Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: Outlaw23, Roscoe 65, TABLE SETTER 11, Thunder Dan; 109 anonymousDiscussion: survey
| Posted | Discussion |
| Dec. 26, 2012 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | survey Great idea on the 1 and 1 count survey. I have placed my vote and I am in favor of it. It may help us get 7 innings in. Thanks Harry # 20 NV FORCE. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 db14 104 posts | 1 and 1 count.....terrible idea !!!!! Too many other options (as discussed on the board) to save time and try first . What's the hurry! |
| Dec. 26, 2012 Dbax Men's 65 2100 posts | 1 and 1 sucks. Thank you. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 17Black Men's 60 414 posts | OK, to me----one and one makes no sense if you still get to waste a foul ball. Lots of guys foul off pitches, it slows the game down especially when foul balls stay in play and need retrieved. Often the pitcher still needs to throw three strikes. If a pitcher is a little off, or not controlling pitches due to windy conditions, I see more walks (only 3 balls) with a 1-1 count. Not all the time, but often. Might as well stay at 0-0 which was my vote. (And thanks for asking us!!!!) HOWEVER-------if you want to make 1-1 work in my opinion, make it an out when you foul off after two strikes!!!!!! Hit it fair or you are out. If we did that, and you really want to speed up the game (which I assume is why you are asking?) I'd vote for that. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | 1 and 1 would speed up the game.... foul balls don't happen every batter! I would like the batter to fire on the first pitch! and Pitchers to get it over too.. it will speed up the game like it or not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| Dec. 26, 2012 The real deal Men's 70 114 posts | I voted yes for the 1 and 1 count (and I also would be in favor of raising the height limit on pitches). Not sure if 1 and 1 count speeds up the game, but it does give a little more of an advantage to the pitcher than what currently exists. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | 17 i'm with ya on the no extra foul....i also voted for the 1-1,but also replied back and asked about doing away with the extra foul.... |
| Dec. 26, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | To the 1-1 count, stop asking why do people want to get the game over with quicker? That's not what it does. The 1-1 count would take 10 minutes of STANDING AROUND and replace it with 10 minutes of ACTION! The game would not get over any quicker, probably just be able to play 7 innings instead of 6. Isn't that what we want? |
| Dec. 26, 2012 Allan55 102 posts | Before any decision is made, I would like to see 1-1 in seeding games in the first two months to see how it is received and how it impacts games. Then the SSUSA can review the results and either go forward with it, amend it (by eliminating the foul), or postpone it for another season. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 George L 1 posts | What's the hurry. If you are not getting enough time for 6 or 7 innings ask for a 70 minute time limit. How much are you paying to play in most tournaments. |
| Dec. 26, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | at the end of the day, I just want as many ABs as I can get... I know a 1 and 1 might get you a few more throughout the year! |
| Dec. 27, 2012 DCPete 409 posts | If you're an outfielder on a hot summer day, the 1 - 1 count will cause the batters to swing earlier in their at bat, which beats the hell out of standing around shooing the gnats away while the hitter waits for the perfect pitch with the 0 - 0 count . . . |
| Dec. 27, 2012 yankees02 Men's 50 11 posts | I like the 4-3 count because in the Florida Half Century tournaments they use a 1-1 count with no foul and it's nice to do something different in National tournaments . |
| Dec. 27, 2012 southernson 280 posts | It's true, Florida Half Century tournaments have been using the 1-1 count for several years.....successfully. It helps getting in a full 7 innings, it requires the batter to be ready to hit and eliminates posturing from the hitter and pitcher, it encourages throwing more pitches around the plate, and most of all it replaces time of inactivity with active game play. This isn't baseball, it's S-L-O-W pitch softball. Using the 1-1 count with no foul works successfully. Thanks for asking SSUSA....now hopefully you can get it done! |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Beasley Men's 50 173 posts | I don't know that going to a 1-1 count is really going to speed the game up that much but if it gets another inning or two, then I guess it served its purpose. I voted for the 1-1 count. If SSUSA goes to a 1-1 count, players will adapt and they'll learn to get the bat off their shoulders and swing away. Something that takes longer then the 4-3 count is pinch runners. How many times have you heard - who's going to run for Billy? You can't run. Quick count six batters. Time. We don't have anyone faster? He already ran this inning. Then the player getting the pinch runner waits on the base until the pinch runner goes all the way to the base, gives them "five" and we all watch the guy that just got the runner to WALK all the way to the dugout. In the end, as long as we don't go to 1 pitch it's all good. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 notretiredyet555 Men's 55 30 posts | DCPete, Beasley, right on! I voted for the 1-1. Standing in the outfield on a hot day watching your pitcher throw 7 pitches to every batter and then having your catcher let most of them get past his glove all the way to the backstop, plus waiting on pinch runners is a real pain! More at bats please. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Most players under the age of 60-65 have played with the 1-1 count, no adapting needed. Agree with your courtesy runners comment, Beasley. The 75+ and 80+ groups are being given the option of playing at 65' bases. Maybe also give them the option of playing with a full count too, so they don't have to change. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 5ToolsinOhio Men's 50 160 posts | Played with the 1 and 1 count NO FOUL League play last year, games in the 30's 1hr 15min avg per game..I believe 1 maybe 2 games whole year got called for time. I mean who likes to be in a slugfest which would mean a great game going, and get pinched on time? |
| Dec. 27, 2012 opey1 4 posts | the 1-1 count with no extra foul balls would be a great addition to the senior game. It would be super playing 7 innings for a change. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | been playing with the 1-1 count and no extra foul in our senior leagues here....oh and we only get 50 minutes total b/c of P&R time limits set forth(40 than open inning)and most always get 5-6 innings in,and 7 once in a while....so for 60 minutes and more(before the open inning)i think we would be able to have 7 innings most of the time......that 50 minute time limit goes for all the leagues at the park....the other park i play at gives 55 minutes,no senior league there..... i'm in favor of not letting a CR run if not ready within 10 seconds of the batter/runner getting on base and time is called(this is what the batter gets to get in the box to hit) ...also once a pitch has been thrown,that runner must run for themselves till they score or put out on the bases....how about this,call a strike on the batter if the CR is not on the base to run..... |
| Dec. 27, 2012 bernie Men's 55 77 posts | 1 and 1 count is a great idea. We are playing Slo-pitch after all. I just don't understand giving a "Courtesy" foul ball with two strikes. It defeats the purpose of having a 1-1 count. If guys are worried about striking out, look for a good pitch on the very first one instead of watching that good one go by. This game will never be a pitches game but come on now, take a little different approach and embrace this part of the game. Sometimes change is actually good. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Enviro-Vac Men's 65 489 posts | 1/1 count is worth a try and I agree with MadDog, courtesy runners not being available have an impact in slowing the game down. They should be available immediately or not allowed to run. Players in the dug out should be able to make a determination of who can run before the batter ever get's to first base. Just an observation here but Umpires also seem to spend a lot of time keeping score. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Enviro-Vac Men's 65 489 posts | p.s. With two strikes a batter should be hitting more to the middle so I think a courtesy foul on the 3rd strike is a good idea as it does not force a batter away from pulling a ball and hitting middle. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Tate22 Men's 60 280 posts | I play in 3 senior leagues in Southern CA that are packed with tournament players aged 50-65. All feature 4-3 counts, and we typically get in 6-7 innings with normal game times. The 1-1 count dramatically changes your approach as a hitter, while heavily favoring the pitcher. If you take a strike to measure the pitcher, you are suddenly in the defensive mode of swinging at crap. SSUSA is stampeding this rule for their own benefit, and that of tournament directors. Get a little whining about games running long, let's pass a new rule. Sorry, but the tournament game is about the players, not the directors or the organization. The 1-1 count should not be part of regular tournament play as it artificially changes the game without solving or improving any actual game conditions or situations (no safety or competitive improvements). Vote "No" on "SSUSA-care"! JMHO; Don Newhard Nighthawks 55 M+ |
| Dec. 27, 2012 SCRAPPY 44 posts | I don't remember one game in several tournaments we played in this year that the time ran out on. The difference between a 1 and 1 count with a foul and a 3-4 count is one pitch. More time is wasted between innings and substituting runners than the pitch count. Half the time a guy asks for a runner and the players on the bench don't even know who is going to run. Why take more out of the game? It seems like more importance is placed on making money and getting the game overwith than playing it. What's next, a one pitch tournament? It would save time and get more games in for associations to make more money. SSUSA increased their game times to help with this recently and we should be able to get a whole game in with the increased times. Have sub runners ready to go in and the guy on the base can leave the base as the other guy is coming out to take his place. scrappy6 |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Allan55 102 posts | I have to agree with you Tate22. I feel the 1-1 count would change things dramatically. I hear a number of you talk about leagues you participate in using the 1-1 count. I also play in one. However, the league pitchers can't compare with the tournament pitchers. Some players have also indicated they want to play 7 innings. I played on a team that never played 7 innings in the world and batted 4-6 times a game. I don't know about most of you, but I am happy getting up that many times. I do feel, like most of you, the courtesy runner problem slows down the game. What would happen if there was only one per inning? The upper age divisions could have more. |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Tater50 Men's 60 336 posts | Well: I have pushed for a Player Poll (been in the SSUSA since 99). IMO if I was not important enough to survey or poll in reference to the AAA HR or any other Rules, then I am not important enough to Poll in reference to the 1 & 1!!! Looks like a PP could be launched just as easy as the 1 & 1 count survey was executed!! Tater50 Columbus LX You Cannot Fool the Man in the Mirror |
| Dec. 27, 2012 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | I like the 1-1 count and voted for it. I do not care for the 1 foul ball after 2 strikes, since this is slow pitch softball with high tech bats, and it is easy enough already to get a hit. I like being able to play 7 innings. We play 2 games in my leagues, one game with no count and one with a 1-1 count as an experiment. We have noticed a big difference in how long each game takes. We are no longer playing till 12:15 or 12:20. We are now finished by noon or ealier. The league is considering playing both games with the 1-1 count. BTW, we do play with the one foul ball after 2 strikes. In our leagues, it has never been a matter of whether we get 7 innings or not, but how long it takes to get 7 innings in for the 2 games. We have no time limits in our games. Unfortunately, tournaments have time limits. Andy Smith, 60 Major |
| Dec. 27, 2012 miken44 90 posts | voted to leave it alone if you going to play 1 and 1 with a foul there is no need to change we do pay alot of money to play tournys if the need is to speed up play the opening games 1 and 1 but no extra foul see how that works |
| Dec. 28, 2012 southernson 280 posts | Tater50, Like your tag line "You Cannot Fool the Man in the Mirror"....so true. |
| Dec. 28, 2012 17Black Men's 60 414 posts | What I am understanding from most folks and votes above, is it really doesn't matter that much which direction to go----------BUT----------if it does go to 1-1 eliminate the extra foul ball? I played in two weeknight leagues last year, Monday/Wednesday was 1-1 and Tuesday/Thursday was 0-0 That does ^^^^^ keep you on your toes as the rule changes nightly :) and then--- go play a tournament on a weekend. |
| Dec. 28, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Why I STRONGLY support the 1-1 no foul after two strikes 1) it's boring watching a batter stand at home plate looking for a walk. With 1-1, after the first strike that batter now swings at anything close 2) nothing more boring then knowing a battle stepping to the plate always takes a strike.... That will stop immediately with a 1-1 count 3) the darn pitch already has to land on a small mat, and a pitch that lands on the mat is not a good pitch to hit? isn't what the batter is looking for???? 4) if we are looking for ways to reduce the HUGE advantage a hitter has in senior ball (no USSSA pitching, small mat, illegal pitch call in the air, can't be higher then 12 or lower then six, senior bats)... 1-1 no foul gives the pitcher a "little" something after he throws an early strike.....as its currently set up he has to throw two strikes out of his first three or four pitches to get to the point he can get to after one pitch with the 1-1. This means he can actually be more then a BP pitching machine earlier in every count. Also...... I hope SSUSA tracks how different age groups and Divisions vote on this....maybe they can start using the 1-1 no foul in the younger age group or Divisions and migrate it up the ladder as the players that have played 1-1 in their youth age. I say this believing many of the 60+ guys have very limited experience with 1-1 no foul from their youth so probably are worried about change.... |
| Dec. 28, 2012 JDub Men's 60 206 posts | WOW TIMMY, SOMETHING WE FINALLY AGREE ON ! ! ! 1-1, NONE TO WASTE SHOULD BE USED IN MAJOR+ AT A MINIMUM. WOULDN'T BOTHER ME A BIT IN MAJOR EITHER . . . Regards, Jeff White #7 Arizona Elite |
