Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 131 anonymousDiscussion: 70' bases at Las Vegas
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 16, 2012 gbakian 3 posts | 70' bases at Las Vegas Why were we not using 60' bases at Shadow Rock (65 Major) in Las Vegas? I thought we were playing SSUSA rules?? That additional 10 feet made a difference. We need to be consistent. Either Las Vegas comes under SSUSA rules or we adopt theirs. Changing the baseline length in the granddaddy of tournaments just isn't right! I won't go back to Las Vegas if that doesn't change. Can't wait to hear the explanation/rationale for this. |
| Oct. 16, 2012 SSUSA Staff 3482 posts | The SSUSA official specification is 65', not 60' as you incorrectly stated. As for the "why" 70' at the World Masters, this has been discussed extensively here, but a repeat of the 'short version' may help. Clark County and the City of Las Vegas are both under the jurisdiction of NSA for local league play. As such, the County and City both declined to allow us to change their bases to 65' from the 70' NSA specification. We played at 70' for the entire tournament (with one exception) for the sake of consistency. The exception was at Big League Dreams in Session #2 for the 75+ and 80+ Divisions, who played at 65'. It's certainly your prerogative to return to Las Vegas or not to play, but there seem to be supporters on both sides of the 65' vs. 70' issue. |
| Oct. 16, 2012 Fabe Men's 65 455 posts | 70 ft bases did affect games, but I thought it was a positive one for the defense. We enjoyed playn under this rule. Aloha, Fabe |
| Oct. 16, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Let's hope they never choose a Super Bowl site that insists on using the CFL field dimensions. And here I thought the customer is always right. |
| Oct. 20, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Again I want to put in that I believe the 70 foot bases are an excellent improvement. Gary, put a cork in it for once. Again, though, I am 60 and I can see where the 65 or 70 and older divisions would like to keep it at 65 feet. That does make it tough for a tournament if they are using the same fields. The defense has more time to make a play. The sometimes almost automatic double for some guys can be contested by an outfielder. The infielders have that split second more. I think SSUSA needs to look at this one very closely. gbakian-where were you playing 60 foot bases. I haven't seen those since the 70's or early 80's. |
| Oct. 20, 2012 curveball Men's 65 705 posts | Webbie, maybe not true in 65 and 70. From what I gather, my 65 team mates prefer 70' bases. It's a better game,gives defense a better shot, and easier to get in 7 innings. I personally like 70' Now he's on football! Wouldn't matter what the dimensions were, he hasn't been to a Super Bowl for either league ever, and most likely has no plans to attend. I'll bet lowering the mound and the DH really chapped his butt. He's probably still calling the NBA over the 3-point line addition. |
| Oct. 20, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | NSA has been using 70 foot base lines nation wide for awhile, ASA is at 65 UNLESS your playing MAJORS, then it is at 80 feet... Maybe SSUSA should keep up with them (ASA) and move the bases out for the M & M+ divisions... That might bring some attitude into the game. lol |
| Oct. 20, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | If we are going to continue to use the hot bats and balls (and we are), 70' bases make it much safer and a better game ... at least for 65 and younger. Most fields now have pegs for 65' and 70'. It takes no time at all to switch them if it is determined that the older divisions just can't play at 70'. |
| Oct. 20, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Jawood, Maybe too, they should go to 80 feet paths for the M & M+. Really safe and better games. Have 3 sets of pegs out there... Got legs..... wind.... :>) |
| Oct. 20, 2012 Al33 Men's 55 183 posts | For what it's worth. At Shadow Rock there were pegs in the ground for three different sets of bases. They could've moved them to where ever they wanted to, so the Clark County excuse is weak at best. Be that as it may, the 70 foot bases were fine and are an acceptable compromise. They do however yield to more double plays. more force outs at 2nd because the infielders can play deeper and less runners scoring from 2nd base. |
| Oct. 20, 2012 TexasTransplant Men's 70 516 posts | I don't really have any issue with 70' bases. That being said, you shouldn't show up at the biggest tournament of the year and find you're playing with different dimensions than you've played with all season. In view of the numbers of players and wives this tournament draws, it seem somewhat small-minded for the city and/or county to refuse to make the change. As was pointed out earlier, the fields at Shadow Rock had the pegs for the shorter bases. |
| Oct. 21, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Transplant, you make a very valid point EXCEPT the city/county got away with it. SSUSA caved and went there anyway despite having to play with those basepath dimensions. |
| Oct. 22, 2012 stattad Men's 65 235 posts | Long live 70' bases! |
| Oct. 26, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Gary19, I think you haven't played a tournament since they went from 60 to 65 foot bases, right? You couldn't stand the change! |
| Oct. 26, 2012 garyheifner 649 posts | In full support of keeping the 70 footers. Really brings the double play back into the game. It also introduced a few pulled hamstrings, but keep it anyway. What was nuts/really different to me was at Lorenzi. The rubber was at 53'. That meant the 6 foot box was 3' in front and 3' behind the rubber. So if you pitched from 56' your lead foot often crashed/bumped into the rubber on your stride. If you got behind in the count and wanted to pitch from 50', you were 3' in front of the rubber. Took a while to get used to it. In one of the early games, one of our pitchers kept coming up short. Thought he was pitching from a 50' rubber and having a bad day. Was really pitching from 53' as we found out later. |
| Oct. 27, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Mark, your "wit" get dumber by the day. Change can be okay, but NOT for a "world" tourney when the entire rest of the season has been played under a different rule. Let's play the Super Bowl on a CFL field. |
| Oct. 27, 2012 Webbie25 Men's 70 2413 posts | Hehe-Gary19,you're just ticked off because I made that observation before you could disparage it. That's funny! |
| Oct. 29, 2012 cpope Men's 75 160 posts | Been a while since I have been on this site, its good to see some names that are still playing. 70 foot bases have my vote. Puts defense back into the game. |
| Oct. 29, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | So would banning bats no one else is allowed to use. There is a reason for that. |
| Oct. 29, 2012 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | plus most all assoc's will be at 70' next year,so lets have the 70' bases.... its called the gray cup in Canada,not super bowl..... |
| Oct. 29, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Yes it is. My point was playing the Super Bowl on a CFL field after playing the entire season on a regulation field would be as silly as using 70' bases for the worlds after playing all year on 65'. No one would go for it, but seniors fell for it in softball. |
| Oct. 29, 2012 Fabe Men's 65 455 posts | We didnt fall for anything, just played by the rules presented! We were informed months before that 70' baseline would be used. This gave the defense a chance to influence the game. This had a positive effect if you enjoy watching some soild D.....Aloha, Fabe |
