"Use Two Hands" and Other Myths
Do you ever pause to consider, WHY do we teach some of the things we teach? When we ask this question, we may find that there isn't always a good answer. For that reason, it's wise for coaches, players and parents to always continue learning, thinking and sometimes even challenging the status quo.
The virtue of always remaining teachable helps us to discover the BEST ways of doing things, rather than just doing things the way we've always done them and assuming that's the best way. For example, in every youth baseball park across the U.S. there are probably people who use the following phrases and coach by all or some of the following principles. How about you? Take a look at the list, and then I will discuss each one briefly (NOTE: by the end of this post you may still disagree with some of my opinions on these things, which is okay; the beauty of this great game is there can be more than one "correct way" to approach some things, depending on the situation). Have you said or believe any of the following:
Always use two hands.
Never swing on a 3-0 count.
Don't watch the ball when you run.
Never make the 1st or 3rd out of an inning at 3rd base.
Never strike out looking at strike three.
Always use two hands. Not necessarily.
I think this teaching must have began in the 1940s or earlier, back when gloves were small and flat, with no pocket for the ball to rest in after the catch. Therefore, players HAD to use two hands in order to keep control of the ball. Today's gloves are designed in such a way that they can practically make the catch for you. Therefore, two hands are not really necessary.
But that's just one reason. There is another reason why teaching kids to always use two hands is unwise, and that is because it seriously limits their range of motion when good range is needed. Basically, on any play where the player's feet are not set up (behind the ball) it is not wise to use two hands. Additionally, catches at the 1st base position should not be received with two hands. Anytime there is a ball that a fielder needs to stretch out his/her arm and make the catch away from the body, it should be made with one hand (which is most of the time).
The reality is, we only use two hands to make a minimal number of catches; typically when we are camped behind the ball and/or have to make a quick transfer and throw. Otherwise, teach them to catch it with one hand. Using two hands often negatively affects a player's reach, range of motion, and quick reflex movement to the spot where the ball is to be caught.
For reference, here is a little list of plays where two hands should be used:
Routine ground balls in which your body is behind the ball and ready to throw as you field it.
Receiving a double play at the bag, when a quick transfer is needed.
Fly balls that you are camped under (still, it's not necessary to use two hands on these).
That's about it. Now, here's a list of plays where it is better advised to use one hand:
A slow ground ball that is fielded on the run.
Any backhand ground balls.
Any forehand ground balls.
Any fly ball that you are running to.
All pitches received from the catcher position.
All catches received from the 1st base position.
All line drives.
All one-hop hard hit ground balls.
Any other throw from another fielder (such as catch and tag throws).
Basically, you will notice your players making more athletic plays when they are not bound to having to always use two hands. That is a good way to think about it. Insisting that they always use two hands is like "binding" their hands together on the majority of plays they will have to make in a practice or a game.
Never swing on a 3-0 count. Not necessarily.
For me, this is not automatic. There are times when it is good to take the 3-0 pitch, but there are times when it's good to let the hitter dig in and plan to crush the 3-0 pitch. If there is no one on base and we need a base runner, I will likely instruct the player to take the 3-0 pitch. If the pitcher has been struggling to throw strikes and has already walked a couple batters, I may instruct the player to take on 3-0. But if we have runners on, especially in scoring position, I tend to have confidence in my hitters and want them to attack the 3-0 pitch if they like it and if it's the pitch they were anticipating.
Think about it. Nearly 100% of the time, the 3-0 pitch is going to be a fastball. The pitcher is told to lay it in there. It's the one time during the at-bat when the pitch is going to look like batting practice. Why not crush it?! Of course, on 3-0 we don't want our hitters to go chasing a pitch that is not their perfect, dead-red, home run pitch. But if we're teaching them that the pitch we want them to attack when in a hitter's count is a meatball fastball in their dead-red zone, then 3-0 is the most likely time they will see that pitch.
Every hitter loves to hit in a 3-1 count. That is what we consider to be a hitter's count. But why isn't 3-0 a hitter's count? If we start approaching it that way, then our hitters will essentially get two opportunities to get their pitch... on 3-0 AND on 3-1. Just something to consider.
Don't watch the ball when you run. Actually, no, watch it MOST of the time.
The only time I don't want my base runners to look for the ball and "watch it" is when the ball is behind them or when they are legging out a ground ball they just hit on the infield. But if a base hit is in front of them and they don't have to turn their head around to see it, then they should be watching it and anticipating an opportunity to advance to another base.
We teach our base runners to never concede to just one bag, but always make the fielders stop you. The only way they are able to approach base running with this aggressive mindset is if they can see the fielder and the ball. I have seen way too many players (of all ages, surprisingly) just simply run from base to base and wait for the base coach to signal them to run or stay. As a base coach, I do not view it as my job to tell you when to run or when to stop, as long as you can see the ball. My job is to merely assist you whenever you can't see the ball.
Players should be encouraged to be athletes, and to play aggressively on the base paths. If they always need to have a base coach tell them when to run and when to stop, then they will never be aggressive. We're going to make mistakes on the base paths from time to time. But, as I mentioned in a previous post, I would rather make mistakes being aggressive than make them being passive.
I am willing to bet you that my teams, who have the green light to run bases freely, will score more runs than your team, who must to wait for you to signal them. We may get thrown out more, but we will put more pressure on your team, and we will ultimately have success for it. And, most importantly, our players will learn more about the game and be much better base runners (regardless of their foot speed). Being a great base runner is not all about foot speed. It's about being confident in reading balls off the bat and reacting quickly and aggressively. Let your players do this, and they will grow tremendously.
Never make the 1st or 3rd out of the inning at 3rd base. Not necessarily.
Many of these "unwritten rules" of baseball have originated from the professional game, where defenses are less likely to make errors. However, most of our kids will not play professional baseball, and therefore the game situations are a little different depending on the level of play. For example, the reason why it has always been taught to never make the 1st or 3rd out at 3rd base is because: A) with no outs and a runner at 2nd we are likely to get the run in before getting 3 outs, and B) with two outs and a runner at 2nd it will take a base hit to score him regardless of whether he's at 2nd or 3rd, so why risk making the out at 3rd?
I get both of those reasons. Actually, I am a lot more inclined to abide by "A" than "B," but I will still abide by both depending on the game situation and the acumen of the base runner. But in the amateur game of baseball (especially high school age and down), there are a few reasons why I would certainly rather have a runner at 3rd base with two outs than at 2nd base.
First, it isn't always guaranteed that the runner can score from 2nd base on a base hit, but he definitely will from 3rd base. If a hard line-drive one-hopper is hit to left field, it's still going to be difficult to score from 2nd base.
Another reason to have a runner try to get to 3rd base with two outs is because of the frequency of wild pitches and passed balls. Obviously, from 3rd base the runner scores on a passed ball, so that's a huge benefit.
And a third reason to try to get a runner to third base with two outs is because anytime there is a runner at third base, the batters are more likely to get better pitches to hit. Pitchers realize a wild pitch/passed ball will score a run, therefore they may tend to elevate pitches in the strike zone or throw more fastballs, making it easier for batters to get a good pitch to hit.
So, for those reasons, we don't make it a black and white rule that the third (or first) out shouldn't be made at 3rd base. Doing so changes the "aggressive" base running mentality in our players. Yet, while I want them to remain aggressive, I also want them to always play smart, understanding the situation, and thinking about what is best for the team in each given moment.
Never strike out looking at strike three. It happens, so what.
Why is this such a big deal to us? I understand that we have to swing the bat in order to hit the ball. But sometimes we, as hitters, just get fooled on a pitch. Or sometimes it looks like an un-hittable pitch out of the strike zone and the umpire calls it strike three. I get it; with two strikes the hitter needs to take a different approach and expand his hitting zone, and should do everything possible to try to at least foul off any pitch that's even close to the zone. But sometimes they just get beat. And sometimes they watch strike three, thinking that the pitch is not hittable and that they will get a better one on the next pitch.
Unless you have a hitter who makes a habit of this, then I wouldn't harp on it too much. Just remind them that a two-strike approach to hitting means they need to swing at "pitchers strikes" as well as "hitters strikes."
So, in conclusion... these are just a handful of things that I think have been permitted to live on in the game, and rarely does anyone ever pause to challenge these "unwritten rules." Whenever we encounter a situation that feels like a "we've always done it this way" type of situation, just ask the question, "WHY have we always done it this way?" And we may find that there is actually a better way, or... other good ways, depending on the situation.
In a follow-up post, I will write about some of the actual written rules that are often misunderstood.