http://seniorsoftball.com/?page=12

 
SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

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

Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 71 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: Drum Roll...the Starting Count decision results.

Posted Discussion
Jan. 9, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Drum Roll...the Starting Count decision results.
RULES COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS / ACTIONS ‐ January 9, 2018 §6.2 • PITCH COUNT – Proposal to expand the “1‐1" starting pitch count to include the Men’s 50+, 55+ and 60+ and Women’s 50+ divisions of play.  NOTE: On a TRIAL basis for the calendar year 2018 only, there will be NO “waste foul” allowed once the batter has two strikes in the count. – FAILED: 6‐7 (Tie vote broken by Chair) §6.2 • PITCH COUNT – Proposal to expand the “1‐1" starting pitch count to include the Men’s 50+, 55+ and 60+ and Women’s 50+ divisions of play.  NOTE: On a TRIAL basis for the calendar year 2018 only, there WILL BE a “waste foul” allowed once the batter has two strikes in the count. – PASSED: 7‐6 (Tie vote broken by Chair) Voting Note: The minority group in both of the preceding votes was NOT comprised of the same six individuals and the Committee Chair cast the deciding vote in both cases. There being no further business to consider, the Motion to Adjourn was approved unanimously.
Jan. 9, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
For the full minutes, including the complete detail data analysis of the Member Survey on this topic, they're available from the download link in the Priority Message above ... The full data analysis splits all results by age, gender and geographic Club and League regions, and further splits the with/without the "waste foul" preference for those favoring the "1-1" count on the same basis ...
Jan. 9, 2018
titanhd
Men's 60
611 posts
Upcomong TOC inclusive ?
Jan. 9, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Nope ... The Original T.O.C. is a 2017 Season event and, as such, plays under the 2017 Rules set ... 40-Masters divisions will be the only age group at the Original T.O.C. playing the "1-1" Count ... The changes WILL be in effect for the upcoming Winter Classic in Bullhead City, AZ next week ...
Jan. 10, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
PREDICTION: Believe me, I'm not a grassy knoll type of conspiracy person. That said and I hope I'm wrong, after this 'experimental count' season and everything shakes out, it will be realized that any time saved is inconsequential. The argument then will be along the lines of 'well that's because the batter still got a foul to waste'. Even though there will be no reliable stats to say how many players hit a foul, the next step will be another 'trial season' without the foul ball option. Following that, I believe that like many of the temporary taxes passed by our politicians that never rescind the 1-1 count will too be with us despite no solid basis to support it. I hope I'm wrong but......
Jan. 10, 2018
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1224 posts
I play league 1-1 counts and most of the time we go 7 innings with open innings every inning.. anyone that thinks that it wouldn't add to the amount of innings played(aka speed up the game) is not very good at math! PERIOD! As a fielder it is great not to be standing out there waiting for someone to get thru their firs pitch.. 1-1 makes a pitcher more apt to throw a strike and a hitter to swing at it.. Facts! Those who try to paint lines will have to get it right quicker.. I prefer more innings to less innings which leads to more at bats and a quicker flowing game.
Jan. 10, 2018
r4pitch
85 posts
GREAT NEWS Just made the senior game better ....Lets hope SPA/ISSSA follow. Reid Miller #4 Team usa
Jan. 10, 2018
Jawood
Men's 50
937 posts
OZ40, How is this for reliable stats? We played 52 games last year and a total 19 of them went into the 7th inning. I could go back and check other years but why bother? More game action in the allotted time we are given to play ... that's what we are getting, it's that simple!
Jan. 10, 2018
Crusher23
Men's 55
52 posts
OZ is a wise man. His prediction will hold true.
Jan. 10, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Math was never my strong suit, and if it's your opinion that the game just got better well that's fine too but then opinion is not fact, is it? Facts are good but not entirely the end all when you have so many variables in the instance you are applying those facts to, in this case senior softball. As I stated, I hope I'm wrong and time will tell.
Jan. 10, 2018
r4pitch
85 posts
most of us have played it with the young guys for 15 years + ...They have no problems and we will have a more enjoyable game....Change will be good
Jan. 10, 2018
Crusher23
Men's 55
52 posts
The 0-0 count was something that made Senior ball special, it was a nice perk. Now, we are just like everyone else. We may as well just go play ASA and Utrip. Ho hum...
Jan. 10, 2018
baseballbill
137 posts
more action with less dead time, I think that's a plus.
Jan. 10, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Yes, I too played U-trip (and umpired) at the time of the great switch. I didn't care for it then and I still don't. As an umpire I noticed how quickly the batters adjusted their stance for a more middle type of shot. I only hope us older guys, and here's another 'fact", as our reflexes slow over time, don't see a marked up swing in pitcher shots and have SSUSA to thank for this. Bravo to you guys that still play with the younger guys. That's a feather in your cap and more power to you. Because it works for you personally is reason enough to bring it to our game? Our pitcher had his face busted up big time playing in the younger leagues. I'm hoping that other associations don't follow suit with this simply to get an extra inning in in the same amount of time.















Jan. 10, 2018
baseballbill
137 posts
slow pitch softball is a hitters game. Do we need 3 strikes to hit a softball ??? I don't think so.
Jan. 10, 2018
marcster13
102 posts
For those that are wanting facts or comparison as to whether 1-1 allows for more innings played SSUSA has these stats for 40's. They could compare innings played for 2016 which was 0-0 and 2017 which was 1-1. I doubt they want to put resources towards this though. Maybe someone with some spare time can volunteer to do it. lol
Jan. 10, 2018
r4pitch
85 posts
I belive dave posted before ....At vegas every 40 game went 7 innings I played 50 m+ we didnt go past 5 innings in any game but the championship game( no time limit)
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
r4pitch ... It was the 40-AAA Division at BLD in Las Vegas ... 58 games played, 58 games to make it to at least the 7th inning ... A couple of games went extra innings ...
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Very interesting "post-election" commentary ... Regardless, here's what the Rules Committee actually did regarding its collective desire to make changes that would be [1] consistent with membership preference and [2] have a desired primary end result/goal of maximizing innings played within current game time structures ... The National Rules Committee ...

• Deferred a (potentially less than fully informed) decision at the Convention last month to allow time for a Member Preference Survey on topic to get an updated sense of the members' desire for change, if any, from the previous 2012 survey;
• Published the survey results timely, to allow a three-week public commentary period for submission of member input to the Committee through the acceptable channels (we received exactly TWO replies, one by a person who does not comment on our Message Board, and the other by one who does, but rarely);
• Established a "1-1" starting count for all age Senior (50+ and older) groups that favored that structure by ≥ a 22% preference margin and left the "0-0" count intact for all other age groups that did not meet that margin;
• Established a "courtesy foul" component to the rule, as favored (moderately to strongly) by each of the above described Senior age groups (Men's 50+, 55+ and 60+ and Women's 50+); and
• Provided a calendar year 2018 trial period solely in order to compel the Committee to re-visit the issue at this year's Convention in Las Vegas rather than just sweeping it under the strike mat, never to be seen again ... This approach also allows the (generally ineffective) "player based" efficiency of play initiatives, that would arguably help in maximizing innings played, to occur ...

So, here are a couple other thoughts from just one member of the Committee speaking only for himself ...

¤ It seems somewhat odd (and amusing) for the Rules Committee to be criticized for giving the membership exactly what they asked for in the Senior divisions of play; and
¤ The vote results yesterday were by the narrowest of margins, requiring the Chair to cast the deciding tie-breaker ballot in both instances ... The Committee has done its part to structure a potential "maximize innings played" rules environment, and now may be the time for the players to do the same ... It would only take ONE vote being "flipped" at the next Rules Committee sessions later this year to completely change yesterday's actions ...

Carry on! ...

Jan. 10, 2018
swing for the fences
Men's 50
1224 posts
40 tripleA =s a lot of sub 600 hitters... innings go quickly! try the major or major plus division.. a bit different I bet!
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Possibly true, swing ... But I'm reasonably certain the percentage of 40-Masters Major and Major+ games to reach 7 innings last year was considerably higher than the same rating groups at 50+, for example ... Also, the 40-Major+ did not play 7-runs per ˝-inning at bat last year, but will this year ... We should, with the luxury of 20-20 hindsight, have excellent empirical data on the actual effects of the "with" (50+) and "without" (40+) the courtesy foul debate, regardless of the rating level ...
Jan. 10, 2018
marcster13
102 posts
Dave- I think most of the people appreciate the voting process and the way it's been communicated. Thanks for all that you and your team do for us!
Jan. 10, 2018
Crusher23
Men's 55
52 posts
The SSUSA does an outstanding job with everything. I commend you on all your efforts and I very much appreciate the fact that I have this senior venue with which to play ball with/against my peers. I do not take this opportunity for granted and I try to remember that every day. Once again, a big thank you for all you do.

Even though I personally disagree with the 1-1 count (I do believe that at the more competitive levels you're all going to see an increase in missile shots hit up the middle, it's inevitable) I respect the process and will move on. Life is too short. Good luck to all the pitchers this year.



Jan. 10, 2018
Omar Khayyam
1352 posts
I don't have a problem with the process—I thought it was well thought through. I am dumbfounded by the low response to the online poll. It takes about two minutes to respond...and the reader is already on the computer! Dave, do you have any data on what the response percentage was a few years ago? Most 60+ that I know are traditionalists and prefer the 0-0 starting count, so the change surprises me (the preference by the 50s did not surprise me).
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Omar ... Last time around (December, 2012), the survey response rate was 29% (this time 23%) ... Here were the percentages in favor of the "1-1" Count both times ... Also, we did not ask the "with/without courtesy foul" question in 2012 ...

MEN supporting "1-1" in 2012 Survey / (2017 % in parentheses)
40+ - 72% / (81%)
50+ - 60% / (74%)
55+ - 57% / (65%)
60+ - 48% / (61%)
65+ - 40% / (54%)
70+ - 36% / (47%)
75+ - 33% / (43%)
80+ - 23% / (38%)

Support for the "1-1" actually increased in all age groups, even net of the five-year aging up factor ... For example, the 2012 60+ group was this year's 65+ group, and they represented essentially the same "break-even" group of players ... The overall preference flipped from about a 10% spread in favor of "0-0" last time to the 12% "1-1" preference converse this time ...

Jan. 10, 2018
ALLPRO
63 posts
Am I missing it or is 70 and above still 0-0?
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Yes ALLPRO, you whiffed the reading comprehension component on that one ... The "1-1" Count for the 2018 Season in SSUSA sanctioned play is only for the 40-Masters (men and women), the 50+ divisions (men and women) and the 55+ and 60+ divisions (men) ... Everyone else remains with the "0-0" Pitch Count starting point ...
Jan. 10, 2018
The Screamer5
Men's 60
67 posts
I can appreciate the opinions that are opposed to this change. Changing something we've done for years is difficult to embrace. Personally, I'm ALL for anything that makes the batter put the ball in play a little sooner and increases the pace of our game. (If I had my way we would start with a 2-2 count or even go to "one pitch," but that's just me.) Regardless of the count, I feel very confident I can hit the ball hard just about anywhere I want and I also like to think I have enough bat control to definitely not hit the ball toward the picture. But if what some of you are predicting is true and we indeed see an increase in picture shots this year, it certainly won't be the fault of SSUSA for going to a 1-1 count. That blame still rests mostly on that batter.
Jan. 10, 2018
Benji4
Men's 55
260 posts
The screamer 5

On my team we use a PITCHER so I'm kinda confused on how you would have bat control not to hit the PICTURE.

Sorry couldn't resist.

I think one of our guys does have a picture of a vegas stripper on his bat though.....
Jan. 10, 2018
yerwombat
Men's 60
74 posts
If you really want to save time drop 1-1 and go to 2 strike your out and 3 balls you walk
Jan. 10, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Pssstt ... yerwombat ... I think ".. 2 strike[s] your out and 3 balls you walk.." is a very good/concise definition of the "1-1" starting pitch count concept ...
Jan. 10, 2018
maskedman
Men's 60
50 posts
Heres an idea.HUSTLE ON AND OFF THE FIELD.But its to late for that now.
Jan. 10, 2018
ffdonnie
Men's 60
133 posts
I applaud SSUSA for this decision. Although I do prefer no extra foul, this is a good start. I'm a fairly aggressive hitter and hate wasting time in the box while the pitcher screws around wasting pitches.

Now we just need to work on; no infield after the first inning/ no warm-up pitches, and no runner after the first pitch to next batter rules(ala Huntsman Games).

And the one pitch, dumb.
Jan. 11, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Want more strikes? More action? Less standing around? Start with a 2 ball count.
Jan. 11, 2018
yerwombat
Men's 60
74 posts
Psst.... Dave....
why not call it what it is
Jan. 11, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Actually, we do ... From Rule Book §6.2 • PITCH COUNT ... "..will be allowed only 3 balls and/or 2 strikes, and all batters will start with a 1-1 ball/strike count.." ... Just makes more sense to use the universally understood shorter phrase "1-1" Count rather than your more lengthy suggestion, which is actually very close to the official definition cited above ...
Jan. 11, 2018
Crusher23
Men's 55
52 posts
There goes OZ again, making more sense. Very refreshing.
Jan. 11, 2018
txnighttrain
110 posts
I played 60 AA at worlds. We only had one game that didn't go 7 innings and that was because of the rule change regarding when time ran out. For those not there, normally a new inning starts when the last out is recorded. They changed this at worlds to the first pitch which wasted 3 to 5 minutes. Our umpire in that game took his sweet time and it ran out before the first pitch of the 6th, so it became the open inning. If it was the it be way we would have played 7. It worked to our advantage, but the team screamed about it and I didn't blame them. Guys will still get their 3 strikes. They will just foul off a pitch. However, a pitcher will have to throw more meat pitches when behind. From my experience as USSSA Umpire expect to see higher scoring games, and more BB. The difference with SSUSA and USSSA is the run limits vs no limits. I have seen team's bat nearly 30 minutes. USSSA also only uses a 50 minute clock and no open inning. (Some use 55 minutes). Also, a survey that has far less than 50 percent participation is not what you should be basing change. If you want to look more like USSSA then get rid of run limits (No more need for buffet inning), shorten the time, no more mat, undefeated bracket team in finals is automatically home. You will be lucky to get 5 innings. Senior ball was made to be an easier paced game but still competitive. When you start down that road you are on, eventually it won't be what it was intented to do. History will just repeat again.
Jan. 11, 2018
DCPete
407 posts
For the record, no one in any of our local leagues, where we've used the 1 - 1 count for the last 30 or so years, has Ever even once suggested, requested, complained or otherwise asked to change to the 0 - 0 count.
Probably not just a coincidence.
Jan. 11, 2018
Jawood
Men's 50
937 posts
Hey txnighttrain, we played 7 games at World's (50+ Major) and none (zero) of them went 7 innings so your point is? I think we'll get to play 7 inning games this year! Maximize the innings in the allotted time we are given to play.
Jan. 12, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
I want to play 7 innings you want to play 7 innings we all want to play 7 innings, heck our league plays 9 innings and I want to play all 9 all the time. It just doesn't work out that way....period.

I don't base the quality of a game by the phrase, 'hey we got 7 innings in'. Sure, it's something to strive for but, when a tournament hangs in the balance I want my managers and players shucks, even my scorekeeper and batboy relaxed, thinking, and making decisions 3 moves ahead of the other team, if this requires playing 6 instead of 7 or 4 instead of 7 I'm okay with that because I know I have put my best thought into the innings I'm playing. Just getting in 7 innings (which may or may not happen anyway) shouldn't be the defining factor of a good game vs a bad game.
Jan. 12, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
One (hopefully) final thought here ... The Rules Committee gave all Senior divisions of play exactly what they asked for on this annual recurring Rules Agenda issue ... Obviously, the preferences expressed by those who took the 60 seconds to vote weren't unanimous ... Some are happy, some not so much so, and another 77% maybe didn't care enough either way to even vote ... After this year's tourney schedule, when it no doubt is the hot conversation topic once again, we'll have the luxury of 20-20 hindsight ... We'll file your majority preferences on it into one of two folders: The one marked "What a Great Idea!" or the one marked "Be Careful What You Ask For, You Might Just Get It!" ... Good Luck and have fun this Season! ...

Jan. 12, 2018
yerwombat
Men's 60
74 posts
Please don't forget the people that didn't get the email and would have liked to vote. If there could be a way one could determine if one has taken all the appropriate steps to ensure participation it would be greatly appreciated.
tim mowery
Jan. 12, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Partial re-print from SSUSA Staff post on December 26, 2017 ...
__________

"You received one of the 22,877 invitations to participate in the survey if you met ALL of the following criteria as of December 8th:

• You are a currently registered SSUSA player, OR were a registered player during the 2016 or 2017 season(s) if your registration hasn't yet been renewed for 2018;
• You have a valid email address on file as a part of your SSUSA registered player page (which is NOT necessarily the same as the email address you may have used when you authenticated your Message Board posting account);
• You have not officially "opted out" of receiving email communications from SSUSA; and
• Your email handling software/device doesn't divert SSUSA emails to a "junk" or similar folder ..."

Jan. 12, 2018
yerwombat
Men's 60
74 posts
So you are saying if I receive the SSUSA news letter and emails concerning trips abroad I should have received the survey email
Jan. 12, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
YES ... Your survey invitation was sent to that same email address ... You must have missed it ...
Jan. 12, 2018
yerwombat
Men's 60
74 posts
Maybe .... Thanks for the feedback
tim
Jan. 12, 2018
hitts
Men's 50
41 posts
I hate one one count. When I pitched in my younger days we had 1-1 the one thing it does is increases middle shots. I quit pitching after having to constantly defend myself from injury. In the senior game guys adjust to rules to win. Middle shots will result in more rules to provide safety, back to the box around the mound automatic out if hit middle. Rule to speed game up Should involve hustling on & off field of play. If teams aren't doing so umpire should call for batter twice and then call strikes after 10 seconds. The game would speed up in the games designed structure. This change results in sending the short front of the plate pitches back at pitcher with 1-1. With regular count most of us layoff that pitch. That's going to change now. Glad I'm no longer a pitcher.
Jan. 12, 2018
Rainmans
42 posts
The spirited debate on the 0-0 vs. 1-1 count has been fascinating to follow. Fortunately or unfortunately depending where you sit, the 40 – 60 year old groups will be using the 1-1 count (one “waste foul” ball) this season. As it Dave Dowell stated, “Be Careful What You Ask For, You Might Just Get It!"

It’s interesting that 23% of the SSUSA population represented the majority (22,877 – I’m sure there are many reasons as to why individuals didn’t vote) of the individuals that signed up for SSUSA. Makes one wonder if the entire population had voted if it would have made any difference in the final outcome of the vote. Statisticians can provide a probability but it there is always uncertainty and we’ll never know because it didn’t happen. Either way, we have to live with the changes or choose not to play in SSUSA.

I agree with OZ40, “Just getting in 7 innings (which may or may not happen anyway) shouldn't be the defining factor of a good game vs a bad game.”

Slow-pitch softball has changed over the decades (originally an indoor game for baseball players looking to maintain their dexterity during the off season) and we’ve all adapted (like it or not) if we wanted to continue to play. Sure, different organizations (e.g., USSSA, ASA, ISF, NSA…) where created to adapt various rules of the game because there were groups of individuals that didn’t like the changes or wanted their own versions of the game. Early on, softball was similar to baseball from when there were (not all inclusive):

• No time limit restrictions
• No limit on the number of hit foul balls
• 7 innings of play
• Stealing of bases was allowed

The game has undergone numerous modifications since its creation in 1887, but it is still one of the most preferred sports games in the country and has developed a following in several countries throughout the world.

Play ball!
Jan. 12, 2018
L.Martin
Men's 50
47 posts
There are batters that will not take the bat off the shoulder until the pitcher throws 2 strikes period regardless if the first 2 strikes where right down the middle, with the 1-1 count with no foul the batter will most likely swing at the first good pitch he sees. We ( Quick Roofing ) played 10 games in Vegas, scoring an average of 55 runs a game between us and our opponent and ever game went the full 7 innings, I believe the no foul is the key, and no there were no more shots hit up the middle that normal. If we want to speed up the game I would start with regulating the number of curtesy runners per inning, that to me seamed like a big waist of time in the game.
Jan. 12, 2018
Rainmans
42 posts
A way to ensure 7 innings, maximize the number of ‘at bats’ per game, get more games played in a day, minimize boredom, reduce injuries would be to (not all inclusive):

• Use a 1-pitch format
• Use an over-the-line format
• Use a 1-pitch over-the-line format
• Use a video game format (reduced travel, equipment costs, and tournament fees)
Jan. 13, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
L. Martin- Really now, what percentage of batters throughout Senior Softball 'will not take the bat off the shoulder until the pitcher throws 2 strikes period'? LESS than 1% I'd bet. So saddle the other 99% to light a fire under the 1%? And while this may not be a factor in the 50+ division the need for curtesy runners is a reality for men 10-20-30 years older than that, so what is SSUSA to do, eliminate a percentage of players from the older age groups because they have either permanent or more frequently the need of a runner? Just retire them from the game? I frequently play ball with older guys, one of whom will be 91 this March and their love of this game is just as strong as the younger players. I firmly believe that the comradery they have out there keeps them going and I say God bless them for still wanting to take the field.
Jan. 13, 2018
mck71
277 posts
L.Martin - First, congrats on winning the 40 Major title in Vegas, truly a great accomplishment.

Now my thoughts: Since Dave already told us that in Vegas, all his division (believe it was you guys, might have been 40 AAA) played 7 innings in ALL game, again, that is AWESOME. My question is to your statement about the "take 2 strikes" guy; based on your scenario, once the guy takes the first strike in a 0 - 0 count, wouldn't he be looking to hit the next good pitch? To me that would be the same as if he had a 1 - 1 count and he's looking to swing at the first good pitch, correct?

As far as your not seeing any "more than usual" middle shots, well you guys played at 1 -1 last year, so if you played the year before (2016) with 0 - 0 and then last year (2017), can you say if the number of middle shots increased in 2017 vs 2016?

And I agree with OZ40 that taking away CR would greatly affect us older guys and the spirit of the game (I still hobble around the bases on my own "most of the time" lol). I believe the rule in place that runner can't run after 1st pitch to batter will help that rule but we should be policing that ourselves by having runners ready (we ALL know who needs runners 90% of the time).

I do know as a pitcher I should be able to answer the question next year at this time as to whether there are more middle shots with 1 -1 vs 0 - 0, stay tuned!!! :-)

Until then, good luck to all in 2018, can't wait to get out on the field (and dodge some balls!)

Stay healthy my friends...
Jan. 14, 2018
L.Martin
Men's 50
47 posts
yes we have played for several years now and no I didn't see anymore shots up the middle this year with the 1-1 count than I have in the past with 0-0 count. This past year with the 1-1 count NO foul the pitch count rarely went to 4 pitches per at bat in our games, generally they and us where swinging at the 2nd and sometime 3rd pitch compared to the 50s I played the week before where the pitch count was almost always 5/6 pitches. I know that don't sound like much but it does add up, like I said in my games I seen more time waited on curtesy runner exchanges. I didn't mean take away the CR all together, maybe limit it to 2 runners per inning or something of that nature.
Jan. 14, 2018
CurtfromKY
62 posts
I apparently was one of the few that never saw an email addressing this topic. But then again I do not check my email daily or do I always check my many junk emails received. Regardless, my vote was not included. Just like most of you, I have played under both 0-0 and 1-1 counts and enjoy the 0-0 better. But to say it speeds up a game and not consider all the other factors would be amiss. I believe we all play under the same "time limit" no matter how many innings played. If you play all 7 innings in that time, should we get more innings as a bonus until time is over?? Also, as we grow older and slower, most do not RUN off the field between innings as we used to. How much game time does that cost per game? Swapping runners, injured players, batters slow to the plate, etc. all reduce playing time that we relish so dearly. Now, my comments do not apply to many of you that still play like you are 30, but for the rest 1-1 has not been "proven" as a game changer. Hopefully, the next time an important subject like this is brought up, it will be better advertised on the website as well as sent by email. I do not check this site daily as some do which is my fault. Good luck in 2018
Jan. 14, 2018
chico senior
Men's 60
132 posts
Things that would speed up the game:
A. Getting on and off field quicker
B. Fewer or no warm up pitches after 1st inning
C. No infield ball after 1st inning
D. Huntsman games courtesy runner rule
E. Catcher not letting balls get past them
F. Fewer errors and walks
G. On deck batters ready to hit
H. No throwing ball around infield after every out
I. Umpires ready to go each innng

All of the above and probably many others ideas would definitely help play more innings in the allotted time. But, as was proven at Vegas over a large number of games played n the 40 Division, the 1-1 count speeds up the game. To say otherwise is to have your head in the sand.

I just attended the NCSSA general meeting and the idea of the 1-1 count was proposed and was voted down because there is a small group of guys who run that organization that are unwilling to change and more likely it is because they play in the older divisions (70 and up) and it was proven in the SSUSA surveythat the older age groups are against most any change.

Also, CurtfromKy, you said you wanted to be contacted by email so that you could vote - they did contact you by email and you choose not to read your email and respond. That’s on you - not SSUSA.

Jan. 14, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
OK, one more comment! ... chico senior ... The SSUSA Rules Committee has done its part for the "association initiative" in structuring exactly what the majority wanted, by age group, in the "1-1 count" issue ... This is also the first time for SSUSA that there has been a significant playing rule variance based on age group, since we have the same age determined bias about the "1-1 count" as is present in NCSSA ... You've provided an excellent list of the "player initiatives" to be employed to assist in maximizing innings played ... Now it's on the players/teams to carry their side of the deal ... Good luck this Season to all!

Jan. 14, 2018
chico senior
Men's 60
132 posts
Dave - I agree with you100%. I just wish the old guys running NCSSA would do what SSUSA did and poll the members. By the way, I am not a 40 year old, I am 68 and my entire point is to come up with ways to play as many innings as possible in the allotted time. Of all the things I mentioned above the easiest one to control is moving to a 1-1 count. It is my feeling that the majority of the NCSSA players (there is something like 100 teams) would welcome the change. Even if all of them did not agree they could do what SSUSA has done and at least try it with the young groups on a trial basis.
Jan. 15, 2018
Jawood
Men's 50
937 posts
Well said, chico senior (and Dave, of course!) I'm sure some will continue to argue the issue!
Jan. 15, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Chico Sr. If everyone played by your A thru I suggestions above we wouldn't need to monkey with the count. I would add "J" to that list--pitch more strikes--
Jan. 15, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
But historically the players collectively haven't, OZ40 ... Their motivation should be there now to avoid a future Rules Committee consideration of the only remaining "association initiative" (as you adroitly mentioned in post #5 of this thread), the NO Courtesy Foul option ... That one failed last week only because the Committee Chair broke a deadlocked 6-6 Committee vote to go that way ...
Jan. 15, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Understood Dave, that was my contention all along that the key to getting in 7 innings rests with the ball players. Now they expect the associations to come up with ideas to give them a full 7 innings because they won't change their habits.
Jan. 15, 2018
hitts
Men's 50
41 posts
I need to get on here more often. Rule change this batter will adjust. I hope it's mandatory for mask & other gear. If you know me, don't leave a pitch on front edge of plate. Game on line. It's a middle shot! Sorry.
Jan. 16, 2018
r4pitch
85 posts
To OZ40 as a pitcher 0-0 count my 1st 2 pitches are to maybe just hit a edge ..With 1-1 it makes the hitter and pitcher more on there game...
Jan. 16, 2018
OZ40
549 posts
Key word there in your statement: "maybe". On the rare occasion when I do pitch my first pitch is more often than not on the mat. Here it is hit it, it's not right down main street but it contacts the mat. As stated above, if we as an association to the man took individual responsibility to police ourselves we could have both, the 0-0 and a larger likelihood of playing 7. The only time you see real hustle now is when the manager is hollering "hurry up, before he calls the game on time".
Jan. 16, 2018
Don5
Men's 65
63 posts
Dave, I'm a little disappointed that the largest responding group in the poll (65's) with 999 responses had 54% wanting some form of 1-1, yet they remain in the 0-0 count.
I've been a proponent for 1-1 and have had success with it in the Stanislaus Senior Softball Association,(34 teams) however, the SSSA Board of Directors at the last meeting voted to stay with 0-0 with a 10-4 vote, for the 2018 season, ignoring the results of our own study, (95% of games in study went 7 innings.)
I'm also on the NCSSA Board of Directors and the 1-1 issue was brought up for vote and did not pass. At our yearly General Meeting managers vote on rule changes, not the Board of Directors as Chico Senior inferred. Had there been a lot of Managers of the younger teams there, it probably would have passed. I'm all for more action and getting more inning's in, relying on players to hurry to their defensive positions is probably not going to happen nor expecting the catcher to act like a shortstop.

Don Angle,
President, SSSA
Director, NCSSA
Manager, Animals 65
Jan. 16, 2018
chico senior
Men's 60
132 posts
Don5 - You are correct - it was voted on by all the managers that attended the meeting. The problem was that I was probably the youngest manager at the meeting and I am 68. We certainly did not get a good cross section of all the teams in NCSSA, especially the younger teams. A simple email sent to all managers asking their options would, in my mind, have been much more accurate. I know - all they had to do was attend the meeting to vote. We could easily implement on a trial basis in groups 0-6 the 1-1 count. If there was a 65 or older team in a bracket at any given tournament give them the option for their games. Simple! No extra work. Seven inning games more likely. What are the negatives of trying it? Obviously, NCSSA follows very closely what SSUSA does - why not this?
Jan. 16, 2018
Don5
Men's 65
63 posts
Tim, There has been a great deal of encouragement towards the younger teams to participate in the meeting. Most younger teams believe they don't really have a say in what's going on and as long as they don't show up and vote, the older managers will get their way. NCSSA is unique because of the way rules are made and changed, directly by the managers. You are correct, NCSSA patterns their rules based on SSUSA rules. The NCSSA Board does present the new rule changes to the General Meeting and explains how they would affect NCSSA and then a motion has to be made to change the rule, if there is no motion then nothing changes. There is a great reluctance for the older guys not to play 1-1 and the Board is filled with guys over 65. I do not see the 1-1 count being used for awhile, not until the age demographics change at our Meeting and that happens only once each year in December.
Now that SSUSA has implemented the 1-1 on a trial basis, any one of our Tournament Directors can indicate that the 1-1 count will be used as long as it's specified on their Tourney Flyer. Then it's the choice of the Teams to enter that tournament or not.
Don Angle
Jan. 16, 2018
chico senior
Men's 60
132 posts
Don - I understand what you are saying. I don’t know why the younger managers are not showing up to the general meeting but I still feel they deserve to be heard. You said it yourself - the board is made up of guys over 65 and the managers that show up are of the same age so it is no wonder they are going to push for rule changes that are going to best benefit them. That is not to say though that the younger guys shouldn’t also have a say. In my mind it just would not be that hard to poll all managers on rule changes. I felt like when I suggested we look into the change at the general meeting the response of “We have discussed this in the past and don’t want it and there is no proof that a 1-1 count has not been proven to save any time” was ridiculous. It has been proven multiple times that it does save time.
Jan. 16, 2018
Don5
Men's 65
63 posts
Tim, the 1-1 count does not really save time, but it does allow for more "playing" time! Action is quicker and overall play is faster.
What benefits the older guys are "NO Changes", they seem to be happy with status quo.
As a member of the Board I firmly believe that the Board members have the greatest interest in improving NCSSA and do not initiate change for their own benefit. Gee Tim, next year you could be on the Board.
More to come on this after tomorrow's board meeting, hopefully.
Jan. 17, 2018
NYGNYY
182 posts
Many opinions continue to be discussed be it increased playing time, speed of the game, action and things that make me laugh at age 63. I'm happy to just be out there playing at any speed. I am not sure playing 6 inning's or 7 inning's has an impact on anything other then if you bat 12th and you missed an at bat during the 6 inning game instead of going 7 innings. Really don't care one way or the other. This was brought on by this organizational leadership and not the overall participants especially at the 60+ level. No one that I have spoken to ever mentioned a 1-1 count ever when playing in St. George, Vegas, Reno, So Cal, Rocky Mtn, Vegas and Phx...ever. And I never heard if we played 7 instead of 6 we would have won...ever. Now the next fun topic should be covering the term trail basis---who on God's green earth is going to make that call...the committee or another survey...OMG can't wait. Done on the topic. Good luck & health in 2018.
Jan. 17, 2018
DaveDowell
Men's 70
3827 posts
Honest, I REALLY was going to check out on this typing practice exercise about an issue that's a moot point for about another 10 months ... But here goes, one last time ...

Don5 ... The polling that was done was a "Member Preference Survey" and not a binding vote for implementation ... The 65+ Men (and the 55+ women) were essentially the "break-even" ages where there was not a significant preference margin of at least 22% for the "1-1" count ... The 65+ division 53.5%-46.5% vote in favor would have required less than 4% of the votes to go the other way for a reversal of choice, and that was not enough of a "mandate" for change ... The break falling at 65+ on the age grid was also helpful in terms of how our TOC Qualifier and Championship events are structured ... By not extending the "1-1" count into the 65+ division at this time, it eliminates potential crossover games between 65+ and 70+ teams playing under different starting pitch counts ...

NY˛ ... It's possible nobody in the 60+ talked to you about the "1-1" at those locations, but 61% of the respondents to the member preference survey "talked" to us about it and were in support ... Also, please re-read the Special Meeting Minutes carefully ... The only thing we enacted that had a TRIAL basis component is the issue of the with/without the courtesy foul ... The "1-1" count is likely here to stay for the forseeable future since 12 of the 13 members cast at least one vote in that direction last week ... The Rules Committee will make that determination later this year ... It sort of has to since we received only TWO properly submitted opinions on it over the last month ... Message Board commentary, regardless of the band-width consumed, is ignored for purposes of Rules Committee debate ...

Have fun!

Jan. 17, 2018
chico senior
Men's 60
132 posts
Don - I disagree with you that it doesn’t save time but that is not really important to me. I think the vast majority of players would like to play a 7 inning game. Obviously looking at what SSUSA did in Vegas in my mind proves that using 1-1 counts greatly improved the chances of playing 7 innings. In fact, every single game that was played in the 40’s went at least 7 innings. I’m just a little disappointed that NCSSA doesn’t look a little bigger sample size to determine what affects all ages, not just the older groups.
Jan. 17, 2018
tg69
387 posts
drummer is about to be tired of this extended drum roll
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
Email: info@SeniorSoftball.com
Phone: (916) 326-5303
Fax: (916) 326-5304
9823 Old Winery Place, Suite 12
Sacramento, CA 95827
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