the cards don't fall your way, are you going to be confident in this type of at bat? I don't see how you can be. I would think your mind would be racing and your rear would be as tight as Mama's hat band!

quote:

What do you do if you have 2 strikes, a runner on third, down by one run in the bottom of the ninth, two out

IMO - You go to the two strike approach talked about earlier.

This is much different than looking for a specific pitch or location. Also, looking for a pitch/location doesn't mean you've given up on everything else. But it's amazing how often hitters will get themself out swinging at a 0 strike breaking ball or other pitch out of the strike zone.

I think everyone would agree to being in attack mode when hitting. However being under control of aggressiveness is very important. IMO

quote:

To those who believe guessing on pitches is the only way to be a successful hitter,

Mic, We all know there is more than one way to be a successful hitter.

quote:

A. Watch it go by for strike three, drop your head and as you are walking back to the dugout think to yourself, "oh well, I had a good year anyway." B. Take a half hearted swing as it goes by. C. Hit a weak ground ball to the right side. D. Rip a line drive down the left field line.

I pick D. Next question please.

This is a pretty easy quiz!

With two outs there is no situational hitting.

You either keep the inning going or make an out.

.

quote:

Originally posted by deemax:

quote:

A. Watch it go by for strike three, drop your head and as you are walking back to the dugout think to yourself, "oh well, I had a good year anyway." B. Take a half hearted swing as it goes by. C. Hit a weak ground ball to the right side. D. Rip a line drive down the left field line.

I pick D. Next question please.

This is a pretty easy quiz!

My kids a pitcher and even I picked D. This is easy!

quote:

Originally posted by FrankF:

quote:

Originally posted by deemax:
[QUOTE]A. Watch it go by for strike three, drop your head and as you are walking back to the dugout think to yourself, "oh well, I had a good year anyway." B. Take a half hearted swing as it goes by. C. Hit a weak ground ball to the right side. D. Rip a line drive down the left field line.

I pick D. Next question please.

This is a pretty easy quiz!

Good answer! Now, if you can do it in this pressure cooker of a situation, why not do it on every pitch? You guessed, guessed wrong and were still successful. Why are you guessing??? You saw it and hit it!

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

quote:

What do you do if you have 2 strikes, a runner on third, down by one run in the bottom of the ninth, two out

IMO - You go to the two strike approach talked about earlier.

This is much different than looking for a specific pitch or location. Also, looking for a pitch/location doesn't mean you've given up on everything else. But it's amazing how often hitters will get themself out swinging at a 0 strike breaking ball or other pitch out of the strike zone.

I think everyone would agree to being in attack mode when hitting. However being under control of aggressiveness is very important. IMO

quote:

To those who believe guessing on pitches is the only way to be a successful hitter,

Mic, We all know there is more than one way to be a successful hitter.

PG,

That's not what Beemax said. He said, the see it and hit it guys get weeded out as they try to move up the ladder. As far as hitters getting themselves out on 0 strike breaking balls out of the zone. My question to you would be, did they do that because they were guessing a different pitch? I am not against looking for a certain location on any count or a certain pitch (before you get in the box), you have two strikes to look at and 3 balls to hit the ball in a specific spot (i.e., in the hole at 2nd or short) but to guess what pitch is coming and where is kind of crazy, IMO. Unless you are trying to tee off on a first strike, I don't really see any gained advantage or at least the ends don't justify the risk.

Are you going to rip a line drive down the left field line if the pitch is on the outside? How about rip a line drive from the correct point of contact as determined by pitch location? Learning to read the pitch is better than guessing. Knowing what the pitcher likes to throw reduces the amount of reading a hitter has to do. Being able to hit with authority to all fields is the key, imho.

quote:

Why are you guessing???

Guessing, or anticipating, goes hand in hand with proper thinking. -Ted Williams

For someone who admires Ted Williams as much as you do, you sure dont take his advice very seriously. Did Ted have all the answers? No. But he had more answers then anyone posting in this forum.

quote:

With two outs there is no situational hitting.

You either keep the inning going or make an out.

True, but not entirely IMO. A hitter has a basic primary job to do in every AB.
1. Get on base, Move runner up, Drive in run, Get in to scoring position, etc.

With two outs and no one on base, the job is to drive the ball (extra base hit/home run)

Some might say this is always the job, but it's not always the primary job. And of course, this differs with the ability from one hitter to the next.

Lead off an inning - job is get on base. This hitter should be much more selective and will probably see more pitches. First is get on base, second is extra bases.

Runner on 3B 1 out, job is to score the run. If infield is giving the run (playing back) a ground ball gets the job done. If infield is playing in fly ball is the job.

Getting the job done is not simple. But knowing what it is, is simple.

These all go out the window with two strikes. I realize this goes against some thinking regards to hitting. But it goes on at every level every game. Thinking is and always will be part of baseball at every phase of the game. Only the very greatest can have a chance to get by without thinking.

There are two types of thinking. One involves preparation (preplanning). The other is more instinctive, the guy who instinctively seems to make the right decisions. (Willie Mays on the bases)

There is an old saying that is used a lot in baseball... Failing to prepare is preparing to fail!

Here is something else that is fairly common knowledge. The higher the level gets the less hitters swing! Some might think that's crazy but the proof is in the statistics. There are all kinds of first year pitchers who have unbelievable K-BB ratios in Rookie ball. As they move up their K-BB ratios aren't nearly as good (There's always exceptions to every rule). Rookie hitters swing at more pitches than vets. Veteran pitchers need to be around the strike zone more often.

Regarding golf... There are millions of people who play golf every day. Baseball players like to have fun too, especially in the off season. Many hunt and fish and many others golf. The hunting and fishing isn't done to improve their baseball skills and I doubt most baseball players are golfing to improve their baseball skills.

I know... Lots of opinions, that's what makes this stuff fun.

I think it was Stanford that charted every pitch, situation, result during an entire season.

I don't remember the exact results, but they showed the BAve, extra base hits, etc. on all counts, against all pitches in all locations.

Once again I don't remember the exact results, but I still would be willing to bet that BAves were higher against fastballs, than any other pitch. If that is true (which I don't know for certain) wouldn't that be a good reason to stay off the 0 strike breaking ball unless it just spun there in the zone for you? Wouldn't it be a good reason to set on the fastball with no strikes, in most cases?

If a pitcher has just one pitch (Mariano excluded) isn't he much easier to hit than the equal pitcher who has three quality pitches. Common sense tells me to look for one pitch (most always a fastball) in a certain location with 0 strikes. There are pitchers who could change that but that would be the exception to the rule.

Also, if we are talking about young hitters improving, I believe the above is even more important than if we are talking about MLB stars.

Mic,

I never have claimed to be an expert on hitting. True, when I become a MLB hitter be using this I feel that it will hold more weight. But you said it yourself, Tony Gwynn and Ted Williams did it, so why do I need to defend this theory? If you want to teach kids to "see it and hit it," go ahead. IMO very few have used this to be successful, and no matter what Walker, Soriano, or Jackson (Did you talk with him?) said, they paid attention to what was going on. They never stepped in the box, looked oout at the pitcher, and said "Dang, its a right hander? I wonder what he's got?"

So if I am not an expert, but I play pro ball, and you say I will be an expert if I reach the Big Leagues, what does that make you, as it seems to be you haven't played pro ball?

I think you can teach mechanics without having played pro ball, but to teach proper thinking at the plate without having played pro ball doesn't fit as well for me. IMO you have to have been there to know what it is like, then you can form your best opinion. Sorry, but I think my opinion holds more weight for that fact.

There are not too many real good hitters in baseball. From those that are realgood, there are some guessers and there are some see the ball, hit the ball hitters. Like somebody said, one system is good for some and vice versa.
It doesn't care what kind of hitter are you the principle of hitting mechanics are the same.
The problem with the guessing hitter is that the pitcher (who can and may think at every pitch) could easily note when a hitter is guessing) He is not so stupid to throw the pitch that the count it recommend. Major leagues it is not High School, the pitcher that can not throw a changeup in full count, or a slider on 2-0, or as a first pitch, can not be a Big league pitcher.
Pitchers, catchers and pitcher coaches call the pitches depending on multiple reasons:
1. History of past at bats.(including what the batter is specting depending on past at bats also)
2. How the hitter reacted to the last pitch. (it doesn't care the count, if the hitter was on the fast ball they aren't going to repited, or if was late, they are not to fallow with a changeup)
3. Game situation. (If the situation of the game needs the hitter to hit opposite side, the pitcher will pitch inside)
4. The whole thing it is to try to deceive the hitter. ( The pitcher can not deceive the hitter throwing every time what is suppose to be pitched)
The hitter that see, hit the ball, guess some times also, the difference it is, that he guess a spot not a pitch. If for the game situation he needs an outside pitch, he is going to wait for that outside pitch, but always is going to hit the natural way. Finally, when the pitcher is on, 80% of the time will get the out, and the best hitter (guesser or natural) is the one that never forgive the mistake of the pitcher.

To Beemax:

I am glad to have seen you hitting some times this year at Hagerstown, and to fallow your performance at Potomac. What a discipline at home plate, what a knowledge of the strike zone. Believe me, you say you are a guessing hitter, I don't know how a guessing hitter may be the kind of hitter that you are.

quote:

Originally posted by deemax:

quote:

Why are you guessing???

Guessing, or anticipating, goes hand in hand with proper thinking. -Ted Williams

For someone who admires Ted Williams as much as you do, you sure dont take his advice very seriously. Did Ted have all the answers? No. But he had more answers then anyone posting in this forum.

Like I said to PG, I don't have a problem with it first pitch, first strike. It won't matter if you look goofy when you guess wrong and it may allow you to sit back and drive an off speed pitch. My problem with it is when hitters try to do it on all pitches or any count. I think that when you get to the Big leagues, you will guess wrong more than you guess right and we have already established that you can still hit without doing it. Like I also said, when you sit and watch strike three because you got fooled, you are a fool.

quote:

Originally posted by beemax:
Mic,

I never have claimed to be an expert on hitting. True, when I become a MLB hitter be using this I feel that it will hold more weight. But you said it yourself, Tony Gwynn and Ted Williams did it, so why do I need to defend this theory? If you want to teach kids to "see it and hit it," go ahead. IMO very few have used this to be successful, and no matter what Walker, Soriano, or Jackson (Did you talk with him?) said, they paid attention to what was going on. They never stepped in the box, looked oout at the pitcher, and said "Dang, its a right hander? I wonder what he's got?"

So if I am not an expert, but I play pro ball, and you say I will be an expert if I reach the Big Leagues, what does that make you, as it seems to be you haven't played pro ball?

I think you can teach mechanics without having played pro ball, but to teach proper thinking at the plate without having played pro ball doesn't fit as well for me. IMO you have to have been there to know what it is like, then you can form your best opinion. Sorry, but I think my opinion holds more weight for that fact.

I never claimed to be an expert either, I just take what MLB players say to be truthful. I guess you don't. But, Larry Walker (in his own words), said, "I don't think about what the Pitcher has, or who he is, I just see it and hit it. Sometimes I'll be singing Garth Brooks songs in my head or thinking how goofy that Pitcher looks, but most of the time I don't think about anything." That's what the man said and I take him at his word. Todd Helton believes what he said, so....! Tony Gwynn said he tried to hit the ball with the knob of the bat, I believe him, some on here don't. It is true that you have an advantage that you can experience your philosophy 1st hand and will get instant feed back on the results, but you don't have to have played to teach. John Madden never played Pro Football, but I'd say he was a pretty good Coach in the NFL and still makes a pretty good living being an ANALYST.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
I think it was Stanford that charted every pitch, situation, result during an entire season.

I don't remember the exact results, but they showed the BAve, extra base hits, etc. on all counts, against all pitches in all locations.

Once again I don't remember the exact results, but I still would be willing to bet that BAves were higher against fastballs, than any other pitch. If that is true (which I don't know for certain) wouldn't that be a good reason to stay off the 0 strike breaking ball unless it just spun there in the zone for you? Wouldn't it be a good reason to set on the fastball with no strikes, in most cases?

If a pitcher has just one pitch (Mariano excluded) isn't he much easier to hit than the equal pitcher who has three quality pitches. Common sense tells me to look for one pitch (most always a fastball) in a certain location with 0 strikes. There are pitchers who could change that but that would be the exception to the rule.

Also, if we are talking about young hitters improving, I believe the above is even more important than if we are talking about MLB stars.

PG,

The thing that actually turned me against guessing, was that I've seen so many kids swing at ball three on a 2-0 count or ball 4 on a 3-1 count because they expected (and have been taught) a fastball right down the middle. However, I'm still not saying it can't be done successfully, I'm just saying you don't HAVE to, IMO.

quote:

Like I said to PG, I don't have a problem with it first pitch, first strike.

If you dont have a problem with guessing on the first strike, then .......

quote:

The thing that actually turned me against guessing, was that I've seen so many kids swing at ball three on a 2-0 count

It contradicts itself. Maybe you meant something else?

quote:

Originally posted by deemax:

quote:

Like I said to PG, I don't have a problem with it first pitch, first strike.

If you dont have a problem with guessing on the first strike, then .......

quote:

The thing that actually turned me against guessing, was that I've seen so many kids swing at ball three on a 2-0 count

It contradicts itself. Maybe you meant something else?

No, it's no contradiction at all. I said "first strike," they were swinging at balls.

This is a great thread,

Consider this: I think whether or not a hitter anticipates/guesses on a pitch has a lot to do with his abilities.

What I mean is: 1)How soon is the hitter able to recognize the pitch. 2)Bat speed & technique, can the hitter wait longer to recognize the pitch before he fires because of bat speed.

If these skills are average to below than the need to anticipate a pitch becomes greater.
If these skills are outstanding than anticipating a pitch may dilute his skills.

Most players probably fall somewhere in between. They might anticipate pitches on certain counts or against certain pitchers.
Not because they want to, but because they need to. I also doubt there are many pure free swingers out there that are successful. Even if your brain is the size of a peanut, it would be difficult to NOT think about what the pitcher might be bringing next. Or at a minimum thinking "If he throws me that, then I'm going to do this"

There is a lot of talk about Bonds swing and his mechanics. I believe Bonds greatest strenght is his freakish ability to recognize a pitch so early. When bonds swings on a pitch it looks like he knew that pitch was coming before he got out of bed that morning. Even more impressive is when he lays off a pitch, watch how early he does/did it. It has been a while since I have watched Bonds closely but a few years back, I sometimes couldn't believe what I was seeing. Of course he is fooled at times, everyone is.

btw. I havn't played MLB nor am I an expert...But I'm a pretty good student.

Again great thread, keep it going...........

quote:

The thing that actually turned me against guessing, was that I've seen so many kids swing at ball three on a 2-0 count

Mic, Don't think we disagree altogether on this stuff. But unless a pitcher has proven he can throw a breaking ball for a strike, why wouldn't a hitter be looking for (expecting) a fastball? And if the hitter has a certain location he is geared in on, isn't he less likely to chase a pitch out of the strike zone.

I think everyone here would agree (maybe) that most pitchers control pitch is the fastball. There are exceptions, but if I don't know a pitcher, guessing/looking fastball at 2-0 gives the best percentage IMO. Even Larry Walker would be waiting for the fastball in his zone! If hitters could hit every pitch equally, there would be no reason that pitchers mix things up. There are certain counts where mixing it up is not as likely to happen.

Also I've noticed a lot of great hitters say things that can be a little off the wall at times. Then again, wasn't it Larry Walker who threw the ball in to the stands after only 2 outs? He sure was an amazing player/athlete/hitter, though!

quote:

Originally posted by TripleDad:
This is a great thread,

Consider this: I think whether or not a hitter anticipates/guesses on a pitch has a lot to do with his abilities.

What I mean is: 1)How soon is the hitter able to recognize the pitch. 2)Bat speed & technique, can the hitter wait longer to recognize the pitch before he fires because of bat speed.

If these skills are average to below than the need to anticipate a pitch becomes greater.
If these skills are outstanding than anticipating a pitch may dilute his skills.

Most players probably fall somewhere in between. They might anticipate pitches on certain counts or against certain pitchers.
Not because they want to, but because they need to. I also doubt there are many pure free swingers out there that are successful. Even if your brain is the size of a peanut, it would be difficult to NOT think about what the pitcher might be bringing next. Or at a minimum thinking "If he throws me that, then I'm going to do this"

There is a lot of talk about Bonds swing and his mechanics. I believe Bonds greatest strenght is his freakish ability to recognize a pitch so early. When bonds swings on a pitch it looks like he knew that pitch was coming before he got out of bed that morning. Even more impressive is when he lays off a pitch, watch how early he does/did it. It has been a while since I have watched Bonds closely but a few years back, I sometimes couldn't believe what I was seeing. Of course he is fooled at times, everyone is.

btw. I havn't played MLB nor am I an expert...But I'm a pretty good student.

Again great thread, keep it going...........

I agree. Great post! I've heard Joe Garagiola (sp) say about Ted Williams that his knowledge of the strike zone or eye, was uncanny. He said he very seldom swung at a ball. John Cohen, Coach of The University of Kentucky told a story that when Bonds had his 73 homer year, that he only swung and missed 6 times after the All Star break. I find it hard to believe that he guessed right that many times. I agree that this has been a great thread and I see both sides. The thing I wonder though, is that if many of the hitters just trusted their vision more, they may improve. It's kind of like typing, if you never trust yourself to hit the right keys without looking at the keyboard, you're only going to get so good. This thread has made me think about this more though. I think, once the mechanics are learned, that confidence is the key to hitting. You can gain confidence in many ways, the most important of which is success. Focus, concentration, knowledge, wearing your lucky underwear, proper preparation (I would list studying Pitchers in this), visualization, all lead to confidence.

PG and beemax,

I appreciate your perspective and knowledge of the game and also appreciate you guys taking the time to share that with the rest of us.

How many times have you heard a player (that's hitting well) say "I'm seeing the ball really well"

Griffey Jr. last year after whiffing 3 times against a pitcher said this "the guy had me guessing all day" This tells me Griffey was not able to see/read this pitcher, thus he was forced to do something he doesn't want to do; guess.

I do believe that regardless of a hitters talent, there are times/situations that he will anticipate a pitch.

There is no black and white on this one. Every great hitter makes adjustments at the plate that is
RIGHT FOR HIM based on the situation; his ability, the pitchers ability, his focus that day, how well he has been hitting lately, the game situation, and yes THE COUNT.


I too appreciate each post they are all good. great stuff.

PGStaff, you have a PM.. (2 actually)

quote:

There is no black and white on this one. Every great hitter makes adjustments at the plate that is
RIGHT FOR HIM based on the situation; his ability, the pitchers ability, his focus that day, how well he has been hitting lately, the game situation, and yes THE COUNT.

TripleDad, I agree.....That is why, IMO, situational hitting should not be taught to hitters...

Coaches would do better by staying out of the way and just let the hitter do what he does............

In my opinion, situational hitting is taught (and expected) by EVERY college and professional hitting coach (as well as the better high school coaches) in America. And I have never been to a MLB academy in Latin America, but would bet good money it is included there as well.

I coach high schoolers and am one of those who choose to teach it (situational base running, pitching and defensive play too).

Would coaches do better by staying out of the way and just letting their pitcher stay on the mound when a ground ball gets hit between the first and second baseman? Or just let their 2b runner advance to 3b on ground balls between the shortstop and third baseman?

I don’t know beemax and deemax but I knew their dad (via the internet). And I would bet money they learned the following situational hitting skills early in their lives. And I know for a fact that kids can learn these (along with solid swing mechanics) before high school. And in my opinion it gives them a distinct edge.

1. Anticipate and capitalize (“smoke”) fast balls during fast ball counts and situations
2. Two strike swing/approach
3. Stand tall (if RH hitter) when runner steals 3b
4. Hit and run play
5. Hit behind lone 2b runner with no outs
6. Hit the ball in the air with runner at 3b (infield in)
7. Hit the ball up the middle with runner at 3b (infield back)

Bluedog, I think you could even charge a little more if you included these in your lessons.

THop

Situation hitting and anticipating a pitch are two different things to me. Well. I take that back a little. A hitter will look for a certain pitch depending on count.

TripleDad,

I’m sure every one of us is a little different in what we teach and how we teach it (especially semantics). But in my opinion, beemax started the best hitting thread I have seen since I bought my computer in 99. I want to be careful not to miss the opportunity to further the importance of the mental side of hitting. Especially in teenagers.

For the record, the following is what I have taught my high school hitters in North Atlanta for the last 10 years. Keep in mind that my kids are from one school and are often undisciplined. I refer the really good ones to Guerry Baldwin at East Cobb.

We rehash/reinforce the following "mental skills" every day in the cages and on the field BP. We mostly work on physical swing mechanics in the cage and tee stations.

Situational hitting skills
1. Bunt direction
2. Sac bunt
3. Drag bunt
4. Squeeze bunt
5. Push bunt
6. Slug/butcher boy bunt
7. Hit and Run play
8. Hit behind the lone runner at 2b with no outs
9. Score the runner from 3b with the infield in (sac fly)
10. Score the runner from 3b with the infield back (hit it up the middle)

Other mental hitting skills
11. Anticipate and capitalize on the fastball counts of 0-0, 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 3-0, 3-1.

12. Anticipate and capitalize on the fastball situations-First pitch after a mid inning pitching change, 1st pitch after an embarrassing off speed pitch, every pitch when the runner at first base is a serious threat to steal, most pitches to the 8,9 hitter.

Strike zone judgment
13. Pulling middle-in strikes.
14. Hitting middle-out strikes hard the other way.
15. Two strike swing or "approach".
16. Check swing- reverse hips in order to get hit with a pitch safely.
17. Discretely shrink strike zone when asked to “take” a pitch for the team (crowd plate, widen stance, take longer stride, hold it for 1 second).
18. Stand tall while the runner is stealing 3b (right handed batter)

THop

PS, I also teach the undisciplined ones to lay off all curve balls until they get two strikes but realize they will eventually have to learn to hit them too.

Mic,

First, my apologies for being out of the loop for the last few days.

To your quote (and again my apologies for not figuring out how to post quotes like everyone else. I am on a Mac and don't know how to yet):
I never claimed to be an expert either, I just take what MLB players say to be truthful. I guess you don't. But, Larry Walker (in his own words), said, "I don't think about what the Pitcher has, or who he is, I just see it and hit it. Sometimes I'll be singing Garth Brooks songs in my head or thinking how goofy that Pitcher looks, but most of the time I don't think about anything." That's what the man said and I take him at his word. Todd Helton believes what he said, so....! Tony Gwynn said he tried to hit the ball with the knob of the bat, I believe him, some on here don't. It is true that you have an advantage that you can experience your philosophy 1st hand and will get instant feed back on the results, but you don't have to have played to teach. John Madden never played Pro Football, but I'd say he was a pretty good Coach in the NFL and still makes a pretty good living being an ANALYST.

In response to this, first of all, I DO take what MLB players say to be truthful. To say that I don't is a cheap shot IMO and I don't appreciate it. IMO basing any teaching on proper thinking at the plate with that Larry Walker quote is wrong (not saying that you do). Maybe he was singing Garth Brooks songs in his head, but I am a percentage guy, and IMO the number of guys that do think up at the plate in the Majors far outweighs those that don't. I also believe you don't have to have played to teach, but I know that I am a much better teacher myself for having the experience I do.
As for John Madden, at least he did play college football and learned the game coaching with other great coaches in the NFL. The NFL (and the NBA for that matter) is a different animal than MLB, for you don't have to have had pro experience to lead a team. MLB is different. Name me any coach or manager in the Major Leagues who has never played pro ball. I think that track record speaks volumes. The NBA and NFL are much more games of X's and O's than baseball. Baseball is a very mental game. It's awfully easy to sit in front of the TV and second guess a guy for doing something wrong at the plate, but until you have been there at a pro level IMO you cannot get the full grasp on it. Study what they say; I believe you that Larry Walker said that, but also look up others (Ted Williams immediately comes to mind). I am very lucky to have the experience I have and I look forward to gaining more and learning more.
As for guessing at the plate, unless the pitcher tells you what's coming or is tipping his pitches, what else can you do? To me, guessing is anticipating. Not just picking any pitch to look for with no reason. Like I said before, I can't look fastball, curveball, changeup, etc. each pitch. There are too many variables there. My best success comes when I pay attention to the pitcher and the game so when I get to the plate I can make an educated guess as to what he will throw and then sit on it for that pitch, and go from there until I get to two strikes.

Sorry for the rant THop, I don't want to take the focus off of your last post. I just didn't have internet the past week and had to respond to that.

beemax,

First, I wasn't trying to take a cheap shot, but I guess I did make a smart **s remark. The statement has been made on here before, that "it is amazing how people that can hit, don't know how they do," I just figured from your comments that you were of that school of thought. If you are not, I appologize for those assumptions. As I said before, I appreciate the perspective you bring as a player and wish every day that I could have had that chance. Having said that though, this is the high school baseball web and I teach High School and younger kids. I have said on here before, that I would not even attempt to try and teach a Professional player. It would be kind of like having a Nurse operate on you, she may have studied it and know what to do, but I'd rather stake my life on the one who has.

There is nothing I've said on this site that won't help a High School or younger player to be successful. I believe for a High School or younger hitter, timing is the biggest thing to master and the more simple the swing can be made, the more successful they will be. When a Scout sees a player, they see the potential in an athlete, but they have to be successful at their level to even get a look. I just believe that when a young player tries to guess what a Pitcher is going to throw while he is at the plate, he is trying to "operate" without the knowledge or the experience to be successful. There will be certain Pitchers that they will have faced enough to have the needed information, but for the most part, you will only face one Pitcher one time in your career.

beemax,

LOL. No problem. I’d rather read your posts than mine anyway. Keep em coming.

THop

quote:

In my opinion, situational hitting is taught (and expected) by EVERY college and professional hitting coach (as well as the better high school coaches) in America. And I have never been to a MLB academy in Latin America, but would bet good money it is included there as well.

I agree with what THop posted above. I think some feel situational hitting is for those who can't hit. To a certain degree I would agree with that, except in baseball (we all know) nobody can really hit to a high percentage. Some obviously hit much better than others.

One of the most fascinating things about baseball is the percentages. I don't know any way that a player can grow up and make it to the top without being exposed to situational hitting along the way.

Also, not sure I understand why the hitter looking for a fastball in a certain location would be likely to chase a pitch outside the zone. Wouldn't he be less likely to chase that pitch?

I'm trying very hard to understand everyone's reasoning here, but if you have no strikes on you, are you better if...

1 - You look for a fastball in a certain location or zone.
2 - You are ready to hit any of three or four pitches that might be called a strike.

Which way are you most likely to get yourself out?

Anyway, I agree with those who say this is truly a great thread. It causes us to think, what a unique concept!

Would a hit and run be "situational hitting"? If so, there is a case where you might have to swing at a pitch you otherwise would take. I hate hit-and-runs! Especially when my Son is at the plate!

Sure, a hit and run is situational hitting. Personally, I enjoy when my manager gives me a hit and run, but it varies from player to player, dad to dad

The most important things to try and do on a hit and run are as follows:

1. Make a conscious effort to keep the ball out of the middle of the field. Why? Because either the second baseman or the shortstop is going to cover second, and it can turn into a quick double play. If you are left handed, the shortstop will usually cover second on a hit and run. If you are right handed, the second baseman usually covers.

2. Next, you have to swing at anything that isn't a ball in the dirt or a pitchout. Remember, the coach gave you the sign, so the guesswork is out. You have to swing.

3. Try to get on top of the ball. A fly out does not work with a hit and run. At the least you want the runner to move to second, and ideally, you want him at third. A ground ball/line drive in the vacated area by the middle infield is ideal.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:

quote:

In my opinion, situational hitting is taught (and expected) by EVERY college and professional hitting coach (as well as the better high school coaches) in America. And I have never been to a MLB academy in Latin America, but would bet good money it is included there as well.

I agree with what THop posted above. I think some feel situational hitting is for those who can't hit. To a certain degree I would agree with that, except in baseball (we all know) nobody can really hit to a high percentage. Some obviously hit much better than others.

One of the most fascinating things about baseball is the percentages. I don't know any way that a player can grow up and make it to the top without being exposed to situational hitting along the way.

Also, not sure I understand why the hitter looking for a fastball in a certain location would be likely to chase a pitch outside the zone. Wouldn't he be less likely to chase that pitch?

I'm trying very hard to understand everyone's reasoning here, but if you have no strikes on you, are you better if...

1 - You look for a fastball in a certain location or zone.
2 - You are ready to hit any of three or four pitches that might be called a strike.

Which way are you most likely to get yourself out?

Anyway, I agree with those who say this is truly a great thread. It causes us to think, what a unique concept!

Just to clarify my position on situational hitting. You have to hit according to the situation. If you need a base hit and they are giving you a huge gap between 1st and 2nd, you should be looking for a pitch that you can hit in that spot. If you are given the hit and run sign, you have to do your job, which is as beemax has explained. Personally when I was at the plate with 2 strikes, I choked up and tried to put the ball in play in most situations, but not all. If I needed a fly ball to score a run, I still tried to do that. If there were 2 out and I wasn't confident in the guy behind me and I needed 1 run to win or tie, I tried to hit the ball out of the ball park. All of these situations were the same as when I went to the plate.

beemax,

Before this thread gets buried too far, I would be curious to know if you use your “two-strike approach” when executing the hit and run. Also, if you always try to hit a ground ball in the hole between 1st and 2nd or just those pitches that were middle-out (and pull the middle-in pitches between short and 3rd).

Thanks,

THop

THop,

When I get a hit and run, it is slightly different from my two stirke approach because I HAVE TO put the ball in play. With two strikes, I am looking for a fastball away so I can still have timing for the fastball but I can also stay back on offspeed. I'm left-handed, so the easiest thing for me to do on a hit and run is roll a ball over between 1st and 2nd. However, the shortstop is usually covering second with a left-hander at the plate, so ideally I want to shoot a ball through the 6-hole. My approach with the hit and run is to let the ball travel, and get on top of it as hard as I can.