PDA

View Full Version : Case For Sliding Into First


MikeKreevich
05-19-2002, 11:56 AM
First, let me state that i'm not suggesting that runners slide into first. I realize the danger of injury. I'm just arguing that diving head first gets you there faster. People like Hawk Harrelson have been saying for years that running through the bag gets you there faster and I don't buy it.
Sprinters in 100 yard races don't dive across the finish line but lean forward as far as they can at the end. They don't dive for the line because they would get torn up when they hit the track, especially on asphalt. Ballplayers, like A-Rod the other night, can dive for the bag. They save a stride or two and have the forgiving soft dirt surface to protect them from injury.
I don't suggest diving, only argue that it is faster.

rmusacch
05-19-2002, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by Guzman's Goat
First, let me state that i'm not suggesting that runners slide into first. I realize the danger of injury. I'm just arguing that diving head first gets you there faster. People like Hawk Harrelson have been saying for years that running through the bag gets you there faster and I don't buy it.
Sprinters in 100 yard races don't dive across the finish line but lean forward as far as they can at the end. They don't dive for the line because they would get torn up when they hit the track, especially on asphalt. Ballplayers, like A-Rod the other night, can dive for the bag. They save a stride or two and have the forgiving soft dirt surface to protect them from injury.
I don't suggest diving, only argue that it is faster.

That is funny that you guys bring up sliding into first. I was just reading a Q & A with Ron Gardenhire in this week's Baseball Weekly and they were asking him about weird things that have happened in the Metrodome and one of the things that he mentioned was a time last year when Cristian Guzman slided into first and ended up scoring on the play because of an error or two.

Spiff
05-19-2002, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by Guzman's Goat
First, let me state that i'm not suggesting that runners slide into first. I realize the danger of injury. I'm just arguing that diving head first gets you there faster. People like Hawk Harrelson have been saying for years that running through the bag gets you there faster and I don't buy it.
Sprinters in 100 yard races don't dive across the finish line but lean forward as far as they can at the end. They don't dive for the line because they would get torn up when they hit the track, especially on asphalt. Ballplayers, like A-Rod the other night, can dive for the bag. They save a stride or two and have the forgiving soft dirt surface to protect them from injury.
I don't suggest diving, only argue that it is faster.

It doesn't get you there faster, because you have to kind of set up your steps to dive. Sprinters lean forward b/c they time it by when your torso comes across the finish line, so they want it out in front. In baseball it's just when your foot (or hand) hits the bag. BTW I leaned during the 100 a week ago and wound up doing a sort of dive on a rubber track, and the tearing up part is no fun.

MikeKreevich
05-19-2002, 05:59 PM
Spiff, I knew someone would disagree. Until someone does a timed experiment, I will still have my beliefs.
And a funny thing about this thread is that I took my tag from Christian Guzman's goatee.

Nellie_Fox
05-20-2002, 03:29 AM
I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that if you keep running, you continue to provide force to maintain speed. The minute you dive, you begin decelerating.

FarWestChicago
05-20-2002, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that if you keep running, you continue to provide force to maintain speed. The minute you dive, you begin decelerating. Then you must have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night because you are correct. :D:

Nellie_Fox
05-20-2002, 03:46 AM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Then you must have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night because you are correct. :D:
LOL...Actually, I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express in Des Moines on Tuesday night; I was doing some consulting with Drake University and there is one right on campus.

FarWestChicago
05-20-2002, 03:48 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox

LOL...Actually, I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express in Des Moines on Tuesday night; I was doing some consulting with Drake University and there is one right on campus. OK, this is spooky. Maybe there is something to those commercials after all. :D:

Garrison
05-20-2002, 09:30 AM
When you dive you stop driving forward and sort of hang in midair and fall. The momentum is all that keeps you going and that runs out faster than running through it. Unless avoiding a tag, diving into first isn't going to help you any. I remember Royce doing it once last year.

KruseControl04
05-20-2002, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox
I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that if you keep running, you continue to provide force to maintain speed. The minute you dive, you begin decelerating.

Yeah, and plus when you dive into first you have to start getting ready to dive way before you actually get near to the bag. So in my opinion diving into first actually slows you down.

ode to veeck
05-20-2002, 10:24 AM
All the arguments aside, I used to love it when Chet Lemon used to do it regularly on close plays at first.

You're also expending some body energy to turn your torso towards the ground, though this my be more than traded off vs energy gained through gravity's accerating force downward, in fact I've heard the argument that this is a net advantage, by bringing additonal muscles (body) into play by redirecting some of this acceleration (the strectch) and in the the reach, you actually touch the bag sooner. I'm not sure I buy it cause, you've also stopped using your legs once you go airborne and friction with the air is decelerating your overall forward motion. Never saw any detailed quantitative, physical analysis on these but I did love watching Chet do it, just to make the game different and a little more exciting.

A flip side type of discussion I remember on sprinters, who start on all fours (essentially) at the ground in the blocks: I remember Steve Prefontaine's coach at Oregon arguing this was a net loss vs starting a sprint from a standing position (as the distance runners do), because you're spending too much energy in the first few steps, raising your center of gravity from closer to the ground to a striding position (in spite of the fact that you get to "kick out" off the blocks).

Steve's coach actually ran some tests with Steve and other runners on short distances and claimed the times were consistently shorter starting the sprints from a standing position, but said it looked too out of place in an actual race so much so that he couldnot' get sprinters to try it in an actual race (no suspension of disbelief possible on the part of sprinters and coaches elsewhere)