EmptyMessage board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 3 members: DBlock, drobi13, homer4; 7 anonymousDiscussion: 1-1 or 0-0 Count
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 2 Bob S. 22 posts | I notice from the survey that the older age groups prefer starting with a 0-0 count, whereas the younger groups prefer starting with a 1-1 count. Since there are already different rules for the older groups (such as the number of players in the field), I suggest that if the Rules Committee is inclined to change the starting count, it should consider making the change just for the younger groups. |
| Jan. 2 GI Men's 60 228 posts | Sounds reasonable to me . have 65 and under start 1-1 and every 5 years change 1-1 for 70 group and so on every 5 years. After 15-20 years years all will play 1-1. Which most played any way when they were younger. I played 1-1 until I reached seniors. GI Happy New year |
| Jan. 3 OZ40 549 posts | I suggested that very concept the last time this topic was threaded on this forum except that I proposed the full count for 60 and over. I suspect this topic will bring out the same pros and cons as last time yet again until the thread is officially (and mercifully) ended and closed once again by the board moderators. |
| Jan. 3 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Seems to me the older age groups get to their positions on the field slower than the younger guys. This means less playing time=s less at bats. 1 and 1 would make guys swing at first pitches which moves the game a long.. but then again, maybe the game is as slow as the old dudes want! More at bats =s more fielding and running. Me personally, I prefer more at bats and more chances to make a play, so I prefer the 1-1 count. |
| Jan. 3 titanhd Men's 60 639 posts | I think to make a valid comparison of weather 1-1 speeds up the games and not make a decision based on one age (40) group.We could be to play with 1-1 count for seeding games and full count for Bracket play for all participating age groups of said tourney.Then we could very easliy compare 1-1 games and full count games - time and innings played across all ages groups participating.The data derived from several or a few tourneys could then be used to make a valid decision not based on opinion. |
| Jan. 3 OZ40 549 posts | titanhd-unless every team in the tournament took the exact same amount of pitches, scored the exact same amount of runs, took the exact same time getting on and off the field, and had every registered team in SSUSA in that tournament your case study would be seriously flawed. A softball game is like a fingerprint, no two are alike, just too many intangibles involved. |
| Jan. 4 r4pitch 92 posts | 1-1 speeds up games...most have played this way for 15 years ..we go back to full count in senior ball only ...Time to make it 1-1 in senior ball..We all known it speeds up games .... |
| Jan. 4 Garocket Men's 55 259 posts | I think titanhd has a good idea. play a few of the early tournaments with all pool games 1-1 and bracket games with 0-0. If 80% of the bracket games gets a full 7 innings and only 20 percent of the bracket games get 7 innings then you will know that the 1-1 does give the teams an extra inning or 2. Just common sense. |
| Jan. 4 Garocket Men's 55 259 posts | Sorry that's 80 % of the pool games get 7 innings. |
| Jan. 4 titanhd Men's 60 639 posts | OZ40. You are correct NO TWO GAMES ARE ALIKE and they won't be anymore alike with the 1-1 count. However if you take the averages of the results you would derive data that would support changing to 1-1 or not. Today you have one "softball expert" or anothers opinion, "the 40's played 1-1"- "we played 1-1 when we were younger", "the survey supports 1-1". While everyones opinion matters, a change (if there is one) should be made on more than opinion. Understanding that Majority rules and the survey was a good idea but, again A survey is just OPINION without consideration to fact. Just for the record I don't mind either way. It's just I think (MY OPIONON)that any change should be fact based. The only real fact being considered today is that "the 40's played 1-1". Fact is. The 40's division is simply a faster game. Now had the 60's played 1-1 and had the same result ? Quite a different picture. |
| Jan. 4 Bob S. 22 posts | To me, the issue isn't just about whether the game will go faster. I think it does when you start with a 1-1 count. It would be even faster if you start with a 2-2 count or play a one pitch tournament. Personally, I like to have more control as a batter about what pitch I hit. When you start with a 1-1 count, if the pitcher hits the corner of the plate with the first pitch (or throws it at a questionable height and it is called a strike anyway), you have to swing at anything near the plate, or at a questionable height, on the next pitch. I'd rather not have to do this, even if the game isn't quite as fast. |
| Jan. 4 OZ40 549 posts | titanhd-absolutely correct there is no predicting what team, what game, or what circumstances, way too many intangibles influence each and every game in different ways. That is no reason to change a huge part of the game which is an intangible, namely the count. As stated before there are way too many other ways to streamline the game first before resorting to monkeying around with the count. Escaping Scot free in this whole equation is the pitcher, why enact a rule that favors him, after all he is already being aided by 10 fielders, the batter is on his own. All the pitcher has to do is throw more first pitch strikes and the perceived problem will solve itself. On the other hand the batter entirely on his own must deal with everything that makes hitting the ball an art as well as a skill. |
| Jan. 4 OZ40 549 posts | Sorry the above line should read: That is no reason to change a huge part of the game which is already TANGIBLE, namely the count. |
| Jan. 4 r4pitch 92 posts | to bob s the hitters have senior bats ....the hottest on market ....it is great to look at more pitches but it was changed 15 years ago with no problems ...time for seniors to make the move.... |
| Jan. 4 SSUSA Staff 3491 posts | REMINDER • Time is getting short for those who may wish to have their comments (NONE received to date) on this issue considered by the National Rules Committee on Tuesday at 11:00 AM PST ... Message Board commentary, due to it's generally anonymous and unregulated nature, is specifically excluded for Rules Committee consideration ... Identifiable (as to the submitting commentator) submissions made timely by email and/or snail-mail (ONLY) will be provided to the committee members for review ... |
| Jan. 5 txnighttrain 120 posts | Can you put out the email to the National Rules Committee. I would let them know my experience as a senior player using 1-1 in our local senior league ( we discontinued it and went back to 0-0) and my experience as a USSSA umpire. |
| Jan. 5 DaveDowell Men's 70 4321 posts | • Email to: info@seniorsoftball.com with "Rules Committee" in the Subject line by the end of the business day 01/05/18 to allow time to forward to the committee members and evaluation. |
| Jan. 6 The Screamer5 Men's 60 69 posts | To me the purpose of going to a 1-1 count isn't to speed the game up (which I think would also be an added benefit), but to increase the amount of actual action in our game, which we badly need. I love this game but watching one of our senior softball games is difficult for me because there is simply too much "dead" time. Our pitchers are already at a disadvantage with the HOT bats and balls. Add to that there are no "corners" on the our strike mat. A pitcher doesn't really have much of a chance. Really good hitters and teams will take a lot of pitches and really work the count in their favor until they get something good they can drive. Now I know its a "hitter's" game, but we have to do something to (maybe) make the hitters hit the ball earlier in the count. I'm strongly in favor of going to 1-1. |
| Jan. 6 yerwombat Men's 60 76 posts | Doesn't throwing strikes really resolve all these issues |
| Jan. 6 OZ40 549 posts | yerwombat- AMEN! As much as this subject has been beaten to death for years you have succinctly summed it up. With the amount of time hitters put into practice many have gotten quite good. So now it's time to penalize them because they practice more than pitchers do? It's ludicrous to think an accomplished hitter will offer at some of the fluff pitches delivered to try and fool them. We can have a more action filled game and keep the 0-0 count. The key to it is in the pitcher's hand, NOT the hitters. SSUSA I'm sure realizes that through tournament sponsorships and such it's the bat manufacturers that add a great deal of butter to their bread. The lions share of money spent and interest by the players is with the bats, not the gloves. Many of the better pitchers I've seen are so good at landing that first pitch on one of the four corners of the mat at the high/low arc border of the strike zone they make it difficult to bat from a point of advantage. yerwombat, you are spot on and I hope you email your summation to the Rules Committee. |
| Jan. 6 mck71 Men's 60 344 posts | OZ40, I have refrained from comment on this because I voted and figured whatever the committee decides, that is how we will play (at least in SSUSA and then once we go to 1-1 some will use this board for talk about how ISSA and SPA are NOT playing with 1-1 but at least they post their results in a timely fashion, can't win here right? lol). I digressed, apologies. Here is my take: Yes, throwing strikes does "resolve the issue" but throwing them right down the middle can be a recipe for disaster for a pitcher. For every one of the "best" pitchers there are those who aren't and unless you have been hit with a rocket a few times you don't really understand how that feels. The best hitters can hit no matter what the count is, but I would venture that MOST prefer not to have 2 strikes on them (no actual data, just playing for many years as a pitcher with younger guys and now seniors). When we nibble on corners, with 0-0 count hitters will take that first one MOST times because they get the FREE strike and thereby still hit the next close one to avoid going to 2 strikes. I tend to TRY and pitch to the strength of my defense or where I see hitter is setting up, works sometimes, sometimes it doesn't. Also, not all umpires know what 6 - 12 feet is (lucky if we get half that do) so it usually is more like 4 - 10. Now as a hitter, I usually take as many pitches as needed to get my first strike. If a pitcher throws "cookies" on that first one then I make a note and if I come up in a certain situation, I will be ready to swing. All that said, really doesn't matter to me what the committee decides, as a hitter I like 0-0 but as a pitcher I prefer 1-1 so I can't lose here since I generally throw my first pitch as a strike! :-) |
| Jan. 6 OZ40 549 posts | mck71-Good points, and I too have voted in the survey, that said what makes a great hitter: practice. Likewise that same formula works for pitchers too. FYI I do on occasion pitch and have been hit and also when batting rarely do I get as far as 4 pitches into the count but late into the game or tournament I like the chance to be a little more selective. However what I want can easily be thwarted by a first strike. Practicing pitching helps assure that your first pitch doesn't go 'right down the middle'. Conversely, I just wonder what the outcome would be if someone suggested forcing the pitcher to throw more strikes by starting the count with a 1 ball count on the batter because that could definitely move the game along. |
| Jan. 6 The Screamer5 Men's 60 69 posts | It will ALWAYS be a "hitter's" game. That will never change. Last I checked, its still underhanded, slow-pitch softball. The batter will always have the advantage. I don't know if throwing more strikes is the answer, especially for the pitcher. (Anything close to mat is more than hittable.) I think the idea of starting 1-1 is simply to get the batter to hit the ball a couple of pitches earlier in the count than he usually would...not to penalize him. |
| Jan. 7 OZ40 549 posts | It's a hitters game---I've heard that old saw for over half of a century. To a point it's true BUT that basic concept is true in all sports: Football is a scorers game, hockey is a scorers game, basketball is a scorers game, tidily-winks is a scorers game, basically unless you're playing a hand of low-hole poker the object is to score more than your opponent. What I disagree with is the notion that the batter always has the advantage. Hitters never get a favorable diamond every game because of the construct of the bracket and the layout of the fields, wind direction plays a part, we've all had to look into the sun when the arc of the pitch hits a certain point, sloppy unstable footing in the box, stiffness setting in between long waits, so no I don't buy the argument that the batter always has the advantage. I've been in one-pitch games and playing one of those not only favors the pitcher but it's like watching a movie in FF mode. |
| Jan. 7 Crusher23 Men's 55 53 posts | A few observations to stir the pot, as I had lots of time on my hands this am: 1) I have seen it posted many times by those in favor of the 1-1 count that “the intent is not to speed up the game”. I disagree, that is exactly the intent, whether conscious or not. The overwhelming desire appears to be to get an entire game in within the time limit as there have been countless posts claiming that the intent of the 1-1 count would be to “get more at bats” within the allotted time limit for a game, or to “go the full seven innings” – well, the only possible way this can happen is if the game moves faster within the allotted time! It’s simple math. So the net desired effect here is indeed to speed up the game, no matter how anyone attempts to spin it. 2) Speaking of that possible one extra precious at-bat per game; since a 1-1 count is perceived as mitigating some of the hitters advantage (which has been posted many times here) it should result in a few less hits & walks per game, meaning less runs and more outs – and thus, actually result in fewer at bats. Hmm… 3) Regarding many claims that the games need more action, insinuating that they are slow and boring. I don’t see it - I play at 50 major level and have played at some 55 as well and these games are anything but boring. I suppose at other levels or age groups this might be the case. 4) The overwhelming sentiment from those that are in favor of the 1-1 count is that the pitcher is currently at some tremendous disadvantage with an 0-0 count. There are many scenarios that can play out that would either support or refute this. For example: I have seen many pitchers go 3-0 on a batter and come back to throw 2 strikes to take the count to 3-2. If that happened with a 1-1 count the result would have been a walk. Yeah, the at-bat was sped up alright, but not the game. 5) The quality of play matters. No matter how you slice it, if your pitcher can’t pitch, or your fielders can’t field, the game will drag and take forever. There’s no way around it. A weak hitter would be an even weaker hitter with a 1-1 count. I bring this up because at the more competitive levels the speed of the game, or any perceived “lack of action” is not an issue – we routinely go at least 6 innings if not 7 and it doesn’t seem to bother us. 6) A first pitch strike makes all the difference in the world, no matter what the starting count… 7) Yes, it is a hitter’s game. Let it be. Sure pitching and defense are important parts of the game, but let’s call a spade a spade – the overwhelming majority of us play this game because we like to hit. Let us hit. 8) If I’m a pitcher I’m not sure I want the 1-1 count - when a good hitter is in a hole where do you think they hit the ball? Yeah, at me! Example, when I play utrip and the starting count is 1-1 that’s all you see is everyone driving the middle. I do not want to pitch in utrip. Is that really what we want to promote in senior ball? 9) Let good hitters use the field – With an 0-0 count the better hitters use the entire field, we rarely hit the middle, even if we’re out of home runs. It’s a safer game this way, and yes, it’s fun. 10) As a follow up to the above, if I go in a 1-2 count in an at-bat, or feel on the defensive in an at-bat (such as a 1-1 count might promote), you can bet that I’m going to drill the next strike up the middle – it’s simply the easiest place to get a hit. Is this the kind of game we want to promote by going to a 1-1 count? Because that is exactly what will happen. 11) Pace of play issue: Two things affect this the most: Lack of hustle, and lack of preparation. Improve on both of these and you’ll be amazed at how much quicker a game progresses. Disclosure: I did vote in the survey. I did not send an email to the SSUSA office on this topic. I don’t play just to play (but I do understand that many people do). I compete to win. I pitch, and I hit. |
| Jan. 7 OZ40 549 posts | Well said Crusher. As far as pitchers go, every team has one pitcher and usually a couple of guys that can throw strikes, but rarely do you find a team with two 'pitchers'. |
| Jan. 7 Crusher23 Men's 55 53 posts | OZ, you and I are on the same page about a lot of things. I've read many of your posts and am in agreement with you on everything. Would be nice to meet you sometime and shoot the shit. Any chance you'll be in Tampa for the ISSA TOC? |
| Jan. 8 OZ40 549 posts | Although we qualified for that, we are not going this year. Just waiting out the winter up here in Michigan, in about 90 days we may be starting to get on the fields again. |
| Feb. 3 desertlady Women's 60 27 posts | From the this lady's view: I just returned from the tournament in Palm Springs for Ladies only. 1-1 count with no foul for everyone. Not sure that the game was sped up since it seemed that not many teams got to the 7th inning anyway. It seemed like many of the players in all age brackets were not used to the 1-1 count - our seniors where I live don't use it in our rec leagues. I saw a lot of looking strike outs and frustration. I agree that it totally depends on the accuracy of the pitcher you are playing against but most players in the older age brackets are looking for their pitch rather than just hitting away. I'm a pitcher who usually throws mostly strikes so the 1-1 count was advantageous for me sometimes but I admit that when I am NOT on, the 0-0 count helps me control my game and challenges the batters to find/hit their pitch. It all goes back to the idea that slow pitch is a hitting game. Wish I would have voted on the count issue. |
| Feb. 3 SSUSA Staff 3491 posts | desertlady ... That ship sailed about a month ago for the 2018 Season ... As a currently registered SSUSA player, with a presumably valid email address in your player record, you DID receive an invitation to participate in the member preference survey ... Regardless, the 2018 changes made to go to the "1-1" count, with a courtesy foul, were ONLY for the SSUSA women's 50+ senior division and the irrelevant to you men's 50+ thru 60+ divisions ... We have no input (nor should we) over what tournament promoters for other association may elect to use for their event rules ... Peruse some of the few hundred posts on this topic over the past 60 days or so to get up to speed if you choose to comment officially (email or snail-mail, only, as Message Board commentary is specifically ignored) for the November 2018 National Rules Committee sessions in Las Vegas ... |
