Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: MLGrif, TABLE SETTER 11; 90 anonymousDiscussion: 5 run spot that allows 6 runs per inning to lower rated teams
| Posted | Discussion |
| July 23, 2012 PlanoPlayer Men's 65 72 posts | 5 run spot that allows 6 runs per inning to lower rated teams This has probably been discussed before but I thought I would add my two cents. I think the 5 run spot that allows a team to go to 6 runs per inning while limiting the other team to 5 is unfair to the team spotting the runs when you have 5 run limited innings. I would use to support my argument the handicap system in bowling and golf as I think the logic is similar and applies. In golf there is a handicap system that relates to total par for the course and the handicap in golf is designed to get everyone close to par so there can be a fair playing field (in handicap events). In bowling the current par relative to handicap is 220 (at least for the leagues I bowl in). To use bowling as an example as it relates to our 5 run spot rule, you can't limit a team to 5 while allowing another team to go to 6...you can't limit the 220 average bowler to a maximum score of 220 while giving the 200 bowler (an analogous situation to Major to AAA or AAA to AA in my opinion) the handicap pins that allow them to score 230 while limiting the better player to 220. Get the lower rated bowler to 220 to match the 22 average bowler, and then let the better bowler for that game win. I would submit that if par in our tournaments is 5 runs per inning, help the lower team get to par but don't allow them an unfair advantage by allowing them to beat par when the competitor is not allowed to beat par. Allowing a lower rated team to go to 6 runs per inning is not a handicap or an equalizer, it creates an advantage for them. I could even buy off on giving the lower rated team 1 run per inning as a handicap for all 7 innings as long as both teams have the 5 runs per inning limit and then the open inning. |
| July 23, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Plano, the idea is that this way they at least have to actually earn and score that extra run an inning they are allowed to get versus just giving them a handout. It really is a much better idea than just blatant Socialism. |
| July 23, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | PlanoPlayer, As Gary said, it's much better than "fake" runs! I think that is a GREAT equalizer! At least the team that can score 6 an inning can feel good about themselves if they do EARN a victory that way. If you can't play defense, you better have a big open inning! I didn't know anyone was equalizing games like that, I thought that was my idea a couple of years ago. lol. I would give all teams a rating index (they kind of do that now, but it's more based on M+. M, AAA, etc.) and let the lower teams earn equalizing runs based on the differnce in their rating. -1, 1 extra run available ... -2, 2 extra runs available ... -3, 3 extra runs available. |
| July 24, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | IMO, the divisions have a decent gap and when handicapping the games, the 5 run per inning seems fair enough... I always felft if my team played it's game we would beat the lower division teams, the Handicapp makes for a more competitive game... Sure you have those that will always Bitch about it, but in General, I find it a nice tool, especially when you have limited number of teams in a Tourney and have to combine divisions. I think when you give runs, coinflip, and an extra player to the lower division team, you are going to far! Also you should play by the lower division rules or meet halfway, IMO |
| July 24, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | When you take into consideration that a lower team can score more runs an inning and the higher team has to use the lower teams HR rule, this equalizing system is very fair. This is why Major and Major-plus can be combined. |
| July 24, 2012 titanhd Men's 60 638 posts | I think that lower team should only get the handicap run per inning if they score their 5. Anything less per inning they don't get the extra run. |
| July 24, 2012 DCPete 409 posts | Why not just the opposite? If the Lower team scores their 5 runs they don't get an extra 6th run. If they get anything less than 5 runs then they get the 1 extra run in each inning they come up short. |
| July 24, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | I'm not really a fan of handicaps for runs because back in the day when I played against the big boy teams we didn't get any handicaps, we played straight up. But since senior softball emphasizes the need an "equalizer" for runs titanhd's suggestion has some merit. I might go a bit further and say that if a lower can get 6 per inning they have to earn it. If the lower team scores 3 they only get 3. If they score 5 they only get 5. If they score 0 they get 0. Let them earn their 6 runs instead of giving them runs. |
| July 25, 2012 Allan55 102 posts | DCPete, I like your idea. A true handicap is when you help a team. This does not mean giving a team an advantage. If a team scores five runs in an inning, it doesn't need any handicap help. If the team scores only three runs in an inning, they do need help and should receive only one run. The team receiving the handicap could receive no more than five total runs per game using this method. Stick8, I do understand a team needing to earn the extra run by scoring five runs (that was also my thinking). However, the team receiving the handicap might not score five runs in any inning, leading to no handicap at all. |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | The question is earning the runs v. receiving a free handout for no other reason than you aren't as good as the other team. |
| July 25, 2012 paul0784 Men's 60 218 posts | Gary, that is the whole idea of the runs is that the lower ranked team is not as good and to give the upper teams more teams to play then you have to EQUALIZE them as best you can. If not the lower ranked teams don't go to tournaments unless they have teams in their own skill level to play. I don't like the runs either but sometimes it is warranted. |
| July 25, 2012 Robo2 238 posts | I do not mind giving up the 5 runs, but why do we need to give up our Home Runs limits as well? |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | But if you aren't as good, then you just aren't as good. That is the nature of sports and true competition. Why does senior softball have to be Socialistic? And why would anyone want to play with a handout? So if you get 5 runs and win by 2, do you really feel like you won? |
| July 25, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | Not a golfer, but in golf the handicap explicitly recognizes that some players are better than others. I believe the concept is to force you to play against yourself in a sense. If the "bad" golfer has a good day, he can beat the "good" golfer who has a bad day. It isn't socialism which is just plain silly to say, it is an attempt to make what would otherwise be a non-competitive contest into a competitive contest. The emphasis isn't winning per se in an aboslute sense, it is playing to your personal best level. The principle is sound whether it works in competitive SB, I don't have the foggiest idea. Guys here quit leagues which are totally unbalanced as to competitiveness since they just aren't fun. What do consistent 40 to 2 scores prove, except one team is clearly better than the other? |
| July 25, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Some are still thinking giving runs! That's not the plan, it's not if you score 5 you are "gifted" another run ... whatever the lower team actually scores, that's what they get, up to 6, 7, or 8, based on the rating index difference. NO FAKE RUNS! Agree with Gary 19, "if you get 5 runs and win by 2, do you really feel like you won?" Been saying that forever! |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | HJ, bad analogy. Golf uses handicaps at the rec level, NOT the highest level. Who was Woods or Nicklaus ever giving strokes to? And what does winning a game by 2 when you were given 5 runs prove? Jawood, sadly I think there are plenty of guys who would feel like they "won".....:( |
| July 25, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Allan55 I understand what you mean. But isn't allowing a major team the chance to score 6 runs an inning when they play a major plus team who can only score 5 team a handicap in itself? |
| July 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | come on Gary, Teams in lower divisions aren't as good, so if they are given runs to handicap the game, what's the big deal...not everyone has the same talent.. Making games more competitive between a lower and higher division gives those teams a chance to play against the best. Which is good experience for those teams that are thinking about or will move up! |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | swing, I know they aren't as good, but where is it written that all teams are supposed to be created (or artifically made) equal? They can still play against those teams and get "good experience" without free runs. The runs don't change the quality of the experience at all. They don't affect the game at all. They just possibly affect the contrived outcome. And I guess back to my question. If you get 5 runs and win by 2, do you really feel like you won? stick, that probably is, but at least the Major team had to earn all 6 runs and did not get them handed to them. |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Truthfully, if a team only needs 5 runs to be competitive with a higher-rated team, then they don't need those runs at all. A couple of key hits, or a key defensive play, can make those 5 runs up for you. And if you need those runs to lose by 12 instead of 17, what real difference does it make? |
| July 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary, a little story,, We played in Redwood City CA this year a month ago... We had Twelve Gauge from AAA first game at 9am.. We have 4 new players that are at AAA caliber but have the ability to be at major or higher... work in progress... We had to spot them 5 runs and we lost our first game by 1... so, We beat them by 4 but technically lost that game.. the 4 guys I'm talking about didn't hit that game along with a few others in the bottom of that order.. AFter that game we rolled everyone including a Major plus team... I took that Tourney as a step in growing our new guys into the major arena and we grew in character as we got better and better in the Tourney and saving our best game for last against the major team.. At the end of the day I didn't feel we lost that Tourney so in my eyes I have zero issue with giving runs to lower ranked teams! If makes it more competitive while giving higher ranked teams more of challenge..IMO One more thing is when there are lack of teams playing and divisions have to combine to get more games in you have to handicap the games.. There is a difference at every level and I think for the most part SSUSA does a pretty good job at ranking us.. I'm sure it's not an easy job! I would like ranking based on how dominate a team is and not just what they had won. IMO |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | But 5 runs, while yes I understand it can make a difference between winning and losing, in reality is not really all that much. Again, a key hit or key defensive play and those 5 runs can be actually earned instead of gifted. swing, why do you "have to handicap the games"? If guys really won't play because they aren't going to get a measly 5 runs that apparently they don't want to work hard enough to earn (notice I said 5 runs, not 15, 5 is not really that large a number), then let them sit home and play checkers. Also, if the association apparently believes there is only a 5 run difference between say Major and Major+, then for sure those division can be combines. Again, 5 is a pretty small number, about equivalent to a key defensive play or key hit and guys should be able to work just a little harder to be able to make instead of looking for handouts. This all goes back to the missing pride in senior softball. Winning by 2 when 5 runs were given really makes guys feel good????? |
| July 25, 2012 stick8 1991 posts | Bingo gary19. Your spot on when you posted: "at least the Major team had to earn all 6 runs and did not get them handed to them". Being allowed to score an extra run per inning should only be achieved by good hitting, smart baserunning and errors by the defense. |
| July 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | I would not have a problem with the 6 run for the majorplus team, only if they played by major rules. Handicapped games are needed for lower division teams no matter what your opinion is on this matter.. it works to keep things competitive.. you say 5 runs isn't that much... I know differently, and I don't think you have a truly major plus team complaining about giving up those 5 runs to a major team! |
| July 25, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | As usual Swing is right on and speaks well for the vast majority of those who post here. The technical designation of who "won" is the end of the discussion for one who posts here. Others see advantages to participation, having fun and having games which aren't blow outs. If you technically lost, but lost only because the other team was given an artificial advantage, having you really lost? The vast majority of us can live with that. |
| July 25, 2012 boston Men's 60 355 posts | I also don't believe in giving runs at any level. The upper division team has to play by the lower division rules that on top of runs is ludicrious. Most of the time these games are played for seeding purposes anyway. So just play w/ the lower division rules and zero runs. I haven't read any mention of what happens if the team that gets the extra runs doesn't score in an inning or justs gets 1 or 2 runs. Does the 1 run per inning really help or matter? I have been in the giving and receiving end of this and it sucks both ways. I am insulted when my coach takes runs and feel insulted by those that take them. I always read on this board about the love of the game and still being able to play. With these types of concessions it seems some only love the game when all is equal. I play USSSA with a team of guys aged 51-59. We play D class and ask for no special favors, accomodations or rules. The kids respect us because we decided to play by their rules instead of forcing the teams to play by ours. Could we have won more games playing by our rules, maybe. Could we have been more competetive doubt it. They are still 15 to 30 years younger. How do you make accomodatations for that? You can't regulate talent, desire and skill. |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | HJ, please tell us why they keep score and standings. Is there something the rest of us have missed? Winning is not a "technical designation", if you believe a HOF coach it is the only thing. If you believe Herman Edwards, it is why the games are played. But surely you know more than they do about sports and competition. boston, I play in a league now with my 19-year-old son. We have a guy in his 70s, one in his 60s, four of us in our 50s, and two more in their 40s. We ask for nothing, take nothing, and finished the regular season 22-6 and in 2nd place. And while we have some physical disadvantages, we take advantage of knowing how to play the game. And yes, some talent and skill hasn't hurt us either. |
| July 25, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | There is a whole posting on this as to why we play and what is most important. G19 and Boston are generally intellectually honest and consistent. I have not problem with that. They have their point of view. At 68 I am still competitive enough, or stupid enough to slide when necessary and hit the turf if it gives me a chance to make a catch. I am lucky I can do it. I play my hardest and smartest and really only get angry if I make a stupid mistake or the rules are violated. I do my best for the team to win and if it happens great, if not, well, we lost. I prefer a system where others have the opportunity to compete to the best of their abilities and enjoy it and the system doesn't discourage them from trying. And yes, I don't like all rules which accommodate those with issues, but I try to see the big picture and play. |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | HJ, there are plenty of opportunities for guys to continue to play to the best of their abilities, and those are rec leagues. Tournaments should not be watered down, or what is the point to them? |
| July 25, 2012 PlanoPlayer Men's 65 72 posts | Guys as the original poster, my point was not to debate the merits of giving runs. It was to say that allowwing one team to go to six runs per inning whlle limiting the other to five is not a good system. That is not a handicap or an equalizer. It is an advantage to the team that can get to six while the other can only get to five and therin lies my complaint. |
| July 25, 2012 wagon487 Men's 55 578 posts | i think DCPete said it best, they score 4 runs or less, give them a run. Five runs, they get nothing. Very Fair. |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Giving, and worse yet the taking of, runs is just so strange to me. And so Socialistic. |
| July 25, 2012 titanhd Men's 60 638 posts | If we must give runs then I agree with DC Pete as well, but I also agree with Gary 19. Giving and or taking runs (Welfare) is just one more rule that we don't need. |
| July 25, 2012 Olden Slow Men's 75 209 posts | I play in a lower AA Division, mostly due to lack of talent and just getting back into the game after 15 years off..We have been spotted runs and hammered the other team, been hammered and won games by the 5 run rule..At the end of the day...I know whether we won or not...NOT BY THE SCORE..but by my score...I just play with whatever is the rule, but that doesn't mean I feel we won a game when we were spotted 5 and won by 1...Just my .02..I play hard, aggressive and always run for myself.. |
| July 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary, once again you talk about a rec league you play in and then compare it to Tourney ball.. Good thing SSUSA and other sactions like NCSSA don't listen to you.. If you were to do as you like Gary, Teams would quit playing and look for a more fair sanctions... when upper level teams play lower level teams, there has to be a handicap! Throwing lower level teams in to compete with the big boys is not a level playing field straight up.. If you think it is, your on glue! Big difference in class as teams thru all the divisions! |
| July 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | No, not that comparison at all. Made a simple comment with no comparison of anything. If all the association is giving is 5 runs, and that makes the lower teams happy, then everyone must be saying there is not that much of a difference between divisions since 5 runs is barely more than potentially one swing of the bat. Or one timely defensive play. So if 5 runs "equalizes" things than the difference is not nearly as big as some have claimed. The playing field is leveled by the ability for all to use the same equipment and work just as hard at the game. Not that anyone has, or should, guarantee a level playing field. Again, we are looking at a Socialistic approach to the game. And again, there are guys who get 5 runs, "win" by 2, and actually feel they achieved something? Wow....... |
| July 25, 2012 garyheifner 649 posts | Don't argue with Gary 19 on this topic. He has ranted on this topic for a year or so. He is RIGHT. All you lesser teams need to go to the tournies, get your ass kicked for 7 innings, shake hands and tell each other that even though you fielded batting practice for 7 innings and got beat by 20+, you are now real men. After all, you are helping increase the self esteem of the superior team. They can go home and tell their Grand kids they killed a team by a bunch even though they probably don't tell the grand kids it was against a lowered rated team. You then hurry over to a nearby field, quickly practice and you might only get beat by 19 the next game against a higher rated team. Just hang in there until you get to play a team of equal rating and have a chance. |
| July 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary, in SF we have a team made up of 80 percent 50 year olds a 65 year old and a 55 year old and three around 30.. We won both the old division and the open this year.. We have to give runs to lower division teams that they brought up to make a 8 team division.. It's the right thing to do and it gave them something to think about as far as learning how to play the game.. Most young teams that we play swing out of their ass's trying to hit the longest bomb in softball history, Us cagey guys just do what ever it takes.. Longballs basehits and great defence.. we take what the other team gives us.. In the old division I would want to give up runs because we have to much talent for everyone! They won't let us put another team in the open leagues.. So, we are playing in this league.. Teams are complaining and I don't blame them. If we gave them 5 runs and an extra player, I would feel we had a challenge now. IMO Again, at the end of the day I know SSUSA get's it right for the most part and I'm sure they are not going to change their policy! it's not broke so you don't have to fix it! Sorry G19 |
| July 25, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | Gary h, you nailed it. Look at Gary 19's team as described above. A .786 winning rate came in 2nd. Therefore, 1st place had to be at least 23 and 5 or a .821 winning rate. With the top 2 teams winning so many, it is likely that only 1 other team might have been above .500 and most of 19's games were blowouts. I prefer my 6 team league which uses a draft to make the teams equal, with the result almost all games are competitive and 4 of the 6 teams are over .500. I guess some enjoy beating up weak teams, I don't. |
| July 25, 2012 Allan55 102 posts | Stick8, Your point is well taken. Remember, I mentioned I thought like you do. However, after playing general senior softball tournaments, I have played against teams that weren't very strong. They had difficulty scoring in double figures and really needed help. On the flipside, if you are playing in a big tournament, the spotting of runs is certainly difficult to understand. |
| July 25, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Boston ... it's what the lower team SCORES in an inning, up to 6! Not "extra runs" if they don't score their 6. The lower team gets to score up to 6 runs an inning and the higher team gets to score up to 5 an inning. They can EARN one more run, no "fake" runs. It's really that simple! |
| July 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Gary Heifner, how dumb are you? If, as you say, the lower-rated teams are all going to go and "get your ass kicked for 7 innings" then what good would FIVE friggin' runs be????? So five runs will be the difference between a respectable loss and an ass-kicking? That is all the association is giving is five friggin' runs! What part of math are you struggling with? HJ, nice job of either ignoring or completely missing the point. We have eight guys over 40, six over 50, asked for nothing and expected nothing. Once again, Jawood gets it. |
| July 26, 2012 spoonplugger Men's 60 95 posts | g-19; the molecule that never split. |
| July 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | spoon, so sorry that dementia has set in. |
| July 26, 2012 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | The reason that there is a rule to give runs in the first place is because of too many divisions, causing too few teams in each division. I suggest having a 50 - 59, 60 - 69, etc, age group for AA, AAA & Major. If people want to stick together and are mostly the same age, they drop a level to stay competitive. Make the major plus tournament any major plus teams plus combinations of the other teams. Most major plus teams are a recruited or tryout players and most of the other teams are made up of players that will stick with friends as their team ages. Schedule the games so they don't conflict within divisions, which is mostly already done. All of us make friends with other teams and a combination team would be something more to look forward to. It would give many a chance to play against and with other players. This thread would not even exist if the issue of too few teams per division were addressed. |
| July 26, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I think the 10 year gap can be done at 50-59, I'm not so sure about the older groups, I'm not there yet. This discussion has come up before with not that much agreement, but I totally agree with your first paragraph, cal50. |
| July 26, 2012 PlanoPlayer Men's 65 72 posts | Guys: some of the posters in this thread understand my complaint, some are just taking my post in another direction, and some don't understand the issue clearly, I think because they think a team can actually hit to score their 6 runs in an inning. Just to clarify, here are the facts of the 5 run per inning limit and the 5 run spot rule in SSUSA. To start either team is limited to 5 actual runs scored per inning, by rule. However, when a higher rated team plays a lower rated team, the lower rated team gets 5 runs added to thier total score in the following fashion, 1 extra run is given to them in each of the 2nd through 6th innings, no matter what, even if they have already achieved their 5 run maximum allowed in an inning. So, if the lower rated team scores 2 in the second inning, they are given an extra run to get them to 3 for the inning. If they actaully score 5 runs in the 3rd inning (which is the limit through actual softball play) they are given another run so they get a score of 6 for the 3rd inning, while the higher rated team is limited to 5 in the 3rd inning. The lower rated team will always get their one extra run per inning, even if they score their 5 run limit in any inning. So...if the lower rated team happens to score 5 runs in innings 2 through 6 they will have 30 runs total for those 5 innings (25 actual runs scored and the 5 extra runs given to them at the rate of 1 per inning) while the higher rated team is limited to 25 runs total for those 5 innings as the higher rated team can only score a maximum of 5 runs per inning. This is not a handicap or an equalizer! The higher rated team is giving the lower rated team AN ADVANTAGE, and that is my argument about this system. Helping the lower rated team to get to 5 as a maximum by giving them one run would be acceptable to me, but not allow them to get to 6. I guess I would consider that a fair handicap or equalizer, but I do not agree with them gettting an ADVANTAGE by giving them a 6th run that the higher rated team cannot match, by rule. DC Pete gets my complaint when he says this: "Why not just the opposite? If the Lower team scores their 5 runs they don't get an extra 6th run. If they get anything less than 5 runs then they get the 1 extra run in each inning they come up short." And Allan 55 gets my complaint when he says "I like your idea. A true handicap is when you help a team. This does not mean giving a team an advantage. If a team scores five runs in an inning, it doesn't need any handicap help. If the team scores only three runs in an inning, they do need help and should receive only one run. The team receiving the handicap could receive no more than five total runs per game using this method." I am not complaining about, or saying that the lower rated team should not get a handicap or equalizer. I am saying they should not get an advantage! |
| July 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Great explanation Plano, but how about no team gets anything for FREE. |
| July 26, 2012 cal50 Men's 50 328 posts | Jaywood, yes I have seen it has been brought up many times without agreement. If the goal is to keep people safe (by divisions) and to increase the number of teams, something has to be done. There are only 4 teams in the major world ISA this weekend with one of them being major plus. I have seen on here where OKI has dropped out because of them being the only major plus team. I don't enjoy playing senior softball as much anymore because there are only 3 or 4 in our major division, I can only imagine the frustration the major plus teams have. I see the trend as more players available to play but less tournament participation. I could be wrong, but that is what it appears. I know we have not played as many this year. Yes, I agree with your first statement about not sure if this would work beyond 60. |
| July 26, 2012 Mulewhipper Men's 55 128 posts | Or how about...allowing the other team to get a possible 6 runs in innings 2-6 by actually scoring them. In other words, give them the opportunity to score 6, but don't hand them anything before the inning starts. This, I would go for. |
| July 26, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | No, I totally get the point. I am talking competitiveness. Guys in their 40s who are "stars" will easily beat rec players in their 20s. I still say an unbalanced league in which you are the big winner proves nothing. What was the record of the bottom 3, by team? And a crafty old pitcher loves over aggressive young guys. |
| July 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | None of this "proves" anything. Winning a senior "National" in a 3 or 4 team bracket proves nothing either. And our benefit is that our "unbalanced" league (which I had no idea of when we decided to play) only cost a total of $90 for both my son and me to play a minimum of 30 games. The bottom three teams do have very bad records, you are correct about that. And also correct that these young guys can get sucked into swinging at a lot of crappy pitches.......:) |
| July 26, 2012 ShaneV Men's 55 393 posts | Plano, your well described argument includes only an analysis of the math, and offense in general. Consider that the higher rated team IS hitting at a lower rated defense, and the lower rated team is hitting at a higher rated defense. That is the other half of the analysis, and half of the reason for the awarded "equalizer" runs. ShaneV |
| July 26, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | a five run spot to a lower team is a handicap that is supposed to be par... you might have a on the verge team (to move to next level) beat your team with the handicap! So what.. I look at it as a challenge. If my team can't beat a AAA team by 5 runs, we need to make some changes! And so on! |
| July 27, 2012 PlanoPlayer Men's 65 72 posts | ShaneV: your point about hitting at lower rated defenses and vice versa as another consideration of why an equalizer is necessary is a good one, but I am not suggesting that the lower rated team should not get an equalizer. I am suggesting an equalizer, but not an advantage and the current system creates an advantage. My team does not average 5 runs maximum per inning, which in a 7 inning game is 35 runs per game as an average for every game played, (with only scoring 5 in the open 7th inning in this example). No AAA team I know of averages 35 runs per game and in fact, no major team I know of averages 35 runs per game when there is a 5 run per inning maximum for innings 1-6. My point is we do not average 5 runs per inning and even if we do score 5 runs in the inning, when the other team gets to go to 6 we have absolutely lost that inning, by rule. My desire would be to give the lower rated team an extra run to help them to get to the 5 run max which is a huge handicap in my opinion since we do not average scoring 5 runs per inning, but don't let them get to 6 because by rule, my team cannot match that. For those that think that spotting 5 runs is no big deal, I would agree if there were not 5 run maximum innings. Raise the runs per inning allowed, or help them get to 5 if that is the limit, but not over. |
| July 27, 2012 PlanoPlayer Men's 65 72 posts | Additionally, I still play young guy USSSA ball and when a higher rated team plays a lower rated team, they only have to give 3 runs and every inning is an open inning! (The higher rated team does have to play to the lower rated team's home run rules.) |
| July 27, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Plano.. I couldn't agree more with the 5 run spot not meaning anything.. it's a big time equalizer... Saying it doesn't mean much as G19 says is ignorant! I get a kick out of teammates and coaches over emphasis on getting 5 runs per inning when the facts are that very few teams get 5 runs per inning more than a couple of times per game at the Major level on average! |
| July 28, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Who amongst us thinks 5 is a very large number? So if 5 runs (the equivalent of merely one timely swing of the bat and one key defensive play) is the "equalizer" between divisions, then how can anyone argue against starting to combine divisions and end this Socialistic, free runs nonsense. Clearly there must not be much difference (only 5 runs according to swing's statement) between divisions. |
| July 28, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary, I just lost a game in NCSSA just about three hrs ago... might have cost the Tourney for us... We had to give up 5 runs against JU/Ave Towing! If we did our job we should beat them with the handicap... We didn't and had two no run innings and we lost by 3 with the Handicap.. I can live with it! You don't play so you should not even have an opinion in our SS rules! |
| July 28, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary, you sound like you just want to throw everyone in the same division and let them sink or swim... Why don't we play against the women straight up too? Anyway, SSUSA and NCSSA has it right on giving the lower teams the run Handicaps IMO.. I didn't hear one complaint after the game on the handicap rule in our dugout after our loss.. NCSSA didn't beat us with their rule.... We beat ourselves by not scoring in two innings! So come out and play in SS and see if it's as bad as you think! |
| July 28, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | See other thread. Apparently some enjoy a league where they are 22 and 6 and that got them 2nd place. I guess some just enjoy beating the weaker team every time out. I prefer a league where I know if my team plays well we can beat any team and if we stink up the place the weakest team can beat us. There is no right or wrong, just preference. I think most agree with Swing. |
| July 28, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | "You don't play so you should not even have an opinion in our SS rules!" Wow, is that an old and tired line, not to mention a bit desperate. I played two years, realized it is not really worth the money that it usually takes for a very small weekend tourney. If things change, I might too. swing, I don't "sound" like that at all, and have said on here numerous times what I think would work better. Two divisions with 8-year age groups at least up to age 65. Can you just rationally think about it? If, as it appears to be, that most people believe 5 runs is the e"qualizer" then there is just not that much of a difference between division. 5 is just not a very large number. A timely hit and one key defensive play and the 5 runs is accounted for. While not automatic, though 2 things are not all that difficult. Taking gifted runs is NEVER right for people that are any kind of competitors, though I might have just answered my own question about how guys take free runs. swing, if you get 5 runs and win by 2 are you actually happy with the "victory"? |
| July 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Gary I'm sure you'll correct me if wrong, but wasn't that just two tournaments 2007 or earlier? Leave the age brackets as they are. It isn't broke. |
| July 28, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Scott, played again in 2010. I guess the only thing that might be considered broken about the age groups is that with so many it contributes to such small tournament brackets. |
| July 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Must have missed that one (2010) someplace. so where and who did you play with? I know they have one in Cleveland every year but I thought you don't like the spend that kind of money for travel a few hundred miles. Can't say I blame you though. Ages as they are has worked since inception. My opinion won't likely chance anything but with the vast number of T's out there, as well as economy are the biggest combined with the mixing of ages\ratings I think dampened the 'want' to attend others because they really don't know the who, what or where, until all arrangements have been made and cant get out cleanly. |
| July 28, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I am surprised you haven't found it, after all you stalked and found me on LinkedIn. Maybe the age groups did work before, but with all the 1, 2, or 3 team brackets I see that doesn't seem to be working now. |
| July 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | I get automatic updates as Likedin calls it. I never looked for you there, If I wanted stalk you I'd just go through your employer... That I found a couple years ago. Yet you haven't heard about that have you. Your really not worth the time. Thin Brackets are result from what I cited above. imo You don't play tourney ball you ramble on about it knowing nil. |
| July 28, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | taits-Gary played 1 SSUSA event and 1 SPA event in 2010 and the one in 2006. What I object to is that he has made the decision not to play-for whatever reason. So why is he here insulting everyone, stirring up everything and just plain denigrating the whole SSUSA concept if he isn't going to play or do something CONSTRUCTIVE to improve the game. He really must have a very boring life if this is his only avenue to vent whatever is bothering him. |
| July 28, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | PlanoPlayer-overall I do not subscribe to the 5 run equalizer, but that is my highly competitive side. I am happy when we are offered the 5 and refuse-as we did in Temecula. However, with the atmosphere of equalization in Senior Softball, I see it's purpose. Your biggest point is that the lower rated team has the opportunity to score 35 runs through 6 innings while the higher rated team has the opportunity to only score 30. If you think about it, though, if that lower rated team DOES in fact score that 35 runs-they have had an incredibly exemplary game-they have scored their maximum and they did it against a higher rated defense. Don't they deserve to win, if they played that well? Don't you expect to win if you score 5 every inning against a team in your division? In that vein, I like the idea of having to actually score 6 in an inning to benefit from the equalizer. That, plus the fact that the higher rated team has to play the lower rated team's home run rule seems a pretty good equalizer to me. |
| July 29, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Webbie, Pretty much my feelings as well. Loose mouth, no relevant substance. Glad to read he did a couple back then at least. |
| July 29, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | You two don't have the ability to recognize and understand relevant substance if it was driving a truck and ran you over. You're over your head. |
| July 29, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | taits-and he chooses not to play. Yet he feels he has to vent here and antagonize people. Sad existence, don't you agree? |
| July 29, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I am sure your little butt-buddy will agree with you. You two are so cute together. Who is venting? And if you are antagonized, it might only be because (a) truth bothers you or (b) you are having trouble comprehending it. If 5 measly runs is an "equalizer" then really isn't much of a difference between contiguous divisions. And who feels good "winning" by 2 with 5 gift runs? |
| July 29, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | It is sad when a discussion degrades to the level of name calling. It is a cliche but we can disagree w/o being disagreeable and maybe not responding to a provocation shows your character in a more positive light than responding. |
| July 29, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Oh geez, let's not get so sensitive. This isn't a Girl Scout forum. |
| July 29, 2012 dano911sc 51 posts | Swing4, Tell us how it was giving up 7 runs against 2 teams today? |
| July 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Dano, giving up the 7 runs to two teams today was a challenge that my Baron team met! I am proud of my team for winning the last game against MTC55 for the Tourney Championship... We lost one early because of three innings of not hitting (not the 5 run spot we gave)when you give up 7 runs to a team it's a challenge that I don't really mind(we gave the 7 run spot to 55 bracket teams.. Dano, who are you, do I know you? I did see some good competition with teams that were given runs to compete in the higher division or older division guys getting runs. As long as I know the rules before the games starts, I can live with it and the games were competitive throughout the Tourney in 50s Today! |
| July 30, 2012 HJ Men's 70 481 posts | It is not being sensitive; it is being civil. There is never a reason not to be civil and cheap shots are just that: cheap shots. |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | HJ, make sure to speak up the next time I am trreated "uncivilly". |
| July 31, 2012 garyheifner 649 posts | Gary 19 I believe I established that I am a whole lot smarter than you a while back. Each night I do my normal prayers and add a quick thank you that the good lord never gives you the urge to come out on tour and destroy, with your mere presence, what have been great tournies so far this year. I will admit that even though your posts are the rantings of an abnormal person, you are consistant. P.S. Your on going rant regarding the 5 run spots is meaningless to my team. We never take the 5 runs. A higher ranked team usually eats up those 5 in a few innings and the rout is on. Take the x-tra defender, push the SS towards the 5-6 hole and help defend the middle with the 11th defender. It takes a lot of good higher level hitters out of their normal hitting comfort zone and will give you a better chance of being competitive. Also, the rants seem to center only on hitting and runs scored. What we have noticed over recent years, being a AAA team, is that the Major teams we play are simply bigger, faster, stronger and play better defense than most of the AAA teams. Simply stated better over all athletes. Also, the 5 run or 11th defender is only used in qualifers or better stated practice tournaments. It does not come into play in the Ring tournaments as you are paired with equally ranked teams. So, Gary 19, really, what is the big deal? Yes, right, no big deal at all which negates your rants. Instead of wasting so much time on this site, you should be out practicing to make yourself a better player. |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Gary, the next time you want to assert your intelligence and your faith, try to remember that Lord is spelled with a capital L.....:( Nice to see your team has enough pride not to take gift runs, but exceptions never prove the rule. Though taking a gift defender is not really much better. In all of your "smarts", you do realize that while each body has its limits you can do a lot to improve your size, speed, strength, and even defensive ability. How many guys on your team work in the off-season to improve theirs? I am just looking for an answer to the question I have repeatedly asked but has been continuously ignored. If you are given 5 runs, and win by 2, do you feel good about the "victory"? |
| July 31, 2012 curveball Men's 65 705 posts | Rather than continue to ask the question that is for players to know, why don't you go for it and see for yourself? |
| July 31, 2012 Olden Slow Men's 75 209 posts | G19..Basic question..basic answer..If we are spotted 5 and win by 2...Nope..We lost..The only thing we won was on paper..Just my .02.. |
| July 31, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Well, I know JU/AVe towing was happy to beat us with the 5 run spot... If they ask you who is the better team, not one would say themselves before after or if we didn't play each other... The Handicap was fair since we are a superior team.. They have maybe one Defensive player that could play on our team and they have maybe two hitters that could play on our team.... So when they get a 5 run handicap I feel it's correct! End of Story Gary19! |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Thanks Tom! I wonder how many goals the U.S. should have been given against the Soviets? How many points the Jets should have been given against the Colts? How many free punches Douglass should have been allowed to take against Tyson? After all, they were all inferior to their opponents. |
| July 31, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Don't forget how many Post G19 has against everyone else.. G19 needs to stop posting for a year and let all us rookies catch up! ;-) |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Hey, I am far behind taits. I am just trying to provide spiritual guidance......:) |
| July 31, 2012 tater9 62 posts | Gary 19, You are looking for an answer to your question that is subjective in nature. Some may feel good while others feel bad and some may have no feelings about it at all. So, there is no one answer to your question. |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I realize there is no one universally correct answer (though some might say there should be), but each individual can answer it for themself. |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | And I still contend that if only five runs is an "equalizer" as it is often called, then divisions can be combined since such a small number of runs is not much of a difference between teams or divisions. Five runs can be made up with one timely swing and one key defensive play. |
| July 31, 2012 boston Men's 60 355 posts | Don't know if this matters or makes a difference. In our Las Cruces/El Paso senior league we have teams that range from 50AA, 50AAA, 55AA, 55AAA, 60AAA and 65AA. On these teams are players that could play major and major plus. Many of these teams are tournament teams such as Drillers 55AAA, El Paso Old School 50AA, El Paso Spurs 50AAA, Team Cruces 55AA and El Paso Bulls 50AAA and 60AAA. When we play we do not give runs to each other. The only concession made is for the 60 yr old teams runs or extra player. We also have 2 different HR rules 1up then singles or 3 up and singles. When a lower ranked team (which was done by team choice) plays a higher team we use the 1 up rule. Just this past weekend I played with a 55AA team and we beat a 50AAA w/o being given any runs, 1up HR rule. I also helped a 55AAA team beat a 50AAA team w/o the benefit of any runs 3 up HR rule. I understand it is not a tourney situation but it is possible and man did it feel good. We all drank together and had a great time after the game. |
| July 31, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | G19, I don't know a game of softball where 5 runs can be made up in one timely swing??? What saction are you talking about;) |
| July 31, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | swing, it can't. Please note I have always said "one timely swing and one key defensive play." I just said that a couple posts up. For that matter, the one timely play can potentially save all 5 runs that inning. Point is, it doesn't take much to make up 5 runs, and if 5 runs is considered an "equalizer" than the difference sure can't be all that large between divisions. |
| July 31, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Gary19 I was messing with you like you do to others! :) Something you would say to someone with the same point of view! |
| Aug. 2, 2012 DCPete 409 posts | Looks like the rest of the "equalizer" is being conveniently overlooked. It's not just the 5 runs, it's also using the lower-rated teams HR rule so when M+ plays M they get 5 Hrs instead of 10. That's probably a bigger impact than just the 5 runs but taken together they hopefully make for a (more) competitive game. Just saying . . . |
| Aug. 2, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Good point Pete. So it sounds like Major and Plus can be combined by simply playing Major rules, since that is part of the "equalizer" and the 5 runs currently being gifted are not all that significant that they can't be overcome with a little bit of hard work and a timely hit or key play. Who amongst you is not capable of working hard and a little bit of good fortune? Same with AA and AAA, just use AA rules and all are pretty equal. Let the better teams win......:) |
