Why do little league tv broadcasts show the converted speed of pitches when it never really holds true?
485964
what they are doing calculating the speed of a mlb pitch based on the little league dimensions. little league pitchers only throw from 45 feet as opposed to 60.5 feet of the mlb. 74mph from 45 feet is equivalent to 99mph from 60.5 feet. it in no way implies that he throws 99mph. what they want you to see is that if this were a mlb game this is how fast the pitcher would be throwing in comparison. the reaction time is the same for both batters .42 sec
114415
Bad calls are part of the game.  The same thing applies to great plays.  They add the "human" element to the game that can make it more intersting.  We have the advantage of seeing a play several times from many angles but umps and refs see only one angle.  \n\nI umpire little league and can admit i make bad calls but i dont do it intentionally.  I usually feel worse when i think about a controversial call and made the wrong one.  After all most of the kids are trying hard and i screw it up for them.  Trust me there is no worse feeling in the world except making it on a stage like the super bowl.
1139455
It is Networks and it is the Delay. It has nothing to do with Cable. If you are using a Sunday Ticket type broadcast maybe BUT the games are still carried on NETWORK TV. It doesn't matter if they are on Cable or no Cable it is NETWORK on Fox and CBS. They do add the delay for live broadcast and it DOES have to do with the FCC. The NETWORK stations have to follow FCC Decency rules and use the delay to bleep anything they need to bleep.
340447
Is this a trick baseball question in disguise?
859090
I think you are going to find it very hard to find a machine that will throw a curve.\nMost of the machines just throw the ball at certain velocities, the mechanism for it to throw a curve would be pretty complicated.
277205
In little league you only need one pitch.  That is a fastball.  Forget about the ohters.  The real art to being a successful little league pitcher is to throw strikes.  If you can throw 2 strikes out of every 3 pitches then you will do great.
214335
Yeah, it was a bad call, a very bad call in the eighth inning.  Even Stevie Wonder would have been able to see that.  This is another example why baseball needs instant replay, that call wouldn't have been reversed if there had been replay.  Japan should boycott.
749375
You mean at the same rate - 32.2 feet per second per second.\n\nGravity pulls on all matter at the same rate. If you drop a bowling ball taped to a baseball, they will fall at the same rate. But it is not because the bowling ball is pulling on the baseball, it is because gravity is pulling on both of them. If the tape breaks gravity will still be pulling on both of them at the same rate. They will hit the ground at the same speed, however, they will hit with different forces. Because Force = mass x acceleration. The acceleration is the same for both of them. But the mass of the bowling ball is larger than the mass of the baseball, so it will hit the ground with more force.
799180
If your highschool has a team they prob. have one or go to a sports camp or batting cage that gives leasons like All Star batting cage or Frozen Ropes.  They will have speedometers. There is also a ball that telles you how fast you throw it when you throw it.  There is a link in my scources if you want to see it.  Also there is a bucket that has one on it so  when it goes over it tells you its speed.  Or you can always calculated it with your physics formulas! Haha.
291550
It's a thinking man's game.  There is a lot of strategy.  Yes, it can be boring to watch at times, but there is so many things going on in the game that the casual viewer misses.  I watch the "game within the game".  For example, when there is a good base stealer on base and a pitcher tries to keep him close to the base.  Baseball is also a numbers game.  Baseball is the best game for satistics.  It is also nice to compare players and eras.
1143093
First off whoever believes that baseball is harder because they've played it don't know what they're talking about.  They have to play BOTH sports to answer this question.  I have not.  I've only played fast pitch softball.  \n\nMy opinion though is that I think it varies in certain areas.  Yea, hitting a baseball at 90 mph would be harder than hitting something larger coming in at about 60 mph, but softball is a lot closer and the direction of where the pitch comes from is different.  The field is shorter in softball, but baseball does get harder, faster hits.  Also, softball is a quicker played game because of the field difference.  The plays have to clean, but same with baseball if they want to get the double play.  I think that both sports are great thought and I love it!
568868
incomplete question!  how infuriating.  I mean we can all see that you expect to throw some rookies with the unit conversion, but c'mon man! take some pride in your work.  finish the darn question.
554537
It's a curveball or slider that doesn't have the desired curve or slide to it, so it just hangs there like it was a fastball.\nThey use that term when a pitcher tried to throw a slider or curveball and it didn't have any movement to it. In other words, he just threw a bad curveball or slider.
685873
ok...there are collisions between the ball and the players.  These collisions cause impulses (changes in momentum) which the players do their best to control in order to accurately change the direction and speed of the ball.  See the link if you don't understand any of these terms.
14926
No, but if you ask a baseball player "does a curveball curve?" they'll tell you that it sure does, and they're right. It turns out it is a lot harder to prove than you may have expected.  In September 1941,  Life magazine claimed to have proven, through a series of high speed pictures, that the curve ball didn’t curve at all and it was just an "optical illusion." Again, as recently as November 1982, Science 82 magazine published an article that referred to the "apparent break in a curveball" as an "illusion."  If curveballs curve a lot, according to baseball players than where does this controversy stem from?\nThe bottom dotted line is tangent to the path of the ball when the pitcher releases the ball.  If the hitter thinks the ball is a fastball this is the path they would expect the ball to take, but the ball curves on its way to the plate, represented by the solid black line, and the hitter would claim the the ball curved the width of the plate.\n\nHowever, if you were to draw a line from where the ball leaves the pitcher's hand to where it crosses the plate. The largest deviation from this line, called the sagitta, is much smaller. If you were to have three poles in a row it would be very difficult to throw a pitch which passes left of the first, right of the second, and left of the third.
410998
It's based on scoring shorthand ... before we ubergeeks sat at laptops ... people would get a scorecard and actually have a shorthand system that they could follow every pitch of every game.\n\nYou're right one is the pitcher ... two is then the catcher ... three is first base ... and so on across the position players. From your short hand, 4-6-3 would be a ball hit directly to the second baseman who threw it to the shortstop covering second and then the shortstop threw it over to the first baseman for a double play.  \n\nI attached a link to a website that tells you how to actually score a game. If you want to watch every moment and see the game unfold, this is one of the best ways to do it.
444527
I think you're getting at the 'staturation' (my term, or?) of baseball. I think the whole Moneyball analysis is hyper-rational, questionable in its practicality and downright dismissive of the tempo, traditions, and feel of the game. As far as pitch counts, I absolutely agree with you. More on that in a bit. However, as long as pitch counts are relied upon by managers to aid in deciding their pitching changes, I think it's necessary to include in box scores. In fact, I get annoyed when newspapers fail to include pitch counts in their roundups. \n\nBut I have to wonder about the whole notion of pitch counts. I feel like the media often hype high pitch counts  as indicative of a.)a gutsy performance, if the P gets a W or b.)a poor use of a pitcher, if the P gets a L. In the former, you have hero-hyping, which makes good copy. In the latter case you have a classic case of double-guessing, which I'm sure managers hate to no end. In the end, I think managers are cowed into keeping pitch counts relatively low not for fear of hurting their pitchers, but for fear of being deemed my management or media as unable to responsibly harness the talents of the team's "poor, fragile" pitchers (I definitely have wee Pedro Martinez in mind here). \n\nFrankly, SPs should be insulted by this. Any SP worth his cleats wants to hang onto the ball, and it is always a good thing to hear of private spats between P and MGR about a quick hook. At the same time, SPs should protect theit MGR if he is called to task for allowing a high pitch count, if he can attest that he was, indeed, feeling good. \n\nAnd that's the thing about baseball, and the stats therefrom. It's all relative. There is no arbitrary safe pitch limit across pitchers, or even for one pitcher. Factors such as pitch selection, temperature, and field conditions all come into play. One day a P may be spent at 100, the next game he's still pumping at 125. \n\nBut for newbie's information, it seems to me that 120 is often an upper pitch limit. Occasionally you'll see a pitcher crack 130. Livan Hernandez, at least once a year, will hit 150. A lot of times, a manager with a history with a certain pitcher can sometimes get away with using him a little bit more than another might be comfortable with. Interestingly, everyone knows knuckleballers can pitch all day, but for some reason quality knucklers like Wakefield seem to be coddled like any other SP. \n\nI don't buy the 'insurance' or 'fragile arm' arguments. Baseball players today are the strongest, healthiest, most athletic ballplayers in history. This goes for pitchers as much as for hitters. Yet if you analyzed innings pitched, CGs, GS, and pitch counts over the last several decades, you might conclude that within the last 20 years SPs have become spindly weaklings. The hyper-reliance on pitch counts, which might be partly due to the unfortunate development of the professional reliever definitely feeds this trend (that is, trained as such in the minor leagues and before). It is undeniable that pitchers are coddled even more so in the minor leagues, and it is possible that they just don't have the stamina that they once did. If this is the case, then I think we can point blame at the farm systems. Today's pitchers are, however, physically still capable of hard workloads if they are just given the opportunity to work up to that level. \n\nEither way, I would argue that the decline in pitching quality has several factors, chief of which is the expansion of the pitching pool. Teams employ more pitchers now than they ever have in history. 12-man squads are now typical; 10 years ago it was 11-man squads; and that was an expansion from ten. If SPs were allowed (or were capable) to last longer, there would be fewer pitchers needed, and thus you'd have a richer pool. If, at the same time, baseball's best pitchers were groomed as starters exclusively, there would