High strike

[maven]

I'm saying the picture on the right DOES define the zone.

I don't think you mean this. The box is 2-dimensional, but the zone is 3-dimensional.

[Thunderheads]

 

I'm saying the picture on the right DOES define the zone.

I don't think you mean this. The box is 2-dimensional, but the zone is 3-dimensional.

 

and so it a computer screen

[LMSANS]

 

I'm saying the picture on the right DOES define the zone.

I don't think you mean this. The box is 2-dimensional, but the zone is 3-dimensional.

 

I meant it in the same context that Fittske posted the original. 

[maven]

 

 

I'm saying the picture on the right DOES define the zone.

I don't think you mean this. The box is 2-dimensional, but the zone is 3-dimensional.

 

I meant it in the same context that Fittske posted the original. 

 

 

OK, I can buy that.

 

My problem with these things is that guys get so tied to straight edges that their zones end up smaller than they ought to be.

 

We can be consistent on the edges without their being straight.

[LMSANS]

 

 

 

I'm saying the picture on the right DOES define the zone.

I don't think you mean this. The box is 2-dimensional, but the zone is 3-dimensional.

 

I meant it in the same context that Fittske posted the original. 

 

 

OK, I can buy that.

 

My problem with these things is that guys get so tied to straight edges that their zones end up smaller than they ought to be.

 

We can be consistent on the edges without their being straight.

 

I agree.  

[bluejerred]

As a rookie, I get yelled at anyways - however, I find that it's a lot more fun to get yelled at for calling strikes than for calling balls.  I've had people in the crowd get to the point of laughing sometimes because my zone was so big.  Generally, what has worked for me is I call the borderlines strikes as far as I can in the early innings and go from there.  By then, the players start to swing and the pitchers are relaxed because they are getting strikes.  Helps move things along.

[T-Rav]

I hate to revive an old thread but this thread is full of great information on the strike zone. My question is this: is it it appropriate when using the eyes at the top of the zone setup to have your head height on smaller batters still at the top of the zone even though it may be lower than the catchers head?

[BuckeyeMike]

We can, but then we run the risk of missing the outside corner pitches, b/c our field of vision is blocked by the catcher's head.   A much better option is to keep your head where it's supposed to be, track the ball all the way in, and "call the glove".  

[Tksjewelry]

I hate to revive an old thread but this thread is full of great information on the strike zone. My question is this: is it it appropriate when using the eyes at the top of the zone setup to have your head height on smaller batters still at the top of the zone even though it may be lower than the catchers head?

If you're lower than the catchers head, how are you going to track the ball?

[Richvee]

 

I hate to revive an old thread but this thread is full of great information on the strike zone. My question is this: is it it appropriate when using the eyes at the top of the zone setup to have your head height on smaller batters still at the top of the zone even though it may be lower than the catchers head?

If you're lower than the catchers head, how are you going to track the ball?

 

Sometimes there's a need to get lower. When you're getting squeezed by F2 and the batter, some advocate getting lower, and the way you get lower and still get a look at the outside corner is to get closer to F2. It's tough to pick up the ball and track it out of F1's hand from there, but the ball will appear. I've been working on doing this when getting squeezed as opposed to going "up and back", and I like the results so far. 

[Tksjewelry]

I hate to revive an old thread but this thread is full of great information on the strike zone. My question is this: is it it appropriate when using the eyes at the top of the zone setup to have your head height on smaller batters still at the top of the zone even though it may be lower than the catchers head?

If you're lower than the catchers head, how are you going to track the ball?

Sometimes there's a need to get lower. When you're getting squeezed by F2 and the batter, some advocate getting lower, and the way you get lower and still get a look at the outside corner is to get closer to F2. It's tough to pick up the ball and track it out of F1's hand from there, but the ball will appear. I've been working on doing this when getting squeezed as opposed to going "up and back", and I like the results so far.

What do you mean by "squeezed"? Like crowding the plate?

[Richvee]

Right. Batter crowds the plate while F2 sets up for an inside pitch. 

[Kevin_K]

I agree with @Richvee.

 

Recently, instructors I have worked with (D1, AA, AAA, & MLB) have been teaching down and in rather than up and back when getting squeezed. I was doing some cage work with batter cutouts and worked on my mechanics when the batter was squeezing the slot. By widening my stance, getting more in the slot, and having my eyes under the batter's elbow, I got a great look at the entire pitch.Initially it was uncomfortable because it was so different from what I was accustomed to, but as the night progressed, it became more comfortable.

 

The biggest concern I might have is that I might not be able to clear the catcher if he needs to move quickly for the ball on an inside pitch in the dirt.

 

I had used up and back, but it seems that down and in is better when considering tracking and personal safety.

[Recontra]

T-Rav, thanks for resurrecting the thread--awesome stuff.

 

Also, glad to see some upper level clinics and umpires here voicing approval of "down or down and in" when squeezed, instead of "up and back." I searched to no avail, but somebody last spring or summer posted a photo of a MLB umpire actually down on one knee when squeezed--eye opener for me--I'd never go down to a knee--but after I saw that photo, I did experiment last season with going down and even down and in when squeezed, and it worked great.

 

Up and back sometimes results in me not being able to see the release point, OR I lose the ball as it crosses in front of the batter, praying I'll be able to pick it up again before somebody asks, "Was that a ball or a strike, Blue?"  I once called a pitch when really jammed after going up and back (as I had been instructed to do) based solely upon where the catcher caught it. I honestly never saw the pitch--just the catcher's mitt when it was caught.  I thought that was complete and utter horse$hit (even if I got the pitch right based upon nobody chipping).  Down or even down and in is a much better visual compromise--sure you might lose sight of the outside edge catch, but you'll see more of the whole pitch.  For me, the mental pain of the extreme anxiety I've felt in not being able to track a pitch is much worse than any brief physical pain I've ever felt after being hit by a pitch because I wasn't in the ideal slot position.  Some experienced umpire once posted here, "do what you got to do to see the pitch."  I took that to heart last season, and have never looked back.  As one of my kids might say, "Up and back is for sucks!!"

 

PS-don't forget to tip your head up a bit if you're going to go down--your face may naturally tilt toward the ground a bit exposing the top of your head slightly--skid marks on the top of the head can hurt for days. And I know, I've already heard it--if you use proper mechanics, you'll never get hit on the top of the head or the throat--just saying--I wear a throat guard because I occasionally might deviate from the standard, so be conscious of a forward head tilt if you do go down when jammed.

 

And by "in" I mean towards the batter. If I set up traditionally in a jammed narrow slot, sometimes by dropping down (head below the top of the catcher's helmet), a visual slot opens up, and you can actually move toward the batter--"in."

[Tksjewelry]

If I take a knee behind a pitcher older than 10, I'm missing the pitch, the catch, the swing, and most of the field. Lol. I'm only 5' (and a 1/4").

I'll try this out in some early scrimmage games and see how it works.

[Recontra]

I don't mean to totally trash "up and back," because it still works for me most of the time for youth ball or even high school games with shorter batters, as long as I can basically see over the top of the batter.  But you get a big senior jamming the plate and a big catcher setting up inside--that's a nightmare of a slotless experience that up and back sometimes can't improve and can even make worse.  Another thing I picked up along the same lines, is if I'm going to give a distance on the outside of the plate for a strike, I endeavor to give almost the same distance inside.  Some guys say they won't take the zone inside, but will give a ball to 1.5 outside. My limited experience has taught me that if you only go outside, by the 3rd inning the batters will have figured it out, they'll all be crowding the plate, and you'll find yourself working a "slotless" game and practicing your "I'm jammed" mechanics on almost every pitch.  Just my limited experience.

[johnnyg08]

I don't mean to totally trash "up and back," because it still works for me most of the time for youth ball or even high school games with shorter batters, as long as I can basically see over the top of the batter.  But you get a big senior jamming the plate and a big catcher setting up inside--that's a nightmare of a slotless experience.  Another thing I picked up along the same lines, is if I'm going to give a distance on the outside of the plate for a strike, I endeavor to give almost the same distance inside.  Some guys say they won't take the zone inside, but will give a ball to 1.5 outside. My limited experience has taught me that if you only go outside, by the 3rd inning the batters will have figured it out, they'll all be crowding the plate, and you'll find yourself working a "slotless" game and practicing your "I'm jammed" mechanics on almost every pitch.  Just my limited experience.

 

The F2 will earn the inside pitch for his pitcher.  Often times that's all you will have when you lose your slot.  

 

It what it is...but a good catcher will get those for you.  

[Jimurray]

T-Rav, thanks for resurrecting the thread--awesome stuff.

 

Also, glad to see some upper level clinics and umpires here voicing approval of "down or down and in" when squeezed, instead of "up and back." I searched to no avail, but somebody last spring or summer posted a photo of a MLB umpire actually down on one knee when squeezed--eye opener for me--I'd never go down to a knee--but after I saw that photo, I did experiment last season with going down and even down and in when squeezed, and it worked great.

 

Up and back sometimes results in me not being able to see the release point, OR I lose the ball as it crosses in front of the batter, praying I'll be able to pick it up again before somebody asks, "Was that a ball or a strike, Blue?"  I once called a pitch when really jammed after going up and back (as I had been instructed to do) based solely upon where the catcher caught it. I honestly never saw the pitch--just the catcher's mitt when it was caught.  I thought that was complete and utter horse$hit (even if I got the pitch right based upon nobody chipping).  Down or even down and in is a much better visual compromise--sure you might lose sight of the outside edge catch, but you'll see more of the whole pitch.  For me, the mental pain of the extreme anxiety I've felt in not being able to track a pitch is much worse than any brief physical pain I've ever felt after being hit by a pitch because I wasn't in the ideal slot position.  Some experienced umpire once posted here, "do what you got to do to see the pitch."  I took that to heart last season, and have never looked back.  As one of my kids might say, "Up and back is for sucks!!"

 

PS-don't forget to tip your head up a bit if you're going to go down--your face may naturally tilt toward the ground a bit exposing the top of your head slightly--skid marks on the top of the head can hurt for days. And I know, I've already heard it--if you use proper mechanics, you'll never get hit on the top of the head or the throat--just saying--I wear a throat guard because I occasionally might deviate from the standard, so be conscious of a forward head tilt if you do go down when jammed.

 

And by "in" I mean towards the batter. If I set up traditionally in a jammed narrow slot, sometimes by dropping down (head below the top of the catcher's helmet), a visual slot opens up, and you can actually move toward the batter--"in."

I've heard this called as the "super slot". You might not get the release point but you will get the catch. Tough.

[TheRockawayKid]

I'll never forget this: There's one time that I was in the super slot. Batter is crowding the plate, and the catcher is inside, so my head is basically above the catcher's shoulder and below the batter's. Curve ball comes in, and I don't even see it until it's over the plate. But, I see it gets all the plate, and gets to the glove. Call it a strike. No complaints.
 

As to some tips, I'd definitely echo the suggestion from page 1 about the catcher. When in the field, look at where the catcher is. More often than not, you'll see that catcher's knees are right about where the batter's knees are, and the top of the head (or for a taller catcher, his eyeballs) are at the top of the zone. So if he darts up, that's too high for me. Below the knee is too low. Turned glove is an automatic ball for upper levels. 

 

Is this a perfect setup? No, I don't think so. But it's close enough that you're fine, until you get to a college level. Hopefully, if you get to the college level, it means that you're able enough to get the zone down on the batter and timing that you don't have to worry too much about it. 

[JonnyCat]

FWIW. TUS taught us to just go up when the slot is being squeezed. You take a slight step with your non-slot foot towards your slot foot to bring your legs more together. That will keep you in the same position, but just elevates your stance slightly. They did not teach moving back.

[kanedog]

I just went to a clinic with 4 current AAA umpires and they all taught down and in opposed to up and back. The higher you go the greater likelihood for an injury or concussion. You probably will not see the release but you will see the catch. Also, if the catcher is that tight inside, if it's not inside, it's not a strike.

[johnnyg08]

I just went to a clinic with 4 current AAA umpires and they all taught down and in opposed to up and back. The higher you go the greater likelihood for an injury or concussion. You probably will not see the release but you will see the catch. Also, if the catcher is that tight inside, if it's not inside, it's not a strike.

I also got some instructors to tell me at one of Jim Evans' camps (off the record) that they move down and in to get a look.

I think with the split from qualified teachers that you have to do what you feel is most comfortable, safe, and help you get the pitch correct.

If up and back helps you stay safe and get pitches right then do that.

If down and in helps you stay safe and get pitches right then do that.

If your evaluator tells you to do one or the other, do what your evaluator tells you to do.

[JonnyCat]

 

I just went to a clinic with 4 current AAA umpires and they all taught down and in opposed to up and back. The higher you go the greater likelihood for an injury or concussion. You probably will not see the release but you will see the catch. Also, if the catcher is that tight inside, if it's not inside, it's not a strike.

I also got some instructors to tell me at one of Jim Evans' camps (off the record) that they move down and in to get a look.

I think with the split from qualified teachers that you have to do what you feel is most comfortable, safe, and help you get the pitch correct.

If up and back helps you stay safe and get pitches right then do that.

If down and in helps you stay safe and get pitches right then do that.

If your evaluator tells you to do one or the other, do what your evaluators tells you to do.

 

Good advice. I've actually done both ways. Sometimes up works and other times down. I found that down is better sometimes when the batters arms obstructs your view of the pitcher.

[Mr Ump]

I simply place my eyes at the top of the zone. As I track the ball if I have to move my upwards then it is a ball. If I lower my eyes then it is a strike. If right at my eyes it is borderline and I make a judgement based on time of game, score, better, etc. never had an issue with this method.

[bam]

I simply place my eyes at the top of the zone. As I track the ball if I have to move my upwards then it is a ball. If I lower my eyes then it is a strike. If right at my eyes it is borderline and I make a judgement based on time of game, score, better, etc. never had an issue with this method.

Yes, but as been mentioned, when you've gota batter. Crowding the plate and a catcher getting inside, setting up at the top of the zone isn't really an option.

Get down and in.

Call the glove, call the glove, call the glove