Pitching distance for HS (in Ohio)

[default]

they need to move the fences back or this game will be dead in 10 years some schools are at 200 and that is just too close.

 

[default]

The game is great the way it is. From my experience, the more they tamper with it, the worse it is. Rarely, in my opinion, do these changes make the game better. They did the same thing with volleyball, rally scoring, no double hit on the first ball over, they don't call lifts anymore or are very ***. They ruined the game. The heroic come backs from 12-0 are a thing of the past with the rally scoring. If it aint broke don't fix it!!!!!!!

 

[default]

OP ... what is your basis for saying the fences need to be moved back?

I just checked and in my DD's 40 college games this spring where 200' fences are the norm, there were a total of 27 home runs (both teams). Is less than one a game too many? My DD is a pitcher herself and she gave up a total of 3 in 185 innings of pitching, so that is one about every 9 games. In Ohio State games this year, there have been 67 in 45 games which is about 1.5 per game between the two teams.

I personally would like to see the bats a little less "hot" for safety reasons primarily.

 

[default]

IMO, in college, hitting seems to be catching up with pitching. The 90's saw a lot of 1-0 and 2-1 games due to dominant pitching. The pitching is still great, if not even better, but there has been a paradigm shift about hitting. Guys (like our Howard Carrier:yahoo who have dedicated an immense amount of their time to studying the "hows and whys" of hitting, and applied real-world principles of training that REALLY WORK, are now starting to make an impact. Gone are the days where one pitcher can utterly dominate a whole league.

IMO, today's pitchers are far more challenged due to an expanded hitting zone created by better trained hitters. I've heard it from my OWN DD - "How the heck did she hit that pitch?? It was under her chin!!!".

IMO, the safety for the pitcher is not so much about the pitching distance; a higher degree of safety comes from learning to NOT throw flat pitches squarely over the plate. Another thing - FORGET the strike zone. College clutch hitters can "golf" what should have been a low outside "ball" over the right field fence. Knowing a hitter's weaknesses (from book or earlier at-bats) becomes ever more important in college.

 

[default]

OP you are right. High School is not College. The minimum distance in high school is 180.
That is why you see so many HR's when you read the sport section in the paper.

 

[default]

43 ft. makes sense for college where the vast majority of pitchers are very good, but look at the high school pitching leaders for strikeouts in your local paper. There will be a handful in each area who average 10+ K's per game, but the majority of high school pitchers are already relying on their defense from 40 ft.

 

[default]

I am not sure about the 180' minimum in high school but there is no doubt there are some schools with smaller fields, as well as some schools with no fences. Sorry, but I have attended multiple high school and college games each of the past 2 years, and I don't think there are too many home runs, and I believe the 43' will be an adjustment, but good for the high school game in the long run.

 

[default]

I'm reading today paper. New high school record was set last night for HR's in a single season .and almost every paper and game I have went to this year, I'm watching HR's. We play in a sectional this weekend and the outfield fence is 180 feet.. Not talked to a high school coach that supports the 43'. but we understand why the college coaches pushed it. I can't see how scoring more runs than I'm reading in today's paper is good for the game, read the team scores above posted daily. 23 games and 175 runs scored for 7.6 runs per game. Lack of offense? One point overlooked in this decision. Lights. Talking to our AD, we do not feel we will be able to finish many JV games. Example. We played 17 games and 291 runs have been scored for an average of 17.1 runs a game. How is 43 feet going to help them?

 

[default]

the pitchers that can throw a ball with movment, i think will be king at 43ft, the pitchers that have just speed will get shelled at 43ft.


the game is now more than ever a 9 person team, as the past was all about pitching. In years gone by how many teams did you see were the team was not very good but the pitcher was so dominating that the team always won...I hated seeing the game when pitchers were getting mid to high teens in strike outs during a game....hitting a ball over a 200ft fence has never been hard if the batter new the right way to swing a bat, today more of these batters are doing just that... now the pitcher will have to adapt and learn movement is more important than raw speed..

 

[default]

the pitchers that can throw a ball with movment, i think will be king at 43ft, the pitchers that have just speed will get shelled at 43ft.


the game is now more than ever a 9 person team, as the past was all about pitching. In years gone by how many teams did you see were the team was not very good but the pitcher was so dominating that the team always won...I hated seeing the game when pitchers were getting mid to high teens in strike outs during a game....hitting a ball over a 200ft fence has never been hard if the batter new the right way to swing a bat, today more of these batters are doing just that... now the pitcher will have to adapt and learn movement is more important than raw speed..

I think the short fences are important to the game, not for the glory of hitting more homers, but to keep kids that swing away in the game. Dominating pitching already created a shift where 50% of the offense being played against a great pitcher was the short game. If we don't want the game to become 100% a track meet where speed is all that matters and batting technique is irrelevant, coach just wants fast players that can bunt/drag/slap(yes I know there is technique to those skills as well). IMO if you moved the fences back to 280-300 you would be encouraging more short game which doesn't need further encouragement. I like the short game's role in our sport right now, but wouldn't want to see it become even more prevalent. There is something special about the duel between a batter and the pitcher and bunting a ball and hoping to leg it out seems like a copout at times. If it's not done as a sacrifice, but as an offensive strategy, your basically saying I like my odds of beating out a bunt over my odds of standing in and hitting the ball. In this sport, very often that is an accurate assessment of your odds, but I wouldn't want to see a game that is 100% bunts/slaps and I think you would push away great players with average foot speed. Right now there is still room for players of average foot speed, because if you put the ball over the fence, it doesn't matter how fast you run.

 

[default]

I think the short fences are important to the game, not for the glory of hitting more homers, but to keep kids that swing away in the game. Dominating pitching already created a shift where 50% of the offense being played against a great pitcher was the short game. If we don't want the game to become 100% a track meet where speed is all that matters and batting technique is irrelevant, coach just wants fast players that can bunt/drag/slap(yes I know there is technique to those skills as well). IMO if you moved the fences back to 280-300 you would be encouraging more short game which doesn't need further encouragement. I like the short game's role in our sport right now, but wouldn't want to see it become even more prevalent. There is something special about the duel between a batter and the pitcher and bunting a ball and hoping to leg it out seems like a copout at times. If it's not done as a sacrifice, but as an offensive strategy, your basically saying I like my odds of beating out a bunt over my odds of standing in and hitting the ball. In this sport, very often that is an accurate assessment of your odds, but I wouldn't want to see a game that is 100% bunts/slaps and I think you would push away great players with average foot speed. Right now there is still room for players of average foot speed, because if you put the ball over the fence, it doesn't matter how fast you run.

Interesting points, but also don't forget the half-swing Texas league bloops, opposite field hitting skills, etc. Not bunts, slaps or home runs - but important parts of hitting strategy. The higher you go in this game, the more "stuff" you need in your offensive arsenal. You don't see those skills too much at the high school level, but think of the options a coach would have IF you had 3 or 4 kids who had advanced hitting skills!

IMO, the fences for high school are just fine at 200'. A few years at 43' for pitching and everyone will forget the argument about 40' vs 43'. They're "big girls" in high school, and will make the transition just fine.

 

[default]

I think one of the things that happens with more girls able to hit the ball deep is that forces the OF to play deep, thus opening up more green for those softliners and Texas leaguers. We might even see the end of sending a shot to right field, only to see the right fielder throw out the batter at 1st. BTW, in my dd's Middle School season, we saw a batter hit two shots over the fence. Awesome hits.

 

[default]

43 ft. makes sense for college where the vast majority of pitchers are very good, but look at the high school pitching leaders for strikeouts in your local paper. There will be a handful in each area who average 10+ K's per game, but the majority of high school pitchers are already relying on their defense from 40 ft.

I totally agree. All moving the pitchers back to 43' in HS is going to do is leave alot of teams with no effective pitching. All colleges from D1 down to D3 pitching rosters constist of pitchers that were successful #1's on their respective HS teams. I would say that the days of being an effective 52 to 54mph #2 in HS is over. But on the flip side it should make the pitchers take their off season training a little more serious.