Talk:Strike zone

Bad definition

"Pentagonal" is an adjective. The subject of the first sentence needs a noun. Perhaps the author meant "pentagonal volume"? --12.10.161.41 (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MLB strike zone

I wonder if the MLB strike zone is acutally getting closer to the rulebook? MLB seems to be using Questec a lot, and I'd imagine the umpires are being pressured to adapt. Any thoughts?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by PSzalapski (talk • contribs) 19:45, 7 September 2004.

I'm going to make an edit here. Please provide a source if you think the enforced strike zone is still really far from the rulebook definition. --PSzalapski 15:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rethinking this page

This page could use some rethinking -- or rather, I think the concept of a baseball strike deserves its own page. If anything, the definition of a strike zone should be a section of the Strike page, and not vice versa. I'd be willing to make this change if there is consensus. --Robert Daeley 23:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Robert Daeley here -- but what do we do with a ball? YB 3 04:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest subsuming the whole discussion under a topic called Balls and strikes (baseball). This could also include discussions of strikeouts, bases on balls (walks), and perhaps even foul balls and hit batsmen. I would be willing to write, contribute, collaborate, or review. Dodiad 00:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Right now, both "ball" and "strike" redirect to here. Base on balls contains a link to here, with the link piped through the word "balls." Yet "ball" is only defined indirectly here. Another weakness is this: the article lists nine ways to get a strike, but only two of these have anything to do with the strike zone. The other kinds of strike are defined by foul lines, by batter's action, etc. One might say that strike is the superior (i.e., more notable) concept, with strike zone being subsidiary to it. So an article on Balls and strikes (baseball) seems an excellent solution. I'd keep Strike zone around. (So the proposal is for a split, not a move.) Strike zone can have the history, the interpretation, the difference between leagues, euphomisms of TV announcers, etc. about the zone. Hult041956 23:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone still working on this? Eudemis (talk) 13:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there should be an article on strikes in general, especially given that this article in its current state doesn't even mention the more common definition of a strike - when the batter swings and misses. I'd also be interested in a history of the terminology itself. (For instance, why is it called a "strike" when it is defined by the bat specifically not striking the ball?) Balls and strikes (baseball) now just redirects to Baseball rules, which has the information there, but somewhat buried. (It's a very long article, which seems to be more about strategy than actual rules. But that's another discussion altogether.) Given that the strike is one of the most fundamental concepts in baseball, it surely deserves its own article. The ball, maybe not so much. Everything you need to know about balls can be explained in this article. But there's many more ways to get a strike than there are to get a ball, so it should be covered separately. Lurlock (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

This topic is written based on US Major League baseball. While MLB may set the standard, I believe definitions of strike zones and all sorts of other baseball terms are based on the league... What about little league, etc.? If the article doesn't want to address other leagues at least clarify that all the "facts" here pertain to MLB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.96.155.194 (talk) 19:40, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Strike Zone: Volumetric or Planar ?

USA MLB Strike Zone

Although my own legacy experience in Baseball agrees with the “volumetric” definition of the Strike Zone given here in Wiki, recent closer examination of the Official Rules(1) reveals only a “planar” definition of the "Strike Zone".

Both the text definition(2) and its single referenced Strike Zone Diagram (Pg. 25, No Figure Number) support only a “planar” definition. In the text, upper and lower limits are described as “lines” and in the Diagram, the Strike Zone is pictured as a vertical rectangular plane standing above - and presumably in line with - the front edge of Home Plate. This plane would be the front (facing the Pitcher) surface of the 7-sided volumetric “pentagonal prism” in the current Wiki definition. Or, borrowing an over-used metaphor, this surface would be the “front-door” of the volume which also has 2 “side-doors” and 2 angled “back-doors”.

Also, it would appear that early, post-pitch, commercial computer graphics representations of the Strike Zone had been influenced by a planar – not volumetric – definition (although some more recent systems display a cube-like volume above Home Plate)(3). I believe Broadcast versions still use the simpler – and possibly more in line with the Rules – planar version.

The 2 different definitions do affect what qualifies as a "Strike" and what does not. (More on this later.)

All this of course is modified by the anachronistic “the Strike Zone is whatever the Umpire says it is”.

I would welcome discussion on this and related subjects.

Satchelp (talk) 07:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC) For Love of The Game, Ed Frank[reply]

The official rule is:

"The Strike Zone is defined as that area over homeplate the upper limit of which is a horizontal line at the midpoint between the top of the shoulders and the top of the uniform pants, and the lower level is a line at the hollow beneath the kneecap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."

The definition says "area" (which is usually considered two dimensional) combined with a third dimension delimiting the height of the zone. So, that gives us three dimensions and that weird pentagonal prism. I would agree with you, though, that outside of this article, I have never seen it described three dimensionally. All of this is of course "in theory," since the umpire makes the calls. At least for the time being. I wonder if computers will do it in say 15 years. Anyway, hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.32.17 (talk) 06:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(1)http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/downloads/y2008/official_rules/02_definition_of_terms.pdf (2)Ibid, Rule 2.00 - Definitions of Terms (3)http://www.questec.com/movies/baseball5.mpg

Yes, I agree the Rule says "area". However, I believe it is just as likely that "area" is referring to that 2-dimensional planar zone specifically pictured in the solitary un-numbered Figure as standing vertically above and as wide as the front-edge (presumably, since the Figure is not clear on this) of Home Plate. Also, the word "line" - used twice - suggests the upper and lower limit/level of that planar zone in the Figure. Another consideration is that the author may be using "area" generically (as in the sense of "region") rather than geometrically as in Height times Width. Volume may be what the author had in mind, but Area seems to be what is pictured and described. Incidentally, in favor of the Volumetric argument, I have learned that MLB evaluations of Home Plate Umpire performance on "called" pitches uses PITCHfx trajectory data to track pitches beyond the planar "front door", effectively validating the Volumetric Strike Zone definition. C'est la vie. Satchelp (talk) 23:19, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Strike zone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111224181907/http://www.thisgreatgame.com/1968.html to http://www.thisgreatgame.com/1968.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]