Yes, but Rounders also had a round bat like baseball but baseball made the one they used bigger so it could be held with more then one hand. The Rule of having to pitch to the batter with limited speed no wrist twist or flick on underhand pitches was removed then underhand removed as long as the ball was not released above the waist as a diversion from Rounders that made you pitch to the person without wrist flick or twist underhand. Also in 1887 was first softball games but Softball the more modern versions came out in 1890's as a fast slow combo with two ball sizes in Chicago and Minneapolis where it was underhand like slow pitch thrown no higher then waist but could be thrown with speed was being developed with only having a single underhand pitching no windmill but allowing wrist twist and curl as to why the switch in 1890's for underhand to overhand happened. These two sports are reasons why the modern throw was developed with first the allowing a pitcher to pitch rather then deliver the ball and to later be able to throw overhand.
Cricket rules also evolved throughout the 19th century - eg first bowling was only underarm, then roundarm, then almost solely over arm by late 19th century.
Exactly. I remember first getting into baseball history as a child, and I was blown away by the insane stats of these insane pitchers of the time such as Pud Galvin, Tim Keefe, etc
Thank you for just making these in general. My friends think I’m insane for loving guys like Cap Anson, Ed Delahanty, and Pug Galvin. And just the craziness of the sport back then
my guys are anson cobb joe start creighton al spalding levi meyerle peek a boo veach etc etc i’m the walking encyclopedia of 19th century baseball 😁👍 so much interesting and intriguing stories
Baseball loves to compare stats over long periods of time. But as this video show, you just can't. I especially loathe stats from the 19th century because the game was incredibly different. By the time MLB took its current form in 1901, things had largely standardized. But it's still hard. You have the incredible hitting eras of the '20s and '30s. The entire American League, pitchers included, hit .301 in 1930. You also have the Dead Ball Era of the first two decades before that, when pitching, bunting, stealing, and hitting for average were the tenets of the game. Or the Pitcher's era of the late 1960s. Remember 1930 when the whole American League hit .301? In 1968, one ONE HITTER reached that mark (Yaz). (Only five in the NL.) When examining the great ones, pay less attention to their numbers and more attention to where they stood among their peers when they played. That way, you'll be less likely to elect Harold Baines to the Hall of Fame, and more likely not to ignore Dick Allen for all these decades.
Harold Baines and Lee Smith getting elected to the Hall had nothing to do with comparing numbers across eras. Why they got in is a mystery, but I wouldn't blame Hoss Radbourne or Cap Anson.
In My Opinion Harold Baines and Dick Allen are Both Hall of Famers. If Dick Allen isn't in, then he ought to be. Considering that Harold Barnes had almost 400 Homeruns and nearly 3,000 hits for his Career there is no question that those are Hall of Fame Numbers.
@@jimwerther Lee Smith was a Great Reliever. That's why he got in. Again Harold Barnes had Almost 400 Homeruns and nearly 3,000 Hits in his Career. Those are definitely Hall of Fame Worthy Numbers.
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup I have no idea who Harold Barnes is. Lee Smith had great stuff, but only the best relievers belong in the Hall, due to the few innings they pitch, and Lee Smith could not be counted on in big spots.
The 1893 rule of 60'6'' was basically the Amos Rusie rule because he threw so hard and had struck Hughie Jennings in the head the year before. Amos led all pitchers in strikeouts for few more years after then, after developing arm problems, was traded from the Giants to the Reds for Christy Mathewson. Pretty much completely forgotten legend of the game.
I keep thinking about how back then Pitchers threw 400+ Innings per year and often with little to sometimes throwing many innings in Consecutive Days. You don't hear about the arms problems that Pitchers seemingly have today. In Modern Day Pitchers Defense Sliders are Extremely rough on one's arm (i.e. Dave Stieb and Dan Petry).
An interesting research topic, of which I know nothing, is how the Civil War affected the proceedings of the National Association of Baseball Players. So many players on amateur clubs in New York went to war from 1861-1865. Star pitcher Jim Creighton died in 1862, but not on a battlefield in the South like some of his friends must have.
@@thebaseballprofessor they are directly credited with spreading the game, New York regiments were everywhere so were playing teams made up of guys from other states who took it home and taught it to new people who caught on it’s no shock that the big cities of Boston, Cincinnati, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Baltimore, and St. Louis fielded pro teams as they’re all major sea and rail links
@@bostonrailfan2427 Players from NY clubs spread the game all over during the war years. What I don't know much about is NABBP's functioning from 1861 to 1865. The rules committee introduced called strikes the same year as the Battle of Gettysburg!
My dad played in a league where they followed 1858 rules it was pretty cool to watch, no gloves and the balls were a little bigger with a softer leather cover
While it is true that pitchers are bigger, more athletic, and have a better understanding of mechanics than ever before, the biggest reason strikeouts are up is because of the way the game is approached on both ends. From the pitcher's perspective, the emphasis is to throw as hard as you can for as long as you can, and when you run out of gas, the next guy will come in and do the same thing. When pitchers were expected to finish their starts, they tried to induce weak contact, and only reached back for the gas when necessary. ("Strikeouts are boring, besides, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls, it's more democratic." - Crash Davis). As for hitters, strikeouts used to be stigmatized, nothing good can happen if you don't put the ball in play. Now it's merely the cost of doing business, the benefits of power hitting are thought to outweigh the negatives of striking out. You should also delve into the details of Jim Creighton's death, a huge part of early baseball mythology. Otherwise, great work.
Very true now with starters going 5 innings ( on a good night) and relievers going 1 inning each for the next four everyone just comes in and throws as hard as they can. Then we have the new hitting theory of "launch angle" and we have what is called modern baseball. A home run or a strikeout and 3 1/2 hour gamed
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup Unfortunately, that's how you can have hitters getting paid to bat barely above the Mendoza Line if they can still get 30 home runs. Adam Dunn was ahead of his time.
Chris Robert: That's a great suggestion!!! I'm a long-time Tigers fan (and Cubbies in the NL) and read up on baseball when I was a kid but don't recall learning anything about the development of gloves. My one story about 19th century baseball is that Ulysses Grant when Prez was a big fan; I don't think he played.
One big reason why batting averages are low is everyone swinging for the fences. The idea of ",hit 'em where they ain't" like willie keeler , dropping a bunt when the infielders are playing deep isn't as hitting 500 ft homeruns. "singles hitters drive chevies, homerun hitters drive Cadillacs" is still a belief. Guys who might hit ten a year still try to hit 50. If you add in a strike zine that's as usuve as unicorns. varying from umpire to umlire and the pitcher maintains the advantage. Ysed ti be, when I was a kid. the strike zone was the letters, or the armpit, to the knees. I've seen pitches at the belt called balls ( too high). Pitchers don't usually go more than 5-6 innings now, and a reliever throwing 90+ comes in, whete in the old days, pitchers were expected to pitch coplete games, and relievers were guys who couldn't be starters. either older ot sore armed. It's a different game now.
Loved the dates. Lowering the mound hit w I was 15 as a pitcher. It sucked! And still does. We pitched whole games back then and Always Hit for ourselves ran or better yet stole bases to boot.
Yes, with only difference the ball was bigger in Softball and that Softball was an indoor winter sport from firat game in 1887 until 1895 with the Minneapolis outdoor rules ball that stayed together better and the indoor Chicago rules with the ball that became softer over time. This is why until the late 2000's to 2010 it was more common for people to see in sports stores and online a big light brown/sometimes Champaigne color of stiff leather ball with wider white stitching that dented easier being used for the Chicago/New Orleans rules of slow-pitch that is supposed to be played without gloves as one of the two types of slow-pitch balls along with the modern slow-pitch ball that is just a bigger fast pitch ball that is almost the same size as the Chicago/New Orleans ball but is smaller by about an inch at 14--16 depending on age with the fast-pitch ball a 12--13 inch for almost all versions. 1993 had the yellow color for NCAA you see more common as of 2000 for the modern softballs with few leagues now using a white that is Still made and used. Some Slow-Pitch Softball leagues use the Fast-Pitch ball in a pinch if they can't find the bigger modern Slow-Pitch ball that easy.
I remember reading that Harvard (I think) refused to throw the curve ball, thinking it was unsportsmanlike, opting to keep throwing the "straight" ball when pitching.
"Athletics have come to the pass where they are no longer fair and open trials of strength and skill, but on the contrary, as at present conducted, they train the young men to look upon victory as the rewards of treachery and deceit. That this is the case, anyone who has seen the game of baseball as it is played by the so-called best college nines will at once admit. For the pitcher, instead of delivering the ball to the batter in an honest, straightforward way, that the latter may exert his strength to the best advantage in knocking it, now uses every effort to deceive him by curving-I think that is the word-the ball. And this is looked upon as the last triumph of athletic science and skill. I tell you it is time to call halt! when the boasted progress in athletics is in the direction of fraud and deceit." - New York Clipper, 1884
There has been for around 5 years or so. Because of All.of The Pitching Changes this was put in in Order to Speed up the Game. If Hitters stopped leaving and reentering the Batter's Box after each pitch, I would imagine that you would reduce each game by at least 35 minutes on average.
The only thing he didn't mention is when it took 9 Balls before you hot a walk. Can you imagine how few walks there would be today if that rule was in place.
F.Y.I. The Modern Era started around the turn of the 20th Century where Hitters didn't Use Steroids to hit 50 Balls over a small fence less than 375 feet away. For anyone yo compare Aaron Judge to Babe Ruth given the Dimensions of Yankee Stadium and Even Fenway Park then (Yes they moved the fences in at Fenway Park over the Years.) Us Totally and Completely Outrageous!!
Not sure if pitchers are getting better per se. Throwing faster? ok. The mindset of hitters have changed as far as batting average is concerned. Who thinks the dreaded "shift" would work back in the day up into the 90's? Hitters would have exploited it. And this launch angle crap. Sure there are more home runs, but less "small-ball" type of offensive baseball (the kind I favor). So I don't know if it's better pitching (maybe?) or different approach to what matters to hitters (homers = $$$) Chicks dig the long ball...or...we didn't even bring modern analytics to the discussion.
I've heard that leagues are experimenting on moving the pitchers mound back a foot or two. With many pitchers throwing over 100 mph and batting averages shrinking, I think that this could be a good solution to solve the hitting drought in the major and minor leagues.
Baseball needs to adjust the mound, both lowering it and increasing the distance, and keep tweaking it until there is a solid balance between offense and defense, where even the worst teams can average scoring around 5-6 runs per game. There are far too many strikeouts in the game today. And more homers would be a very good thing for MLB to try to attract desperately needed younger fans.
MLB has asked the Atlantic League to test out a 61'6" mound. I think a possible change to the distance in mlb is coming due to low league wide batting averages.
You should consider making video about how World Series rewards were changed overtime, especially considering how initially it wasn't the rings that were awarded to players.
I'm planning a video about baseball salaries. Your comment reminds me of the significant financial rewards for winning the world series before free agency.
We were having a thread about this year's season yesterday and how pitchers are getting away with using small amounts of sticky stuff again, and somehow the convo got to using glow-in-the-dark baseballs and using blacklights on the field. The purists howl but the game will keep on altering.
Wow… no wonder Koufax and Gibson were so dominant- the mound was 10” higher until the late 60s. I think in 69 it went to present height. Imagine randy Johnson pitching from an 18” mound- frightening
I think everyone should be aware of the history of baseball, because people tend to think 'change is bad' when the game needs to change, I come with ideas to improve things all the time, including baseball heres a few make the baseball easy to produce and consistent, instead of hand crafted less groves on the ball to make it harder to spin, move the mound back count home runs as 'outs' but keep the runs scored put limits on how many runs per inning, like 3 runs, unless a team is behind so they can catch up if a team is ahead by a large enough margin by the 7th inning, end the game, no point in playing later innings if the team has a less than 1 percent change of winning limit it to 3strikes/3 balls give the catcher a foam seat only allow a player to play a position for 3 innings, so they have to change things up allow some padding for batters to protect against hpb, or fielders, like first baseman free base if a pitcher throws at a batters head robo umps for balls/strikes if game is tied in 9th+ innings, load the bases to get the game over with add a larger first base in the foul territory, if they touch that they have to stay on first, if they touch the in play side of the base they are 'live' and can be tagged, instead of a guessing game of 'if they looked' at 2nd base add a larger home plate, that extends forward, if the catcher is touching that when a player touches home they are out, instead of having to tag or collide
Interesting ideas. I think moving the mound back a few feet would be the most straightforward change. I'm not a huge proponent of tinkering with the rules, but it seems prudent to consider all possibilities.
@@thebaseballprofessor thanks for the reply, I do this for other sports as well, golf, hockey, I'm trying to look for ways to make the game more interesting to watch and play, all ideas have to be tried out first, minor league players should test this stuff, I saw they did try out 'robo umps'
Tinkering continues. Most experiments are being tested in low-A. In a 9-inning tie game the 10th begins with a runner on second for each half. Very few games go beyond the 10th. Pitchers are timed. If the clock runs out the batter is awarded a ball. If the batter steps out of the batters box more than the maximum he is awarded a strike. Doubleheaders are 7 innings each. And recently there are two lines that extend from 2nd base toward the outfield. One parallel from 1st base, the other parallel from 3rd. Short and 3rd players must stay on the 3rd base side of the infield and 1st and 2nd players must stay on the 1st base side of the infield. This kills the shift on left handed batters. Have these sped up the game? This year we have had several 9-inning games played in 2 hours or less. Two more changes would help. When a new pitcher is brought in during an in-progress inning the pitcher should get no more than 2 practice pitches instead of 8, After all he's been warming up for some time. And then there's the great batter undressing when he reaches base. Ankle protection, shin protection, elbow protection, forearm protection, batting gloves off and sliding gloves on. Ridiculous ritual. This is not football where every play is contact. This year I have watched nearly 60 low-A games and have yet to see a batter hit on the protective parts. Usually they're plunked in the body.
Actually, modern pitchers are not getting “better,” they are using engineered sticky substances (last year’s brief moment of enforcement aside) to increase spin rates and pitch speeds to get out dumber all or nothing batters.
Considering the mound having been lowered, Hitters with better Eyes and Dinky Ballparks with Hitters that can use Steroids legally as of right now, I don't know how you can say that. Perhaps it would be helpful if you saw a video on Sandy Koufax or Greg Maddux. If that doesn't change your mind then nothing would I suppose.
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup 1. So you’re good with pitchers using super stickum? And with modern pitchers being as dumb as Gerrit Cole. 2. I saw both Koufax and Maddux pitch. Live. Koufax threw hard, but at the height of his career, knew how to pitch. Maddux was in another universe all together. He knew how to move the ball, could place it wherever he wanted, change speeds and arm angles. Modern pitchers, especially those wh depend on the super stickum, do nothing but rear back and throw, Nuke LaLoosh style. And, like Cole, are absolutely boring, both on the mound and off it.
After 1968, "The Year of the Pitcher," where Bob Gibson had an 1.21 ERA and Denny McLain had 31 wins, MBL management went into panic mode to try to get more offense into the game. They lowered the mound six inches and shrank the strike zone. The effect was minimal. Pitchers adapted by using more of the lower part of the strike zone. But, as said previously, the batters went more for power and HRs instead of good contact and base hits. Thus, more strikeouts and catchable fly balls.
Thank you for the information. I learned a couple new things. I think it's time for a change. They need to make the game more exciting. There are too many strikeouts. They need to get the ball in play like they used to when the game first started. I have been saying for several years now they need to limit the speed of the pitch to around 85 mph. If the ball exceeds that speed it is considered a ball no matter if it was in the strike zone or not.
You’re joking, right? If you want the game to be more exciting, then just move the pitching mound back a little more. Or, allow bats to be a larger diameter. Or, allow the ball to be woven tighter. Or, bring the bases closer together. Keep changing the rules of baseball and it will become a completely different game from what we grew up playing.
banning square bats was huge for another reason: it severed a huge tie to cricket, one of the sports that contributed to the development of the sport.
Excellent point .
Yes, but Rounders also had a round bat like baseball but baseball made the one they used bigger so it could be held with more then one hand. The Rule of having to pitch to the batter with limited speed no wrist twist or flick on underhand pitches was removed then underhand removed as long as the ball was not released above the waist as a diversion from Rounders that made you pitch to the person without wrist flick or twist underhand. Also in 1887 was first softball games but Softball the more modern versions came out in 1890's as a fast slow combo with two ball sizes in Chicago and Minneapolis where it was underhand like slow pitch thrown no higher then waist but could be thrown with speed was being developed with only having a single underhand pitching no windmill but allowing wrist twist and curl as to why the switch in 1890's for underhand to overhand happened. These two sports are reasons why the modern throw was developed with first the allowing a pitcher to pitch rather then deliver the ball and to later be able to throw overhand.
@UncleMikeNJ At least that was not me thinking why a call was not called in Rugby only to find you were watching Australian Rules Football.
Cricket rules also evolved throughout the 19th century - eg first bowling was only underarm, then roundarm, then almost solely over arm by late 19th century.
Thank you for covering 19th century baseball. It's a fascinating time that doesn't get covered enough.
Exactly. I remember first getting into baseball history as a child, and I was blown away by the insane stats of these insane pitchers of the time such as Pud Galvin, Tim Keefe, etc
Thank you for the engaging historic perspectives on baseball's evolution. Great content! Well done 👍
Pitchers are getting better but batters are also willing to strike out more often in the name of hitting the ball farther when they do make contact.
This is it. Power hitting has really come to the forefront.
Great job....I am a baseball geek and knowing the rules from the 1800s is amazing to me..Thanks much and looking forward to more from your channel.
Thank you for just making these in general. My friends think I’m insane for loving guys like Cap Anson, Ed Delahanty, and Pug Galvin. And just the craziness of the sport back then
my guys are anson cobb joe start creighton al spalding levi meyerle peek a boo veach etc etc i’m the walking encyclopedia of 19th century baseball 😁👍 so much interesting and intriguing stories
Old hoss Radbourn
Baseball loves to compare stats over long periods of time. But as this video show, you just can't. I especially loathe stats from the 19th century because the game was incredibly different. By the time MLB took its current form in 1901, things had largely standardized. But it's still hard. You have the incredible hitting eras of the '20s and '30s. The entire American League, pitchers included, hit .301 in 1930. You also have the Dead Ball Era of the first two decades before that, when pitching, bunting, stealing, and hitting for average were the tenets of the game. Or the Pitcher's era of the late 1960s. Remember 1930 when the whole American League hit .301? In 1968, one ONE HITTER reached that mark (Yaz). (Only five in the NL.)
When examining the great ones, pay less attention to their numbers and more attention to where they stood among their peers when they played. That way, you'll be less likely to elect Harold Baines to the Hall of Fame, and more likely not to ignore Dick Allen for all these decades.
Harold Baines and Lee Smith getting elected to the Hall had nothing to do with comparing numbers across eras. Why they got in is a mystery, but I wouldn't blame Hoss Radbourne or Cap Anson.
In My Opinion Harold Baines and Dick Allen are Both Hall of Famers. If Dick Allen isn't in, then he ought to be. Considering that Harold Barnes had almost 400 Homeruns and nearly 3,000 hits for his Career there is no question that those are Hall of Fame Numbers.
@@jimwerther Lee Smith was a Great Reliever. That's why he got in. Again Harold Barnes had Almost 400 Homeruns and nearly 3,000 Hits in his Career. Those are definitely Hall of Fame Worthy Numbers.
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup
I have no idea who Harold Barnes is. Lee Smith had great stuff, but only the best relievers belong in the Hall, due to the few innings they pitch, and Lee Smith could not be counted on in big spots.
@@jimwerther That doesn't negate him from being a Hall of Famer. If you know anything about Baseball you ought to know who Harold Barnes is.
Don't forget that in 1887 walks counted as hits for BA purposes
True.
Yep and I had came across some idiot who conflated that with this happening in the 1990s...
he uses baseball reference, which adjusts for this
I daresay that fellow isn't letting me have a go at the ball. It's as if he wants me to miss. Bully to you sir
That's some deliciously dry wit, right thar!' 🤓🤓
Dude, your channel is awesome and I look forward to every new video. Stick with it and this channel is gonna explode.
Thanks man!
I really enjoyed this video, keep up the great work! Jim Creighton sure was something special.
Interesting, according to the box score shown @:58, the Excelsior club batted in the bottom of the ninth with a 22-4 lead.
Wow - great catch. I hope the host of this channel sees this comment and can explain the background.
I prefer low scoring baseball. It makes the big hits more exciting and important.
The 1893 rule of 60'6'' was basically the Amos Rusie rule because he threw so hard and had struck Hughie Jennings in the head the year before. Amos led all pitchers in strikeouts for few more years after then, after developing arm problems, was traded from the Giants to the Reds for Christy Mathewson. Pretty much completely forgotten legend of the game.
I keep thinking about how back then Pitchers threw 400+ Innings per year and often with little to sometimes throwing many innings in Consecutive Days. You don't hear about the arms problems that Pitchers seemingly have today. In Modern Day Pitchers Defense Sliders are Extremely rough on one's arm (i.e. Dave Stieb and Dan Petry).
Rusie hit Jennings in 1897.
@@KevinWindsor1971 My bad, I miss read that in a story I read. You are right. Thanks for being so diligent. The rest is true, though.
Here's another guy that was a pretty good pitcher from that era who you may have never heard of: Charlie "Silver" King.
@@danejurus69It is a tragedy that Silver King is not in the Hall
Any video that mentions Old Hoss is gonna get a thumbs up from me
I find this timing humorous.
"What happened in 1863?"
"Baseball added called balls to its rules...oh and the Battle of Gettysburg."
An interesting research topic, of which I know nothing, is how the Civil War affected the proceedings of the National Association of Baseball Players. So many players on amateur clubs in New York went to war from 1861-1865. Star pitcher Jim Creighton died in 1862, but not on a battlefield in the South like some of his friends must have.
@@thebaseballprofessor they are directly credited with spreading the game, New York regiments were everywhere so were playing teams made up of guys from other states who took it home and taught it to new people who caught on
it’s no shock that the big cities of Boston, Cincinnati, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Baltimore, and St. Louis fielded pro teams as they’re all major sea and rail links
@@bostonrailfan2427 Players from NY clubs spread the game all over during the war years. What I don't know much about is NABBP's functioning from 1861 to 1865. The rules committee introduced called strikes the same year as the Battle of Gettysburg!
@@thebaseballprofessor
Yeah, the OP just made that point.
My dad played in a league where they followed 1858 rules it was pretty cool to watch, no gloves and the balls were a little bigger with a softer leather cover
He was killing them softly
While it is true that pitchers are bigger, more athletic, and have a better understanding of mechanics than ever before, the biggest reason strikeouts are up is because of the way the game is approached on both ends. From the pitcher's perspective, the emphasis is to throw as hard as you can for as long as you can, and when you run out of gas, the next guy will come in and do the same thing. When pitchers were expected to finish their starts, they tried to induce weak contact, and only reached back for the gas when necessary. ("Strikeouts are boring, besides, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls, it's more democratic." - Crash Davis). As for hitters, strikeouts used to be stigmatized, nothing good can happen if you don't put the ball in play. Now it's merely the cost of doing business, the benefits of power hitting are thought to outweigh the negatives of striking out.
You should also delve into the details of Jim Creighton's death, a huge part of early baseball mythology. Otherwise, great work.
This guy has it right. It's over the fence or "oh, well."
Very true now with starters going 5 innings ( on a good night) and relievers going 1 inning each for the next four everyone just comes in and throws as hard as they can.
Then we have the new hitting theory of "launch angle" and we have what is called modern baseball. A home run or a strikeout and 3 1/2 hour gamed
Or you could just say good work....
It also the Money. Homeruns are financially worth more than other hits.
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup Unfortunately, that's how you can have hitters getting paid to bat barely above the Mendoza Line if they can still get 30 home runs. Adam Dunn was ahead of his time.
Excellent video! Serious research, wonderful content, solid delivery, appropriate soundtrack, and terrific visuals. Bravo!
Good work; thanks. Somebody should do a video on how the glove developed over the decades.
Chris Robert: That's a great suggestion!!! I'm a long-time Tigers fan (and Cubbies in the NL) and read up on baseball when I was a kid but don't recall learning anything about the development of gloves. My one story about 19th century baseball is that Ulysses Grant when Prez was a big fan; I don't think he played.
One big reason why batting averages are low is everyone swinging for the fences. The idea of ",hit 'em where they ain't" like willie keeler , dropping a bunt when the infielders are playing deep isn't as hitting 500 ft homeruns. "singles hitters drive chevies, homerun hitters drive Cadillacs" is still a belief. Guys who might hit ten a year still try to hit 50. If you add in a strike zine that's as usuve as unicorns. varying from umpire to umlire and the pitcher maintains the advantage. Ysed ti be, when I was a kid. the strike zone was the letters, or the armpit, to the knees. I've seen pitches at the belt called balls ( too high). Pitchers don't usually go more than 5-6 innings now, and a reliever throwing 90+ comes in, whete in the old days, pitchers were expected to pitch coplete games, and relievers were guys who couldn't be starters. either older ot sore armed. It's a different game now.
Loved the dates. Lowering the mound hit w I was 15 as a pitcher. It sucked! And still does. We pitched whole games back then and Always Hit for ourselves ran or better yet stole bases to boot.
amen! same
Love the videos! Great content, keep it up. For once the algorithm brings me in on the ground floor
So thankful for OOTP Baseball and RUclips channels like this one for sparking my curiosity about this fascinating era of the game.
Awesome. More like this please.
So they originally pitched underhand, from 45 feet. Sounds like softball lol.
Yes, with only difference the ball was bigger in Softball and that Softball was an indoor winter sport from firat game in 1887 until 1895 with the Minneapolis outdoor rules ball that stayed together better and the indoor Chicago rules with the ball that became softer over time. This is why until the late 2000's to 2010 it was more common for people to see in sports stores and online a big light brown/sometimes Champaigne color of stiff leather ball with wider white stitching that dented easier being used for the Chicago/New Orleans rules of slow-pitch that is supposed to be played without gloves as one of the two types of slow-pitch balls along with the modern slow-pitch ball that is just a bigger fast pitch ball that is almost the same size as the Chicago/New Orleans ball but is smaller by about an inch at 14--16 depending on age with the fast-pitch ball a 12--13 inch for almost all versions. 1993 had the yellow color for NCAA you see more common as of 2000 for the modern softballs with few leagues now using a white that is Still made and used. Some Slow-Pitch Softball leagues use the Fast-Pitch ball in a pinch if they can't find the bigger modern Slow-Pitch ball that easy.
Pitchers keep getting more and more spin rate for getting outs.,,, there I fixed it for you.
So who was baseballs first unhittable pitcher? Did I miss it?
I love a pitcher’s duel.
Wonderful
Love this. Great work bringing this to life. Super interesting, informative, educational and just great content.
How would you be able to hit the ball if the mound was only 10 feet away ?
One name came to mind as soon as I saw this. Denton True "Cy" Young
Imagine if you could make your videos to 20 minutes on a subject. It would be amazing!
I still wish the Reds would go back to that logo.
I love man ... keep it coming
I remember reading that Harvard (I think) refused to throw the curve ball, thinking it was unsportsmanlike, opting to keep throwing the "straight" ball when pitching.
"Athletics have come to the pass where they are no longer fair and open trials of strength and skill, but on the contrary, as at present conducted, they train the young men to look upon victory as the rewards of treachery and deceit. That this is the case, anyone who has seen the game of baseball as it is played by the so-called best college nines will at once admit. For the pitcher, instead of delivering the ball to the batter in an honest, straightforward way, that the latter may exert his strength to the best advantage in knocking it, now uses every effort to deceive him by curving-I think that is the word-the ball. And this is looked upon as the last triumph of athletic science and skill. I tell you it is time to call halt! when the boasted progress in athletics is in the direction of fraud and deceit." - New York Clipper, 1884
@@thebaseballprofessor Excellent find. Thanks.
I didn't know there was a 3-batter rule for pitchers now.
There has been for around 5 years or so. Because of All.of The Pitching Changes this was put in in Order to Speed up the Game. If Hitters stopped leaving and reentering the Batter's Box after each pitch, I would imagine that you would reduce each game by at least 35 minutes on average.
Cool video, thanks
Great video especially if you're a fan of baseball history.
Would enjoy hearing a comparison between the NY Yankees of 1927 and Philadelphia A's of early 1930s.
Great video. 19th century baseball is so fascinating. Getting to see presentations like this add considerably to the joy of the game👍
The only thing he didn't mention is when it took 9 Balls before you hot a walk. Can you imagine how few walks there would be today if that rule was in place.
Have you read Keep Your Eye on the ball; A Study of the Physics of Baseball by Watts? Out of print but a must read. No you cannot have mine.
I have not read Keep Your Eye on the Ball. Thanks for the recommendation.
@@thebaseballprofessor it is delightful and begins the book with some historical accounts of thIs most wonderful of games.
As a fan of old time baseball, pre 2000's I enjoyed the video. Great work.
F.Y.I. The Modern Era started around the turn of the 20th Century where Hitters didn't Use Steroids to hit 50 Balls over a small fence less than 375 feet away. For anyone yo compare Aaron Judge to Babe Ruth given the Dimensions of Yankee Stadium and Even Fenway Park then (Yes they moved the fences in at Fenway Park over the Years.) Us Totally and Completely Outrageous!!
Do a video on baseball and the influence of organized gamblers.
I like the idea. Thanks for the comment.
Loved it! Thanks!
Not sure if pitchers are getting better per se. Throwing faster? ok. The mindset of hitters have changed as far as batting average is concerned. Who thinks the dreaded "shift" would work back in the day up into the 90's? Hitters would have exploited it. And this launch angle crap. Sure there are more home runs, but less "small-ball" type of offensive baseball (the kind I favor). So I don't know if it's better pitching (maybe?) or different approach to what matters to hitters (homers = $$$) Chicks dig the long ball...or...we didn't even bring modern analytics to the discussion.
There's some old video of Whitey Ford pitching. His fastball looks to me like it tops out at 88mph. It looks like batting practice.
Awesome video thanks!
Brutally awesome and informative... you the man... the best... teach us on all parameters
8.68 strikeouts per team, per game with few balls put into play summarizes perfectly why the game today has become unwatchable. A shame.
It's unwatchable because most games nowadays are night games and you never know how long it might last.
The first really unhittable Pitcher was Cy Young. He threw the first perfect game , and he did start playing in the 1890's.
I've heard that leagues are experimenting on moving the pitchers mound back a foot or two. With many pitchers throwing over 100 mph and batting averages shrinking, I think that this could be a good solution to solve the hitting drought in the major and minor leagues.
Baseball needs to adjust the mound, both lowering it and increasing the distance, and keep tweaking it until there is a solid balance between offense and defense, where even the worst teams can average scoring around 5-6 runs per game. There are far too many strikeouts in the game today. And more homers would be a very good thing for MLB to try to attract desperately needed younger fans.
I've played vintage and modern baseball. No gloves, with gloves, It's still the perfect game.
How can anyone like baseball and not like this channel? Fun, relaxing; just like baseball. 👍🏿
MLB has asked the Atlantic League to test out a 61'6" mound. I think a possible change to the distance in mlb is coming due to low league wide batting averages.
another huge impact on pitching are medical improvements like TJ surgery...
Awesome! Love your content!!!!
Fran Tarkenton played baseball in the 19th century? Who knew?
Great Video! Thanks.... I like the history of the game. The current game - not so much.
You should consider making video about how World Series rewards were changed overtime, especially considering how initially it wasn't the rings that were awarded to players.
I'm planning a video about baseball salaries. Your comment reminds me of the significant financial rewards for winning the world series before free agency.
Love this channel, keep the content coming!!
We were having a thread about this year's season yesterday and how pitchers are getting away with using small amounts of sticky stuff again, and somehow the convo got to using glow-in-the-dark baseballs and using blacklights on the field.
The purists howl but the game will keep on altering.
More so Interleague Play, Expanded Playoffs and the Steroid Era Ruined The Game. It also would have been good to have All of The Teams in The U.S.
Not necessarily for the better however.
I liked your video a lot and I have subscribed. Good work!
Wow… no wonder Koufax and Gibson were so dominant- the mound was 10” higher until the late 60s. I think in 69 it went to present height. Imagine randy Johnson pitching from an 18” mound- frightening
It was 15" through 1968, and 10" thereafter.
Unlike Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson pitched quite a few years after 1968 when the mound was lowered.
Guy is 1869 were throwing 20 mph
Jim Creighton is a dead ringer for Fran Tarkenton 😮
Glad I found this channel !!
Loved it.
I didn’t know any of these old time rules
When did the chewing tobacco era end in baseball?
Good stuff. Thanks for posting.
"banned square bats, for bunting" 🤣
Great video. Subscribed!!!
Excellent
I think everyone should be aware of the history of baseball, because people tend to think 'change is bad' when the game needs to change, I come with ideas to improve things all the time, including baseball
heres a few
make the baseball easy to produce and consistent, instead of hand crafted
less groves on the ball to make it harder to spin, move the mound back
count home runs as 'outs' but keep the runs scored
put limits on how many runs per inning, like 3 runs, unless a team is behind so they can catch up
if a team is ahead by a large enough margin by the 7th inning, end the game, no point in playing later innings if the team has a less than 1 percent change of winning
limit it to 3strikes/3 balls
give the catcher a foam seat
only allow a player to play a position for 3 innings, so they have to change things up
allow some padding for batters to protect against hpb, or fielders, like first baseman
free base if a pitcher throws at a batters head
robo umps for balls/strikes
if game is tied in 9th+ innings, load the bases to get the game over with
add a larger first base in the foul territory, if they touch that they have to stay on first, if they touch the in play side of the base they are 'live' and can be tagged, instead of a guessing game of 'if they looked' at 2nd base
add a larger home plate, that extends forward, if the catcher is touching that when a player touches home they are out, instead of having to tag or collide
Interesting ideas. I think moving the mound back a few feet would be the most straightforward change. I'm not a huge proponent of tinkering with the rules, but it seems prudent to consider all possibilities.
@@thebaseballprofessor thanks for the reply, I do this for other sports as well, golf, hockey,
I'm trying to look for ways to make the game more interesting to watch and play, all ideas have to be tried out first, minor league players should test this stuff, I saw they did try out 'robo umps'
Tinkering continues. Most experiments are being tested in low-A. In a 9-inning tie game the 10th begins with a runner on second for each half. Very few games go beyond the 10th. Pitchers are timed. If the clock runs out the batter is awarded a ball. If the batter steps out of the batters box more than the maximum he is awarded a strike. Doubleheaders are 7 innings each.
And recently there are two lines that extend from 2nd base toward the outfield. One parallel from 1st base, the other parallel from 3rd. Short and 3rd players must stay on the 3rd base side of the infield and 1st and 2nd players must stay on the 1st base side of the infield. This kills the shift on left handed batters.
Have these sped up the game? This year we have had several 9-inning games played in 2 hours or less. Two more changes would help. When a new pitcher is brought in during an in-progress inning the pitcher should get no more than 2 practice pitches instead of 8, After all he's been warming up for some time. And then there's the great batter undressing when he reaches base. Ankle protection, shin protection, elbow protection, forearm protection, batting gloves off and sliding gloves on. Ridiculous ritual. This is not football where every play is contact. This year I have watched nearly 60 low-A games and have yet to see a batter hit on the protective parts. Usually they're plunked in the body.
I thought that was Doyle Lawson
SMHing my head, this is REALLY when baseball started to decline. Miss the better times MBGA!!! 😂😂😂
MBGA. Bring back 1860s rules. ;)
@@thebaseballprofessor 😂🤣
Very nice. I enjoyed the history of baseball it answered a great many questions I had. Great job!!!
Actually, modern pitchers are not getting “better,” they are using engineered sticky substances (last year’s brief moment of enforcement aside) to increase spin rates and pitch speeds to get out dumber all or nothing batters.
Considering the mound having been lowered, Hitters with better Eyes and Dinky Ballparks with Hitters that can use Steroids legally as of right now, I don't know how you can say that. Perhaps it would be helpful if you saw a video on Sandy Koufax or Greg Maddux. If that doesn't change your mind then nothing would I suppose.
@@DownriverBusinessEventsGroup 1. So you’re good with pitchers using super stickum? And with modern pitchers being as dumb as Gerrit Cole.
2. I saw both Koufax and Maddux pitch. Live. Koufax threw hard, but at the height of his career, knew how to pitch. Maddux was in another universe all together. He knew how to move the ball, could place it wherever he wanted, change speeds and arm angles. Modern pitchers, especially those wh depend on the super stickum, do nothing but rear back and throw, Nuke LaLoosh style. And, like Cole, are absolutely boring, both on the mound and off it.
Absolutely fascinating! Thank you for this!
Interesting, thank you
Great eye opener for me, who likes baseball, but never delved into the deep, storied past. Very entertaining.
Pitchers were also called "hurlers" back in the day too.
Very true
Very informative-and something I appreciate, not at bloated. Great video.
Pitchers are not better ? ? ?
Time to lower the mound.
Fascinating history 👏
After 1968, "The Year of the Pitcher," where Bob Gibson had an 1.21 ERA and Denny McLain had 31 wins, MBL management went into panic mode to try to get more offense into the game. They lowered the mound six inches and shrank the strike zone. The effect was minimal. Pitchers adapted by using more of the lower part of the strike zone. But, as said previously, the batters went more for power and HRs instead of good contact and base hits. Thus, more strikeouts and catchable fly balls.
*1.12 ERA.
It's not that pitchers have gotten better these days. It's a proven fact that umpiring has gotten worse!
I wish I was an unhittable pitcher lol
At least your an unpittable hitcher
@@harlow743 yeah true lol
i’d rather be an unpitchable hitter: more money in slugging 😀
@@bostonrailfan2427 Maybe an Untichable Puser
Well...who was it??
Great vid. Subbed.
Thanks for the journey from Mound to Home Plate.
Great video, very educational. Thank you!
Thank you for the information. I learned a couple new things. I think it's time for a change. They need to make the game more exciting. There are too many strikeouts. They need to get the ball in play like they used to when the game first started. I have been saying for several years now they need to limit the speed of the pitch to around 85 mph. If the ball exceeds that speed it is considered a ball no matter if it was in the strike zone or not.
You’re joking, right? If you want the game to be more exciting, then just move the pitching mound back a little more. Or, allow bats to be a larger diameter. Or, allow the ball to be woven tighter. Or, bring the bases closer together. Keep changing the rules of baseball and it will become a completely different game from what we grew up playing.
Excellent video
Excellent!!!