Prep Zone

By Steve

October 8, 2007 5:49 PM | Link to this

Slow pitch if fun to watch for offensive displays, but when I covered a couple of teams for a small paper when fast-pitch cranked up in the mid 90s, I was hooked. fast pitch offers up a hundred times more drama, and to me is on a par with watching two great baseball teams slug it out.

Also, fast-pitch softball offers a chance for scholarship play at the collegiate and Olympic level.

Slow pitch was fun in its day, but fast is the way to go.

By GaSouthAlum

October 8, 2007 10:26 PM | Link to this

I’ll agree that the sport is going where the scholarship is, but I think that is sad.

Personally, I have always liked the slow-pitch game better than fast-pitch. If I want to watch a three-person game with a stick, I’ll go catch a half-rubber game.

My argument has always been to offer fast-pitch in the fall and slow-pitch in the spring. The hardcore girls will still go out for fast-pitch, and more numbers will participate if slow-pitch is offered at another time of the year. This should really be all about participation and not about scholarship opportunities. But sadly, that is the way all high school sports (football excluded) are becoming. It’s all about summer all-star teams and AAU coaches that have bigger endorsement deals than most colleges and getting that precious college scholarship. Most parents don’t realize that their little Julie and Johnny are just average and not the next Chipper or Mia Hamm.

By Slow-pitch by choice

October 9, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this

In my opinion slow-pitch is the better game. Sure fast-pitch may be where the scholarships are, but after college what do most softball players do? They go back to slow-pitch in leagues and travel teams.The travel team I play on in the summer won the USSSA, ASA, and ISA world and not one word was in the paper even from the ASA National Tournament when the Sandy Plains Outlaws were the only Georgia team in the 19 and under age bracket. I find it a lot more fun to have a batting average of .833 in slow-pitch as opposed to .244 in fast-pitch. I played fast-pitch for a while but found it was more of a mental game than a game that required skills and talent. Many people say it is harder to hit a fast-pitch pitch, but if you ask any coach they will tell you it is the exact opposite. In fast-pitch you can just stick your bat out and the ball goes somewhere. Behind a slow-pitch pitch you have to generate your own power to hit the ball. I was selected as MVP for a a national tournament we played in and my batting average was over .700 and still nothing was in the paper, yet every time you open up the newspaper to the sports section there are full pages about fast-pitch. There will be articles about fast-pitch teams that came in 5th place out of 6 teams. It’s just a shame how slow-pitch is getting the shaft.

By iluvmccann

October 10, 2007 11:59 AM | Link to this

My daughter has played fastpitch for 8 yrs after 2 years of slowpitch and the example that i use when people ask why we enjoy fastpitch better is this: People love to watch the home run derby during the All-Star game. It fun to watch them launch baseballs 500 feet. We admire the strength and power it takes to smack them over and over like that. For baseball fans, would you like for every game to be like that? Of course not. Its fun to watch for an evening but baseball is about quickness, skill, mental cat-and- mouse games between pitcher and batter. Not who can hit it the farthest the most times. Thats the difference with fast and slow-pitch. It isnt fun (my opinion only) to just watch people launch balls over and over again. I like the speed of the game, the intensity of a 1-0 ballgame with a runner on third and 2 outs in the last inning. Hitting .700 is fun, but where is the challenge???????