http://www.mikensports.com/

 
SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

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

Online now: 1 member: wdodge22; 47 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: Change

Posted Discussion
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Change
It would be interesting to see what changes everyone thinks would make the game better than what we have today. Equipment,fields & rules.
Sept. 28, 2011
BruceinGa
Men's 60
2582 posts
1)Two divisions, rec and competitive
2)No run limits per inning
3)Full count, 4 balls, 3 strikes
4)Scorekeepers provided
5)Scoreboards used
6)325' fences if using 44/375 balls
7)Competitive division able to pick up two out of area players
8)More games played at night
9)Only the championship games will be played on Sunday
10)Each division should include 7 yr age groups ie 50-56, 57-63 etc
11)TOC to be held in December or earlier. ;)
Sept. 28, 2011
tinman
Men's 50
75 posts
2 or 3 out of area players would save my current team from folding
Sept. 28, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
Bruce-can you see that well at night? Our whole team struggles with night vision. :-)
I believe that 2 divisions is just too few. At our ages, the disparity in ability and age might be better served with 3 divisions, Rec with no home runs to keep it a true rec division for teams that want to get together for a tournament or two just for the fun of it, Competitive for teams that may be AAA type teams that want to compete, but can't go head to head with the big teams, and Major-for those aforementioned big teams. That combined with the 7 year age groups would seem to enhance the divisions in two ways-less divisions and less age groups. That would cut out 7 divisions overall-from 16 to 9 for teams under 70. I think, if a change were to be made toward this, that it would be a little too much 'culture shock' to do all of your changes at once.
Also, for thought, with no inning run limits, would you consider going to 1-1 on the count, with a courtesy and with a mat? It would speed the game along.
Also, if you increase the number of teams by having fewer divisions, would that make it difficult to schedule only championship games on Sunday in some instances when you have a large division?
Bruce-it is a great proposal, well thought out. I threw these ideas in for discussion only.
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Webbie, I think when we talk about two divisions, people are looking at teams in the divisions as they are now. That could change with this type of alignment. Some teams that are AA could find themselves in the upper as well as some AAA teams in the lower. But policing by watching games is the only way to bump or drop teams. Won/loss records should very little to do with this. JMO
Sept. 28, 2011
BruceinGa
Men's 60
2582 posts
Webbie, as our "friend" Gary19 has mentioned before, not everyone is supose to win a tee shirt!!
When we were younger we had to play Dave Carroll, Howards and other great teams. We were excited just to make it far enough to play them.
Btw,I can still see at night.
As for 1-1 count, it's just another way to shorten the game, to please the tournament director and umpires. If we had less divisions it would mean less awards and more money to pay the umpires for longer games.
I should add that games should go to 90 minutes! :)
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Bruce, those are some great point being made. I guess it depends on why certain people play the games. Wanting to win comes with being competitive, but what is it that all the players are looking for to satisfy their competitive needs? Do they have to win or they quit or want to drop? How many teams when they win want to move up? In a two-division format, if you’re in the upper and you win you stay in the upper. Winning the lower would be mandatory to play upper for one year before petitioning to drop. These are simple rules that can be policed easier than what is available to our directors now. For the sake of saying this, the associations and their directors do not have an easy job and do a great job with what they have to work with. Thanks folks!
Sept. 28, 2011
Budda12
Men's 65
29 posts
Bruce what would you consider rec league and would they be able to pick up competitive players.I dont think a lot of players would like to play at night. know problem with 1-1 count or 4 and 3 . Would they rec league need senior softball cards to play and would they have nationals and cal cup like th competitive league and what would be the entrie fee for rec league vs competive
Sept. 28, 2011
Jawood
Men's 50
784 posts
1. Three divisions - Major, AAA, Rec
2. Expanded age groups (40+) (50-57) (58-64) then every 5 years
3. 7 runs per inning in Major, 5 in AAA and Rec
4. Progressive HR rule
5. 1 and 1 count
6. 70' bases
7. Trump ball currently being used
8. Border rules only, no our of area players so teams can't "buy" championships
9. TOC in December in Phoenix
10. No Friday games when it's not needed
Sept. 28, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
I like this discussion. Yes, Bruce, we played Howards and York and Nelson Paint and Port City Ford and Campbells and teams of that caliber and were happy just to get the chance to play them then. At the time, we were too uninformed (or young and dumb)to know we weren't supposed to compete with them. We actually won a few times. I don't have a problem at all, but I just think the mood of players would not be too positive toward 2 divisions. The 'more winners' mentality is pervasive in our society now-look at the little leagues with the absolutely ridiculous practice of 'not keeping score so there are no LOSERS'. STUPID with a capital STUPID. You learn to win by losing and learning why you lost and improving. Personally, I would have no problem at all with playing with your rules as put forth, including the 90 minutes time limits. The 325 fences would make my 320 foot wind aided blasts outs. :-) The no run limit would make a lot of teams rethink their defensive positions. You can't just go out and give up the 5, hoping you can stop them an inning or 2 and out hit them.

PS Hint--don't ever agree with Gary19 in public--could tarnish your brilliant reputation!!! LOL
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Jawood, who are you considering a rec player and what is the need for this division?

Budda12, if rec lge is getting same number of garuanteed games, monies for registeration and tourney fee's would be the same.
Sept. 28, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
lots of great ideas.
1)3 divs - upper,lower,rec
2)upper hr limits 5 than 1 up with walks,
lower 3 hrs than 1 up with outs,rec 2hrs and outs.
3)upper = 9 runs inning,lower 7 runs.rec 5 runs
4) 1 and count,no extra foul,use mat
the other rules can be done as per say....
Sept. 28, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
Leave it as it is, re position teams which by the way may well happen anyway, in the next year or two.
With only two divisions you will still get the teams that want to play down, and those who won't play up.
Either way you will still see brackets with only 1-3 teams in it. Sure you may play other teams during that 5 games but only 1-3 of them really count for your age\rating. Those suck big time and ruin the game.
Sept. 28, 2011
BruceinGa
Men's 60
2582 posts
Maybe I shouldn't have given the two divisions names. Make one Blue and the other Red, that way no one can label one or the other as rec or competitive etc.
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Bruce, I see nothing wrong with your first post regarding division or names of them. Your last response very well could be the reason we're having this discussion now. Feelings get hurt and we need to find a place for everyone to participate. We can call it anything we want, but it is most definitely tourney ball. You might be new to it, but why would we need to make it more users friendly for the new folks. All who have played before know the way things have been done in the past and how they should be done in the future. How many real rec teams are really out there? If you’re truly a rec team, are you really playing for the same reason the tourney teams are?
Sept. 28, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
Call them what they will but I doubt and team\players that travel and spend what they do could really be considered Recreational.
Maybe something along the line for results NCAAS uses: Won \ Almost Won.
But: Competitive and Almost Competitive.
Sept. 28, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
How about just using Major (or Open) and A?

That seemed to work for ASA in the 70s and 80s, and most of you were probably playing in and happily living with those names back then.
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Sometimes when things seem broke, you need to back to when were the easiest & simplest format and go from there. Money can be an issue and with only two divisions you have a better chance for more local turnout than we do now.
Sept. 28, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
From what I hear the TOC is locked in until 2016... I think it is a winter get away for some...
Re structuring age brackets would be a nightmare even more if other assn's didn't go with the flow.
Some places don't have or are not working scoreboards. But yes they should be used if available. Scorekeepers are good but what is wrong with the home team doing it?
Most teams do it anyway.
70' base lines are used in many places as is 53 foot pitching mounds.
Doubt the open run limits will come back except for the open inning.

SSUSA does a good job even with the bumps in the road along the way, but I doubt many of the ones would ever fly, like the age changes.
Sept. 28, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
If you are 56 or 57 and cannot still play with 50 year olds you probably don't need to be playing in tournaments.

Just playing locally is just fine.
Sept. 28, 2011
stick8
1238 posts
BruceinGa:
1)agreed
2)agreed
3)agreed
4)agreed but aren't they provided for the big tourneys anyway?
5)that would be nice but not vital
6)agreed
7)agreed but I'd allow that for all divisions
8)for me personally I don't mind (as long as their good lights) but I know many who enjoy senior ball because of few, if any night games
9)agreed, ideally bring back losers bracket final, championship and potential if game but it would depend on # of teams and how many fields are accessable.
10)agreed
11)agreed. I'd have the TOC the first or second week in November. When thanksgiving and then the holidays come around some aren't as apt to travel to national tourneys.
jm $0.02 worth
Sept. 28, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Taits, take no offense, but this comment here is a major part of the problem.
"Re structuring age brackets would be a nightmare even more if other assn's didn't go with the flow." Someone has to be the leader. Lead by example, the others will follow or be left behind if it's right. But so far I have not read where there's a real reason to go to more than two divisions, other than what if's!
Sept. 28, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Jeff, the best I can tell is the reason is so more guys can win something or another, whatever it might be or however watered-down it is.
Sept. 28, 2011
Conman
Men's 50
71 posts
Time limits ... there should be none. Sorry but we pay a lot of money and travel a long
way only to play 5 innings sometimes.

No game should start before 9 am. Let me say that it's not the getting up early that bothers me. I am at work at 5:40 am. It's having to play on wet fields (especially here in Florida. Not very much fun to play on.

The new one-up rule and the home team not being able to go up. I don't think it's
fair that the visiting team could bat and swing for the fences and the home team can't.
The visitors had the opportunity and either tried not to hit a home run or were unable to cash in.
To be honest, I don't like the one-up rule. If your HR limit is 7 then you hit 7. If it's
3, you hit 3.

I've said it before guys ... we can moan and groan about this rule and that rule. But you know what? It sure beats sitting home doing "honeydo's" all weekend.


Conman
Sept. 28, 2011
Crazy Joe
10 posts
With the 5 run per inning keep all teams equal thats why they should only have upper and lowers
Sept. 28, 2011
Mario
Men's 50
346 posts
Great post Bruce - I'm all for your proposals. I'm really surprised that no one has said that there should be HR limits. Since you did not put that in there I'm assuming you meant that it was unlimited. Now your talking!!!!!!
Sept. 28, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
Pricer
I take no offense to it. Good comments by many here.
The re structuring would just be another thing this assn or any other that may do it would need to occupy time and resources to do. It has been brought up before a couple years ago and you can see a lot ha been done ... not.
Jockeying players one way or another is just time wasted trying to get all the other stuff they are working on to actually work.
The age changes might work for some but not another. Then there are the rosters in between tournaments and assn's which use the different two & would use up time checking to be sure so and so wasn't playing out of age\ranking on the different rosters for each team and or assn he may be on.
Heck, be that leader if you have the time and expertise, volunteer your time to do the work.

Two divisions will not happen. Just like I figure we won't see no time limits except for championship games. But I would welcome them.
Back when I played for Motorcraft in the 70's it was sweet and at least you got your 7 in.
As it is there will be changes going on for many teams in the next two years.
I can see why one may want it, but why change something that really has been working for over a decade. Do you recall the time & effort wasted on the PPR. Look what was the result. Gear and wavers. Wear, sign or don't pitch.
Sept. 28, 2011
Jawood
Men's 50
784 posts
Pricer, the rec division is AA. I really don't know much about that division, but I would think a lower level is needed where teams are truly recreational and possibly many of the players have just picked up the game in their later years.
Sept. 28, 2011
Budda12
Men's 65
29 posts
So you say AA is rec league what makes you think the AA does not put out the effert the major plus and the major teams do they pay the same money you do or anyother major or major plus or AAA teams they might have the home run power the but they still give their best. I seen a few AAA and major players playing down do they need a ring that bad or just wanting to try to feel superior.
Sept. 28, 2011
Jawood
Men's 50
784 posts
I did not say the AA level puts in any less effort than Major or Major-plus at all. I believe that the AA (rec) level should remain intact and is very important to the total program.
Sept. 28, 2011
garyheifner
334 posts
If you go to 2 divisions, it will KILL senior softball. Many teams will not be allowed in Rec. because they might have 2 or 3 players with reputations as upper level abilities/players. Meanwhile, a handfull of teams will load up with the top players in their states/areas and dominate the championships. End result, teams will stop coming to big tournies just to get pounded. I can see having a M/M+ combined level for the big timers but keep the AAA and AA as is for us I guess low ability, slow, no catch, no hit recreational players. Why do all these proposals seem to keep going back to, in my opinion, a central issue. We have a group of teams that have loaded up on the absolute top talent they could find, went out and pounded people got moved up to M+ and M and now have very few opponents to pound on anymore. It seems like a small handful of M+ and M players are trying to change the rules/game and ruin it for the 1000s of men currently playing and enjoying the AAA and AA levels. As I said in another recent reply, the guys in California work hard at rating teams and try to keep the competition fair. I can only think of 1 or 2 teams that might have slipped through the cracks. Maybe they should let the M+ and Ms play 2 hour games with unlimited Hrs 52/575 hot dot balls etc. Or better yet, have all the managers of the new M/M+ combined division show up at the winter rules meeting and make up their own rules. Keep the AAA and AA as is. Don't know about anyone else, but I really wouldn't want to play 9 or 10 games in Phoenix, in 100 dgree heat that go an hour and a half or 2 hours. The 60 or 65 minute games work well if combined with a 1-1 count. I pitch and it drives me nuts that many of the 0-0 count guys don't swing until they get 2 strikes. Even my own teammates do it. Such a waste of game time because if I walk even 1 in a game, thats unusual.
Sept. 29, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
Conman-I fought to have the rule written about the home team not being able to go 1-up. Think about it, the home team already has the advantage of batting last and knowing EXACTLY what they have to do to win. Why should we also give them the advantage of an EXTRA home run also. It is the same as saying 'The visitors get 3 home runs and the home team gets 4 home runs'. That is not fair, for sure, and I don't think many teams would go for that. Making extra home runs a walk will not penalize someone who does hit it out in that situation. I firmly believe it is a good rule.
Sept. 29, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Guys, isn't this tournament ball and not tball. Not everyone is supposed to win, tourneys should not be for getting participation ribbons.

Can anything else get dumbed down? :(
Sept. 29, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
Here is a killer thought on your 2 div game. Make one for the runners
Just a take off on the courtesy runner thread above for your 2 div thought.
Sept. 29, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Maybe I'm reading the rankings all wrong. But isn't they AA division one of the smallest? How would it kill anything?
Sept. 29, 2011
taits
Men's 65
4251 posts
That question might be batter answered by the assn. But it will also change in the near future as will some others.
Would also depend on which age group you refer to.
Sept. 29, 2011
garyheifner
334 posts
Gary 19, you are correct, not everyone is supposed to win. But everyone wants a fair and level chance to have some success. My Chicago Classic 65 AAA team is very good but we have one power hitter and 14 singles hitters. We can't bang with the big boys. You M type players score 5 with a couple of singles and a couple of Hrs. My team scores 5 with 8 or so singles in an inning. We are far better than a rec type team but would have a dismal season in the M level of competition.

Pricer, yes the AA is shrinking but not because of of lack of interest. Many AAs have been moved up. 3 of the best midwest 65 AAs, Gray Sox, Chicago Seniors and KFC all got moved up. It will be interesting to see how many 65 AAs show up in Phoenix from east of the Mississippi.
Sept. 30, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Gary, I understand that everyone wants a fair chance, but the question is should you get that chance by making your team better or by some dumbing-down of the game.

There are two ways people can get ahead in any walk of life, either by passing up those in front of them or by dragging those in front behind.
Sept. 30, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
Gary-there are a lot of teams here that are family oriented and their goal is just to compete and have fun, and if they do well, great. I know in Seniors that is more prevalent than it was when we were younger. That's where we were until we needed to move to 55 and didn't have enough guys at that age in Albuquerque to do it. We never expected our merge with remnants of another team would be so successful. We went 1-5 and 2-4 in Phoenix in 2007 and 2008 and that was pretty much how both of those whole seasons went, but the team was happy with that. We got to compete in Worlds. SSUSA knows this and factors it in to their decisions.
Sept. 30, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Divisions should never be decides by homeruns. If a team can score the max 5 runs an inning using 10 batters to do it with no homeruns and the other team use 6 batters using three homeruns, does that make one of them a major and the other a AAA team? Gary, everyone has the same chance to win as the next guy when the tourney starts. That's why they play the games. But in no way should we create divisions to give everyone that opportunity, which has happened up to this point. If anyone out there sole interest is winning it everyime they take the field or they will just pack it in and stay home. LET THEM STAY HOME!! We don't need those kind of idiots destroying the game.
Sept. 30, 2011
#19
Men's 60
252 posts
Pricer ... You don't see the difference between a team that scores 5 runs using 10 batters in an inning, and a team that scores 5 runs using 5 batters in an inning? ... Please explain your thinking ... Thank you
Sept. 30, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
Pricer-the main criteria is run differential, not home runs. #19-I really don't see a difference. The scoreboard still shows five runs no matter how you got it. So you hit 5 Qweebos-our word for flares and got 3 other hits-we got our 5. We've won many games that we didn't hit any home runs and gave up 3 to our opponent. If you are AAA, you can only score five with 5 batters 3 times in a game, then your home runs are gone. Home run limits are an equalizer for sure, but not a be all end all.
Sept. 30, 2011
#19
Men's 60
252 posts
Webbie ... I don't have a problem if 3 dingers are the maximum ... But, I think Pricer might be suggesting something a bit different.
Sept. 30, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
well why have we had div's in all of the softball assoc since the 80's.

well i see it this way,the team that has to use 10 players to get 5 runs will be exerting more energy to do so(all the running and such)and in the long run will tire more easily.the big boys who get their 5 runs in the 5-6 batter range will not be expending as much energy,and most likely will be getting CR's if they don't hit it out.also the big boy hr hitting team can crowd the other team on defense to take away their basehits.
Sept. 30, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Ten players is the very absolute max you would use in one inning to score 5 runs, and rarely happens that way, so why keep bringing it up as an example to prove some point? Exceptions rarely/never prove any rules.

By the way, the other side of the coin is that the more you bat and don't homers the more the defense has to run around chasing the ball and will get tired as well. So that would tend to even out.
Sept. 30, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Hey fellas, I have no hidden agenda on the home runs limits. I was just trying to clarify that there should be no difference in classifications for a team that tallies five runs without using homeruns vs a team that scores 5 runs in any inning hitting all homeruns. It's all about the talent, not the power.

#19, I do not see a difference between the two examples in scoring 5 runs per inning.

MD, exerting more energy to run & such should never be a factor in deciding classifications. Which is how I understood your example.

Gary19, I only used it for the purpose of making my point on a singles hitting team putting up 5 per vs a homerun hitting team doing the same. There is not difference in my opinion. As a matter of fact, alot of teams that hit for power do not hit well for average. Which in turn would make them very vunerable after HR are gone.
Sept. 30, 2011
JB23-1
1 posts
I'm a 60AA player Gary19 and Pricer say get better or go home. Our team has been together several years, no amount of working out or pratice is going to make us that much better, we are what we are. To get better we have to add AND subtract players. We get better,but not good enough to be moved up. So we add AND subtract some more players. We win a couple of tournies and are moved up to AAA. We want to compete at our new level So we change our roster again. at our 1st pratice I look around and see no familiar faces. Sadly our team has gone home.
Sept. 30, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
I'm sorry JB if that's what your reading into my comments. I have not said anything remotely close to that. Someone is being short sighted here? If you take all the teams and divide the talent by two, you will have your divisions. Why is it so hard to see this? Instead, most of you are looking at the divisions as they are now and wondering how to compete. These teams and divisions would have to change. Your AA teams would still be playing mostly the same people your playing now. Look a little harder at the scenario instead of looking for the quick easy answer.
Sept. 30, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
pricer you make it sound so simple with your "we only need 2 div's".just as jb23 says,there'll be a lot of teams that will have to go home b/c your short sighted comments about only needing 2 divs.in all of softball since the 80's we have been playing with div's down to D and now E.i think the senior programs have shorten that up by only having 4 div's,where all the youngens have 5 and 6 divs per their assoc's.with your thinking we will loose a lot of teams and players b/c of their non ability to play with the upper type players,and that is what you'll have with only 2 div's.top div will have the elites and then next div down will have the almost elite players.the truely AA's will have no place to play,the way i see it.and would you put a team to go to a tournament just to be fodder.
Sept. 30, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
First off MD, please don't attempt to draw me into a pissin match over my opinion. What you call short sightedness, others might call it visionary. Like I said, some cannot see the big picture and most are afraid of making a tough decision for themselves, let alone one for the masses. The way some of these comments or opinions I'm reading, it would be in the best interest to add more divisions instead of subtracting. By the way, it is simple! Also, to answer you’re questions regarding the younger programs? They are a mess right now because of the multiple divisions they have created as well and for the same reason we're addressing now. No bragging, just facts! Please try and keep it civilized!
Oct. 1, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Multiple divisions plus small age ranges equal very small brackets.

Why do you guys want to play in so many tournaments with 4-6 team brackets? Other than giving you more of a chance to tell the grandkids "Pappy won the tournament", what is the appeal to spend that kind of money on that kind of experience?
Oct. 1, 2011
Webbie25
Men's 60
1933 posts
Pricer, I have been thinking about the 2 division scenario and I think it is just too much of a cut. If I read correctly, 60AAA in Phoenix alone has passed 30 teams. I know 50 and 55 AAA both have had upper teens to low 20's in numbers in some tournaments. In Reno with a 17 team bracket in 2010 we played 9 games and R&R played 12 through the losers bracket. That's a lot of games. The perceived problem seems to be with the upper divisions, M and M+ and with smaller tournaments that don't draw enough teams. It could be they are trying to get an annual tournament off the ground, like the Rocky Mountain in Denver in September. I know SSUSA really wants to make M+ a viable division. There just might not be a way. But, I can see a cut to three divisions working, and think a viable option that really is worth discussing is the 50-56, 57-63, and 64-70 age bracketing.
Pricer, if you or anybody else can, try to make the National Convention in Florida. They WILL listen to you and talk to you and you will get quite an insight into the workings of SSUSA.
Oct. 1, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
webbie rock-n-reno this year in the 60 AAA was 24 with 1 team dropping a week before it started,to me this doesn't sound like little brackets.the worlds draw the teams,even the big tourney's draw them.

when ever the reference to small brackets,it is always for local qualifier tourneys.how can you compare them to the larger tourney's,no way.....tell me who is gonna travel 200-300 miles or even more just to play a local type tourney,maybe that is the reason for the small brackets,have you ever thought of that.senior teams are spread out over the country,which makes it hard to make for big brackets.guess we should mandate that all senior teams within a 500 mile radius attend all tourney's in their area,now.....

pricer you are the one who seems to want a pissing contest,with the jumping of anyone who seems to think that 3-4 div's is what we need,instead of your 2 div idea.
Oct. 1, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
MD, not one time did I jump down anyone's throat that does not like my ideas. I have responded to their responses though. But I still have not heard one real reason to not go to two divisions, other than, it won't work or too many teams. Are these solid reasons to you? I can have a conversation with someone who does not agree with me without me pissin in his cheerio’s from a personal standpoint. Remaining stagnant, set's someone up for failure!
Oct. 1, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
i guess saying we would be losing teams,is not an answer for a reason not to.it seems your stuck on this,but really don't want to see the overall picture,which is there are not enough teams in each area to have bigger brackets.only cali and florida have the number of teams to have bigger brackets and such.also the talent level among the seniors is not conducive for the 2 div only format,and that is why we would be losing teams,and please don't tell me they should just go and be fodder for the better teams.......kind of like sending the freshmen team to play the senior team.
Oct. 1, 2011
the wood
1071 posts
Reducing the current number of divisions has been a subject of numerous debates, harangues, arguments, etc. It's a bit like the weather, everyone talks about it but nothing gets done.
While to the players (myself included) it seems highly logical, the business owners (assns) do not see it that way at all. Their fear is that they will either have fewer teams competing or more complaints... or both.
Also, there have been lots of comments about how 'it used to be' years ago. My experience has been that the number of divisions grew with time... from 1-2 early on (1971 forward) to Open, A, B, C, D, E... but this was/is based upon a larger number of teams than are in senior ball... the older we become, the fewer the number of teams.
How many Open teams are currnetly playing? The rich has gotten richer and this has decreased the ranks. The same phenomenon existed in senior ball in the late 90s.
In 2000, The Summit created geographical boundaries (bordering states) that limited the 'have bat, will travel' concept somewhat. The late 90s saw 3-4 (50 M+) teams and then the post-2000 era saw a growth in this division for roughly 6-7 years.
Then SPA and a couple of others allowed the 2 'out of area' guys (in addition to the bordering states)and the M+ ranks have been reducing every year. However, there were/are larger brackets in LV this year... but smaller ones in SPA. Why is this?
IMO, the latter is most likely the result of the teams making a budgetary decision (LV over GA)... this is just a gut feeling.
The other issue, the dip in M+ teams since 2006, may well be directly linked to the roster expansion (out of area guys). At the same time, this helps those '2 guys' who may have been landlocked before. It also helped some teams... but what effect has it had over all? This, too, could be a subject of many discussions without much agreement.
I do not discount the economy as a factor (fewer M+ teams) but the 'big hit' there occurred in late 2008.
BW
Oct. 1, 2011
crusher
Men's 70
380 posts
Dallas area. Most tournaments here are small in number of teams.
I think that number will get smaller if we go to 2 divisions as many individule players will stop playing Senior Softball. If you get beaten bad over and over your interest goes away.
This same process might happen if divisions go to 7 years or 8 years. In 5 year division a 64 year old can still compete and start, if he is having to compete for a spot against a 58 year old though, he will probably be on the bench and then retire to golf.
It is a fine line as what can be done. May need to have fewer tournaments, may need fewer organizations, or, may need to leave well enough alone.
Cursher definitely does not have the answer!!!!!!!!!!!
Oct. 1, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
wood,crusher,i kind of think along those same lines.when we go to play,we would like at least a chance to compete and not be there for fodder for the other teams,otherwise teams will not show up.i have yet to see a team that says,we are going but know already we will be killed and not even be close in the games we play,that does not happen.

crusher even tho texas is a big state,we don't have the number of teams to support big brackets.in the 60AAA we have 5 or 6 teams spread thru out the state,hard for them to drive 400-500 miles to play. i do like a 3 div set-up.......tho.....
Oct. 1, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
With four divisions and so many age groups, what are you really competing for? A victory in a watered-down tournament? Is that really that thrilling?

Seriously, what is the sense of achievement?
Oct. 1, 2011
crusher
Men's 70
380 posts
g19 - MANY, MANY MEN JUST LOVE THE GAME, THERE ARE OLD FRIENDS THEY WILL SEE FOR A LAST TIME, AND, THERE ARE OL ENEMIES TO DEFEAT IF POSSIBLE.
YES I AM YELLING.

When you win you do not win anything except the fact you competed. You apparently are looking for something BIG like may be a Pot Of Gold. HEY, you ain't gonna find IT.....

Next time you play a tour, try playing and doing your best and try to get your team mates to do the same and you might find the thrill of playing a tournament.
Oct. 1, 2011
obagain
Men's 50
56 posts
I agree with bruce and on the 1 up rule, I would say if the visiting team hits a HR in the last inning then the home team should be able to go 1 up in their last inning, simple and fair.
Oct. 1, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
crusher, that is all fine. But why can't it all be accomplished with just two divisions, larger age ranges, and perhaps larger brackets?

And while I understand all that you said, and it is all fine, there is a reason why they keep score.
Oct. 1, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
what part as we age we can't stay with the younger guys,that is the reason for the age brackets at 5 years.10 year diff's as we get older is a lot.even the 5 yr at the older ages are a little trying.you have a team that is bordering on moving up to 55,it is hard for them to compete with a team just starting out in the 50's,try and do that with 57 yr olds if the age was expanded to 50-57,near impossible.once we hit 60,it is even more noticeable......


ob-that is not fair,your giving the home the ability to hit 1 more hr than the visiting team,that is no good.
Oct. 1, 2011
obagain
Men's 50
56 posts
But the visitors got to use the 1 up to get or pad their lead, if the home team gets to bat they are down so it gives the visitors the incentive to not go 1 up in the last inning.
It is more perception than a real advantage, the home team gets to think the 1 more HR could be the difference.
The visitors can even the HR but if they go up just thinking bomb they give the home team an extra HR to try and win with.
Oct. 1, 2011
SSUSA Staff
1007 posts
SSUSA Rules interpretation: Teams will not be allowed to go "1-Up" in the bottom of the last (or extra) inning. To do so would allow one team to have one more home run than their opponents in a game. We believe that to be an unfair advantage, especially since being the 'Home" team has additional advantages already. A 'Visitor' may go 1-Up in the top of the last, and a 'Home' team may equal that HR count.
Oct. 2, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
All I can say is, wow!!! I know this was thought out, but this rule that a home team cannot go 1 up is not right at all. Yes the home team has advantages already. But it's a coin flip before the game. The visting team has every opportunity to hit them before them. Cmon folks, just play the game!
Oct. 2, 2011
obagain
Men's 50
56 posts
I just like that ir brings some strategy to the game that would add a little gamesmanship to the last inning, if the visitors go 1 up before the last inning the rule stays the same, only if the visitors use their HR in the last inning would the home team get to use the 1 up.
It would just add a new dimension to the last inning.
Oct. 2, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
no it is like telling the teams there is a 5 hr limit but the home team can hit 6 hr,that is not equal or fair.
Oct. 2, 2011
Duke
Men's 60
678 posts
Reading some of the posts, I did pick up on one item that was interesting for thought. The other comments, while good for consideration, is old as heck. Like listening to Einstein over and over about the ball/bat comments. Sorry, but that is just how I feel about it now. We have discussed this for years, and nothing has been done or will be done, in regards to reducing the divisions or changing the ages at this time. I do not know everyone on this board, but I would bet to say, that most in this discussion are Major/Major Plus players/teams in favor of reducing divisions.

The talk about restructuring the divisions, ages, or both is interesting. If SSUSA does make a change, then how are the other organizations going to put those same teams into their age/brackets? I really did not think about that before, but every organization would have to go along with the changes, or you would have a mess. Getting back to my comment "...that most in this discussion are Major/Major Plus players/teams...", I think is a pretty accurate statement. Over the past 11 years, I have played AA, AAA, Major, and next season Major Plus and Major. I feel that I can relate well to each division. When I played AA and AAA, about 80% of the Major/Major Plus players that I tried to talk to, looked down to me as an inferior player, once they knew that I played on a AA team. I just thought the arrogance of those players did not leave much to be desired or a want to play in a higher division against that kind of atmosphere. They would not even give me the time of day. What a bunch of crap. Now you expect these lower rated teams to have sympathy for your lack of teams to play. Are you kidding me!

Regardless of what level of play you are at or for whatever the reason, I respect all levels of play. I see whatever level trying as hard as the next to compete at their level. Obviously, there are different levels of play, but for all the levels of play, I see teams out there for the competition, and/or to have a good time and get some exercise. Trust me, I know what the upper level teams want, MORE TEAMS TO PLAY. I know that, and I am there now too, but do not advocate 2 divisions to accomplish this. I am not going to be in favor of that, just to have more teams to play, like lamb out for the slaughter. I do feel that there may be more teams for the Major/Major Plus players to play, with the passing of the 3 impact player rule for 2012 and then 2 for 2013 on. That was a huge step in the right direction in trying to resolve the lack of teams at tournaments in the Major/Major Plus divisions. It could have been resolved by moving up the teams that should be moved up, but that is another issue. Now SSUSA can just sit by the phone as calls come in for the 2012 roster submissions, and reinform teams of their new status or drop some players. How easy it will be for them to do this and correctly so.

Hey Tommy D., I would trade all my rings(except 2 maybe, LOL!), to be able to play on your team. You have the right idea for all levels of play. Have fun first, compete as best you can, and if at the end of the day, you did not win the top prize, not the end of the world. Many times I put my extreme competitveness on the top of the list, but at the end of the day, "did I have fun, whether we won or lost?" If my answer was yes, then all is good. I admire the way you have structured your teams. Hope to see you out in Phoenix some time. Say hi to Martha for me.

Andy Smith,
55 Major/60 Major Plus
Oct. 2, 2011
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
ISSA is planning on doing away with the Major+ division beginnning in 2012 unless a team specifically requests to play at that level. RB is planning on some rule changes to merge the Major and Major+ divisions next year.

I guess we'll all have to wait and see what he has planned and how it works out. He's also planning on expanding the offering of ISSA tournaments around the country.
Oct. 2, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Interesting idea, but what will he do if only one team "specifically requests to play at that level"? Or even a couple for that matter.

People are getting hung up with names/labels. Call them anything you want. Major and A. Upper and Lower. Red and Blue. Doesn't matter to the concept. A rose by any other name.....................
Oct. 2, 2011
17Black
Men's 50
207 posts
I've been reading all the posts, and I must be in the minority, as I really don't want to see much more change.

I would like to see more tournaments played on 325 fences-------but not every complex across the country is going to pay to move their fences back. If we are going to use composite bats, the 325 is fair in my opinion. IF complexes are going to have 300' fences they need to have tall fences----played in Barberton Ohio at a SPA tournament which was fun but the fences were 300' but way to short.

I don't have a problem with five runs per inning---------my league plays with 7 and it works too. I personally don't have a problem with unlimited runs per inning either but if so, there has to be a run rule used. One thing I don't like about unlimited runs in our age groups though is when a team has injuries or etc, a really good team could just put too bad of a whooping on somebody, and make some really LONGGGGgggggg innings---I think that's why we do have run limits per inning.

Regardless of fence size I would like to see 70' bases-------but that's just me. I see a lot of injured and hurtin' guys out there that think 65 is too long. I really think with the extra footage, a lot of guys who still have speed will think twice about stretching singles into doubles.

I have no problem wiht night games but one reason I am glad we don't play many (or at least not too late most of the time) is when we go out of town for tournaments we like to go out to dinner as a team, have some adult beverages and still get to sleep so we can play in the morning. Most SSUSA and SPA tournaments I've played in, I don't ever remember finishing later than about 9pm or so, which was still under the lights and a little late for grub and fun afterwards.

I've Played in Vegas for a few years, and most years when we are winning we are done by 5pm, last year we had seeding games and saturday games under the lights. Sure, Vegas is open all night, but wives and girlfriends often have a different agenda than sitting at the ball park late in the evening too-------they did it for 20/30/40 years already.

I still want to compete but playing 11pm games----I've done and did that when i was younger and don't want to do it again unless a tournament is backed up due to weather:)
Oct. 2, 2011
obagain
Men's 50
56 posts
Someone need to invent a portable fence extender, that way you can make a field play like 325.
Most fields are already set up so it would cost a lot to move the fences back and in most places it would be impossible to move them but if you could extend a fence from 6' to 10' it would make it harder to hit them and some of the line drives that clear the normal fence stay in.
Oct. 2, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
So witht the extender the batter winds up with a sure double or possibly a triple instead of a homer. Sure that is some difference, but no one will oonsider it worth the cost.
Oct. 2, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
300" foot fences used to be more than far enough for the best hitters in their day! Now at 50 plus, 325' is to short. Houston, we have a problem!
Oct. 2, 2011
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
Wrong !!
Oct. 2, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
No Al. If you are talking to Pricer, or me, we are correct.

Why is "achievement" through the technology of others such a turn-on for so many guys? What exactly do you feel good about? Having the money to purchase what others researched, designed, developed, and manufactured?
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Wrong? Well big Al, how many parks across the country built 325' fenced fields for softball? How many folks do you think are gonna start building new parks with these 325' fences in mind? How mant existing complexes are going to run out and update the parks to accomodate the suggestion? NONE will AL. We have a problem. You can't correct problems, until you admit you have one! Look for some band aids, because thats all your using for the problems.
Oct. 3, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Gary, do you still use an open unlaced glove? Or wooden bats in league or tourneys? Are you still using the original sock ball?
How would you be able to even be here on this thread without someone elses, research, design, technology, development, and manufacturing?
Try hitting a 44/375 out of a 300' or 315' park in 90+ heat after a couple of innings with any of the legal composites bats, very very few seniors at any level will be hitting them out. Most are lucky to rattle the fence on a one hop.

Oct. 3, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
So what if old guys can no longer hit homers without special equipment? That is just, for the most part, a function of our ages.

And if we can no longer do that, then maybe we would not need goalie equipment, screens, PPRs, run limits, time limits, pitcher's boxes, or any of the other whacky rules the special bats help to create. Is that such a bad tradeoff?

Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
E4/E6, are we supposed to be entitled to hit the ball out? Technology is a great thing in this world, but is it supposed to change the game we play? Baseball at the MLB level has never wavered on the use of better technology for the bats. Why do you think this is? I will give a small hint. #1 would be safety and #2 would be the integrity of the game would be tarnished if they had even went to aluminum, let alone composites. They want the power hitters to be those special players, not every one of them. The records would be shattered & rules would have to be changed. MLB parks would need to be bigger by as much as 25%. Some might say you can't compare the two sports, well only if you were dumb as a box of rocks you'd say that. The college game has changed drastically since they did away with the special bats. Home runs are way down in high school as well and all this was done for safety. I guess it's more important to protect the younger folks, than it is the seniors. JMO
Oct. 3, 2011
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
Pricer says - "300" foot fences used to be more than far enough for the best hitters in their day! Now at 50 plus, 325' is to short. Houston, we have a problem!"

Listen fellas. Back in the day 300 ft. wasn't enough either. I don't know what level you guys played back in the day, but guys had no problem hitting the ball 350 ft.+++. 300 ft. back then wasn't enough either.

One thing you don't forget how to do is hit. As long as your body holds up, you can still hit with power. That is unless we we use junk balls and junk bats!!!!

Gary19, you for one are always advocating staying in shape, working out and getting better. Well many guys are doing just that.

I'll say it again. There haven't been that many games this year where the home run limits have been reached that I've seen or played in. So where's the problem?
Oct. 3, 2011
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
Pricer says - "300" foot fences used to be more than far enough for the best hitters in their day! Now at 50 plus, 325' is to short. Houston, we have a problem!"

Listen fellas. Back in the day 300 ft. wasn't enough either. I don't know what level you guys played back in the day, but guys had no problem hitting the ball 350 ft.+++. 300 ft. back then wasn't enough either.

One thing you don't forget how to do is hit. As long as your body holds up, you can still hit with power. That is unless we we use junk balls and junk bats!!!!

Gary19, you for one are always advocating staying in shape, working out and getting better. Well many guys are doing just that.

I'll say it again. There haven't been that many games this year where the home run limits have been reached that I've seen or played in. So where's the problem?
Oct. 3, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Al, I will buy that the homers might not be a problem, they have always been part of the game.

But I do have a hard time believing the special bats do not contribute to the need for run limits, time limits, home run limits, PPRs, screens, goalie equipment, and the like.

And I am guessing we both know guys who were not hitting as many balls out in their 30s as they are now. Now maybe those guys have caught the workout bug in their old age. I doubt if that is much of the case, but I suppose it could be.

But I know a lot of guys hitting the ball MUCH harder than they were 25 years ago. Has to be some reason. My guess is the bats.
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Where did you witness these super natural humans back in the day hitting these bombs with no problems? I played in some pretty good tourneys over the years and it was still quite the acomplishment for the home run not to be a special moment.
Oct. 3, 2011
cal50
Men's 50
256 posts
Pricer, I disagree with you that baseball has never changed technology over the years.

In the early 1900's there was an average of .2 home runs per game, today it is over 1 per game.

What do you think changed?

Here is one source http://michaelbein.com/baseball.html. Since we are on the bat subject, here is an interesting history of baseball bats. http://www.baseball-bats.net/baseball-bats/baseball-bat-history/index.html

Oct. 3, 2011
Al33
Men's 55
183 posts
If we were using the balls we used back in the day with the good old alluminum bats I'd venture to say we'd still have the same problems as we do now.
Run limits, time limits and the like are soley for tournaments to stay on schedule to keep the scores down. All about money.
I played in the old Pro League (APSPL) back in the late 70's and believe me none of those guys had any trouble hitting the ball a mile or numerous times.
Also played in the NSPC in the early 80's and it was the same. Hell Howard's was hitting them out of a minor league baseball stadium at will during the World Series.
Oct. 3, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Al, I know that, but those guys were the best of the best. Now you have guys who can't spell Howard's hitting balls 350'. In their FIFTIES and SIXTIES!

And I am not so sure these limits are just to keep tournaments on schedule, since they are also used in every Senior league I know of around here.
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Cal50, do you think you might be nit picking just a tad? I think everyone but you understood we were talking about wood vs alum and composite. The ball got better as well. But it is still a cork center strung wound ball being used in the MLB. Al, congrats on the level of ball you've played. There's a chance you hit a few off me back when directors fed us A teams to the wolfs back in the day. But you guys were exception back then.
Oct. 3, 2011
cal50
Men's 50
256 posts
Did not mean to nit pick, was just making the point that technology has changed in baseball and it has increased the home run output in baseball. There are very few of us that used wooden in the Howard day. Despite your statement that "Baseball at the MLB level has never wavered on the use of better technology" the fact is that it has.
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Like I said the wavering comment for the MLB was intended for the alum & composite bats. But just for the hell of it, what has baseball changed to where they had to change rules and parks to accomodate them?
Oct. 3, 2011
cal50
Men's 50
256 posts
Not sure or really interested in researching that. I was just responding to your false statement, baseball in fact has used technology to improve the game.
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
Cal, here is my comment. "Baseball at the MLB level has never wavered on the use of better technology for the bats." They started off using wood and they still use them today. Are there better ways of making them? Yes! Are there different types of wood bats to use? Yes! But if your trying to chop me down a bit by using your logic vs what everyone else understood from the comments. You win! Stop by and pick up your participation trophy or T-Shirt. Thanks for playing!
Oct. 3, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Pricer I suppose MLB didnt look the other way when medical technology, (Steroids, HGH & certain creams), were rampant. Did Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, and countless other players deserve to change baseball as we knew it? Were they entitled?
Lets not forget the introduction of Astro Turf, more MLB technology.

Do you think Maple isnt hotter then Ash when it comes to wooden bats? It is. Why has every new MLB field gone to shorter fences? To enable the lighter hitter to hit the long ball. I'll bet they now feel entitled too.

So yes, we are entitled, entitled to use whatever is legal and available to stay competitive.
Do we need this technology to play our game, no we dont, I do agree with you that it has changed how we play and not necessarily for the better.





Oct. 3, 2011
Mr. Manassas
223 posts
You know that the "Bat" and "Balls" wars have been going on as long as I have been playing softball(1970). Wood to Aluminum to thinner Aluminum and airplane Aluminum and doublewall Aluminum, etc.( Not to mention; cryogenics, bent handle, perforated, ceramics, etc.) Now it is carbon composites. It is never going to end with someone always trying to build a better mousetrap.....AND getting you to buy it!!!!
Oct. 3, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
But the truth is MLB has not sanctioned the use of any technology that NO one else allows to be used.

Quite the difference from the sanctioned special bats.
Oct. 3, 2011
cal50
Men's 50
256 posts
Good grief, don't get so defensive when someone disagrees with you. You seem to feel the need to attack when disagreed with.

Your argument, I quote your words...."Technology is a great thing in this world, but is it supposed to change the game we play? Baseball at the MLB level has never wavered on the use of better technology for the bats" is simply incorrect.

The amount of people playing at the senior level would drop if the senior organizers weren't doing a lot right. I am one that agrees with most of how the tournaments run now.

I don't like the time limits when starting with a 0 and 0 count and having to touch the next base on a Home run, (because they both take up time from the time limit) but very little else I find fault in.

Oct. 3, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
And why do you think that is Gary?
Oct. 3, 2011
crusher
Men's 70
380 posts
Here is PURE FACT.

IF WE BANNED THE "SPECIAL BATS"
SOME posters WOULD BE SCREAMING AND COMPLAINING
ABOUT THE "SPECIAL ALUMINUM BATS"

Some folks like to fuss all the time, they never will enjoy
the game of softball or probably any other thing in life.

Myself, I just enjoyed a great game of golf, shot a 99 on a tough course and did it with "Special Titanium Golf Clubs".
Oct. 3, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Sure, go ahead and rub it in Crusher, a 99 with your Special Clubs =)
Oct. 3, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Why do I think what?

That MLB has not sanctioned anything not used anywhere else? Perhaps because they are trying to keep baseball as pure and consistent as possible. Sadly, not perfectly with things like the DH, but they seem to get it. And because with their skill levels someone might get killed with special equipment.

That Senior softball sanctions special bats? Probably because old guys would moan/whine/cry if they could not do in their 50s and 60s what many weren't in their 20s and 30s.
Oct. 3, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
please tell me how these bats are special...they pass the same test that ASA devised(the 1.20 bpf test) to begin with,senior bats must pass that test to be legal for senior play.so again tell me why they are special.....
Oct. 3, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
MD, I have no idea what makes them special other than they are the hottest thing I have ever seen & hit with. But if they pass all the test, why are they not sanctioned for everyone else except senior ball? This is a question.
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
So they are legal for non-senior ASA play? Please tell me, can they be used in ASA-sanctioned non-senior games? You are saying they have to pass the "same test".

Please answer directly, mad dog. Those are two direct Yes or No questions.
Oct. 4, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
ASA has since revise their test as has other assoc's,if they hadn't we would still be using the same bats as all other assoc's.the senior assoc didn't revise their test just left it alone,so again why are you saying they are special.by the way ASA has banned several bats that have ASA stamps,other than the utlra's,along with the worth wicked,and a red est,are they special bats......b/c one assoc won't let you use a bat that has past the original bat test why should the others.


ok so to you all bats that won't pass the ASA test are special.........


Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Dopey, you just answered your own question.

"ASA has since revise their test"

"the senior assoc didn't revise their test just left it alone"

No, only the ones that are banned by ALL other associations for guys under 50 but Senior softball.

Seems pretty clear to me.
Oct. 4, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
MD, I'm sure you’re a great guy. But we can't hide behind all the testing and rhetoric. Our associations can only use these SB. Can we just stop going into denial on this subject. Screw the testing that all the association are using cause they don't mean squat when it comes to senior ball. This is a fact and there is absolutely no denying this. I'm not going to argue right or wrong when it comes to their use, but please don't use testing as the foundation for it's allowable usage.
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
The insecure often try to cover up their insecurities.
Oct. 4, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Gary, when was the last time you went or played in a tournament that allowed Senior equipment? Did you swing a senior bat? Or are you a league guy?
Oct. 4, 2011
ju25
Men's 55
138 posts
They way I understand the bat tests are:

ASA(post 2008) 98mph batted ball speed after ABI(Advanced break-In) which is rolling the bat

USSSA- BPF 1.20 testing the whole barrel

Senior- BPF 1.21 changed from 1.20 because there were no more 47/375 balls to test with. 1.21 is an adjustment to compensate for 44/375 balls. Only the sweetspot (6" from end of bat was tested)

1.20 test was designed for aluminum bats which were as hot as they were gonna get out of the wrapper and did not have the massive sweetspots that composites have.

Once broken in a USSSA and Senior bat wil
l surpass the 1.20/1.21

USSSA used to just test the sweetspot until they found out that the sweetspot on a composite is larger than the original 6" from the end and can be hotter than 1.20

Unless we are gonna go back to aluminum bats (which will never happen) leave the senior bats alone, otherwise we will have the same problem the kids have (shaved bats) which are hotter.

USSSA is changing their test in 2013
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
2010. Yes. Yes.
Oct. 4, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
E4/E6 he has no team to play senior tourney's with,none will let him play with them.they all told me the same thing,to much BS and no game either.

ju25 you have basically got it down,different assoc's do different tests for each assoc,senior ball sticks with the first test that came out,all the others have switched to different tests to fight the a-hole cheaters,who feel the need to shave a bat.

oh by the way,to the gary19 who has no team to play with,i'll match my total abilities against yours any day of the week,no insecurities here....

pricer but it is a test the senior assoc use(and the first one to come out),we aren't getting bats that haven't been tested for 1.20 bpf,that is the original test and senior assoc stayed with it.people who play ASA can't use USSSA bats,so what is the difference,must be USSSA bats are special then........
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
"So they are legal for non-senior ASA play? Please tell me, can they be used in ASA-sanctioned non-senior games? You are saying they have to pass the "same test".

Please answer directly, mad dog. Those are two direct Yes or No questions."

Still can't handle direct questions Sad Pup?
Oct. 4, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
well why don't you answer what team you play for that is a direct question.

they are not legal for the present ASA testing procedure,but you already know that,well don't you,as i have already told you so,so why are you trying to make it sound like the ASA test is still the old one they had(the one senior assoc's use)actually ASA has changed their testing for their bats a couple of times since the original one,and so has USSSA,so what........please come on here with some knowledge of subjects you plan on griping about.
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
To help you make your long, rambling, and irrelevant story short, Senior bats are NOT allowed in non-Senior games by any association. I just know that was what you were trying to say in all that drivel.

Hence, and quite logically, they are "special" bats that only old guys can use.

"please tell me how these bats are special...they pass the same test that ASA devised(the 1.20 bpf test) to begin with,senior bats must pass that test to be legal for senior play.so again tell me why they are special....."

See, now we have cleared this up for you. You can thank me later.
Oct. 4, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Gary19, just want to be clear on who the insecure ones are. Happy to see you are one of us using the "Special Bats". Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black isnt it?
Why havent you played in a tourney since 2010? And what Senior Bat do you swing? Asking as a curiosity.
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
No, not at all.

I would gladly give them up to get rid of time limits, run limits, home run limits, screens, PPRs, pitcher's boxes, goalie equipment, and the like.

How many others on here can truthfully say that?

You act like 2010 was the last century.

Black Miken 2.
Oct. 4, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
still no answer as to who you play for,you can't answer that direct question........


you say you would give them up,then why don't you.i play in all the different assoc's i can,and use what they say i can use.i don't go around saying i'll give everything up like you do.as for those limits you speak of,they have been around since the 80's(except the run limits per inning).i would like to see this goalie you speak of as i have never seen one in softball,only in hockey.there is no PPR so why is that brought up.i have seen no screens at any tourney i have been to,again why.....i guess USSSA is wrong for their pitching box also,it is just there,get over it....
Oct. 4, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Many of the rules you have listed have little or nothing to do with Senior bats, they are in place to speed up the game.
I have never seen a softball player using goalie equipment, yes some do use head gear, and shin guards, which is a smart move without composite bats. A personal choice.
I think you would be surprised at how many of us would step back in time and eliminate senior bats. If you look back on some of the threads that Einstein and others discussed the topic you will find more would be happy to give them up as opposed to those wanting to keep them.
2010 is closer to the last century then 2011.......
A Miken Ultra II, good choice.
I didnt see an answer about why you havent played since 2010....sore subject or an oversight?
Oct. 4, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
E4, the game is slowed down, or at least prolonged, by the special bats. The rules are just trying to counteract what the bats help to create.

Yes, the goalie equipment (face it, that is what it resembles) is a personal choice, but a choice much more steered that way by the hot bats. There can be no disputing that.

I would like to think you are correct, but don't think so. If the majority are willing, why haven't we?

2010 is a LOT closer to 2012 than it is to 2000.

I like the feel of it.

Not sore at all. I played in three local leagues this year, did not hook up with a tourney team and did not really pursue much. 2010 reinforced what I saw earlier, small brackets and often the same teams. Not a lot of bang for the buck, and with three kids in college the bucks could be used differently.
Oct. 4, 2011
E4/E6
Men's 60
850 posts
Gary competition dictates we use what other use to be competitive, and like it or not Einstein was right about our love affair with our bats and the balls being used today.
Thanks for clearing up why you missed a year of tourney ball, our kids education is certainly more important.
Not every tourney can have 200+ teams or 25 per bracket, but many do have 8 or 10 if you choose to look for them.
Oct. 6, 2011
neck10
476 posts
usssa has two divisions they had two 55+ upper division teams in (maumee) tourney the besdt 55+ team had to play 50+ because no one wanted to play them,then the other 55 team didnt want to play mo town but u trip really struggles to get teams & one its the bats & two its there divisions ssusa gets tons of teams for there worlds AA,AAA,major&Major plus
Oct. 6, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
From a competitive aspect I agree, so perhaps the associations can protect us from ourselves and eliminate the special bats. This way hopefully some of the subsequent silly rules could be removed as well.
Oct. 6, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
as you have seen neck10 posted,very few teams in usssa senior tourney's,mmmm wonder why,maybe only 2 divs,maybe non use of the so called special bats,tell me why.......our so call national in texas drew 7 teams total,mmm wonder why......
Oct. 6, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
MD, it could very well be the issue. But integrity, and enforcement of rules should mean even more at our level of play. I enjoyed my first season playing senior ball. I even used the Miken II for the worlds after a lot of prodding from my teammates. I personally feel there are way to many divisions to police. Very thin lines in talent dividing each class, as matter of fact we have better teams in lower levels than the higher ones in some cases. That should never happen. Please don't c’mon here and do the old, I told you so BS. The proof is in the pudding and the pudding is still in the oven. All we here are excuses on why things can't be done a certain way, I wonder if it's because no one wants to give up their new drug? (Senior bats)
Oct. 6, 2011
Gary19
Men's 50
2617 posts
Jeff, there is NO question your last line is the reason. Long live the Miken hitters! :(

Otherwise, how could they tell the grandkids "Pappy hit 3 singles today, and actually had to play some defense"? Who would care about that?
Oct. 6, 2011
mad dog
Men's 60
3921 posts
PRICER,to me the 2 divs will never work for senior ball,yes there are more better teams that are down in the lower divs than lesser teams in the uppers,and it will always be that way unless they are made to move up.it is called sandbagging to win a ring.i think 3 would be about as low as the assoc would go,you have to remember,they are in it to make money,so the more teams the more money.the thin lines only exist at the top of a div going into the next one.for example-you have say 50(any age brackets) AA teams,5 could prolly compete in AAA real easy,the next 5 you be no better than middle of the road AAA teams,the next 10 would be bottom of the AAA group,basically fodder for the upper teams in AAA,the last 30 would not even make it past the elim bracket,going 0-2 and most likely losing all their seeding games with an 0-5 record for the tourney.and i would venture to say this would be the same as you go up in div's.
i think if they would break it into 3 div's the M+ would benefit,as those top M teams can compete up there.
i played on a 50M team when i first started playing senior ball,and yes we could hang at times with the M+ teams(we didn't have the overall power a M+ usually has),not sure if we could win a big tourney unless everything click all together,but hey we did try.

me personally,if there is a ball game and i can be there,i'm there regardless of equipment being used,i deal with it,and have fun.........
Oct. 6, 2011
neck10
476 posts
pricer you will never get everyone to agree look at you usssa boys versis us asa boys from up north when we came down to play in your USSSSA tournements we used our asa bats and still hit the limit on home runs,we use asa bats in our senior leauge in traverse city only maybe 4 guys that can hit it out,there's a few guys on some other teams that the senior bats woulld help them hit with our team.I say personally if you are 60-65 you should be able to use anything made.
Oct. 6, 2011
Pricer
Men's 50
616 posts
MD, I think at times we sell the players short. If we use the more divisions, the more teams. We might as well just continue to add divisions. Isn't that what we're saying? If you never had 3 divisions, would we be indicating the need for a 3rd one now? Most people just want to go along for the ride until it gets a little bumpy, then everyone has something to say. I would just about bet, that the fewer the divisions, the fewer the problems. Teams and players would know where they fit in. JMO
Oct. 6, 2011
TOMAR77
Men's 55
188 posts
This just get's OLD. What is it that those on the Board want to change The Senior Game !?
Not the Baseball Game that we all played in our younger years, but a game that has been modififed to accommadate our slower reflexes and weaker eyesite so that we can keep the fatality rate at a reasonable level. Yes , there has been adjustments to keep the game viable for those of us that have aged, God forbid ! If those of you were to prevail and reduce the divisions down to 2 or 3 categories you would lose many teams. Your lack of commonsense is suprising. I am sure that if you thought it completely through you would know that you would hasten the demise of Senior Softball. Most of us play for the Sport of it ! We are not looking to be the best. We try to be the BEST that we can be with whatever limitations we personally have to deal with at whatever level. So now you want to endanger us to prove what ? I like to play with the best equipment that is available , but if the associations are going to follow your lead than I think that I will stick with Rec. Ball in our city leagues to keep life and limb in place. Speaking of Rec. Teams, they do not compare with AA Teams , those of us that are committed to playing Senior Softball Tournaments are the best in the world , no matter the level. I have put together a number of Rec. Teams and Senior AA Teams and Trust me the Rec. Teams at our age do not compare with Senior tournament teams at our age level. So if you have the penchant to beat up on Teams that don't meet your level of competiveness just so you can feed your EGO,then your shortsighness will be your demise.
Duke you would be welcomed to our team if it was allowed. You have earned your well deserved rating , a terrific player and a gentleman to boot ! Martha and I say to you GOOD LUCK at the Worlds.
TOMAR
Oct. 6, 2011
SSUSA Staff
1007 posts
We're closing this thread for an excessive pitch count. At 130 replies, and with similar threads open, let's save some bandwidth and page loading times. Thank you for all of your comments.
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