http://www.seniorsoftballstore.com

 
SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

Message board   »Message Board home    »Sign-in or register to get started

Online now: 2 members: road kill, softball4b; 41 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: 1-1 count no extra foul tourney

Posted Discussion
Feb. 4, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
1-1 count no extra foul tourney
We had a chance to play in our first NSA senior event Saturday.

There were three maor plus teams and two major teams in the event.

One hour then open inning rule.

1-1 count

No extra foul with two strikes

There were three extra inning games

The tourney stayed on schedule and every game was seven innings or extra innings.

In four games there were a total of four walks.

Whoever has been saying 1-1 doesn't speed up the games is wrong based on this event.
Feb. 4, 2013
cal50
Men's 50
288 posts
It does speed up the game, no question.

Has the SSUSA made a final ruling on the 1 and 1? I have not seen it up brought for awhile and curious if they were still considering changing it based on the age survey results?
Feb. 4, 2013
Longhorns
39 posts
Timmy the Tourn. ran great an the 1-1 count let us play 7 innings in all games. The competion was also good. The 1-1 count speeds the game up an makes the hitters more aggressive. MTC 55 wishes all organizations went to 1-1 counts.
Feb. 4, 2013
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
Make the time limits longer or get rid of them.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Agreed 100percent
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
With tim that is!
Feb. 4, 2013
db14
91 posts
Millette... the issue has been voted on and a majority has spoken. Give it a rest, get over it and move on to something else!
Feb. 4, 2013
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
Agreed 100%

With db14 that is.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Hey Tim, I find that the one extra foul works well in the city and Games go full 7 innings.. only thing I would change in NSA! But do like the 1 and 1...
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Here is my feelings on speeding up the game... I rather get 4 abs with 1 and 1 count then 3 abs at 0 to 0 count... I rather get in 7 innings then 5 or 6 innings.. 1 and 1 makes this possible.. I don't care what the voting showed, it should be a no brainer,however there are those that can't hit unless someone sets it on a T for them and these are the ones that voted it like it is obviously! I think that we should have option of using either 1 and 1 or 0 to 0 Counts before game begins managers could have the option of agreeing!
Feb. 4, 2013
cal50
Men's 50
288 posts
Swing, now you are sounding like Gary19, you state an opinion then claim it is a fact. Although I agree that 1 and 1 count is the way to go, saying that people who can't hit are the ones that voted for the 0 and 0 count is very insulting to the older age groups who mostly voted that way.
Feb. 4, 2013
GI
Men's 60
168 posts
DB 14 Majority ??/ look at results 40-58 group voted 1-1 but wereover looked. Even a politian could have figured out somekind of trial - say maybe 40-55's 1-1 count for a year. Like what has been said please do not argue with those of us who like to play 7 innings and think 1st pitch down the middle should be more than shadow dressing for picture time. I will play whatever the rules are but you can believe once I give you the 1st cookie at 6-8 foot the 2nd one will take awhile unless you are looking down than I will fling the fast one and ask for 2nd strike.. Tim I agree with you many others here who do also keep asking maybe one day a trial test will result if not we can always bring in the batting tee. HA Hugs.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Cal 50, you may be right on the fact that I called those who voted on it that way! I am just fed up with the rigit thinking.. I want the 4 abs per game to be the norm... the facts are the facts and I was at Tims Touney watching the games.. they moved quickly and even had two extra inning games.. So, for those that say it isn't so, IT IS!!!!!
Feb. 4, 2013
Jawood
Men's 50
799 posts
A lot of people just don't understand what the 1 and 1 count can do. Actually the majority of the younger groups do, but the older ones are just set in their ways. Could have compromised very easily making the pool games 1 and 1 to show everyone how it works.

Remember, we are NOT trying to speed up the game per se, just trying to get more game action in the time alloted.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Jaywood... that's a great idea for Pool games as a Start. In time people may be able to enjoy the added game.
Feb. 4, 2013
GI
Men's 60
168 posts
I agree start small try pool games see if guys like getting in a full game. Or at least try it at 40-50-55 level. I believe in terry and the rest of his team. They are fair and I think in time , it will happen. Gotta love the game no matter if it is perfect or not. What is. Is this Heaven? With some of us Heaven and eternity to play could be sooner than we think.
Feb. 4, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
GI,
What does fariness have to do with this issue? Do you think that SSUSA has been unfair in allowing the outcome to be decided by a vote?
Would you guys like someone to turn the dead horse over? Surely you can find a guy that knows how... or maybe insert another dead one in its place.
That ship sailed about a month ago.
Pardon the multiple euphemisms.
BW
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
what are you afraid of BW, why not talk about it at the levels we are talking about or even give it a try at your level.. Are you afraid of one more at bat per game...
Feb. 4, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Swing:
Are you just small minded or were they rhetorical questions?
I really don't care it it's 1-1 or 3-2. I just get tired of the persistent whining. When a guy like audie hollis says that it (1-1) works well in the FHC league I buy into it. When chronic chicken littles like you & tim say it, I tend to doubt it. I guess that it boils down to credibility... Simple as that.
You might want to stop with the 'fear card'. This has nothing to do with fear.
BW
Feb. 4, 2013
GI
Men's 60
168 posts
Fairness good question, I am faced with that question almost daily as a counselor at school . Sometimes a majority of numbers does not always give us all the facts or even the right answer sometimes, Without going into to much detail I recently was given information at school when a student was involved with an incident at school. Upon getting as much info as I could the numbers allowed us to make a decision about the situation and decision about the students involved. The numbers gave us a chance to come to a conclusion about who was wrong and some idea about what might have occured. A final decision on flawed or possible questionable results make it very difficult to pass out a fair and teachable decision. Is it fair to judge a person by a few who gave us info but at same time may have had other reasons for the stories they shared , was it true, was it changing what occured, was it making sure the result they wanted was told because they had certain feelings . I suspect we did not get all the facts because some chose not to talk, for whatever reason. With softball at our age I think no matter what, we realize we are blessed just to be here and just glad to still be a part of the game, for the love of it. For the young ones with a long future ahead we are faced with tough choices sometimes not getting all the information often leads to bitterness, anger, and as we know all to well sometimes even leading to future events that have a long lasting affect on others. Is it fair ? To me softball is a outlet , Fun but like life not always as perfect as you would like but but to be honest with softball I sleep alot better after a game than when I hear some of the stories I have to deal with on a daily basis.This is not a complaint, after 35 years I still love the challange of the kids, But when we question fairness I can tell you what our kids face is not fair. Softball is easy. With or without the 1-1 count and I would play the game tomorrow with a wood bat if it would keep me in the game. Thanks again to Terry and gang for keeping us in the game.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
BW Chicken littles? Really, come on man! We are talking about something to better the game... Just because you are to ignorant to understand what we are talking about, doesn't mean you have to get nasty! BS name calling Retoric is just your attempt to be another internet tough guy, go Figure.
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
rhetoric oops typo
Feb. 4, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
GI, We all agree I think that we would play w the game as it stands or with rule changes... it's no big deal to me one way or the other.. I just think it would move the game along and we could get a few more ABs per team per game if we went to 1 and 1... It's not about crying as some would like to point out... it's about getting in more of the game we love to play.. if they don't change it, so be it...We will continue to play! Tim was pointing out how a Tourney ran with the 1 and 1 count used. Some don't like change and I can understand that.. I just think that I'm used to playing 7 innings and I don't like playing 5 or 6 with getting less than 4 ABs.. just stating the flip side of the change that I see from my perspective.
Feb. 4, 2013
Olden Slow
Men's 65
183 posts
swing...all...I have no problem with either way we go..Interesting conversatio today at our game...Most of the guys I talked to also don't care about 0-0...1-1, 70' bases..But the guys I talked with didn't even vote...Not really sure why ...I do know that quite a few of them don't play Tourneys and don't get on this site...Call it what you will, but none of them voted...That could be a big issue...BTW: I play both 60's and 65 tourneys and like most of you...I just play because I can..
Feb. 4, 2013
GI
Men's 60
168 posts
Thanks Swing, I agree with you, I have long stated before even before any thought about vote etc. I always ask my coach to question before a tournament can we play 1-1 count, just to speed up the game get in 7 innnings. To be honest if they said we will play 7 innings even with 0-0 count as a pitcher and batter I hate it. I know as a pitcher my first pitch is down the middle letter high . Unless we are behind in game I would not ask our players to not swing at first pitch best pitch to hit in most cases. if you give me the first strike than I am going to try for a crap strike maybe 13 or higher or a fast one if your in plate area and not watching. Not really much a pitcher can do but like most we will try to get away with what we can. I am thankful for our Sponsor who helps us with cost CJS express (Sam) but I really do not like playing 5-6 innings of a game, I want him and us to get our moneys worth. Some here has questioned why we ask or bring it up but if we don't peole may think we like short games or 0-0 count. I don't and will not be afraid to say could we consider but again I will play game for as long as God permits me to be on field. I think it is great we can talk about our thoughts and concerns about life etc. As I tell the kids we can never have enough friends ands I consider you all friends even if we do not agree.
Feb. 4, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Werner von swing:
Do you know what it was that Chicken Little was known to say? 'The sky is falling'. That is what all of this whining sounds like to me. It has nothing to with being an internet tough guy. Btw, weren't the one who threw out the fear card? If can't take the heat don't light matches.
Had the vote gone the other direction you can bet your ass that I wouldn't be on this site lamenting it. The rules are what they, just show up & play.
We're lucky to be playing ball at this age and several guys that have played it well have died recently. To me, that's something to be mourned, not whatever count we use.
For what it's worth, we played a senior game on Sat and played 7 innings (w/ 3-2 count). So what? Almost all of the games in this league go 7? So what?

GI: I agree with you on most of the things you've stated. But I still ask if SSUSA was unfair in using a popular vote to decide the outcome of the count?

BW
Feb. 4, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
First...I was not crying about not using 1-1.

I was just stating facts about one tourney we played last weekend.

NorCal and the rest of the country is seeing the initial phases of a huge tidel wave of the younger kids associations pushing into senior ball.

Just this season ASA, NSA, AWS and USSSA have opened their associations to us seniors using senior bats.

At least two of them use 1-1 counts. (don't know about ASA)

Here in NorCal we have over 2r weekends to play these new associations.

My guess is that SSUSA will soon allow 1-1 up till the 60 age group.

I say this because SSUSA knows what the vote tally was and they know very powerful LARGE softball associations are at this very moment scheming to take away some of the senior dollars SSUSA and SPA had lose to a monopoly on just three months ago.

To the guy above that told me to get over it, and the other guy that seconded his view.... A little secret for you two....

THE MAJORITY OF OUR 50 TEAMS SENIOR GAMES THIS YEAR WILL BE PLAYED WITH THE 1-1 COUNT.

NSA is talking about having their senior world in early November in Vegas this year and NSA is working out their initial senior worlds... Both are using 1-1
Feb. 4, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
That was supposed to be 25 tourneys in NorCal not 2r
Feb. 4, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
And....USSSA is having their first senior worlds in St Louis... A large hub in the middle of the country that's not to expensive to get to... Oh ya..... They are using 1-1 also
Feb. 4, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Tim:
What do you & Leo Tolstoi have in common? You both lead w/ verbosity... And wrap it up w/ wordiness.
If you feel that the 1-1 count will shake the world for me, it won't. Do we wear the red shirt tomorrow or the black one? Does it really matter?
I will say this though... Imo, you do your homework and you state your case (at times too frequently) but you always seem to maintain a level of decorum. Most folks as passionate as you cannot do this. I respect this.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
your last line BW is something you should live by...
Feb. 5, 2013
Smokey20
Men's 55
102 posts
Personally, can go either way. Whatever the rule I'm in.

Can see where a number of players may accept the 1-1 count but not the "no foul" rule. Split the deal, 1-1 count with the foul ball.

Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Yes Smokey, that is the one thing I would change too... We have been playing in SF with this rule for years!
Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
I guess it comes down to personal experiences....

Since I played without an extra foul for the last 15 years of my usssa days I guess that puts me in a little different mindset then most of the guys now playing senior ball. The majority of which are over 55.

I see the guys fearing going to no extra foul in the same light as the guys that want to start 0-0.

Fear of the unknown is a strong human trait for many.

Anyway..... There are choices for seniors comming very fast.... Options World Championship.....

Want a screen go to USSSA in St Louis

Want 1-1 go to NSA or USSSA Worlds

Want 0-0 go to SSUSA or ASA

Don't really know all the AWS rules yet

SPA is always an option also

Let's just say..... SSUSA has done so well other associations are wanting a piece of the pie.

We, the players are in for a new era of senior ball. Our options are unlimited when fompared to as recently as last year.

And yes.... I believe the vast majority of those entering senior ball from 2008 on want 1-1. I am sure the ssusa pole showed that.
Feb. 5, 2013
taits
Men's 65
4403 posts
Tim,
I disagree with you as to the so called majority want. If you were correct, they would have spoken up don't you think?
While there are assns with the 1-1 start it is not all not is it in ALL their events. I doubt in you vast 15 years of this you played in all their major ones even though you are totally funded.
Last time I played at the Huntsman in 07 they had mixed it up for some reason as well with the base paths 65 and 70 also the pitching 50\53. not all game nor parks or fields within certain parks. It was really strange. Do not remember if it was the same set up for those odd ball differences all the time though.
I've played both 1-1 with & w\o a foul ball, but still prefer 0-0 start.
Most of the time lost imo is the time teams take changing OF\DF and getting CR's in place. Little with waiting for the next batter to come up, arguments or the like.
Enjoy where you choose to go play under what ever rules they have waiting for you.
Also, enjoy playing M+, you earned it.
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Tim I know my team won't be going to Saint Louis anytime soon that time of the year is good chance of the rain out
Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
One tournament does not make it a fact
Unless you have run some tournaments, more than one, you do
not understand how mean, unkind,etc. SS players can be. A
tournament director would try anything to make you all
happy---1 and 1 did not do the trick---if you want to get
7 inning within your 60 min+ one inning:
1. The coachs need to get their line up in on time.
2. The coachs need to be at home plate ready to flip.
3. The next batter needs to be standing ready to bat not
shooting the S it the dug out.
4. If the coach is going to put in a runner have him
ready. I also play and we all know who will need a
runner before game starts.
5. Some teams still want to throw the ball around each
inning. Some want to throw it around after an out.
6. If I start the first game at 7:30AM or 8:00AM so that
we can get all the games in by supper I get compliants.
7. If we start a game after 4:00PM or 5:00PM you get
compliants.
8. Etc
I have tried 1 and 1--it is not the ansewer---if you guys
want to play 7 innings--- make sure you and your team is
ready to play when the clock starts and keep to game moving.
If you see that the umpire is not ready call the tournament
director---unpires are a problem also---they do not take charge of the game and keep it moving
Etc
wes
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Wes those are all good points! however you are dead wrong about the 1 on 1 not speeding up the game!
Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
My point is if you do not take care of the above using
1 and 1 will not get you 7 innings
wes
Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
?????? If next year I started the first game at 8:00AM
and the last game at 6:00PM, the game would end befor dark,
and guarantee everyone 7 innings would you come????
Wes
Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
Swing, don't really know what our team will be doing for worlds this season.

We had talked about driving to Medford for the ASA but are now considering how many teams will be there?

We are thinking that the site is so expensive to fly to/hard to drive to, that it will not be well attended..

St Louis could end up being well attended. USSSA is a big fish and I am sure they are working hard to grow senior softball

As far as the SSUSA world goes....now that we are Plus..... We could play against 80% of the same world plus teams in our own back yard/NorCal and or Reno.

Heck.....three of the Plus teams...around half the number in the west.....are from NorCal.

So who knows? It sounds like we want to attend one World event.

I think USSSA could be interesting, seeing different teams????? Besides...it's only a couple hundred dollars more to go to the Midwest.

If we were still Major we would surely be going to Vegas but....other then a couple other Plus teams...the Reno, Western Nationals tourneys are more or less over 80% of the SSUSA plus program.... Seeing other teams back east Is tempting.
Feb. 5, 2013
southernson
261 posts
The notion that the 1-1 count does not speed up the game is folly. It's just pure math for those who skipped that class. We don't need to drop an apple more than once to prove gravity, it's going to happen no matter the opinion, and the same can be said for the 1-1 count as it saves time and overall increases the number of team at bats per game. Florida Half Century has many years of using this successfully.

The SSUSA vote is already cast, and the old guys who should be concerned that Father Time never loses a battle, obviously had a temporary lapse in adequate blood flow and chose a playing option that reduces the number of times they will now come to the plate in their lifetime. Go figure....

At the same time I agree with a lot of the sentiment here, we can't just blindly say "let's just be happy to play" when the opportunities to make the game better present themselves.

A big thanks to SSUSA for allowing this board to function with open opinions. Now, can we have a blood pressure check for those over 60 before we vote again on the 1-1?








Feb. 5, 2013
SSUSA Staff
1319 posts
The "1-1 Count" debate has become an annual fixture at the SSUSA Rules Committee Meetings, and we expect 2013 to be no different. In 2012, the Committee instructed Staff to poll the membership on their preference. In a virtually identical result from the same poll six years ago (55-45% in favor of retaining the "0-0" starting count) this year the results came back at 54.93% to 45.07%, again in favor of "0-0". While technically the trend is moving in favor of "1-1", gaining 0.07% over six years doesn't approach a mandate, let alone indicate any significant shift in public/membership opinion.

Adding five minutes of playing time both in pool games (65) and bracket games (70) two years ago had a much more profound positive effect on the number of 7-inning games played. The items mentioned by some above, generally under the category of readiness to play and efficient play, by Tournament Directors, Umpires, Managers and Players will contribute more toward complete games than will shorting each batter of a couple of pitches from the conventional strike count.

As for those who would like application of the "1-1" to sub-groups who may have favored it in the polling, that will not be implemented. (The 24 states that voted in favor of Mitt Romney in November still have Barack Obama as President!) This was an all-inclusive vote, and the "0-0" count remains applied across all ages and divisions of play. We trust this clarifies the issue a bit from the SSUSA administration perspective.

Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
southerson---------------------------------------------- the math only work if use assume that all batters
go to a full count befor they hit or walk---if you want to
check and see if your math works this coming season each
game your play mark down how many pitchs are made to each
batter-do that for each game you play for one tournament
and take that as your base and see if your math still works.
I think you will find that a batter will hit the ball in
4 pitchs OR LESS--1 and 1 would not change that
wes
Feb. 5, 2013
southernson
261 posts
Wes, I understand what you are saying, but does 9 years of playing 1-1 once or twice a month count for anything? Let's see that's about an extra 400+ innings of experience with the effects of the 1-1 count. Think the SSUSA vote count would have been the same if EVERYONE had 9 years experience playing the 1-1 count? Not hardly.....





Feb. 5, 2013
Olden Slow
Men's 65
183 posts
southerson...Don't shoot all the dogs because some have fleas..I'm 64. Yesterday we played with 3 teams...rotating each inning...Played 8 innings in 2 hours..I was up 7 times and had a total of 10 pitches...Note that this is a Senior League in Prescott, AZ...Just sayin..I go up to hit as do most of my buddies..
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Southernson:
You should take comfort in knowing that those of us older players (that voted against the 1-1 count) did so because of an inadequate blood supply to our brains. Well, we've progressed from being fearful to being light-headed.
Thanks for the promotion as I didn't think that we could ever escape the 'fear tag'.
You mentioned that we'll miss out on one 'at bat' per game. Was/is this based upon fact or just anecdotal? Now that AAA has instigated the 3 HR rule won't this give you that 'at bat' back to you? Will this not have a greater impact of the number of innings played than the count?
Likewise for the higher levels won't the fewer runs/inning create more time than the count?
Also, since you seem to be a student of math... what would you say was the ratio of games that went the full 7 ot those that went less? I'm referring to the 2012 World Masters Championship in Las Vegas.
Let's just lay all of our cards out on the table here and put the BS behind us.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
Southerson---If you have the experience with the 1 and 1 I
have two ??????
1. Do ALL of your games go a full 7 innings????
2. If so, how does it happen???? Do the batters hit the
ball in less that 4 pitches---for the math to work
something has to cut the time down. I think the thinking
is because you start with one strike the batters
swing at the next CLOSE pitch--is this so or not???
Wes
Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
SSUSA staff.... With that voting concept I will have to ass u me you do not believe in states rights.

In other words..... Separating out age groups/states would most assuredly have created different vote results in some age groups.

Looks like, at least in NorCal... many of the younger seniors will be able to experience/enjoy first hand how 1-1 works.....with USSSA (who I am sure will at some point start running events with their own rules), NSA, All World all implementing 1-1 with senior bats in all their senior events.

The origin of this thread was to enform other seniors how the concept worked last weekend in a NorCal NSA one day event.

Maybe next year SSUSA will consider surveying different age groups as individual states with the ability to decide their fate on the 1-1, and wheather or not there is an extra foul.
Feb. 5, 2013
Wes
Men's 65
312 posts
Tim---I assume you understand Roberts Rules of order
concept of you keep voting until you get the vote that you want
Wes
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
He sure as hell doesn't seem to be aware of the 'Peter Principles'... this is a level of incompetency seldom attained.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
SSUSA Staff
1319 posts
Not sure how states' rights figures into your theoretical analysis, but it's irrelevant in any event. Just to play along, though, you "lost" your home "state" of the Far West by an even larger margin (56.88% to 43.12%) than the National results. So, I guess we DID end up with a states' rights approach for you; and you simply lost your state.

As mentioned earlier, we'll likely re-visit this annual exercise at the Rules Committee meetings in another 10 months or so. Until then, it's a "0-0" starting count for all ages and levels of play, just as the membership voted.

Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
First.....I don't handle "peters" so I guess I'll leave it to the "wood" man.

On the SSUSA staff thing....I was playing off your Romney thing.

Using your theory..... I would have to believe you have individual age players vote count.

With that..... Are you saying the 40-54 year olds voted over 58% against 1-1 or are you trying to muddy the waters by throwing all age groups into some statistical base of the "west".

It should have been obvious with my states rights thing....if you re read it you should easily see I was refering to age groups being individual states....

Then again..... I guess I'll try to make it a little easier.....

If individual age group players votes were tallied how did the 49-54 age players vote.

I say 49-54 because the 50 Division guys that are turning 55 this year,I believe, should have their votes entered in the 55+ group.

As you stated on the 1-1 thing.... Like I have said before....maybe next year ssusa will take its vote one step farther for the good of individual age groups and let the age groups vote individually.... So if a large majority of any individual state/age group wants 1-1 you will allow them to participate in whatever state of the game they desire.
Feb. 5, 2013
taits
Men's 65
4403 posts
Next up we'll see Joe Rinaldi's yearly 'platooning' thread come back to life.
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Tim19:
Gee, was that your 'tongue in cheek' reference to the Peter Principles? Priceless.
Who is it that constantly refers to pickles and 'under the SF bleachers? You're very predictable when it comes to taking a conversational detour.
Re: the demographics of the 1-1 count vote... do you know of a way to make chicken salad out of chicken droppings? I hope that you do because, no matter how you slice it, the over all vote favored the 3-2 count.

Perhaps you now can be the message board guy that craves/demands attention no matter how far off his comments are from reality. The key is that you occasionally need to throw in a logical one... that will be your challenge.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
So what kind of hitter are you BW? Do you need all 7 pitches to pull the trigger? Seems to me if you are any kind of hitter you would want extra at bats which the 1 and 1 would give all of us, however 50 plus percent by vote went with no change.. Doesn't mean that they understood entirely what they were voting for... Seems to me if the proof shows more at bats per game per team with 1 and 1 and more innings played per team over all. The Vote outcome might be different... Just putting it to vote without the facts is not going to fly as there are those who want zero change! You have to show everyone why we would want the 1 and 1..
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
I never have felt that the speed of my at bats were as important as the results. But if you want to know anything personal about me you can email me @ awtgroupsc@aol.com. Or, if you prefer, you can call me... 714 325-1017.
Serious inquiries only.
BTW, when someone who is more anecdotal than factual begins a sentence with 'seems to me' my BS flag goes up. What ARE the facts? Do you have them at your disposal? How about answering the same question that Southernson ignored? Just how serious is the problem that you and Tim continuously dredge up? i.e. how often does the game go 7 innings v. not.
And I'm not talking about games in your backyard... I'm talking about national events. Start with the tourney in LV last October.
Let me simplify it for you... in your division, whatever that was, of the total games played, how many went less than 7 innings?
Your type of propaganda annoys the shit out of me. You purport that anyone voting against your weak premise is fearful. Yet you have never come up with any real data. I know, Tim started this post off with it... BS.
He started it off by stating what he wanted us to know. When Wes asked for the guts of the matter no one has come forth. Can you create a controlled environment?
You really want to know more about me I've given you options. The ball is on your court.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Number 1 BW only an handful of our games last season over 13 tourneys went 7 innings with 0 0 count FYI... Scores were on average 21 to 18 type of scores...

BW you want to get personal about a discussion about the 1 and 1 Grow the F up!

I know for a fact how the 1 and 1 is, compared to the 0 and 0 count.. It's a no brain-er as far as getting in more softball innings and more At bats...

I'm personally not hard to find! I have been playing with the one and one count in leagues for years and we 99 percent of the time get in all 7 innings in 60 min of play... So if your BS meter is on tilt maybe you should stay off this thread! It's obvious by your personal attacks that you can't comprehend when someone is telling you the truth!
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
And one more thing, A tourney was just played in NSA in California.. proof is that we had two extra inning games within the time limit. you call it propaganda BW when it's truly the facts.. if it annoys you so much you should quit posting! Get a life!
Feb. 5, 2013
E4/E6
Men's 60
855 posts
Wow, after reading every post in this thread I have to stand with The Wood. As I read it all he is asking for are some FACTS. That doesnt seem too out of line.
I havent read anything that is an all out personal attack either. Maybe some ineuendo but nothing that calls out anyone by name.

For everyone who wants the 1 n 1 count, if stats hold true, in six (6) years you will vote against it. Since you will be in the 60 or above age group.

Taits, I'll be looking for Joe's Platooning thread, he is priceless!

Joe I know you are reading this, email me with your thoughts.
Feb. 5, 2013
SSUSA Staff
1319 posts
RE-POST FROM 01/07/2013 (for those who missed/ignored the factual results presentation)

The ONE & ONE COUNT Survey voting period has now closed, as of 5:00 PM EST on 01/07/13. Here are the FINAL RESULTS as voted by the 5,143 respondents expressing an opinion.

TOTAL VOTING TO RETAIN existing "0-0" starting count: 2,825 (54.9%)
TOTAL VOTING TO IMPLEMENT a new "1-1" starting count: 2,318 (45.1%)

MEN VOTING TO RETAIN existing "0-0" starting count: 2,528 (53.8%)
MEN VOTING TO IMPLEMENT a new "1-1" starting count: 2,174 (46.2%)

WOMEN VOTING TO RETAIN existing "0-0" starting count: 297 (67.3%)
WOMEN VOTING TO IMPLEMENT a new "1-1" starting count: 144 (32.7%)

NOTES:

Retention of the existing "0-0" starting count was favored by 10 of the 14 gender/age groups. The minority in favor of the "1-1" included only the Men's and Women's 40-Masters and the Men's 50+ and 55+ divisions. All other age groups, in both genders, favored retention of the "0-0" starting count.

Retention of the existing "0-0" starting count was favored by 10 of the 13 geographic regions surveyed, as categorized by the SSUSA Clubs & Leagues Regional areas (plus one other category comprised of foreign and snowbird players.) The minority in favor of the "1-1" included only the Central, Great Lakes and North regions. All other regions favored retention of the "0-0" starting count.

For a complete breakdown of the voting, by age, by gender and by geographic region, please click on the following link:

ONE & ONE SURVEY DATA

Thank you to all who participated. The SSUSA Rules Committee will be evaluating the data later this week during a conference call Rules Committee meeting.

Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Swing:
This is your lucky day! You're about to get double the facts for the price of none.
I believe that you played 50 M last year (feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken).
In your division in Reno there were a total of 25 games. Now you mentioned that your team went 7 innings last year ' only a handful of times'. Yet the 50 M division had 24 7seven inning games and one that wasn't. If you were there, you had to play in at least 4 of the 7 inning games. That's real close to a handful... but not close enough.

In the WMC in LV, held last October... in the 50 M division there were 160 games. Wow! That is a lot of games. Would you care to speculate as to the ratio of 7 inning games v. shorter ones?
Did your team play in LV last October?
Would anyone else wish to take a shot at this?
Assuming a 'no' response... roughly 97.5% went 6-7 innings... 56.9% went 7 innings.
As stated before, some other rule changes will increase the number of 7 inning games over the 2012 numbers.

I guess that a 'no-brainer' means different things to different people.

Now I'm sorry that you think that you're being picked on. I told you before not to dish it out if you can't take it. As long as everyone plays by your rules you're happy to play. But if anyone disputes 'your facts' you want to play the 'weak tit' game.
I don't particularly like to 'baffled by bs' and tend to react negatively when this occurs.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Swing:
I stand corrected. The WMC numbers that I gave you was for the 50AAA. My fault!
The actual 50 M numbers were 74, 31 and 1. This means that 68.5% of those games went 7 innings. Only 1 went less than 6 innings. So roughly 2/3 of the games went the full 7.
WMC = World Masters Championship
Toodles!
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Seems to me Woody, what is it? 6 or 7 innings??? one inning less is a huge difference... SSUSA we played three tourneys.. all year. I know we didn't make it to 7 that much!!! FYI If you think 68 percent is a good number.. so be it! this means 32 percent of the games don't go a full 7! this means we aren not getting our moneys worth of the 32 percent of the games.. let me ask you if you were picking up your pay check.. how would you feel getting 32 percent less???? just saying!
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
ONe more thing Woody, if 97.5 games went 6 or 7 innings by your account and 56percent went a full 7 then I say I would bet with a 1 and 1 count that 100 percent of the 97.5 would go the full 7... Thanks for the data!
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Swing:
Come on. With reduced runs/inning the 68% will clearly increase. The 40 M+ went 7 in every game.
I clearly understand your point about the time saved by the 1-1 count. It would save some time. So would the many things that Wes stated.
To answer a previous question of yours, I do not like the thought of losing an at bat. There are many factors that go into this in addition to the count. We've played 1-1 count events and we did fine with it. I meant it when I said that we'd continue to compete, 1-1 or 3-2.
The bottom line for me is... How serious is the problem and what are the best alternatives?
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
BW I respect your opinion... I just think that by the numbers you posted.. BTW thanks We should be able to get the 7 innings in with all the above items.. 56 percent is not good enough in my book.. games should be going 7 over 90 percent of the time in my book.. If they extended the time limit ten minutes, I would be happy! This would mean nothing else would have to change. Not to beat a dead horse, I just think the 1 and 1 works and limiting the amount of pitch runners per inning would help also! and Make all HRs Walk offs... let's demand 7 innings!
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
The 56 is low but it was for AAA. The 3 hRs will stretch them out. As for upper divisions, if the new rules don't increase the % then perhaps the vote will change. Until it does we ought to look at Wes' comments and use them to speed the game along.
I also understand that time is a greater driving force at your level than for my age level (65). Most of us are just thankful to be alive, healthy & playing. Hence the higher % that favor the 3-2.
Do take the opportuity to call/email me.
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
Woodie, my views on the 1-1 have more to do with pitcher safety and faster pased at bats then it does about inning.

1-1 dramatically increases the pitchers ability to dictate the at bat. Lord knows pitchers need all the help they can get...we stop hitting at five runs for a reason.
Unless your of the very small group that somehow thinks batters do not expand the strike zone when they have two strikes on them.

1-1 also eliminates much of the down time batters take while taking very hitable pitches.

As far as the ssusa voter results go.....ssusa's own results show they are not giving almost half the individual age groups what they voted in favor of.

Some how ssusa refers to "only the men and women's 40 divisions and the men's 50 and 55s". ONLY! Really...ONLY !

It sure looks like a whole lot of ssusa seniors are not getting what they voted for when it comes to 1-1.

That could have easily been cured by allowing individual rules for individual age groups.....after all...every age group does not out law sliding or allow over running the bases.

Maybe ssusa should have a vote on those two rules also.....then we'd all have to avoid sliding and run past the bases....

Don't they allow an 11 fielder in some age groups? Let's put that up for an association wide vote also.

I don't think not having the 1-1 is as important as knowing ssusa knows that certain age groups are not getting what they voted for....

When the established senior associations such as ssusa are facing the strong competetion ASA USSSA. NSA and AWS will soon be sending their way I would of thought they would have been trying to show they are listening and supporting their customers.....

On these issue ssusa has proven they will allow different rules for the older seniors (ie over running bases and no sliding) yet not give the younger seniors what they voted for.....things like this are not forgotten.

Who knows???? Maybe ssusa doesn't believe ASA NSA USSSA AWS are in it for the long run and they will soon have a manopoly back in senior ball....that is Nieves and wrong minded.

If this winters other associations meetings/run on senior ball doesn't wake them up to their monopoly soon being over and the need for them to adjust reduce prices/listen more to the customer/not force them to buy and chase their own home runs after paying $700 on entry....they were not paying attention, and very well might soon become a second tier senior association.

SSUSA needs to listen and
Feb. 5, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Tim, that's a horse of a different color. Pitchers will continue to be at risk as long as we use 1.21 bats. But aren't you a guy that goes middle quite a bit? How do balance your desire for pitcher safety and trying to hit middle?
I have a hard time w/ this dilemma. I play infield (1b) and I know how short the reaction time has become. So I'm reticent to go middle at times.
Would it make any difference if a pitcher was hit on the 1st pitch or the 4th one?
BW
Feb. 5, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
Woody, I'd be all for softball balls or better yet single wall aluminum. But we all know that's not going to happen. In our senior league each team has the option to call aluminum...if they do...both teams must use aluminum. We always call aluminum

As far as pitchers goes...I believe and have pushed for things to help give them a little better chance to get the batter off balance.

Wider mats

Longer mats

Wider pitching rubber

1-1 count

No extra foul

As far as me hitting balls between the ss and second baseman goes.....I have been hit many times while pitching...most of the time by guys that hit the ball much harder then seniors.

I have a helmet, shin guards and a chest protector...every time I pitch when composites are in the game I wear my helmet and shin guards...sometimes I have even put on the chest protector.

Our team tries to play a five man as much as possible to protect against singles up the middle....no one tries to hit the pitcher but hitting is not a perfect science.

With all that....I have no problem going to hits up the middle. I don't aim at the pitcher....if and when I ever hit a senior pitcher...it will be my first and I will be sorry if he is injured.

I just hope he will be smart enough to be wearing protection.

We have two pitchers on our team that do not wear protection...I say they are crazy
Feb. 6, 2013
SSUSA Staff
1319 posts
The SSUSA Rulebook makes NO provision for special rules for sliding or over-running bases at any level of play, age based or rating division based. The false premise stated invalidates, on its face, the argument for different starting pitch counts for different age groups. Tim, your support group lost the vote. There is no more concise explanation. Majority rules, globally, in this circumstance.

Additional factual clarification: Of the "only" four age group/gender sub-groups to vote in favor of the "1-1" count, the 40-Masters men and women, 50+ men and 55+ men, the total votes cast in favor (905) comprised "only" 17.6% of all votes cast in the poll. We do not view this as a mandate, either.

Feb. 6, 2013
Webbie25
Men's 60
1995 posts
I have known a pitcher here in Albuquerque for over 30 years that believes almost exactly the way you do, Tim, as far as pitching rules go. 'Chemical', as we call him,(for a reason) even goes off in games occasionally. You are not alone. However, the biggest point out there is that this is a hitters game. Almost nobody questions that. If you were to poll everyone in senior softball, they would overwhelmingly agree. That's the fun of AMATEUR softball. And, as passionate as you and swing and my good friend GI are about the 1-1, it got voted down by a healthy margin. And, in this case, I don't think there was any vote tampering, either. No softball players were bussed to the polls. By your reasoning, Tim, we also should have 2 presidents now. Obama could be President of the states he won, and Romney could be President of the states he won. Or, you could split it demographically, and Obama could be President of women, and Romney President of men. Ridiculous? Of course, but so is changing the count for just a few age groups who voted for it. The confusion would be unbelievable-especially if you have a game between 2 teams of opposing viewpoints. It would be like Congress trying to decide which rules to play. UGH! Should we go farther and break it down by teams? Team A voted for the 1-1 and Team B voted for the 4-3. Or even by batters? The first, third, and eighth batters are 1-1 because they voted for it. The rest are 4-3. No Tim and Swing-majority rules-you did not get out the vote.
One other observation about time limits-we played a healthy majority of 7 inning games last year. 1-1 is not the only way to speed up a game, but pitchers hoping for an advantage will push it as the best way. There are other ways to speed the game that players know, but it just isn't important enough to them to implement. The umpires add 2 minutes to the clock at the start of the game for the teams to get set on the field to start with the full time available. I have seen 5 minutes of game time tick off before the first pitch. Having courtesy runners ready, being ready to bat or pitch, getting on and off the field between innings, having balls ready in case of fouls, etc. I have also played with a coach who felt one tactic was to shorten the number of innings in a game if he felt it was to his advantage. He would stall any chance he got during the whole game and it would add up. If people are passionate about speeding up the game, these things will change. I don't see that move yet.
Feb. 6, 2013
taits
Men's 65
4403 posts
Tim,
There was nothing wrong with the mat size BEFORE it was enlarged years ago. If you need an even larger mat, take up T-ball or get glasses with magnification built in. ie readers glasses. The mound is also good as it is and has been since the start.
Go to unlimited height and you put some balance into the pitcher vs batter equation. As it is now, its a hitters game. The batter knows about where the ball will be. With the unlimited arc, it could be anywhere and its one less worry (height) the Ump need to worry about.
Feb. 6, 2013
southernson
261 posts
Olden Slow and Wood....points well taken, understand the thought process.

And if I haven't said it enough, I will now. Thank you Florida Half Century, thank you, thank you, thank you for some sanity with league play. Unlimited home runs, unlimited runs per inning, and yes, a 1-1 count.

Did I say thank you yet? Thank you FHC....

Feb. 6, 2013
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
What does a 1 and 1 count have to do with unlimited runs and unlimited home runs?
Feb. 6, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Come on scott, tim wants a bigger matt so he can pitch! He wants the shortcut to the mound! Matt size and arc is fine, not playing a full 7 innings isn't!
Feb. 6, 2013
the wood
1096 posts
Tim:
I would have no problem down grading the bats... been saying this for years. I also have no problem leaving them as they are... lots of $ spent by lots of folks, etc.

Southernson:
I believe you when you say that. I've also heard from others that play in the FHC and Mad Dog in TX. I would have no problem playing with the 1-1.


There have been many passionate threads on this board over the years. This entire thread has been acedemic. Looking back at it I am surprised at just how much the 1-1 count means to some people. This fervor turns some folks off, perhaps unfairly.
Too often we focus on our differences. What do we all have in common? We love softball... and the people within it.
We're losing some every year. For those of us in the older divisions (65+) we're losing them in greater numbers every year.
Sam Pearson passed last month and, IMO, very little was said about him. It was because of players like Sam that Turn Two has been able to bat 11 or less and maintain a very solid defense. They've done this for the beter part of 8 years and done it extremely well.
Tim, I realize that I'm off course here but you've taken this thread (the one you initiated) from soup to nuts so forgive me for this.
Sal Silva also passed and too little was mentioned, IMO. The man played for 12-13 years and played it passionately. He was a frequent contributor on this board, particularly about bats. He was a student of them...
On our team we have 6-7 cancer survivors (of various forms) and one guy has had a stroke. I won't even go into the many ortho surgeries. Our team mantra is to enjoy every game, play to win and thoroughly enjoy each other and the competition that we play.
To summarize, we ought to be more cognizant of our similarities and be thankful that we're able to do something that less than 2% of seniors can. At times we look for black lining in the silver cloud. No one more guilty of this than me.
BW
Feb. 6, 2013
mad dog
Men's 65
3958 posts
ok bob since ya dragged me into this...LOL......

my thoughts are :
1-1 no foul,as a pitcher i love the 1-1 count with no foul..as a hitter i can live with it

1-1 count with foul to give,as a pitcher ok but it gives the advantage back to the batter....as a batter,prolly the best count,pitcher can walk ya in 3 pitches other than 4....

4-3 count,nothing good for the pitcher but bp....hitters well what can i say....

i like the 1-1 count no foul,let the pitcher have some fun also,instead of having to be a bp machine.....
Feb. 6, 2013
JDub
Men's 50
152 posts
DITTO ! ! !
Feb. 6, 2013
CurtfromKY
42 posts
Wow, this thread sure took an UGLY turn from what it started as. As with other observations mentioned, only a limited number of players have replied and given their opinions-for or against. More might have done this if it the comments had not gotten so personal. Even so, it is difficult to know how the "majority" feels if so few express their voices. Lots of suggestions have come from MANY years of experience--mostly good ones. As seniors, we tend to enjoy things being stable and little change, but as players we need to realize that won't happen. I am new to SS but have been playing tourny and league ball for over 30 years and have seen the game change constantly. The issue of 1-1 will not be going away.. whether we accept this and play is our choice. We will never agree with all the rules. Most tournaments I play in use 1-1 w/ a courtesy which I do like. As was mentioned, how many times does a player watch more than 2-3 pitches before swinging- unless the pitcher can't find the plate? 1-1 is only part of the answer for speeding the games.. the others were mentioned as well. But if we as players want as many AB's each game, each wkd we have to do our part to help. One idea has not been mentioned yet-and I HOPE it never happens--is a 1 pitch. But, if you want more AB's, there ya go!! ALL associations want more money, more teams, less game times, and quicker tournys but the players should be the ones getting the benefits. So, agree or disagree, talk to your teammates and encourage them to voice their thoughts each time SS wants our help in deciding how great we can make this game become!!!!!!
Feb. 6, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Come on scott, tim wants a bigger matt so he can pitch! He wants the shortcut to the mound! Matt size and arc is fine, not playing a full 7 innings isn't!
Feb. 6, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
Come on scott, tim wants a bigger matt so he can pitch! He wants the shortcut to the mound! Matt size and arc is fine, not playing a full 7 innings isn't!
Feb. 6, 2013
Tim Millette
521 posts
Actually Rich, I have put myself on the back burner because I have team mates I like and want to pitch, and they are better then me at this time.

I pitched at the end of my young kids days and still do it in a league in Pinole and Pleasanton.

This winter I am 55 eligable and plan on pitching some. Maybe even almost full time if I am good enough.

Oh ya....one more thing.....I will NEVER cry about balls hit up the box. It's part of the game.
Feb. 7, 2013
southernson
261 posts
Wood,
Thoughtful post, well put. Those are things that really count, and like you, love the game, love to compete. But the relationships and camaraderie formed with people you meet and share with, that's the best benefit of all.

Thanks for the reminder...
Feb. 7, 2013
taits
Men's 65
4403 posts
Swing,
I'd bet Tim can pitch, but given toe recent post on the issue as a whole, I think Maybe t-ball or the glasses is a better fit... only kidding guys.
He wouldn't be playing M+ ball otherwise.
Feb. 7, 2013
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1009 posts
I'm sure he might be able to get it across the plate, but he sure would be a sight in his Hockey Goalie gear! LOL
Feb. 7, 2013
taits
Men's 65
4403 posts
You should see what I wear then. Well, on second though maybe not.
Sign-in to reply or add to a discussion or post your own message and start a new discussion. If you don't have a message board account, please register for a free nickname. It will only take a moment.
Senior Softball-USA
Phone: (916) 326-5303
Fax: (916) 326-5304
2701 K Street, Suite 101A
Sacramento, CA 95816
Send us e-mail
Senior Softball-USA is dedicated to informing and uniting the Senior Softball Players of America and the World. Senior Softball-USA sanctions tournaments and championships, registers players, writes the rulebook, publishes Senior Softball-USA News, hosts International Softball Tours and promotes Senior Softball throughout the world. More than 1.5 million men and women over 40 play Senior Softball in the United States today. »SSUSA History  »Privacy policy

Follow us on Facebook

Partners