What has happened to the art of fouling off two strike pitches?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
It really is an art that can be practiced. My guy is regularly tossed pitches 6"+ off the plate and expected to hit them foul down the 1st baseline or behind him. It has been part of his overall training.
It is part of allowing the ball to get deep in the zone (even when off the plate)
It is part of allowing the ball to get deep in the zone (even when off the plate)
I love this thread and the fact Florida that someone else actually works on spoiling pitches with two strikes. I thought maybe I was "out of touch" teaching my son to shorten up with two strikes make the pitcher work and just try to take the ball back up the middle. It is something that is rarely taught and even frowned upon by some hitting coaches who want 3 big swings every at bat.
What evidence is there that this "art" has diminished?
Anyone think that some hitters intentionally try to just foul off that outside fastball?
Anyone think that some hitters intentionally try to just foul off that outside fastball?
Actually yes.
Yes, hitters intentionally foul off borderline pitches that are not good to hit but are too close to take.
I guess that is why it is an "art". It's called battling at at the plate, waiting for a pitchers "mistake".
It is similar to being a lead-off hitter where the philosophy may be to make the pitcher show all his stuff.
I guess that is why it is an "art". It's called battling at at the plate, waiting for a pitchers "mistake".
It is similar to being a lead-off hitter where the philosophy may be to make the pitcher show all his stuff.
neither of my sons two hitting instructors through this point in his baseball career taught fouling off a borderline pitch with two strikes even though their approach was totally different otherwise. They both wanted full cuts with two strikes.
that was wonderfully stated floridafan and it precisely states why my son takes the approach he does. I can recall when I was young hearing announcers talking about MLB players who struck out more than 100 times in a season needing to take another tour in the minors so they could cut down on their strikeouts. I think the term art is appropriate for exactly this reason.. there seems to be little difference these days in striking out and making an out on a ball put into play whereas in the old days not striking out was a badge of pride a lot of players had in the man to man contest that was pitcher vs. batter.
I teach my son to do it b/c it plays to one of his greatest strengths.. an outstanding batting eye.
that was wonderfully stated floridafan and it precisely states why my son takes the approach he does. I can recall when I was young hearing announcers talking about MLB players who struck out more than 100 times in a season needing to take another tour in the minors so they could cut down on their strikeouts. I think the term art is appropriate for exactly this reason.. there seems to be little difference these days in striking out and making an out on a ball put into play whereas in the old days not striking out was a badge of pride a lot of players had in the man to man contest that was pitcher vs. batter.
I teach my son to do it b/c it plays to one of his greatest strengths.. an outstanding batting eye.
In 2190 career abs Dustin Pedroia has struck out 184 times.
I've never met the guy but it doesnt look like he "shortens up his swing" to me.
I think the amount a player strikes out is slightly more complicated than a two strike approach.
Brian Giles went a season where he swung and missed 70 times. Only 70 times in an entire season.
Some of its physical, alot is mental, but the ablity to not swing and miss is God given in my opinion.
I've never met the guy but it doesnt look like he "shortens up his swing" to me.
I think the amount a player strikes out is slightly more complicated than a two strike approach.
Brian Giles went a season where he swung and missed 70 times. Only 70 times in an entire season.
Some of its physical, alot is mental, but the ablity to not swing and miss is God given in my opinion.
Now I did not indicate that my son has been taught to choke up and take a defensive approach to hitting when he has two strikes. He is on the offensive when he has a club in his hands, and he is always looking to drive the ball through or over the fence.
Intentionally fouling a ball off has no upside...even if you succeed, you don't gain anything...if you fail (swing and miss), you'll strike out. The objective is to get a hit, not not strikeout. Intentionally fouling off a ball does nothing to help you put the ball in play, let alone hard. It's a tie-lose proposition. Why put yourself in that position?
I don't believe that any hitters actually try to hit the ball foul, here's why:
I do not believe that a hitter can decrease his chances of swinging and missing by altering his swing to intentionally hit a ball foul instead of trying to put it in play with a routine swing. There is more room for error in a swing that would put the ball in play.
If a hitter puposefully hits a ball foul, it would mean that at some point he made up his mind to hit the ball foul. I don't believe that anyone decides before the pitch that they are going to hit this pitch foul, but that would mean that hitters make up their mind mid pitch to go from swinging to put it in play to swinging to hit it foul. Is that really what happens?
PS I agree with Walawala. A two strike approach may or may not help cutting down strikeouts, but in my opinion the number one factor in not striking out is not swinging at balls, both early and late in the count.
I don't believe that any hitters actually try to hit the ball foul, here's why:
I do not believe that a hitter can decrease his chances of swinging and missing by altering his swing to intentionally hit a ball foul instead of trying to put it in play with a routine swing. There is more room for error in a swing that would put the ball in play.
If a hitter puposefully hits a ball foul, it would mean that at some point he made up his mind to hit the ball foul. I don't believe that anyone decides before the pitch that they are going to hit this pitch foul, but that would mean that hitters make up their mind mid pitch to go from swinging to put it in play to swinging to hit it foul. Is that really what happens?
PS I agree with Walawala. A two strike approach may or may not help cutting down strikeouts, but in my opinion the number one factor in not striking out is not swinging at balls, both early and late in the count.
I hate any kind of "defensive" swinging in kids!!
S
S
The way strike zones vary and you cannot take lose pitches---fouling them off prevents bad calls and strikeouts and also build the pitch counmt for the opposing pitcher
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
The way strike zones vary and you cannot take lose pitches---fouling them off prevents bad calls and strikeouts and also build the pitch counmt for the opposing pitcher
Yes,take the decision out of the umpires hand.
My son hit most his homeruns with 2 strikes this season,but those pitches were down the middle on full counts that the pitchers were just trying to get over the plate.He will slap a pitch on the edge of the plate to stay alive but put it down the middle and he uses his best swing.
IMO,this is what the better hitters will do.
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
The way strike zones vary and you cannot take lose pitches---fouling them off prevents bad calls and strikeouts and also build the pitch counmt for the opposing pitcher
Who amongst us doesn't believe that this is the "perfect approach" to two strike hitting? This line of logic suggests that the outcome will result in a the hitter getting a pitch he can handle which he will center and put it in play at some point in time.
Let me give you another perspective by some hitters:
Hitting a baseball is not done under controlled, lab like, conditions. Hitting is accomplished with round bats against moving round balls. That two strike defensive swing, on a "border line" pitch, just as often results in Strike Three, or a weakly struck ball that is fielded in fair or foul territory (weak pop-up) for an out!
Thus the Theory is this: "Why go after a pitch I can't do anything with when I know three things; it's likely a ball, I can not put it in play with authority?" AND, the fact is, that I have a 50/50 chance it will be called a ball if I take it!
I had a very good hitter, for both power and average, lay this on me after watching him take Strike three, with men on (and no doubt it was a BALL). This kid could differentiate balls from strikes BEFORE they where thrown I believe (his strike zone recognition was that good).
I said; "you know what you may be right." That's why you are going to College on a scholarship and I'm coaching youth baseball!
the end result of everything done in an at bat whether its a two strike approach or earlier in the at bat is to "get a good pitch to hit".
My view is that two strike situation involves understanding the hitter, where they are in the order, the situation and how they got to the 2 strike count. There is no one answer that is successful.
If the hitter got to 2 strikes by seeing everything the pitcher can throw, including his out or best pitch, then he can be much more aggressive.
If the hitter got to 0-2, without seeing the best pitch, I think he has to be less aggressive with his approach.
The higher the level of competition from HS to college to Milb, the smarter the hitter needs to be in this situation.
Just as the pitcher is attempting to set up the hitter, the hitter is looking to out think the pitcher, and get into a hitter's situation, especially seeing every pitch.
In my view, there are some extremely talented hitters in college and Milb who don't need to change the approach depending on the count, but they are the minority.
Most do need foul off pitches with 2 strikes, or have an approach to be able to handle good pitches in those situations. The question is whether they have the bat control, discipline and approach to do that.
Good hitters love 2 strike situations. They feel there is nothing more demoralizing to a pitcher than to give up a hit in those situations, especially against the pitcher's best.
If the hitter got to 2 strikes by seeing everything the pitcher can throw, including his out or best pitch, then he can be much more aggressive.
If the hitter got to 0-2, without seeing the best pitch, I think he has to be less aggressive with his approach.
The higher the level of competition from HS to college to Milb, the smarter the hitter needs to be in this situation.
Just as the pitcher is attempting to set up the hitter, the hitter is looking to out think the pitcher, and get into a hitter's situation, especially seeing every pitch.
In my view, there are some extremely talented hitters in college and Milb who don't need to change the approach depending on the count, but they are the minority.
Most do need foul off pitches with 2 strikes, or have an approach to be able to handle good pitches in those situations. The question is whether they have the bat control, discipline and approach to do that.
Good hitters love 2 strike situations. They feel there is nothing more demoralizing to a pitcher than to give up a hit in those situations, especially against the pitcher's best.
If you're good enough to foul off a pitch, then, just hit it solid instead....
If you can do one, you can do the other....
If you can do one, you can do the other....
Bluedog
You continue to amaze me----I am talking of pitches that are borderline stikes---not real good to hit but possbly can be called strikes---you must be one hell of a coach--are you saying you can hit every pitch solidly that you can foul off?
I think you better stay in your garage
You continue to amaze me----I am talking of pitches that are borderline stikes---not real good to hit but possbly can be called strikes---you must be one hell of a coach--are you saying you can hit every pitch solidly that you can foul off?
I think you better stay in your garage
Two strike routines are different from spoiling pitches, but neither work for most. They often end in double play balls. Why choke up when pitchers are aiming away. You would make the bat shorter. If you can't handle the bat, start with a shorter one. One major league hitting coach said, "if two strike routines work, use them all the time."
I dunno?
baseballpapa, are you saying every hitter needs to have the same approach, and every hitter needs to have the same approach in every situation and count?
Pitchers sure don't.
Why would hitters?
baseballpapa, are you saying every hitter needs to have the same approach, and every hitter needs to have the same approach in every situation and count?
Pitchers sure don't.
Why would hitters?
The mlb batting average is below 200 with 2 strikes. I saw Posey intent on going to right field against Oswalt when he pitched in relief & got it done. That makes sense. I think few can have a two strike routine that works.
quote:Bluedog
You continue to amaze me----I am talking of pitches that are borderline stikes---not real good to hit but possbly can be called strikes---you must be one hell of a coach--are you saying you can hit every pitch solidly that you can foul off?
Even more amazing is that you are saying a hitter can decide he can't solidly hit a certain pitch that is coming at him so he purposely mis-hits it enough to foul it off....
A hitter can mis-hit a pitch on purpose?.....And, I amaze you?....Uh, OK!
Better just have a one strike routine....The routine is, don't get the next strike....
When you get to college and Milb, they have scouting reports on hitters.
Why do you think they have them?
Let's assume they don't pay for this information just to keep scouts employed. Must be a reason.
Hitters seem to know what it is.
So, Blue Dog, you are suggesting/stating the guy batting first in the line up in college and Milb/MLB takes the same exact approach as the 4/5/6 and he does it game, after game, after game, after game, and never adjusts?
Why do you think they have them?
Let's assume they don't pay for this information just to keep scouts employed. Must be a reason.
Hitters seem to know what it is.
So, Blue Dog, you are suggesting/stating the guy batting first in the line up in college and Milb/MLB takes the same exact approach as the 4/5/6 and he does it game, after game, after game, after game, and never adjusts?
there are some hitters who cannot, will not and never will be disciplined hitters at the plate. If your player is more like Vlad, Clemente et al than they are Wade Boggs or Max Bishop then let em hack!. I like the odds of the Boggs approach better. This game is all about working every little percentage to your favor IMO.
People should look up the averages of MLB players depending on the count if you dont think it matters what your approach is. You are putting YOUR player at a severe disadvantage if you are unaware and not sharing this fact.
This past weekend at a showcase event a parent on our team yelled at their player after taking a FIRST pitch strike that was 4 to 6 inches outside "swing the bat!" This sickens me...
People should look up the averages of MLB players depending on the count if you dont think it matters what your approach is. You are putting YOUR player at a severe disadvantage if you are unaware and not sharing this fact.
This past weekend at a showcase event a parent on our team yelled at their player after taking a FIRST pitch strike that was 4 to 6 inches outside "swing the bat!" This sickens me...
One must be careful when looking at averages in different counts as evidence that it is better/worse to be in a certain count...there are a lot of factors that aren't accounted for in those statistics.
For instance:
Which pitchers are most likely to get hitters to a two strike count? The better pitchers are more likely to get to two strikes than lesser pitchers, and hitters averages will be naturally be lower against these tougher pitchers. At least some of the difference in average with two strikes has to be because more two strike counts occur against better pitching.
Another point:
I have heard some coaches advocate going after the first strike and point to high 0-0 averages as evidence that this strategy works. However, these averages can be misleading because hitters will only swing at great pitches to hit on a 0-0 count, and let the marginal strikes that lead to a lower average go by for strike one. This naturally inflates the average of balls put in play in 0-0 counts.
For instance:
Which pitchers are most likely to get hitters to a two strike count? The better pitchers are more likely to get to two strikes than lesser pitchers, and hitters averages will be naturally be lower against these tougher pitchers. At least some of the difference in average with two strikes has to be because more two strike counts occur against better pitching.
Another point:
I have heard some coaches advocate going after the first strike and point to high 0-0 averages as evidence that this strategy works. However, these averages can be misleading because hitters will only swing at great pitches to hit on a 0-0 count, and let the marginal strikes that lead to a lower average go by for strike one. This naturally inflates the average of balls put in play in 0-0 counts.
quote:However, these averages can be misleading because hitters will only swing at great pitches to hit on a 0-0 count, and let the marginal strikes that lead to a lower average go by for strike one.
^ how is this "misleading"?
Interesting thread and comments.
Anyone heard of Luke Appling and his ability to consistently foul off the tough, borderline pitch? Not a power guy but good enough to be a HOF.
Anyone heard of Luke Appling and his ability to consistently foul off the tough, borderline pitch? Not a power guy but good enough to be a HOF.
Misleading was the wrong term to use...my point is that you can't use a high average on first pitch balls put in play to justify changing your approach and swinging at more first ball pitches.
Not sure there is a right or wrong approach. What feels good for your style will probably dictate the approach.
I'm may have been way off base but the basis of a hitting style that I presented to my son consistently thru his life was; "no matter the count or the situation, if you get a pitch worthy of swinging at, go after it with the intent to do serious damage. I want the baseball to explode when you connect with it." I told him if he didn't like that style then he needed to begin working on his speed and bunting skills.
I don't see how you can build power and improve bat speed with out going all out, all the time. Then the learned skill is to do it while remaining under balance and control. I see "trying to foul off pitches" as a defensive drill worthy for a slap hitter. I, however, don't see anything defensive about the art of "driving the baseball with authority."
So far, the approach has worked very well for him.
I'm may have been way off base but the basis of a hitting style that I presented to my son consistently thru his life was; "no matter the count or the situation, if you get a pitch worthy of swinging at, go after it with the intent to do serious damage. I want the baseball to explode when you connect with it." I told him if he didn't like that style then he needed to begin working on his speed and bunting skills.
I don't see how you can build power and improve bat speed with out going all out, all the time. Then the learned skill is to do it while remaining under balance and control. I see "trying to foul off pitches" as a defensive drill worthy for a slap hitter. I, however, don't see anything defensive about the art of "driving the baseball with authority."
So far, the approach has worked very well for him.
I hope we can avoid all the steroid speak and hustle issues but...
All this talk of basically swinging from the heals. How do you reconcile that with one of the best hitters of this era Manny Ramirez saying concerning his approach at the plate: "dont try to do too much"?
There is a fluidity and a grace in Manny's swing.
All this talk of basically swinging from the heals. How do you reconcile that with one of the best hitters of this era Manny Ramirez saying concerning his approach at the plate: "dont try to do too much"?
There is a fluidity and a grace in Manny's swing.
quote:best hitters of this era Manny Ramirez saying concerning his approach at the plate: "dont try to do too much"?
What Manny does and what he said he did has always been two different things!
If you've watched him swing throughout his career I would describe his approach as "controlled aggression." Certainly, he's no panty waist when it comes to hacking at the baseball. And I agree, it's poetry in motion to watch.
Nothing wrong with swinging from the heels with 2 strikes at the borderline pitch....if you guessed right. If you guessed wrong you will be sitting back down more times than not.
No one goes to bat intentionally to foul off a good pitch to hit. But how they handle the pitches that fooled them often determines the outcome of an at-bat.
Classic example is a pitcher with a good fastball and a good curveball...most hitters will expect him to attack the outer half of the plate, hoping to get a fastball. You get the fastball on the black you are looking for you might be able to do some damage but if it is a good curveball you won't hit it with authority but can foul it off to stay alive. Speed and location just doesn't apply to pitching.
Many here will say they can still drive that curveball...if so, they have never seen a good college or MLB curve. They might drive it with a 4 iron because it will be in the dirt. And if the pitcher can cut a fastball inside under your hands when you're looking outside, might as well swing and pray you can foul it off and hope for a mistake on the next pitch. Heaven help you if the pitcher can throw a changeup down for a strike with 2 strikes.
There's aggressive and stupid aggressive when hitting and the dividing line gets really thin at each progressive level. Pitchers/catchers just love the stupid aggressive hitters trying to crush everything no matter the count but the guys that can get wood on anything and everything are the toughest to strike out....those are the guys that frustrate pitchers and cause pitchers to make mistakes.
I hope everyone understands that there are "hitters strikes" and "pitchers strikes". Both are strikes but very different. Simply put, there are strikes that very few hitters will ever hit with authority (pitchers) and the strikes toward the middle of the zone and higher up (hitters) that can be consistently driven. Borderline strikes make pitchers millions of $...mistakes send them back down to Toledo and taking bus trips again. JMHO
No one goes to bat intentionally to foul off a good pitch to hit. But how they handle the pitches that fooled them often determines the outcome of an at-bat.
Classic example is a pitcher with a good fastball and a good curveball...most hitters will expect him to attack the outer half of the plate, hoping to get a fastball. You get the fastball on the black you are looking for you might be able to do some damage but if it is a good curveball you won't hit it with authority but can foul it off to stay alive. Speed and location just doesn't apply to pitching.
Many here will say they can still drive that curveball...if so, they have never seen a good college or MLB curve. They might drive it with a 4 iron because it will be in the dirt. And if the pitcher can cut a fastball inside under your hands when you're looking outside, might as well swing and pray you can foul it off and hope for a mistake on the next pitch. Heaven help you if the pitcher can throw a changeup down for a strike with 2 strikes.
There's aggressive and stupid aggressive when hitting and the dividing line gets really thin at each progressive level. Pitchers/catchers just love the stupid aggressive hitters trying to crush everything no matter the count but the guys that can get wood on anything and everything are the toughest to strike out....those are the guys that frustrate pitchers and cause pitchers to make mistakes.
I hope everyone understands that there are "hitters strikes" and "pitchers strikes". Both are strikes but very different. Simply put, there are strikes that very few hitters will ever hit with authority (pitchers) and the strikes toward the middle of the zone and higher up (hitters) that can be consistently driven. Borderline strikes make pitchers millions of $...mistakes send them back down to Toledo and taking bus trips again. JMHO
quote:There's aggressive and stupid aggressive when hitting and the dividing line gets really thin at each progressive level.
^ this is exactly the reason I have worked and worked with my player on his approach. I have found some resistance to "patience" at the HS and early years showcase level. I am hoping my player will be able to find a college coach who appreciates his approach. Add to this the fact that the breaking stuff gets progressively nastier at each succeeding level and you have a recipe for a player with talent failing because they have no plan.
My whole effort with my player has been drawn towards being IN CONTROL at the plate rather than REACTING to what the pitcher is offering. I dont think anyone here would disagree that you need to be hitting "fat" pitches... my players goal is to get that pitch.
Prime: what I see with Manny is more control than aggression and while I would characterize Pujols in the same manner what I see with him is more aggression than control.
quote:Many here will say they can still drive that curveball...if so, they have never seen a good college or MLB curve.
You can and should drive that curveball or you won't hit at the higher levels. A hitter that gets sucked into that low breaking ball hasn't learned an early lesson; "if it's low, let it go!" Having said that, the best breaking ball hitters I've seen, didn't miss the fastball.
You make great points Abrams and Bothsports Dad. I have spent many years with my son focusing on hitting that good pitch at each at bat. Problem for the hitter is, as Abrams pointed out, sometimes that best pitch is a Pitchers strike.
We often get divided on these discussions by mere semantics. I don't define the term aggressive, as it applies to hitting, as "swinging from the heels."
What many here may not realize, is that you cannot be quick or powerful (aggressive in this application) unless you have learned how to relax. The great hitters with exceptional bat speed, should and do appear effortless in their swings. Physiologically, you can't perform at peak, unless your muscles, and mind, are absolutely at peace. That allows the hitter to wait, recognize the pitch, coil and strike. JMO..
Th
great post Prime... I agree semantics is often the culprit.
two weeks ago my son followed the if its low let it go maxum on a curve and was called out looking for the first time this entire summer/fall showcase season.
I thought the pitch was a bit low out of the strike zone but when we talked after the game I told him this game is one where even when you do everything right you still may not enjoy success in any one snapshot of time.
two weeks ago my son followed the if its low let it go maxum on a curve and was called out looking for the first time this entire summer/fall showcase season.
I thought the pitch was a bit low out of the strike zone but when we talked after the game I told him this game is one where even when you do everything right you still may not enjoy success in any one snapshot of time.
Prime,
Good point about being mentally and physically relaxed when hitting....most have difficulties with this. Having your son focus and understand what "his pitch" is has helped him be a step ahead of other hitters his age by not going after "pitchers pitches" early in the count. Sounds like you've done alot work with your son on the mental side of the game which will pay big dividends the higher he advances.
Playing to your own strengths and not the opponents is pretty important in any sport; a hitter has perhaps the most difficult time doing this in all of sports because the defense controls the ball, not the offense. Its why the "stupid aggressive" hitter that tries to pull that low pitch on the outer half gets himself out instead of staying back and attacking the pitch the other way.
Good curveballs simply do not get driven consistently by anyone, at any level. Bad curveballs get stung by some. Hanging curveballs get sent to the cheap seats by most. You are 100% correct in hitting the fastball first because no one in the history of MLB baseball has made a living hitting good curveballs.
Hitters tip their caps to pitchers alot more often than pitchers tip their caps to hitters. As much as I enjoyed hitting, I always wished I'd been good enough to pitch and control the game. Never was good enough so I became a catcher so at least I'd have some input.
Good point about being mentally and physically relaxed when hitting....most have difficulties with this. Having your son focus and understand what "his pitch" is has helped him be a step ahead of other hitters his age by not going after "pitchers pitches" early in the count. Sounds like you've done alot work with your son on the mental side of the game which will pay big dividends the higher he advances.
Playing to your own strengths and not the opponents is pretty important in any sport; a hitter has perhaps the most difficult time doing this in all of sports because the defense controls the ball, not the offense. Its why the "stupid aggressive" hitter that tries to pull that low pitch on the outer half gets himself out instead of staying back and attacking the pitch the other way.
Good curveballs simply do not get driven consistently by anyone, at any level. Bad curveballs get stung by some. Hanging curveballs get sent to the cheap seats by most. You are 100% correct in hitting the fastball first because no one in the history of MLB baseball has made a living hitting good curveballs.
Hitters tip their caps to pitchers alot more often than pitchers tip their caps to hitters. As much as I enjoyed hitting, I always wished I'd been good enough to pitch and control the game. Never was good enough so I became a catcher so at least I'd have some input.
Abrams, you're so smart! 
Don't have to hit to be a catcher!
Don't have to hit to be a catcher!
Bluedog,
That's what the coaches always said about me ....smart and can flatout hit.
I was the one that always thought being a pitcher would be cool by shutting down the other team. Wasn't to be.
That's what the coaches always said about me ....smart and can flatout hit.
I was the one that always thought being a pitcher would be cool by shutting down the other team. Wasn't to be.
Blueddog
If you are a catcher you had better be the best defensive catsher since Wes Westrum to not have to hit
You continue to amaze me
If you are a catcher you had better be the best defensive catsher since Wes Westrum to not have to hit
You continue to amaze me
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
What has happened to the art of fouling off two strike pitches?
Originally posted by tfox:
Yes,take the decision out of the umpires hand.
This post is right down Pop ups alley, he calls me the other day to say he went 0 for 3 in intersquad, with one called third strike with the bases loaded. So I ask him what happened: "Dad it wasn't even close to a strike, everyone agreed". Well everyone except the most important person, THE UMPIRE!!! This happens way too much to him, the only time he has been ejected was same situation, called third strike and after an 0 for 4 game he decided to argue. We have discussed this before and he is adamant about not swinging at "balls".
He has good enough coordination to foul off most of these pitches and a good coach can tell a full swing at a bad pitch to reaching out trying to foul off a bad pitch. I don't care how good a defensive catcher he might be, but he won't go much further taking too many called third strikes. Evidently his current coach isn't too concerned about this, but as his dad, taking the third strike with two out and the bases loaded is terrible. I would rather see him take the bat off his shoulder and at least try. It seems too many umpires tend to make these "borderline" calls when the game reaches this point. By the way his count was 0 and 2, so Mr. Umpire could have let this one go as a ball.
TRhit's question seems to have sparked a good dialog but there seems to be only two opinions, my son's and TR's.
A pet peeve of mine is when a player is effectively fouling off 2 strike pitches and a pitch is thrown that is outside by a foot or more and get rung up on a called 3rd strike. It's like: "You've been up here long enough, I am tired of looking at you...next!"
Best at bat of the day Sunday by my son and he gets rung up like that! Granted, it was by a fellow teammate who is a pitcher calling balls and strikes from behind the mound..lol!
Best at bat of the day Sunday by my son and he gets rung up like that! Granted, it was by a fellow teammate who is a pitcher calling balls and strikes from behind the mound..lol!
quote:We have discussed this before and he is adamant about not swinging at "balls".
Popup;
I have had this same "maddening" discussion with my son. He, however, has me thinking that he may be on to something.
Prime Jr. explained it to me this way. "Being blessed with very good or great strike zone awareness, provides a big advantage to a hitter. However, those decisions are made in milliseconds and the awareness software isn't all that discriminating." In other words, if you recognize strikes from balls early in the count, you can't really go to an alternate set of built in parameters for two strike situations. It just doesn't work that way in real time. To your trained eye, a strike is a strike and a pitch out of the zone is a ball ... that's it. You are making go (swing) or no go (check) decisions almost instantaneously.
Furthermore, he says, "why swing at a ball (we aren't talking border line, on the black here, but pitches inches or more out of the zone ... that's a bunch) that I have no chance to do anything with?" After all there is at least a 50% chance I will miss the pitch anyway, striking out. If I believe the pitch is outside the zone and I trust my strike awareness skills, then I have at least that same 50/50 chance it will be called a ball and I can live to see another pitch that hopefully, is one I can do something with, or take my base."
So, the question is, how do you preach "get a good pitch to hit" which is what all good hitters do, and then speak from the other side of your mouth when preaching "expand the zone with two strikes?
Frankly, after watching him hit all these years, I can no longer argue with his logic. He gets his occasional K looking, but far more often he recognizes pitches that he can drive (hitters strikes) or ones the can put in play with less authority (pitchers strikes).
Prime Jr is a smart boy.
quote:Originally posted by Prime9:quote:We have discussed this before and he is adamant about not swinging at "balls".
Popup;
I have had this same "maddening" discussion with my son. He, however, has me thinking that he may be on to something.
Prime Jr. explained it to me this way. "Being blessed with very good or great strike zone awareness, provides a big advantage to a hitter. However, those decisions are made in milliseconds and the awareness software isn't all that discriminating." In other words, if you recognize strikes from balls early in the count, you can't really go to an alternate set of built in parameters for two strike situations. It just doesn't work that way in real time. To your trained eye, a strike is a strike and a pitch out of the zone is a ball ... that's it. You are making go (swing) or no go (check) decisions almost instantaneously.
Furthermore, he says, "why swing at a ball (we aren't talking border line, on the black here, but pitches inches or more out of the zone ... that's a bunch) that I have no chance to do anything with?" After all there is at least a 50% chance I will miss the pitch anyway, striking out. If I believe the pitch is outside the zone and I trust my strike awareness skills, then I have at least that same 50/50 chance it will be called a ball and I can live to see another pitch that hopefully, is one I can do something with, or take my base."
So, the question is, how do you preach "get a good pitch to hit" which is what all good hitters do, and then speak from the other side of your mouth when preaching "expand the zone with two strikes?
Frankly, after watching him hit all these years, I can no longer argue with his logic. He gets his occasional K looking, but far more often he recognizes pitches that he can drive (hitters strikes) or ones the can put in play with less authority (pitchers strikes).
Jr is right to a degree BUT you also must recognize tendencies in your league or umpires.At some point you have to know what is a CALLED strike and what is not.
Balls clearly out should be left alone but balls that are called strikes more often than not need to have a bat put on them.
quote:Balls clearly out should be left alone but balls that are called strikes more often than not need to have a bat put on them.
I agree, however, the problem comes in the semantics, what and WHO defines "clearly out" consistently. Sure it differs from Ump to ump, inning to inning, pitcher to pitcher some time. Trying to make a living hitting a baseball within those parameters is little to vague to act on in the time allowed .. IMO The mind, and then body, will react in a precise manner, every time, only it has been trained that way, every time.
Do you think if you expand to include close pitches on strike two, that you can then not do it on the earlier counts?
I wonder if Ted Williams book on hitting addresses this issue, after all he was one of the best hitters ever. I understand there has to be a limit as to how far you go to protect and some are better than others but #1 son is pretty set, if he doesn't believe he can hit it properly than a called third strike to him is better.
quote:Originally posted by Prime9:quote:Balls clearly out should be left alone but balls that are called strikes more often than not need to have a bat put on them.
I agree, however, the problem comes in the semantics, what and WHO defines "clearly out" consistently. Sure it differs from Ump to ump, inning to inning, pitcher to pitcher some time. Trying to make a living hitting a baseball within those parameters is little to vague to act on in the time allowed .. IMO The mind, and then body, will react in a precise manner, every time, only it has been trained that way, every time.
Do you think if you expand to include close pitches on strike two, that you can then not do it on the earlier counts
This is precisely the point of the thread.Seems like with today's players that the effort isn't even there and players of the past were able to "protect" with 2 strikes.
My son has a good eye.He is young,only 11 last season but he only struck out 7 times last season (rec ball)and atleast 4 of them were looking.All on the same pitch that is a called strike in his league at least 90% of the time.(low and just outside)He adjusted later in the season and was able to stay alive by smacking that pitch into the fence.He ended up drawing more walks than strikeouts(8) with 5 homeruns.
Although young,he understands the strike zone very well and is very much like your son and doesn't want any part of swinging at the low outside pitch but he soon figured out that with 2 strikes,he was sitting very quickly if he didn't learn to do something with it.Granted,this is rec ball so pitching is not near what he will be seeing in the very near future.
tfox;
low and away (definitely not a strike) is commonly called a strike at the younger levels.
The difference being a hitter learns that is ALWAYS a strike by most all the umps at that level. Adjustments of moving up on the plate and taking it to right can and should be made.
At higher levels, more velocity or a somewhat tighter strike zone, although more ambiguos, makes those adjustments on strike two a little more challenging.... hence the debate.
low and away (definitely not a strike) is commonly called a strike at the younger levels.
The difference being a hitter learns that is ALWAYS a strike by most all the umps at that level. Adjustments of moving up on the plate and taking it to right can and should be made.
At higher levels, more velocity or a somewhat tighter strike zone, although more ambiguos, makes those adjustments on strike two a little more challenging.... hence the debate.
I believe our son at this level still believes hes going to get one down the middle. What he doesn't seem to realize is what pitches is he calling as catcher? Everywhere but down the middle.
quote:Originally posted by Prime9:
tfox;
low and away (definitely not a strike) is commonly called a strike at the younger levels.
The difference being a hitter learns that is ALWAYS a strike by most all the umps at that level. Adjustments of moving up on the plate and taking it to right can and should be made.
At higher levels, more velocity or a somewhat tighter strike zone, although more ambiguos, makes those adjustments on strike two a little more challenging.... hence the debate.
I totally agree on all accounts but it is possible to have the ability to stay alive on not so good pitches that have a better than average chance of getting you called out.
IMO,having this ability will just make you a better hitter and it needs to be worked on.
quote:I believe our son at this level still believes hes going to get one down the middle. What he doesn't seem to realize is what pitches is he calling as catcher? Everywhere but down the middle.
Interesting thing I heard from Scott Rolen once. He said something like he could count on both hands the number of at bats during an entire season where he did not get at least one hittable pitch "down the middle." He said it might be a fastball, curveball, slider, or change or whatever. But almost every at bat there was one pitch that did not catch the corner and went down the middle.
As a hitter I took this knowledge and developed a philosophy to analyse my at bats each time. If I strike out, I first ask myself if I missed my "one pitch." If I did, then I obviously put myself in a hole for the ab. If I didn't, its usually because I was too agressive out of the strikezone. I didn't let the pitcher come to me whether I chased early in the ab or I was trying to protect with 2. I feel like if I never get that one pitch, I should at least come out of the ab with a walk.
greenmachine, I like your approach. I wonder if son does this?
For our HS hitters, I ask what their approach is. If they have a a solid one (rare) and it works, I usually leave them alone. If not, I usually use the following as a base..
With less than 2 strikes...
I like to determine dead center spot of a hitter's favorite pitch and draw a zone around that spot that is about 2/3 size of the actual strike zone. This is that hitter's "drive zone" - not so small that he can't be aggressive but not so big that he is swinging at pitches he can't drive hard.
With 2 strikes... (except full count)
For most hitters, change to regular strike zone plus one ball (adjusted by the ump of the day) and get the bat on the ball any way you can. Depending on the hitter, usually move a couple inches closer to the plate to protect the likely pitch just off the outside and know to fight off inside or turn and take one.
Some exceptions to be made with power guys, pure pull guys and those with exceptional zone awareness.
Full count...
Regular strike zone, hit it hard if you can.
I make a few colored cardboard cutouts for visuals.
With less than 2 strikes...
I like to determine dead center spot of a hitter's favorite pitch and draw a zone around that spot that is about 2/3 size of the actual strike zone. This is that hitter's "drive zone" - not so small that he can't be aggressive but not so big that he is swinging at pitches he can't drive hard.
With 2 strikes... (except full count)
For most hitters, change to regular strike zone plus one ball (adjusted by the ump of the day) and get the bat on the ball any way you can. Depending on the hitter, usually move a couple inches closer to the plate to protect the likely pitch just off the outside and know to fight off inside or turn and take one.
Some exceptions to be made with power guys, pure pull guys and those with exceptional zone awareness.
Full count...
Regular strike zone, hit it hard if you can.
I make a few colored cardboard cutouts for visuals.
I'm skeptical about intentionally fouling off marginal two-strike pitches--possibly, this is a skill to be expected of punch-and-judy hitters whose default approach is playing pepper. Possibly. Definitely do-able on the sandlot vs. lob-pitching (but two fouls and yer out).
But not by any normal athlete (Ty Cobb is dead) who takes normal cuts against game-speed pitching.
Coaches, with your team watching (to imitate game pressure), get in the cage against an erratic pitching machine and try it yourself. You're trying to center up the strikes on a round bat, and off-center the marginal pitches. Making swing decisions in milleseconds...changing your intent in milleseconds (center the ball? off-center the ball? swing on time? swing late to foul it off?)... give it a try and report back.
But not by any normal athlete (Ty Cobb is dead) who takes normal cuts against game-speed pitching.
Coaches, with your team watching (to imitate game pressure), get in the cage against an erratic pitching machine and try it yourself. You're trying to center up the strikes on a round bat, and off-center the marginal pitches. Making swing decisions in milleseconds...changing your intent in milleseconds (center the ball? off-center the ball? swing on time? swing late to foul it off?)... give it a try and report back.
If you can purposely mis - hit a pitch and foul it off, then, just use that talent to square it up and crush it.....
quote:Originally posted by BlueDog:
If you can purposely mis - hit a pitch and foul it off, then, just use that talent to square it up and crush it.....
Because if a pitch is in a "pitcher's pitch" location, it may be a strike but in a place that you cannot crush regardless of talent. You may be able to get a bat on it enough to foul off and stay alive for the next pitch, hopefully either more clearly a ball or more "crushable".
The fact is, you are not purposely mis - hitting the pitch.....
And, don't move up, or back in the box.....Get as far back as possible and stay there....
And, don't move up, or back in the box.....Get as far back as possible and stay there....
Respectfully disagree... I used to do it on off speed pitches inside (yank it foul) or down and away (reach and flick oppo foul) to protect, Cabbage does the same as do many of the club boys I have coached.
I have 2 boys playing at the high school level.after a lot of years mandating they "look for a good pitch to hit" I have now changed my theory to "look for a pitch you can hit good"..Lots of thought and reasons behind this. I can probably write for an hour.
A. your lucky if you get one good pitch
B. you have to be able to hit a pitchers mistake
C D E F. you can't count on an umpire knowing what a strike is or looks like. if the umpire was any good he wouldn't be here umpiring games...etc
G. taking a first pitch curveball is a great theory but if it's hanging and you can whack it I say "LOOK FOR A PITCH YOU CAN HIT GOOD"!
A. your lucky if you get one good pitch
B. you have to be able to hit a pitchers mistake
C D E F. you can't count on an umpire knowing what a strike is or looks like. if the umpire was any good he wouldn't be here umpiring games...etc
G. taking a first pitch curveball is a great theory but if it's hanging and you can whack it I say "LOOK FOR A PITCH YOU CAN HIT GOOD"!
Greenmachine outstanding post.
quote:Originally posted by I'mJustADad:
I have 2 boys playing at the high school level.after a lot of years mandating they "look for a good pitch to hit" I have now changed my theory to "look for a pitch you can hit good"..Lots of thought and reasons behind this. I can probably write for an hour.
A. your lucky if you get one good pitch
B. you have to be able to hit a pitchers mistake
C D E F. you can't count on an umpire knowing what a strike is or looks like. if the umpire was any good he wouldn't be here umpiring games...etc
G. taking a first pitch curveball is a great theory but if it's hanging and you can whack it I say "LOOK FOR A PITCH YOU CAN HIT GOOD"!
"Look for a pitch you can hit good" or "Get a good pitch to hit"...
Is a hanging curveball a good pitch to hit? I would argue yes...it is in fact a pitchers mistake.
The reason that I like "get a good pitch to hit" is it implys an activity on the part of the batter to create a situation where he is more likely than not to get a pitch that he can hit well.
To me, this can involve spoiling pitchers pitches (or the expanded strikezone of a generous ump), and then hit a line drive into the gap...or get a walk.
Look for a pitch you can hit good, works fine though!
