Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: Bob Downs, TABLE SETTER 11, Tab27, king b; 73 anonymousDiscussion: Home plate Mat size change?
| Posted | Discussion |
| Dec. 2, 2014 L.Martin Men's 50 47 posts | Home plate Mat size change? Are they considering changing the size of the mat, that's the rumor here in Texas. |
| Dec. 2, 2014 cronin51 Men's 55 20 posts | As a pitcher it's not big enough, as a hitter it still isn't big enough. Swing the bat. Holy crap the 13 mph fastball is just to tough to hit. Is my bias showing. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 B94 Men's 50 138 posts | It would be nice to see the 24"x36" mat become the standard... |
| Dec. 3, 2014 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Mat is big enough as it is...want to chance something give the pitcher pitching leeway especially with height limit. Can't hit it now have your eyes checked. :>) Stay healthy, either way. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Fred S Men's 85 297 posts | 242x36 You have to be kidding. LOL After pitching a lot of SPA this year I would prefer to go back to the 17" mat. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | ok the ball is 3" in diameter....so that is 3" to each side ...plate is 17" wide...add 6" and you have 23" total....so 24" sounds like a good width to me.....now for the length...it is already 34" long..so why not have the mat 36" long....and anyone saying that the mat is easy to hit....that is BS...as anyone who has pitched knows...... |
| Dec. 3, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | What is the point of continuously making rule changes? Are the current scores higher than normal? I get it with the composite bats... it doesn't take Werner Von Braun to see that they're more lively than before (previous to 2002). This is not going to change any time soon but how is this impacting the scores? Are most teams scoring their max/inning on a consistent basis? If so, our team must really be lagging behind. BW |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | I think a 24 x 36 mat would be GREAT. Pitchers are already at huge risks...and hitting a softball is way to easy. And one more thing..this is directed at Fred S... you claim to be a pitcher and want a small strike zone??? Is that because you have super accurate/dominate pitching powers or is because your a vary weak hitter that's scared to fail much more often because of a bigger mat? Twits idea isn't bad either...heck move the height to 14 feet, reduce the size of the haters box, ENCORCE THE BATTERS BOX..widen the width of the rubber to four feet |
| Dec. 3, 2014 laramie55 13 posts | Actually the strike zone is defined in the rules as 19 x 34-1 1/2 inches and is plenty big. Figure the barrel of senior bats around 12" to 14" and the sweet spot significantly less than that and you see the pitcher has a pretty good area to land on while the hitter has to make adjustments to hit the ball on the sweet spot. The other day I watched an 88 year old just dropping pitches on every edge and corner of the mat with varying arcs, curves, knucklers and deliveries. If you can't hit the mat where you want keep practicing. Not everyone can pitch but I don't see a shortage of guys who can. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Fred S Men's 85 297 posts | It is because I pride myself on my control to be able to hit the smaller mat and hit the edges and I can hit even at 81 with good success. Maybe you need the bigger plate to throw strikes I don't. There are pitchers and there are throwers. The throwers need the bigger mat. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 laramie55 13 posts | Well said, Fred. I noticed that an awful lot of threads where the mat size topic can be squeezed it is and by the same 3 guys. Give it up and learn to pitch, geez. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim might be the exception to your last comment, Laramie. He seems to like playing the 'fear card' whenever someone disagrees with his premise. 'you don't want the 1-1 count, it must be because you're afraid'... 'is because your a vary weak hitter that's scared to fail much more often because of a bigger mat'... Tim, sometimes it's better to remain a fool than open you mouth (i.e. keyboard)and remove all doubt. You sort of remind me of Samson... one of you sports the jawbone of an ass and the other lost his strength after cutting his hair... how about giving it a rest on the 'fear' BS? Older players are not looking for new ways to play the game... we like the status quo. This is due to many reasons, none of them are based on fear. Bob Woodroof |
| Dec. 3, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Correction: sometimes it's better to remain a fool, in others' eyes, than to open you mouth (i.e. keyboard)and remove all doubt. Bad time for poor proofreading... :-) |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | Lets make the mat 34"X34" that way it is the length and width of the legal length bat. LOL!!!! |
| Dec. 3, 2014 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Maybe it needs to be round! |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | My views on the offensive side of the senior game can be summed up easily. I think the bats/ball combo are dangerous, but I think getting ride of the combo is almost impossible because of so many seniors living a offensive game they never got to experience when they were young. I also think it's evident that pitchers more or less have to serve up batting practice in games (pitcher catchers gear, homerun restrictions because it's so easy to hit home runs and run limits for innings) So yes...I would support almost any new rule to give a pitcher a new "advantage" against hitters. It looks like Fred plays in the upper senior levels that allow an 11th defensive fielder...if that's the case...his views on pitching should not be considered when talking about the younger (only 10 defensive players) programs. It's admerable to be able to play at 81 years old..but we need to agree that the game he is playing compared to the under 60? Programs have almost nothing in common. As for woodie and my view of many being afraid/scared of loosing some of the huge advantages senior hitters get...Its my view and I will stand by it |
| Dec. 3, 2014 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Tim, when was the last time you watched a 60 major or major plus team play?? Just ask Bob, Webbie, LL, SLI and other 60+ players! |
| Dec. 3, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | I actual gave hitting lessons to many of the old As players over the years so...I know many 60+ players/although many of those same players are now pushing 70 years old...and, on occasion watch them/now the Omen players play in NorCal events. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 garyheifner 649 posts | As a part time pitcher, I don't care what the size is. I can zero in and hit it. Maybe my thinking is off here, but if the mat is bigger, wouldn't the batters have more area to defend? As a result, the hitters would be more likely to swing at the 1st pitch that is in their window rather than take 2 strikes and be forced to swing at a marginal 3 strike. The pitcher would have more area to throw a waste pitch that could still hit the mat. The larger mat might help the many of us who would rather play with the 1-1 count as I said above might encourge hitters to swing sooner. Hope you get my thought. |
| Dec. 3, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, I'll pass your thoughts along to my sister, Woodie. Fred, IMO, is very qualified to speak on pitching since he's been doing it for a long time. The fact that there is an additional fielder in his division does not detract from his ability or his expertise. Do you pitch with a 5 man infield? If so, does this impact your expertise? When we're talking about widening the plate in senior ball who should be eliminated from weighing in? |
| Dec. 3, 2014 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Tim, maybe your post should have been directed at the over 70 player and not the over 60's? I'll agree with Bob, Fred is qualified! |
| Dec. 4, 2014 laramie55 13 posts | Gary said, " The pitcher would have more area to throw a waste pitch that could still hit the mat." Gary, if it hits the mat it isn't a "waste" pitch is it? Then, "The larger mat might help the many of us who would rather play with the 1-1 count as I said above might encourge hitters to swing sooner." Hitters already only get to see two pitches if the pitcher wants to throw strikes (and who can't in softball?). And why exactly do I not want to hit the ball on the sweet spot? And why would I want to have to shuffle both feet to do so? I came here to hit- not learn dancing. The so-called time issue is bogus as it is easily addressed by both my post on "courtesy runners" and the ump's ability to do this, "5.10 (3) DELIBERATELY DELAYING GAME". If anyone is in such a hurry to get home (or the bar) maybe you shouldn't have left. |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Fred S Men's 85 297 posts | Tim: FYI I play in the 75/80 divisions in tournaments in league play (3 times a week) I pitch against players 55+ and I can hold my own against them. |
| Dec. 4, 2014 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Next you'll be wanting the "mat" to be the size of the area between the batters boxes, 2'.5"x 7' and probably want the boxes widen so you can really run the box... Been a hitters game for too many decades. How about making it a defensive game for a change. See an eye Dr. or practice pitching more. It was fine at 17". |
| Dec. 4, 2014 southpaw Men's 70 1077 posts | I am not an expert on much, especially softball, but I do pitch. I am not the best, but not the worst at it either. I don't know if it would help by going to a bit larger mat, but my problem is that I throw every pitch breaking left or right. Many pass through the strike zone and then will miss the mat by less than a quarter of an inch. I find myself at times taking some of the spin off for less break, but that ends up as a really fat pitch that gets plastered. Maybe I should just catch!! |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Bruce, I did play in one tournament about 6-7 years ago, and the mat was round. It was a bit different. Andy Smith, R & R Strokers, 60 Major |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | No need to compare abilities.... How about getting back on the subject of what would be the positive and negative effects on the game with an enlarged mat. Less walks Batters wouldn't be able to sit around waiting for that cookie Pitchers could use more angles with their pitch Pitchers would not get behind in the count as often and need to throw cookies Pitchers would have a better chance of hitting the mat while pitching from the back of the box(giving them more reaction time) Pitchers with the ability to throw breaking balls would have a better chance to hit the mat. Batters woukd have to cover the outside corner of a larger mat/thereby requiring them to stand closer to the mat..which would give the pitcher a better chance to jam the batter with an inside pitch Now I know...according to many...I have shown my ignorance so...maybe you geniuses can use this as a teachable moment and help me out. |
| Dec. 4, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, it's too bad that you weren't around in 1839 when Abner Doubleday created baseball. I'm sure that your insight would have been a big help to him. And maybe Al Ramsey could have let you design the strike zone in the late 60s when USSSA was developed. Somehow MLB and USSSA are still active organizations. It wasn't that long ago that the readers of this board were treated to your continuous diatribe regarding the best way to handle the M+ division. One of your suggestions that I'm particularly fond of was your 'break up the winners'... surely you'll remember that one. SSUSA paid you no heed and there were 38 M+ teams in LV 2 months ago (from age 50 to 65)... however, SPA did instigate an idea similar to yours in 2013. Anyone care to guess how many M+ teams that they've had over the past 2 years? Keep the thoughts coming, Tim, as you're a real beacon of enlightenment. To quote you... 'Now I know...according to many...I have shown my ignorance so...maybe you geniuses can use this as a teachable moment and help me out.' You want help? Try not to waste time fixing things that aren't broken. It isn't complicated at all. There were 506 teams in LV, which is roughly 25% of the total number enrolled... 7,500 players out of 30,000 (using round numbers). I know from reliable sources that you are a good guy and a good hitting coach. But a prognosticator? Not if history means us anything (no pun intended). Bob Woodroof |
| Dec. 4, 2014 southpaw Men's 70 1077 posts | Thank you Tim; I just tried to imply; you said it precisely. I agree with your points. It is a hitter's game; why not even up the odds a bit for pitchers? |
| Dec. 4, 2014 L.Martin Men's 50 47 posts | I appreshiate a good pissing match as much as the next guy but no one answered my original question, is there a chance the mat size might be changed for next year? |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | BW, on the number of Plus teams at worlds I could swear some guy called that an "anamaly"???? Does that sound familiar????? Maybe we will just call that a senior moment;-) |
| Dec. 4, 2014 tg69 393 posts | OK, how about this.Do away with the mat altogether.Leave the plate and let your pitcher pitch to his own team.ONE PITCH, you either hit that one pitch or your OUT. Then the middle hitting would be a little different. We did this one time and is no trouble getting 7 innings in...ya, in 30 minutes. |
| Dec. 4, 2014 SSUSA Staff 3490 posts | NEWS FLASH • We are past that specific issue in the 2014 Rules Committee sessions and NO change to the strike mat size or color were made ... |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | Thanks SSUSA!!!! |
| Dec. 4, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, in our division (65 M+) we went from 5 to 6 teams (2013 to 2014). As anomalies go, this may well be an example. But the larger grouping (50-65 M+) had 38... who can really call this one anything other than an increase at this point? Could it have been a perfect storm of positive forces that generated a huge turn out? I cannot say unequivocally that it was or was not... i.e. I don't know. I can say that the trends have not followed your prediction. I see that the 50 and 60 M+ divisions are as healthy as I've ever seen them. In 2000 we had 8 teams in the USSSA 50 M+ World Series (Salem, OR)... there were 5 in 1997. You had 15 this year. We have NEVER had 15 teams in our divisions... except for SSWS which had 'drop down' divisions of M/M+ teams... the 60 M+ in 2008 had 3 teams. I also see that the teams/players are much better than when we played... line ups are complete (v. 6-8 deep back then). There were a couple of teams with deep line ups but not all 5. There were no geographic boundaries at all (until 2000). It is with these things in mind that I feel that the SSUSA model isn't broken. Are the rules perfect? No. But they never were... The biggest concern for me is that we have fewer choices today (national events). You had said 'wait and see about USSSA in October' but that didn't really pan out... zero teams for us to play. At one time we had 8-9 senior assns... we could go to 3-4 each year. But folks said that this was too many. Little by little, the competition weeded them out. Be careful what you wish for... you just may get it. BW |
| Dec. 4, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | BW, I will agree that USSSA has not evolved into anything special at this point. I paid no attention to how there worlds went but..I would guess they didn't do well. On the USSSA issue...at least in the plus division they running a glorified homerun contest giving everything the power hitters wanted..it started out as 15 hrs then walks..I don't know how it ended up but that more or less killed it for me. Usssa also decided not to use the already set SSUSA division format of AA, AAA, Major and Plus. A big mistake as far as I am concerned. USSSA also turned down running their world earlier in the year...maybe playing thier world the same weekend as a couple of their Big Conference events.. Maybe during the Smoky Mountain Classic in Maryville run the Eastern Senior Worlds except having it start on Sunday at Sandy Springs/late Saturday if possible at the satellite fields and end Monday night at sandy springs. Then maybe after a Conference event in the west running the Western senior worlds Saturday night and ending Monday.. They did a smart move trying to run their western worlds in SoCal where there are many teams except I think they should have run their worlds about 1 month before SSUSA not after it. I doubt very mich that USSSA will walk away from senior ball...they will tweak it till it works. |
| Dec. 5, 2014 laramie55 13 posts | Bob, I think that trend upward will continue for some time as the late boomers continue to arrive. I didn't start playing with seniors until I was 55. I was playing with the younger guys and holding my own until around 49-50 when the wheels slowly started coming off and I lost a step... and then another and so on. I wasn't aware of senior softball till I was 54 but sure am glad I found out as I thought my playing days were coming to an end. Turns out there's a long future ahead. Insofar as the rules, they seem quite reasonable and fair. We have all seen how even in MLB there have been complaints by players and fans about various rule changes over the years. Nothing's perfect or ever will be but clearly SSUSA senior ball is not and should not be designed for pitcher's duels or 2-1 and 3-2 ball games however a few pitchers might feel. There are at least 9 other guys (and all the pitchers I know) who want to get their AB's. I hear noises made about wood bat and/or mush ball leagues being out there or at least contemplated. Perhaps that will be the way to go for some players. Holds no attraction for me personally. Play ball! |
| Dec. 5, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, USSSA always ran their Series World Series in August. I can tell you that August in Little Rock, AK, is no box of chocolates but they were consistent in the timing. It was a big deal to seniors until the senior bats came around. Even then, it hung around for 4-5 years. They only had 2 divisions... major and AAA. They had no resemblance to present day classifications. Major was essentially M+ and perhaps a few M teams. AAA was everyone else. They started with DE and the eliminated teams went into a DE consolation bracket... games that were sort of like kissing your sister (or so I've heard). Aside from these two issues, I liked their tourneys having grown up on USSSA from my early 20s. It would be great if they could offer a good alternative. We would like to go to more than one... we've considered the senior version of the Smoky Mtn Classic but weren't certain that we'd see enough teams. Laramie, I hope that you're right about the trend. Without sounding pessimistic, I've seen the ebb and flow (size of brackets) over the years. Following the trail backwards, we (players who are my age or older) were the SO CA pioneers with USSSA in the 70s. Behind us came larger and larger groups of younger players. This may be true today as well. Fred, You're 81 and still going strong... to me, that is impressive. My father-in-law is 81 and in poor health... a sedentary lifestyle, working in TX oil fields, 2 packs a day 'Jack & Coke... I hope to meet you some day. BW |
| Dec. 5, 2014 Tim Millette 615 posts | Bruce, your name sounds familiar... For some reason when I hear Bruce Wood I think of Bunca or Jimmies. In my younger days I was a Pro Team, American Reality/Budweiser SF, Dan Smith player. Who'd you play for? I to played younger ball latter in life..major World Series till 43, B worlds at 48/Disney, C Worlds at 49/at Liberty Park. Glad there is senior ball...it's nice being one of the young guys every five years. |
| Dec. 5, 2014 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | BW is Bob Woodroof. Bruceinga is Bruce Fairchild ;) |
| Dec. 5, 2014 jfsully 82 posts | Bob : " 1839 when Abner Doubleday created baseball" You may want to read about the history of baseball. The Doubleday has been proven to be a myth made up by Albert Spalding. The book Baseball in the Garden of Eden: The Secret History of the Early Game by John Thorn is a very interesting read. |
| Dec. 6, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Thanks for the tip... I'll pass it along to Google. BW |
| Dec. 6, 2014 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | JFSully: I actually do have a historical book about the evolution of baseball, published by Murray Books in 2007. It credits Shane Riley Foster as being the person who wrote the first official rules. I have read it and found it to be very interesting. A lot of what we have accepted as 'fact' has been slanted in some way, whether we're discussing baseball, assassinations, military battles or whatever. In this case, I googled 'when did Abner Doubleday invent baseball' and it gave me 1839... clearly, it was a bad entry on my part. My baseball history book was about 35 feet away at the time but I took the easy route. I'm always open to reading about baseball and may well heed your recommendation... BW |
| Dec. 6, 2014 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | JFSully, it may be ok to mess with baseball, but you better not be jumping on with that group of haters that says Santa Claus not real. |
| Dec. 6, 2014 jfsully 82 posts | I would never question Mr. Claus, I don't think I could hit with a coal bat. |
