Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 1476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

MLB strike zone box  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you like the strike zone box graphic imposed on your tv for viewing?

    • No, I am a sports fan that doesn't need this gimmicky graphic to let me know balls and strikes!
      3
    • Yes, it is sort of cool, it helps me see the strike zone and the close pitches.
      13
    • I don't care one way or the other, whatever!
      7


Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
Posted
13 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

Well actually ,there was a multitude of like minded people who agree with me. 

Generally wise not to literally start a post with "well actually…".

There are multitudes here who don't.

So what?

You didn't advance your argument, you simply found another thing that said what you'd said already.

It's an opinion. There is no "right" or "wrong."

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

This seemed relevant.

Gotta love the human element to umpiring, right? Because rules should be flexible from game to game based on who’s making the calls?

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, billchao said:

This seemed relevant.

Gotta love the human element to umpiring, right? Because rules should be flexible from game to game based on who’s making the calls?

I always like posts with photos and videos showing the context. Great! Interesting, as your video shows two different pitches, the first pitch seems outside by 6 inches or so. Although the second pitch is very deceiving, and to me, shows a flaw in the 'kzone' box. If you advance the video frame by frame you will notice the baseball actually is well within the box (strike) when it passes through the entire length of the plate, and as the ball hits the catcher's mitt, because the pitch is diving down and right, it shows the pitch outside of the strike zone. As a result, pitch #1 looks to be definitely a missed call, but as some think pitch #2 is definitely out of the strike zone, I feel they are mistaken and the ump made a great call. Now the Kzone is not the deciding factor or what gets called a ball and a strike, but to the untrained eye it looks like the ump missed the call when actually he made a great call.

 

30962056_Screenshot(53).thumb.png.8d0c1133b5164985a029c4fc75b6fcca.png

 

Edited by Billy Z
photo added

Thomas Gralinski, 2458080

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
17 minutes ago, billchao said:

This seemed relevant.

Gotta love the human element to umpiring, right? Because rules should be flexible from game to game based on who’s making the calls?

Hernandez was the opening day home plate umpire for the Mariner's game.  The announcers said he was one of the league's most loved umpires...


  • Administrator
Posted
10 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

I always like posts with photos and videos showing the context. Great! Interesting, as your video shows two different pitches, the first pitch seems outside by 6 inches or so. Although the second pitch is very deceiving, and to me, shows a flaw in the 'kzone' box. If you advance the video frame by frame you will notice the baseball actually is well within the box (strike) when it passes through the entire length of the plate, and as the ball hits the catcher's mitt, because the pitch is diving down and right, it shows the pitch outside of the strike zone. As a result, pitch #1 looks to be definitely a missed call, but as some think pitch #2 is definitely out of the strike zone, I feel they are mistaken and the ump made a great call. Now the Kzone is not the deciding factor or what gets called a ball and a strike, but to the untrained eye it looks like the ump missed the call when actually he made a great call.

 

30962056_Screenshot(53).thumb.png.8d0c1133b5164985a029c4fc75b6fcca.png

 

You’re greatly misunderstanding camera angles.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Just now, iacas said:

You’re greatly misunderstanding camera angles.

That's your opinion, but the attached photo I included showing the ball inside the strike zone, even when it is past the physical plate yells out that you are mistaken.

Thomas Gralinski, 2458080

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

That's your opinion, but the attached photo I included showing the ball inside the strike zone, even when it is past the physical plate yells out that you are mistaken.

I would say 50/50 at best, most likely a ball. 

Pitcher on the right side of the mound. Catcher set up inside. Not sure if the ball would be curving towards the strike zone or not, but it looks more like a fastball. I'd say borderline strike if that. 

The graphic is lined up with the edge of the plate. The ball is nearly to the edge of the plate, but it is still way before crossing the plate. This indicates that the ball is further right than it seems due to the camera angle. 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
9 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

That's your opinion, but the attached photo I included showing the ball inside the strike zone, even when it is past the physical plate yells out that you are mistaken.

Here’s how parallax works:

image.png

So basically because the camera angle is from Viewpoint B, the ball appears more to the left than it actually is.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
26 minutes ago, billchao said:

Here’s how parallax works:

image.png

So basically because the camera angle is from Viewpoint B, the ball appears more to the left than it actually is.

Well, then from what you 'just' wrote in this thread: "the ball appears more to the left than it actually is", testifies to the inaccuracy of the Kzone technology when viewing with the 'off center' tv camera. I could say that this kzone box and it's associated technology with camera angles is not very accurate. Now add in the idea of an untrained eye, the avg baseball tv viewer is fooled often times by this imperfect set up. Besides all that, I think I remember the word 'austerity' being used in these forums in reference to things of golf, being desired for it's no frills simplicity. Strangely, all of a sudden, people want just the opposite when it comes to the kzone. Frankly, I think the ump gave the correct call on the 2nd pitch there, and is proven by the frame stopping photo I attached. Although, to each their own.

Thomas Gralinski, 2458080

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
3 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

Well, then from what you 'just' wrote in this thread: "the ball appears more to the left than it actually is", testifies to the inaccuracy of the Kzone technology when viewing with the 'off center' tv camera.

No, I’m saying what you’re seeing isn’t an accurate reflection based on the single camera angle. The K Zone system is developed based on multiple camera angles and computers sync it together to give the measurement. The technology is significantly more than just a box on your tv screen.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Upvote 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 minutes ago, billchao said:

No, I’m saying what you’re seeing isn’t an accurate reflection based on the single camera angle. The K Zone system is developed based on multiple camera angles and computers sync it together to give the measurement. The technology is significantly more than just a box on your tv screen.

Good points, but as you said the pitch gave an appearance that may not be accurate due to the camera angle.

Thomas Gralinski, 2458080

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
4 minutes ago, Billy Z said:

Good points, but as you said the pitch gave an appearance that may not be accurate due to the camera angle.

In regards to your claim that the ball was a strike, yea. I’m not sure what your point is because I just typed this out in the post you quoted.

The Yankees have an overhead angle on home plate. I’ve never seen the K Zone wrong before. And I’m not saying it’s not possible, but it’s highly unlikely. 

No offense, but I believe a computer technology developed over 20 years over a guy watching on tv.

  • Like 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
36 minutes ago, billchao said:

In regards to your claim that the ball was a strike, yea. I’m not sure what your point is because I just typed this out in the post you quoted.

The Yankees have an overhead angle on home plate. I’ve never seen the K Zone wrong before. And I’m not saying it’s not possible, but it’s highly unlikely. 

No offense, but I believe a computer technology developed over 20 years over a guy watching on tv.

41AACEC5-597B-4702-97C4-142A09C6CBBC.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted
16 hours ago, Billy Z said:

That's your opinion, but the attached photo I included showing the ball inside the strike zone, even when it is past the physical plate yells out that you are mistaken.

No, it’s not an opinion.

You cannot judge where the ball is in 3D space from a 2D image.

Not when it’s off axis like that.

Not an opinion.

I use cameras all the time, too. Angles skew things fast.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 hours ago, iacas said:

No, it’s not an opinion.

You cannot judge where the ball is in 3D space from a 2D image.

Not when it’s off axis like that.

Not an opinion.

I use cameras all the time, too. Angles s as Lew things fast.

Yes I agree, it can be very tricky. The way I would sum it up is: from the video that was attached early, based on my judgement as to the depth of the ball in reference to the front of the home plate, it appears to me (imo) the ball nipped the plate as it crossed over the front plane of the plate. Can I prove this beyond any doubt? No. If I were a betting man, as they say, I think I would say it was a strike. As great as technology is these days, just from the previous conversations that was started by @billchao, you can see how pitches can appear one way but possibly be the other way. I am getting used to kzone, but I like a simple, clean look to things, not busy looking. Sometimes more is less.

Thomas Gralinski, 2458080

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

@Billy Z I recorded this just for you 😃

Did it catch the plate or no?

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 1476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • No one should measure a joint mobility away from that joint. If you go to physical therapy, they are not measuring your knee mobility based on your midline. It is based at the joint. Shoulder mobility should be measured in reference to the shoulder joint. 
    • He's using a driver swing, while I used the iron swing. Bryson goes from about 65° B to 15° B, hence the 50°. If you bend your right elbow, you're going to pull your hands across your chest some. Conversely, if you abduct your right arm and hold onto a grip with your left arm, you can see how extending the right elbow as we do in the golf swing during the downswing will "pull" the right shoulder/humerus forward (adducting it, as going from 65° to 15° of abduction is). Even people who pull their right shoulder WAY too far around them eventually get it "back in front" when their right arm/elbow extends. So, such a motion shows up as shoulder adduction even though the movement that causes it is just widening the trail elbow. The left hand on the grip almost "pulls" the hands forward as the left arm can't stretch much (there's some shoulder protraction, but that's almost maxed out at P4). Oh, I downloaded it and watched it (and commented there) before he blocked me. It's what led to him posting the comment in the "update" above. 😄  Single shoulder range of 75°, and that's going out well into the follow-through. 50° Max range up to impact. Manavian's video is bad. He keeps saying "midline" which is just a horrible way to look at it. He also kept saying that the club was moving that amount — also wrong. Adding left and right together is really freaking dumb. Another golf instructor said "That's like saying the player has 100 degrees of knee bend (adding left knee bend to right knee bend) 🤦‍♂️" (similar to what the biomechanist said about squatting). Also, see my post above about elbow bend. That's why Plummer’s alignment stick demo is so intellectually dishonest. A golfer can't get anywhere near that position on the left with his left hand on the alignment stick (quoted below).  
    • That makes no sense at all.  so, I watched that Instagram. Here is a summary...  Bryson.... Address: Trail Shoulder 0 degrees adduction. P4: Trail Shoulder 65-deg abduction. Impact: Right shoulder 15-deg abduction. P9: 10 degrees adduction. Rory... Address: Trail Shoulder 16 degrees adduction. P4: Trail Shoulder 26 degrees abduction. Impact: Right shoulder 0 degrees abduction.  P9: 18 degrees of adduction.  DJ... Address: Trail Shoulder 4 degrees adduction. P4: Trail Shoulder 42 degrees abduction. Impact: Right shoulder 2 degrees abduction.  P9: 15 degrees of adduction.  Their point is that arm doesn't stay on the trail side. That the arms have to get across the chest from P4 to P9. I mean they do. What matters is the rate of which it happens relative to the position of the swing. The trail shoulder at P9 is not abducted a lot. The range of that total abduction movement is like 40 to 70 degrees. Bryson might be an outlier. Rory might be an outlier as well.  A couple of points.  1. None of them had any adduction at impact. So, this tells me the trail arms stays on the trail side of the body at impact. Is it moving towards lead shoulder, yes. It doesn't happen till post impact. The right side of the body is moving towards the target, so the arms don't have to as much as people think.  2. Trail shoulder adduction from Impact to P9 is 18 to 25 degrees.  3. P9 adduction of the trail shoulder is only about 2 to 12 degrees more adducted than at address. The arms/hands stay in front of the chest a long-time post impact. If Rory, from his address position just rotated his body towards the target and raised up his arms so he is at P9. He basically didn't have to move his trail arm further across his chest than where he started at address. Visualize that for a bit. I bet for people who tend to stall and drag their arms across their body to hit the ball, that would emphasize how much the arms stay in front of the body and how much you have to turn.             
    • Do you know how Manavian is measuring his shoulder adduction-abduction that purports to demonstrate 50 degrees or motion in Bryson's downswing? I know the broader biomechanics research/scientific literature on this suggests shoulder adduction-abduction is only a modest contributor of force generation in the downswing, so I'm definitely not convinced by anything he's arguing, I'm just curious how different people can be claiming to use ostensibly the same "data" to tell a much different story.
    • I have an update… I don't have much of a response, because the fact that they would ADD the numbers for the lead and trail shoulder together… I mean, wow. I was giving them too much credit. Nobody would think to assume they were doing THAT. That's beyond comical. One of the biomechanists I talked to put it this way: "So if I squatted down and went from 180 to 90 deg knee angle, then I would say 180 deg range of motion because I have two knees?" I'd type more (maybe), but honestly, I'm laughing a bit too hard. 🤣 Update: Mini Manavian blocked me on Instagram, so I cannot see his post showing Bryson with about 50° of range of motion (with a driver) from P4 to P7, and 75° only if you go out to the mid-follow-through. What a terrible loss for me. 😉 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.