Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
fp_mom

Registered:
Posts: 400
Reply with quote  #31 
Softball needs to bring back wood bats, period. There is a new article published just this morning at NYTimes.com about the controversy on new bat standards for youth baseball:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/sports/baseball/bats-youth-sports-equipment.html

Most of the comments focus on support for bringing back wood bats due to their cheaper cost. They are saying $400 for a Little League bat is outrageous and elitist, since lower income kids can't play. The same should be done for softball. Wood bats also would teach these players how to hit and field better, since the sweet spot is smaller.
philo

Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #32 
Old enough to remember when Aluminum bats were introduced. Funny cost was the reason at the time to switch to these. Now it's completely opposite. I'm a baseball guy so can anyone tell me, is their a drop weight for softball bats? i.e. a length to weight ratio?
TBarvsd

Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #33 
Most women swing a -9 or -10, with 33 or 34 in. bats being the overwhelming majority of lengths. 26oz and above bats would be considered "slow pitch" bats and are marketed as such, whereas 25oz and below are "fastpitch" bats. Although, most men's fastpitch players swing the "slow pitch" bats
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 6,706
Reply with quote  #34 
Love to see the results when a girl swings a 33/30 piece of lumber. Probably wouldn’t even need outfielders
__________________
#SCOTUS

DunninLA

Registered:
Posts: 5,129
Reply with quote  #35 
Quote:
Originally Posted by philo
Old enough to remember when Aluminum bats were introduced. Funny cost was the reason at the time to switch to these. Now it's completely opposite. I'm a baseball guy so can anyone tell me, is their a drop weight for softball bats? i.e. a length to weight ratio?
do you remember THE YEAR OF TITANIUM?  Holy cow, those were hot bats.  Testing showed balls came off those at 102 - 110 mph depending on model.   A the time, aluminum bats tapped out at about 94.

__________________
qui tacet consentire videtur
lovsofbal

Registered:
Posts: 1,830
Reply with quote  #36 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spazsdad
Love to see the results when a girl swings a 33/30 piece of lumber. Probably wouldn’t even need outfielders


Boring...….  who wants 0-0 games after 15 innings
Mangler

Registered:
Posts: 215
Reply with quote  #37 
The only people who ever want to change the field are pitchers parents.
Hitting, is the reason the game has been expanding quickly.  No one (except pitchers parents) want to see a slap bunt, 2 hit, 1 run game.
Leave the game alone.
Everybody digs the long ball.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,453
Reply with quote  #38 
Well, deepening the fences only reduces the home runs. It increases singles, doubles and triples

It would bring a flatter swing back into vogue
lovsofbal

Registered:
Posts: 1,830
Reply with quote  #39 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangler
The only people who ever want to change the field are pitchers parents.
Hitting, is the reason the game has been expanding quickly.  No one (except pitchers parents) want to see a slap bunt, 2 hit, 1 run game.
Leave the game alone.
Everybody digs the long ball.


My DD is a pitcher and I don't want to see the field bigger
Mangler

Registered:
Posts: 215
Reply with quote  #40 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Well, deepening the fences only reduces the home runs. It increases singles, doubles and triples

It would bring a flatter swing back into vogue


Vogue? Vogue doesn't fill stands.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,453
Reply with quote  #41 
Well, fences are NEVER getting deepened.... way too costly

And yes, mis-hit fly balls getting four bases IS a big part of what has made the sport so popular
CajunAmos

Registered:
Posts: 1,134
Reply with quote  #42 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Well, fences are NEVER getting deepened.... way too costly

And yes, mis-hit fly balls getting four bases IS a big part of what has made the sport so popular


Additionally, some parks are land locked and couldn't expand.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 15,453
Reply with quote  #43 
correct.... though, I suppose you could put the catcher's rear end hard against the backstop padding....LOL

Double plus for pitchers! No HRs and no WPs or PBs!
DunninLA

Registered:
Posts: 5,129
Reply with quote  #44 
Or the NCAA could simply stop using the .47 core, 400 lb compression ball, and use the ubiquitous ASA fastpitch approved .47 core, 375 lb. compression ball that everyone in travel grew up with.   That would take about 10' off a deeply hit fly ball.   Or back it off to a .44 Core, 375 compressioin to take even more distance off of it.

There are all sorts of possibilities when altering core and compression, and the NCAA could simply dial in whatever average distance they want vs. the current ball.

Fences don't have to move.

__________________
qui tacet consentire videtur
philo

Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #45 
So my answer to the posters original question would be to tighten the length to weight ratio of the bats. That's what they did on the men's college side to stop the craziness of the 90's.
olddawg

Registered:
Posts: 947
Reply with quote  #46 
I don't think anyone wants to go back to a steady diet of 1-0 games and I also am not in favor of tilting everything back to the side of stroking the ego's of pitchers....but it is really disappointing to see a great pitching performance or even a really close higher scoring game decided by a mis-hit fly ball which just makes it over the fence.  I think that sort of thing actually cheapens the value of a home run.  It is sort of like grade inflation in academics to me.  Migration back to a flatter swing which produces more doubles and triples would be more exciting to me.  They bring more premium to accurate throwing by outfielders. To me, plays at second, third, home are a lot more exciting than watching a home run trot produced by a miss hit ball.

It just seems like the pendulum has swung too far at this point and needs to swing back a little. 


I also wonder what decompressing the ball a little would do to slappers. 


philo

Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #47 
I'm not in agreement of changing the fences. My response was to offer a better solution to changing the dimensions of the fields. I think their's a direct correlation with the growth of the sport and the long ball. That being said, my biggest pet peeve is cheap home runs.
texassmallball

Registered:
Posts: 217
Reply with quote  #48 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DunninLA
Or the NCAA could simply stop using the .47 core, 400 lb compression ball, and use the ubiquitous ASA fastpitch approved .47 core, 375 lb. compression ball that everyone in travel grew up with.   That would take about 10' off a deeply hit fly ball.   Or back it off to a .44 Core, 375 compressioin to take even more distance off of it.

There are all sorts of possibilities when altering core and compression, and the NCAA could simply dial in whatever average distance they want vs. the current ball.

Fences don't have to move.


Where do i vote for this? I think it makes alot of sense. The ball works in travelball.
Rebala

Registered:
Posts: 8
Reply with quote  #49 
My 16U team played at Scenic City this weekend.  Our park was 225 all the way around with permanent 8 foot fences.  Balls were still leaving but the ones that did were legit shots.  That was a good distance, separated the legit dingers from the marginal ones, but that was still with 15/16 year olds.
JBAKE66

Registered:
Posts: 14
Reply with quote  #50 
There are several reasons for the increase in HR's recently...

1) better players...2) better coaches...These 2 things will not change only get better...

3) ball material and compression...4) bat material and technology....These are 2 things we can control that will have the desired effect on the way the ball fly....

So why not control what we can control without making major changes to the field dimensions. This is how the MLB controls there game (wood bats and how the balls are made). Since going to wood bats is not an option (just imagine) then controlling the balls is the obvious solution.

So since this is the easiest and most cost effective way to control the game then my suggestion would be to use a lower compression ball and maybe bring back the cork core balls (similar to older Mizuno balls)...This will reduce those undeserved check swing home runs to outs like they should be and only the balls that are truly squared up properly will leave the field for HR's...This will also give the infielder and outfielders a chance to get to and make plays on balls that they don't normally get to as the ball is moving so fast off the bat past them.

A big thing that I have not seen in this post yet is the concern for "SAFETY" of the infielders and mainly the pitchers. A human only has so much reaction time and I know for fact that the current balls that leave the current bats do infringe upon that reaction time for pitchers who are at approx. 38' at the time of release. This does leave pitchers defenseless in many cases...how many times have you seen pitchers get hit and how many close calls have we had...Safety should be the main reason we dummy the balls down and this would also better fit with the dimensions of the game.

I could go on and on about the reasons to dummy the balls down but if you want to experience it first hand go out and throw BP to some of the games top level batters and you will understand when I say the pitchers is a "sitting duck"...

Just my 2 cents worth...

__________________
JLB
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.