Put a little science into your softball technique.

You're a high school softball coach and you have a batch of young kids coming into your program every year. After years of ASA or Little League ball under inexperienced coaches, you cannot reasonably expect perfection.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

You are going to find the kids making the mistakes--and fighting you about the corrections. Since you may also have to remember that the kid received his previous coaching from a parent or a neighborhood fan.

Even when you are absolutely certain you are right, you might be wise to remember, "When in Rome, do as the experts do." Remember that different coaches have different philosophies and you might seriously listen to their recommendations. Conversely, when the players come into your program, they should be expected to do things your way.

However, this never really settles the issues involved, and the players will often revert to the techniques they were taught in their backyards or elementary fields by amateurs.

You might use another approach to meet the issues head on and explain that what some of your pupils were previously taught or allowed to do was simply wrong. This incurs a problem: You run the risk of alienating both the players and their parents.

We prefer a less confrontational approach, one that will settle the issues involved for both the players and all but the most recalcitrant parents. More importantly, it will be free of the coach's bias. It will rely on objective, observable evidence that has a clearly motivational effect on the players.

Our first objective teaching point will be to establish a simple benchmark for performance that everyone will be able to understand. For example, if we want to concentrate on throwing technique, including proper footwork, we will, for example, use a very simple frame of reference.

We will assume that most college coaches believe that a good athlete should be able to run from home to first in three seconds. We will take that standard and break it down into feet per second (20) and even fractions of that (10 feet per 1/2 second and five feet per 1/4 second) and allow the players to see the simple math involved for them.

Since many crucial plays are often decided by a step, the players come to understand that the small fractions of a second saved by proper technique can make a major difference in determining the outcome of games.

The next step is to simply time the players in an equal setting where they can demonstrate their performance in a "catch to throw to reception" format. We'll align the players at the same spot, have them field a ball at the same point, and then throw to the same designated target.

The clock will start when the ball is first touched by the fielder and end when it is caught by the target. We will call out the times for feedback and motivation.

The message is subtle, but very effective with our new players, who think they have more basic athletic ability than their competitors, yet still have poorer times in these drills.

Unless they are hopelessly stubborn, they will eventually realize that something must be done to cut down on their times, giving the coach the perfect moment to discuss and change techniques.

With catchers throwing to second we employ a two-second standard from the catch to the reception at second base. But, since the runners can break as the ball leaves the pitcher's hand, the basic approach is still the same.

We let the new candidates use their previous technique, then ask them to try our approach, and we measure the difference. The players will usually see it our way within a few trials--with no heated arguments or harping, once they do the math.

A .25 second difference may not seem like much, but, using our 20 feet per second standard for runners, we see that .25 seconds puts runners five feet farther from the base when the ball arrives. Thus many runners trying to steal will be safe or out by mere inches.

We obviously can employ this 20-feet per second standard to our offensive work, as well, when dealing with base running techniques.

Case in point: We once had a very promising freshman, identified as a middle-school student, with high impact potential on both defense and offense. As a left-handed batter with excellent speed, power and the ability to bunt, she was a perfect choice for a spot in our order, except for one major flaw.

She had an extremely closed stance, which limited her power to the opposite field, and made her very vulnerable to inside pitches.

Despite suggestions to change during the summer between eighth and ninth grades, she preferred to keep her closed stance throughout ASA and Little League play.

But that changed very quickly once we timed the players from home to first, starting with the completion of the swing. Despite having very good speed, her times were consistently near four seconds, while other players with similar ability were near or under three seconds.

This provided a perfect teaching moment. Because of her closed stance, the first step by her back foot took her out toward the pitcher, instead of toward first base. I asked her to even out her stance and try it again. Her next two timings were 3.18 and 3.06, and we never had to discuss her stance again. The issue was settled right there.

That demonstration also brought home to the other new players of the importance of getting out of the batter's box as quickly as possible with the step toward first base. Waste half a second, and you lose 10 feet.

Perhaps the most unsettled controversy in base running concerns the runner's stance on base. Even at the highest levels of competition, you see both the "running start" (with the front foot on the base and the other foot behind it and moving forward as the pitcher approaches her release) and the "push-off start" (with the back foot against the base, pushing off on the actual release of the pitch).

We've done the math, and the difference is virtually negligible in a pure timing situation. However, whenever a pitcher is introduced into the equation, the issues of release point and the timing of the running start become crucial. You don't want him to be called out for leaving too soon.

An indecisive or insecure runner may actually leave too late and, consequently, lose valuable time. We therefore have all of our runners use the "push start" from every base to kill the risk of being called out for leaving too soon, even when we are not stealing.

"Station to station" running is only one aspect, however. The ability to take that extra base is crucial and involves more than aggressiveness and a "feel" for the game. It also requires a proper technique for rounding the bases that will cut down the time needed. Since the runner's speed is a constant, the only way to do this is by decreasing the total distance covered.

To make this point, time some of your faster new players from first to home without any instruction and announce the times. Then have several of the veterans with proper techniques, who have already timed out slower, station-to-station, do the same and announce their times.

The new players who do not use the proper techniques to round bases may be surprised to find that the "slower" veterans' times are as good as or better than theirs! This is an excellent way to explain the reason and introduce the techniques you require.

The use of sound science and mathematics will put you on very solid ground with even the most obstinate players and the parents when you seek to make changes in techniques.

This approach will also help disarm the parents who feel "politically connected" and may attempt to influence your supervisors when you don't see things their way. It certainly will trump pure opinion as a basis for the evaluation of personnel and line-ups.

More importantly, however, this approach will give you the valuable feedback you need to evaluate the techniques you teach at any given time. If you are truly objective and open to new ideas, it should also provide the support you may need in the future or corrections you need in the present.

I remember when the World and Olympic records in the high jump flat-lined until a guy by the name of Dick Fosbury came along with an unorthodox backward flopping technique that revolutionized the event and sent the records soaring.

The same is true of the "soccer style" kick in football. It produced longer and more accurate results that revolutionized that phase of the game.

That type of phenomenon may also happen in softball. You can never tell about softball players with an unconventional technique. You owe it to your player, your program, and the game in general to "test" a technique objectively, using scientific principles and math. Don't give anything a "knee jerk" dismissal because it doesn't conform to your present philosophy.

Eleven years ago I had a freshman player enter our program who did not conform to our basic batting techniques, but it was hard to argue with her "output," so we let her be. As a sophomore, she justified that decision with the most productive single season offensive performance in the history of our program and helped lead us to a 28-0 record and a State Championship!

By Duane Ford, Mifflinville, PA