Will Baseball ever strike out?

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-08 05:46am

No how dare you cricket's great! But golf....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-10-08 05:48am

BoredShirtless wrote: Don't be so touchy.

Then quit telling me what my opinion's should be. Or what my personal experiences were like. Reverse roles in that situation and se e how you would like if if I told you what your life was like without any sort of information to base it on jackass.

I've got eyes, I've seen people play baseball. Darth Wong is right, it's one of the few sports which you can play at the highest level with a beer gut.

Wow, you watched it, Oooooo what an accurate method of assesment. Listen try playing it once and see how you do. and I dont mean some sort of just for fun no score league, I mean actual competition.

Professional Football (American) lineman bulk up intentionally to over 300 pounds in order to gain size, these guys are definitely not in shape on the average. Tony Siragussa is an excellent example of this. Nate Newton being another. John Daly is an example in the realm of golf. Wrestling (Olympic wrestling, not WWE) has had its share of athletes that dont have the leanest of appearances.

So those fall into your little category of sports that you can play with a beer gut. The point is that these guys with beer guts are still trememndous athletes far more capable of performing great physical accomplishments than you or I will ever be. To sit back and claim that what they do isn't physically demanding is ignorant.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-08 06:13am

Darth Fanboy wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote: Don't be so touchy.
Then quit telling me what my opinion's should be. Or what my personal experiences were like. Reverse roles in that situation and se e how you would like if if I told you what your life was like without any sort of information to base it on jackass.

That was my opinion of your opinion, tongue in cheek too. Stop whining.

I've got eyes, I've seen people play baseball. Darth Wong is right, it's one of the few sports which you can play at the highest level with a beer gut.
Wow, you watched it, Oooooo what an accurate method of assesment.

Do you really think making an oooooo sound does anything for you? Good one champ.

Listen try playing it once and see how you do. and I dont mean some sort of just for fun no score league, I mean actual competition.

I don't need to play it to make a decent assessment of it.

Professional Football (American) lineman bulk up intentionally to over 300 pounds in order to gain size, these guys are definitely not in shape on the average. Tony Siragussa is an excellent example of this. Nate Newton being another. John Daly is an example in the realm of golf. Wrestling (Olympic wrestling, not WWE) has had its share of athletes that dont have the leanest of appearances.

So those fall into your little category of sports that you can play with a beer gut. The point is that these guys with beer guts are still trememndous athletes far more capable of performing great physical accomplishments than you or I will ever be. To sit back and claim that what they do isn't physically demanding is ignorant.

You're so full of shit. First, you know nothing about me. You have no idea how fit I am. Secondly, using John Daly, at his prime an unfit golfer, as some sort of "physically demanding" example is fucking laughable. Thirdly we were comparing baseball to soccer in terms of which is more demading, stop bullshitting with your wrestling and NFL. Fourthly you said and I quote:

Back when I played Soccer and Baseball I would have had to say that Little League was a more demanding sport.

Frankly that's a load of shit. I stand by my opinion that you never really played soccer, just farted around probably spent more time chatting or picking your nose.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-10-08 07:48am

Darth Wong wrote: You seriously feel you get as much exercise from little league baseball as you do from hockey or soccer, where you run ragged and sweat buckets? Are you delusional?

If you're the goalie maybe.

As a midfielder I ran my ass off. As a fullback I wasn't quite as active but still probably more active than when playing baseball except in incidences where I was running a lot of bases, but then I usually played catcher.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2003-10-08 12:30pm

Master of Ossus wrote: I defy anyone to find a successful NHL player who's out of shape. An overweight soccer player?

tatatatataaaaa
the little fat guy in the middle is Conçalves da Silva Ailton aka Kugelblitz. he plays for 1. bundesliga (major league soccer) team werder bremen.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-10-08 12:37pm

I was watching an Arsenal game on TV at 2 AM in the morning, and it
was Arsenal 1-0 against it's opponent, and I went away and watched a
special on the Red Baron, and an hour later it was just 1-1...........

BOO-RING.

Zac Naloen · Post by **Zac Naloen** » 2003-10-08 12:39pm

well sure if all your after is goals...

Post by **Kuja** » 2003-10-08 12:45pm

salm wrote:tatatatataaaaa
the little fat guy in the middle is Conçalves da Silva Ailton aka Kugelblitz. he plays for 1. bundesliga (major league soccer) team werder bremen.

I assume you mean the guy in the white shirt? He looks like he's in pretty good shape to me. He's got good muscle tone on his arms and legs.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-10-08 02:41pm

BoredShirtless wrote:snip

Im glad you're willing to be an ignorant fuck then, saves me the trouble caring about your responses anymore.

ReinnResauq · Post by **ReinnResauq** » 2003-10-09 01:14am

My experience with baseball usually was demanding. Demanding on my psyche because my 10 year old mind couldn't sit through anything that boring, but I still told myself I liked it. Even named my cat after my then favorite player, Ken Griffey Jr.

There is no doubt that baseball takes physical ability. Almost superhuman enhancements of normal physical powers. The hand-eye coordination must be beyond thinking. A baseball player spends much of his play-time operating on instinct.

The strategy of baseball is undeniable. Since baseball is one of the real team sports, the team that doesn't coordinate its actions long term and short term and both offensively and defensively does not win the game. It's one of the reasons (I read on the ESPN website once) that the Yankees were such a 'giant.' They didn't play via their strong players, they played via basic concepts such as when to bunt, which players to walk, etc.

That being said, many other professions also require fast hand-eye coordination or mastery of a single part of one's anatomy, as any muscian can attest to. Short term and long term strategists on the level that baseball allows are as common as those with 100/67/80 w/l/t records on Blizzard's battle.net.

Do Americans have the capacity to really enjoy baseball? Given our culture where a shitty news service like Fox News can become successful because it's fast and skims over the boring parts, baseball seems out of place. More than likely, the national interest in baseball is due in large part to the fact that people think others like it. That and the fact that going to a baseball game is an experience that is nothing like any other sports event, even if parts of it tend to be boring.

In relation to the strikes and general bullshit that occurs in professional sports, I am still for a National BASEketball league, only 18+ allowed in. "How to speak San Fransiscan" *Pulls down the pants of a nearby fundie* "Butt-gina."

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 03:28am

Darth Fanboy wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:snip
Im glad you're willing to be an ignorant fuck then, saves me the trouble caring about your responses anymore.

Waa waa ya big sook.

Coaan · Post by **Coaan** » 2003-10-09 06:04am

Darth Fanboy wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:snip
Im glad you're willing to be an ignorant fuck then, saves me the trouble caring about your responses anymore.

Stop being a complete and utter tit and look at the evidence..

In soccer or hockey....unless you are goalie for those two...you are always moving...how does that compaire with resting your arse on a bench for most of the time? Yes...as a outfielder you will run about a fair lot...if the ball is coming towards you....yes it is excercise..ie when your running, or pitching..or whatnot...but it's less than the likes of soccer..where even if you aren't in play with the ball...you are moving to keep up with the ones who do or moving with an opponent

When compaired with other athletes from those two...(football isn't a good example as was mentioned the 350 pound tubs) baseball gives nowhere near the same level of excercise.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-10-09 08:15am

In terms of athletic requirements, it's an apples v. oranges comparison. There is no dispute in regards to the fitness required for soccer or rugby (sports involving such continuous exertion on the pitch for such long sustained periods of time that I doubt most NFL players would last through halftime in either).

The baseball player is essentially a sprinter. He has to be prepared, at any given moment, to put on bursts of speed from a standstill position to steal a base, beat the throw to the next base, tag up and score home from second or even first base, back a fielding play at any given base or place himself under a fly ball. To give one such example, the most famous catch in baseball history: the 1954 World Series Cleveland Indians v. New York Giants, game 3 in the Polo Grounds in New York (a field with a cavernous outfield depth —out to a maximum 475 ft in dead centre field). Vic Wertz hit a long triple-shot to right, being covered by the great Willie Mays. Mays had about ten seconds to hustle 250 ft. from his position to be at the warning track in time for that ball to drop right into his glove —then had to wheel about to hurl the ball on relay back to home to prevent a Cleveland run from scoring (and did). Now while today's outfielders don't quite face that sort of challenge (Polo Grounds was an exception for baseball parks and no field built since 1962 has featured such outfield depths or eccentric configurations), it is not untypical for an outfielder to have to put on a 50-100 ft. sprint to make the out; nevermind the challenge of burning past 60 feet to steal a base or to reach first on a squeeze-bunt.

It's easy to point to players like David Wells or Mo Vaughn as examples of "unfit" players making it in the majors but they are exceptions rather than the rule; Wells is a pitcher and his skills on the mound do not require the same level of fitness as a Bernie Williams or a Derek Jeter (who play positions where Wells would be a disaster). And while Mo Vaughn may have been a bit on the tubby side for an outfielder, he was in far better shape than Babe Ruth was in the era when he was making his home run records. Ruth lasted as long as he did with the Yankees in that day because power-hitting had become so dominant that baseball offense was a very one-dimensional affair then. Babe Ruth the Sultan of Swat would bomb with any contemporary major league team because of his weight, poor muscle tone, and lack of speed on the base-paths (ironically, the Babe Ruth who was the lefty pitcher for the BoSox from 1912-20 and a trim and fit athlete then would fit in with today's baseball quite nicely). But overall, it's not David Wells or Mo Vaughn but rather Aramis Ramirez, Rafael Furcal, Javy Lopez, Richard Hidalgo and Kenny Lofton who are typical of the physical standard for baseball today.

Make no mistake; baseball is a physically demanding sport, albeit in a different way than soccer, and the unfit are best advised to never try taking the field for anything more demanding than a father-son cabbageball game.

Post by **haas mark** » 2003-10-09 08:21am

As per my experiences with basebal.. well.. I never really liked it. It was fun to go to.. for the first three innings. Then it just got kind of boring. Mind you, I've only been to minor league games (in Norfolk, VA, and here in Albuquerque before the idiots sold the "Dukes" name.. damn them.. those games were actually FUN). So I can't make a real statment on the subject.

[EDIT] It surprises me, sometimes, how vehement those of you that are sports nuts can get. o.O

~ver

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 08:44am

Patrick Degan wrote:In terms of athletic requirements, it's an apples v. oranges comparison. There is no dispute in regards to the fitness required for soccer or rugby (sports involving such continuous exertion on the pitch for such long sustained periods of time that I doubt most NFL players would last through halftime in either).

The baseball player is essentially a sprinter.

While the soccer player is not only a sprinter, but a distance runner. It's not apples and organges; it's more like set theory, where baseball players are a subset of soccer players.

Patrick Degan wrote: Make no mistake; baseball is a physically demanding sport, albeit in a different way than soccer, and the unfit are best advised to never try taking the field for anything more demanding than a father-son cabbageball game.

I don't think so. To say baseball is "physically demanding" means you ranked baseball according to "physical demand" after doing a top level comparison against other sports. "Physically demanding"? When compared to other sports? Not in my opinion. Compared to golf, lawn bowls and snooker? Yeah ok.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-10-09 08:58am

BoredShirtless wrote:While the soccer player is not only a sprinter, but a distance runner. It's not apples and organges; it's more like set theory, where baseball players are a subset of soccer players.

No, don't think so. The soccer player would be almost exclusively a distance runner except in the red zone in toward the goal. There is no play in soccer, that I've ever observed, that is anywhere akin to the sprints required in baseball.

Patrick Degan wrote: Make no mistake; baseball is a physically demanding sport, albeit in a different way than soccer, and the unfit are best advised to never try taking the field for anything more demanding than a father-son cabbageball game.

I don't think so. To say baseball is "physically demanding" means you ranked baseball according to "physical demand" after doing a top level comparison against other sports. "Physically demanding"? When compared to other sports? Not in my opinion. Compared to golf, lawn bowls and snooker? Yeah ok.[/quote]

As you wish...

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 09:45am

Patrick Degan wrote: No, don't think so. The soccer player would be almost exclusively a distance runner except in the red zone in toward the goal. There is no play in soccer, that I've ever observed, that is anywhere akin to the sprints required in baseball.

Are you kidding me? What soccer games have you seen?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-10-09 09:52am

Patrick Degan wrote:The baseball player is essentially a sprinter. He has to be prepared, at any given moment, to put on bursts of speed from a standstill position to steal a base, beat the throw to the next base, tag up and score home from second or even first base, back a fielding play at any given base or place himself under a fly ball.

As one who is a natural sprinter but a poor distance runner, I suppose I have a warped perspective on this, but I feel that the stamina required for sustained exertion is a much more impressive measure of athletic ability than the ability to put on the occasional sprinter's burst.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 10:03am

Darth Wong wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote:The baseball player is essentially a sprinter. He has to be prepared, at any given moment, to put on bursts of speed from a standstill position to steal a base, beat the throw to the next base, tag up and score home from second or even first base, back a fielding play at any given base or place himself under a fly ball.
As one who is a natural sprinter but a poor distance runner, I suppose I have a warped perspective on this, but I feel that the stamina required for sustained exertion is a much more impressive measure of athletic ability than the ability to put on the occasional sprinter's burst.

Soccer players do sprint, as hard as they can if they don't have the ball, even when they're not in the red zone. Baseball plates are 27 metres apart. With the exception of the goalie and Ronaldo, soccer players generally do that numerous times.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-10-09 10:14am

BoredShirtless wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote: No, don't think so. The soccer player would be almost exclusively a distance runner except in the red zone in toward the goal. There is no play in soccer, that I've ever observed, that is anywhere akin to the sprints required in baseball.
Are you kidding me? What soccer games have you seen?

Premier League, Bundesliga, Seri-A, Tri-Nations, Mexican League, UEFA, 1998 and 2002 World Cup, and our short-lived local Class-A minor league franchise. Your point being...?

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-10-09 10:16am

Darth Wong wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote:The baseball player is essentially a sprinter. He has to be prepared, at any given moment, to put on bursts of speed from a standstill position to steal a base, beat the throw to the next base, tag up and score home from second or even first base, back a fielding play at any given base or place himself under a fly ball.
As one who is a natural sprinter but a poor distance runner, I suppose I have a warped perspective on this, but I feel that the stamina required for sustained exertion is a much more impressive measure of athletic ability than the ability to put on the occasional sprinter's burst.

Granted. I do not make the argument that one is superior to the other; merely that they have differing requirements.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 10:24am

Patrick Degan wrote: Premier League, Bundesliga, Seri-A, Tri-Nations, Mexican League, UEFA, 1998 and 2002 World Cup, and our short-lived local Class-A minor league franchise. Your point being...?

So you've watched UEFA games, yet you didn't know soccer players can sprint 27 metres or more. Well I guess there's only so much you can get from watching soccer then. Ever played it before?

Chardok · Post by **Chardok** » 2003-10-09 10:24am

OPINION:
Baseball sucks. It's slow. and it's stupid. Round ball, round bat, hit it square. I can't sit through a full game. Strategy? Bah.
football is like a battle! Flanking, deep bombs, artillery! YEAH! Much more fun, IMHO.
If I want people to throw things at me I'll go to a right-to-lifer meeting and tell em my views, spank you very much.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-10-09 10:26am

BoredShirtless wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote: Premier League, Bundesliga, Seri-A, Tri-Nations, Mexican League, UEFA, 1998 and 2002 World Cup, and our short-lived local Class-A minor league franchise. Your point being...?
So you've watched UEFA games, yet you didn't know soccer players can sprint 27 metres or more. Well I guess there's only so much you can get from watching soccer then. Ever played it before?

Only so much you got from watching soccer. Just wanted to make that clear.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-10-09 10:39am

BoredShirtless wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote: Premier League, Bundesliga, Seri-A, Tri-Nations, Mexican League, UEFA, 1998 and 2002 World Cup, and our short-lived local Class-A minor league franchise. Your point being...?
So you've watched UEFA games, yet you didn't know soccer players can sprint 27 metres or more. Well I guess there's only so much you can get from watching soccer then. Ever played it before?

My my, aren't we in a bit of a snit? Yes, the full-field TV coverage was quite thorough and I am well aware of how the players move on the field. That was not my point.

And yes, I've played before, long time ago in school, and ended up utterly drenched each time. I'd play again in preference to any form of American football, but I've got to get myself in better shape before I try for any sport.