Time analysis of throwing motions to second base by baseball catchers: Comparison of three throwing motions

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate a baseball catcher’s throwing time to second base using three throwing motion types. The subjects were professional (n = 4) and college (n = 12) baseball catchers. Two high-speed cameras were set to capture the throwing motion, while one was set to capture the net on second base. The throwing time of quick throw (throwing motion to release the ball immediately after catching the ball rather than usual throwing motion) was significantly shorter than those of usual throw (throwing motion used during games and practice) and fast ball throw (throwing motion to increase the ball velocity than usual throwing motion). From this result, it became clear that quick throw is the optimal throwing motion when judged by time. Thus, with respect to correlations between variables, there were significant positive correlations between throwing and motion times (usual throw: r = 0.760; fast ball throw: r = 0.719; quick throw: r = 0.767), and between throwing and airborne times (usual throw: r = 0.784; fast ball throw: r = 0.744; quick throw: r = 0.806), for all three throwing motions. However, negative correlations were shown between throwing and release times in usual throw and fast ball throw. The results suggest that, to shorten the throwing time, it is necessary to shorten the hold and stride times and to improve the ability to throw the ball as fast as possible with a shorter motion time.

Keywords

Airborne time ball velocity fastball throw quick throw

Introduction

The study will focus on a catcher’s throwing time to second base since the most frequently stolen base is second in baseball. When a runner attempts to steal second base, the catcher must complete the following actions in a short time: (1) quickly change the caught ball, (2) get up quickly, (3) step on the lead, and (4) throw with a small arm swing. Several studies have examined the mechanics of catchers throwing to second base,^1–7 but there are only a few studies on the throwing time to second base. Eto⁸ reported that the throw to second base must be completed in about 2.0 s since a professional baseball player with fast sprinting velocity can run from first to second base in about 3.3–3.5 s, and the time from when the pitcher starts his pitching motion to when the catcher catches the pitch is about 1.3 s. Sakurai et al.⁹ investigated age-related differences in throwing techniques used by a catcher and reported that the throwing time among college catchers was 2.2 s. Also, Sawamura et al.¹⁰ demonstrated that the throwing times for step and non-step throws among college catchers were 2.11 and 2.15 s, respectively, and Miyanishi and Sakurai¹¹ indicated that the throwing time for step throws among college catchers was 1.91 s. In specific, Takebayashi et al.¹² investigated throwing motion by dividing participants into superior and inferior groups based on throwing time and reported that superior and inferior groups were 1.92 and 2.09 s, respectively. When it comes to a professional level, Ozeki¹³ reported that the throwing time of professional baseball catchers was less than 2 s. This implied that to be successful in stopping base stealing, catchers must reduce the time between their catching and releasing motions and increase the velocity of their throws.

Numerous throwing techniques for improving the quickness of the throwing motion in the baseball have been proposed (Kawamura,¹⁴ Hatori and Miyazaki¹⁵). However, although there are several ways to increase the ball speed in baseball pitchers (Shimoyama et al.¹⁶), there are few suggestions for increasing the ball speed for baseball catchers. Accordingly, Kawabata et al.¹⁷ observed that catchers with shorter throwing times attempted to increase the initial velocity of the ball even if it increased their motion time. Also, Takahashi et al.¹⁸ demonstrated that a large wrist displacement in the throwing arm from lead foot contact to release increased the initial velocity of the ball. In addition to the necessity of a quick throwing motion, these studies also suggested the importance of increasing ball velocity. Although differences can be found between scientific studies and instructive methods in baseball, both the reduction of motion times and the increasing of ball velocity are indispensable to prevent base stealing. Regarding the relationship between the reduction of motion times and the increasing of ball velocity, Sawamura et al.¹⁰ indicated that the ball can take longer to reach second base if the catcher’s throwing motion becomes too large because of throwing the ball at a higher velocity, and that the ball velocity cannot be increased if the throwing motion becomes too small. That is, the reduction of motion times and the increasing of ball velocity have an antithetical relationship, so which throwing motion is effective to shorten the throwing time to second base remains unclear. Solving this problem is important because it could help clarify ways to improve throwing technique. If the characteristics of the timing of these two throwing motions can be clarified, a new coaching method to shorten the throwing time to second base can be proposed.

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to clarify which throwing method is effective for shortening the throwing time to the second base using the following three conditions: (1) throwing motion used during games and practice (=usual throwing motion), (2) throwing motion to increase the ball velocity than usual throwing motion, (3) throwing motion to release the ball immediately after catching the ball rather than usual throwing motion.

Materials and methods

Participants

The participants in the present study were male professional (n = 4) and college (n = 12) right-handed baseball catchers (age [mean ± standard deviation (SD)]: 21.4 ± 3.7 years, height: 1.74 ± 0.05 m, body mass: 74.1 ± 6.8 kg). The Wakayama Medical University Ethics Committee has determined that ethical review is not necessary and has approved the experiment. Before the experiment, the aims and risks of the study were explained in full to all participants, and written informed consent was obtained.

Experimental procedure

To simulate actual game situations, all participants wore catcher’s gear (face mask, catcher’s helmet, chest protector, and shin guards). Before testing, the participants were required to perform test trials of throwing to second base in addition to their regular warm-ups. After catching pitches in the middle-center part of the strike zone, participants were asked to throw the ball toward the center of a net (2.5 m × 2.5 m) placed on second base using the following three throwing motions: usual throw (throwing motion used during games and practice), fast ball throw (throwing motion to increase the ball velocity than usual throwing motion), and quick throw (throwing motion to release the ball immediately after catching the ball rather than usual throwing motion). The order of three types of throwing motions in the tests was random. Failure trials were defined the ball thrown by the pitcher was not a strike, the ball thrown by the catcher took a one-hop, and the ball thrown by the catcher did not hit the net at second base. The trial was carried out repeatedly until the best throw was obtained as judged by both the participants and the measurers.

Two high-speed cameras (Casio, Tokyo, Japan) recorded the catchers’ throwing motions, while another camera (Casio, Tokyo, Japan) recorded the net at second base (Figure 1). The three cameras were synchronized using a wireless synchronizer (DKH, Tokyo, Japan). In the experiments involving the professional catchers, the throwing motions and the net on second base were recorded at 240 Hz. In the experiment involving the collegiate catchers, the throwing motions were recorded at 210 Hz and the net at second base was recorded at 240 Hz.

Definition of throwing time

In the present study, throwing time started when the ball was caught and ended when the ball reached second base. As shown in Figure 2, this time was first divided into two primary segments, motion time (ball catch to ball release) and airborne time (ball release to arrival at second base). Motion time was further divided into the following four segments: step time (ball catch to lead foot contact with the ground), hold time (ball catch to ball in throwing hand), stride time (ball in throwing hand to lead foot contact), and release time (lead foot contact to ball release). Each segment’s time was calculated by multiplying the number of frames in each segment by the seconds per frame.

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using the statistical analysis package SPSS 23.0 for Windows (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Differences in the mean values between the three throwing motion types were determined using one-way repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) for all parameters. The assumption of sphericity was verified by the Mauchly test. When the assumption of sphericity was not met, the significance of F-ratios was adjusted according to the Greenhouse–Geisser procedure. In the case that a significant main effect was recognized, the differences among the three throwing motion types were assessed using multiple comparison tests with Bonferroni correction. The relationships between throwing and segment times for each of the throwing motion types were examined using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The level of statistical significance for all tests was set at α = 0.05.

Results

Comparison of segment time between the three throwing motions

Table 1 shows the mean throwing, motion, and airborne times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. The mean throwing times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 2.051 ± 0.105, 2.066 ± 0.1, and 1.975 ± 0.11 s, respectively. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant main effects of throwing motion types in the mean throwing (p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.458), motion (p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.705), and airborne (p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.591) times. The mean throwing time for quick throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p < 0.001) and fast ball throw (p = 0.004). The mean motion times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 0.748 ± 0.066, 0.784 ± 0.067, and 0.645 ± 0.067 s, respectively. The mean motion time for quick throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p < 0.001) and fast ball throw (p < 0.001). The mean airborne times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 1.303 ± 0.069, 1.282 ± 0.07, and 1.33 ± 0.072 s, respectively. The mean airborne time for fast ball throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p = 0.008) and quick throw (p < 0.001), and the mean airborne time for usual throw was significantly shorter than that for quick throw (p = 0.002).

Table 1.

Difference in throwing time, motion time, and airborne time between usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw.

	Usual throw	Fast ball throw	Quick throw	Comparison
Throwing time (s)	2.051 ± 0.105	2.066 ± 0.1	1.975 ± 0.11	b, c
Motion time (s)	0.748 ± 0.066	0.784 ± 0.067	0.645 ± 0.067	b, c
Airborne time (s)	1.303 ± 0.069	1.282 ± 0.07	1.33 ± 0.072	a, b, c

Data were means ± SDs

All comparisons significant at p < .05.

^aUsual throw versus fast ball throw. ^bUsual throw versus quick throw. ^cFast ball throw versus quick throw.

Table 2 shows the mean step, hold, stride, and release times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. The mean step times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 0.551 ± 0.077, 0.581 ± 0.085, and 0.445 ± 0.069 s, respectively. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significant main effects of throwing motion types in the mean step (p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.663), hold (p = 0.002, partial η² = 0.395), stride (p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.588), and release (p = 0.465, partial η² = 0.050) times. The mean step time for quick throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p < 0.001) and fast ball throw (p < 0.001). The mean hold times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 0.254 ± 0.024, 0.246 ± 0.036, and 0.216 ± 0.03 s, respectively. The mean hold time for quick throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p = 0.004) and fast ball throw (p < 0.001). The mean stride times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 0.297 ± 0.076, 0.335 ± 0.086, and 0.228 ± 0.066 s, respectively. The mean stride time for quick throw was significantly shorter than those for usual throw (p < 0.001) and fast ball throw (p < 0.001). The mean release times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 0.197 ± 0.021, 0.203 ± 0.027, and 0.2 ± 0.017 s, respectively. No significant differences were observed between release times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw.

Table 2.

Difference in step time, hold time, stride time, and release time between usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw.

	Usual throw	Fast ball throw	Quick throw	Comparison
Step time (s)	0.551 ± 0.077	0.581 ± 0.085	0.445 ± 0.069	b, c
Hold time (s)	0.254 ± 0.024	0.246 ± 0.036	0.216 ± 0.03	b, c
Stride time (s)	0.297 ± 0.076	0.335 ± 0.086	0.228 ± 0.066	b, c
Release time (s)	0.197 ± 0.021	0.203 ± 0.027	0.2 ± 0.017

Data were means ± SDs

All comparisons significant at p < .05.

^bUsual throw versus quick throw. ^cFast ball throw versus quick throw.

Relationships between segment times for the three throwing motions

Figure 3 shows the relationships between throwing and motion time and throwing and airborne time for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. Significant positive correlations were observed between throwing and motion time (usual throw: r = 0.760, p = 0.001; fast ball throw: r = 0.719, p = 0.002; quick throw: r = 0.767, p = 0.001) and between throwing and airborne time (usual throw: r = 0.784, p < 0.001; fast ball throw: r = 0.744, p = 0.001; quick throw: r = 0.806, p < 0.001) for all three throwing motions.

Figure 4 shows the relationships between throwing and step, hold, stride and release times for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. Significant positive correlations were observed between throwing and step time (usual throw: r = 0.827, p < 0.001; fast ball throw: r = 0.727, p = 0.001; quick throw: r = 0.768, p = 0.001) and between throwing and stride time (usual throw: r = 0.876, p < 0.001; fast ball throw: r = 0.696, p = 0.003; quick throw: r = 0.638, p = 0.008) for all three throwing motions. A significant negative correlation was observed between throwing and release time for usual throw and fast ball throw (usual throw: r = $-$ 0.624, p = 0.01; fast ball throw: r = $-$ 0.526, p = 0.036).

Figure 5 shows the relationships between airborne and release time for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. A significant negative correlation was observed between airborne and throwing time for usual throw (r = $-$ 0.571, p = 0.021).

Discussion

Throwing time (ball catch to arrival at second base), motion time (ball catch to ball release), and airborne time (ball release to arrival at second base).

The purpose of the present study was to clarify which of three throwing motions (usual throw, fast ball throw, or quick throw) was most effective for throwing a ball to second base in a shorter amount of time. As a result, the throwing time of quick throw was the shortest of the three conditions. Comparing whether this result was the influence of a reduced motion or airborne time for the three throwing motions, the mean motion and airborne times for quick throw were significantly shorter and longer, respectively, than those for usual throw and fast ball throw. These results indicated that the reduction in throwing time was caused by the shortening of motion time, revealing the importance of quick throwing motion. Takebayashi et al.¹² investigated throwing motion by dividing participants into superior and inferior groups based on throwing time. They reported that both the throwing and motion times were shorter in the superior than in the inferior group; no significant difference was observed in ball speed between the groups, indicating the importance of a quick throwing motion, similar to the present study. It was considered that the coaches knew from experience that a reduced motion time led to a reduction in throwing time because of the amount of practice needed to improve the quickness of the throwing motion during fielding practice for the catcher.

The results of throwing, motion, and airborne time of the fast ball throw indicated that fast ball throw achieved a high throwing speed by securing a longer preparation time, which increased the ball speed. However, as the throwing time for fast ball throw was significantly longer than that for quick throw, it is likely difficult to reduce the throwing time by shortening the airborne time.

Significant positive correlations were observed between throwing and motion time and between throwing and airborne time for all three throwing motion types. That is, the catchers with a short throwing time had shorter motion and airborne times, suggesting that they had the ability to throw the ball at a high ball speed, even with a quick throwing motion like quick throw. This result suggests that it is necessary to practice to quickly release the caught ball in order to shorten the throwing time. In addition, the training to increase the ball speed in a quick throwing motion is also necessary. Several training methods exist for increasing throwing speed, including a long throw that throws the ball far at high initial velocity. Kawabata et al.¹⁷ reported finding significant negative correlations between throwing distance and airborne time, that catchers with a long throwing distance had a short airborne time, and that to obtain a higher initial ball velocity at release, catchers need to adopt the practice of increasing the throw distance. Additionally, Shimoyama et al.¹⁶ investigated the relationship between throwing distance and ball speed as training for increasing the ball speed. As a result, they reported that a long throw with the highest initial velocity in the horizontal direction was a 40-m-long throw in which the release angle was reduced. Therefore, as the distance from home plate to second base is 38.184 m, it is considered that throwing to the second base itself is the effective training to increase the ball speed.

Step time (ball catch to lead foot contact with the ground), hold time (ball catch to ball in throwing hand), and stride time (ball in throwing hand to lead foot contact).

The results of step, hold, and stride time of the quick throw indicate that the reduction in motion time was caused by a shortening of the hold and stride times. According to a baseball teaching book, Eto⁸ indicated that quick footwork and a quick motion to grab the ball from the catcher’s mitt were needed to improve the quickness of the throwing motion. Kawamura¹⁴ suggested that “quickly placing weight on the axis foot and making small steps” is important for quick throwing. The results of the present study support the contents pointed out in the baseball teaching book and highlight the importance of quick footwork and motion to grab the ball from the catcher’s mitt.

As a result of examining the relationship between throwing and hold time and throwing and step time, the catchers with a shorter throwing time shortened the stride and step time for all three throwing motions. This result suggests that athletes with short throwing time were superior in their ability to move their lower limbs quickly. Hatori and Miyazaki¹⁵ investigated the motion time for “step throwing” (the throwing motion in stepping forward with the stepping foot without moving the pivoting foot) and “hop throwing” (the throwing motion in stepping forward with the stepping foot after stepping forward with the pivoting foot). As a result, they found that the motion time for “hop throwing” was significantly shorter than that for “step throwing.” Sawamura et al.¹⁰ also investigated the times for “no-step throwing” (a throwing motion identical to “step throwing”) and “lead-step throwing” (identical to “hop throwing”). As a result, the mean motion time for “lead-step throwing” was not significantly different from that for “no-step throwing”; however, the throwing and airborne times for “lead-step throwing” were significantly shorter than those for “no-step throwing.” Although the present study did not provide specific instructions for step motion, the participants used the same as those for “hop throwing” and “lead-step throwing.” Therefore, it was thought that to reduce the step time, including the stride time, it is important to step with the left foot quickly with a small step length. A squat jump training to increase the power of the lower limbs to quickly rise from a crouching posture and agility training to increase quickness may help improve step time.

Release time (lead foot contact to ball release)

No significant differences were observed in mean release time between usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw. However, the ratios of release to motion time for usual throw, fast ball throw, and quick throw were 26.3%, 25.9%, and 31.1%, respectively, with that of quick throw being the largest. That is, it is thought that quick throw increased the release time ratio to obtain the minimum ball speed reachable to second base in a short motion time.

As a result of investigating the relationship between throwing and release time, a significant negative correlation was observed between usual throw and fast ball throw. This finding indicated that catchers with a short throwing time had a long release time. To increase the initial velocity of the ball, the impulse to the ball must be increased. That is, if force is added for a long time, a high initial velocity can be achieved. A significant negative correlation was observed between the airborne and release time for usual throw. That is, as catchers with a long release time had a shorter airborne time for usual throw, it is inferred that they were throwing with a short airborne time to increase the ball velocity by securing a long time to add force to the ball. However, no significant correlations were observed between the airborne and release time for fast ball throw. In other words, it was revealed that a long release time was not reflected in the airborne time despite securing a long release time for catchers with a short throwing time in fast ball throw. Perhaps there is a boundary line that cannot reduce the airborne time further, even if the release time is further extended beyond a certain period of time.

No significant correlations were observed between the throwing and release time or the airborne and release time for quick throw. This result indicates that there were catchers who had reduced the airborne time by throwing a high-speed ball even with the same release time, because the release time was almost the same time (about 2 s) regardless of the airborne time. Takahashi et al.¹⁸ reported that catchers need to perform a throwing motion so that the ball can be accelerated efficiently with the distal end having a small mass and moment of inertia, and the initial velocity of the ball increasing as the ball and head are as close as possible by raising the elbow high during arm cocking. In other words, it is thought that some catchers have throwing techniques and physical fitness that can increase the ball velocity in a short time, as indicated by Takahashi et al.¹⁸ However, further investigation using motion analysis is necessary to clarify these issues.

Although this study was able to clarify the time to be improved in order to shorten the throwing time, it was not clear what kind of motion was effective. This is the limit of this study. In the future, it will be necessary to analyze the catcher’s movement (kinematics of throwing arms, step work of lower limbs, etc.) with a short movement time focusing on the movement.

Conclusion

The motion type with the shortest throwing time was quick throw. To shorten the throwing time based on the characteristics of quick throw, it is important for coaches to emphasize shortening the time from ball catch to lead foot contact with the ground and to throw the ball at a high velocity, even with a short release time.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Koichi Kawabata

References

Chen

Lee

HJ.

Comparison of the catcher’s traditional throw-down versus pith-out. In: Sato K, Sands WA and Mizuguchi S (eds) Proceedings of 32nd international conference of biomechanics in sports. Johnson City, TN, USA, 12–16 July 2014, pp. 513–516.

Fortenbaugh

Fleisig

Bolt

Coming down: throwing mechanics of baseball catchers. In: Jensen R, Ebben W, Petushek E, et al. (eds) Proceedings of 28th international conference of biomechanics in sports. Marquette, Michigan, USA, 19–23 July 2010, pp. 356–359.

Oliver

Lohse

Gascon

Kinematics and kinetics of youth baseball catchers and pitchers. Sports 2015; 3: 246–257.

Peng

Wang

LH.

Lower extremity muscle activation and kinematics of catchers when throwing using various squatting and throwing postures. J Sports Sci Med 2015; 14: 484–493.

Plummer

Oliver

GD.

Quantitative analysis of kinematics and kinetics of catchers throwing to second base. J Sports Sci 2013; 31: 1108–1116.

Plummer

Oliver

GD.

The relationship between gluteal muscle activation and throwing kinematics in baseball and softball catchers. J Strength Cond Res 2014; 28: 87–96.

Plummer

Oliver

GD.

Descriptive analysis of kinematics and kinetics of catchers throwing to second base from their knees. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2016; 29: 107–112.

Eto

Kangaeru chikara o nobasu! junia yakyū ‘tōshu hoshu’ renshū menyū 150. Tokyo: Ikeda Publishing, 2009. (in Japanese).

Sakurai

Elliott

Grove

JR.

Age-related differences in throwing techniques used by the catcher in baseball. Pediatr Exerc Sci 1994; 6: 225–235.

10.

Sawamura

Kuribayashi

Hosokawa

A study of catchers’ throwing to stop stealing 2nd base: the comparison lead-step with no-step throwing. Artes Liberales 1997; 60: 197–215. (in Japanese).

11.

Miyanishi

Sakurai

Yakyū no hoshu no kuikkusurō ni kansuru baiomekanikusu kenkyū∼ suteppu nage to hiza tsuki nage no hikaku∼. In: Proceedings of the 21st biannual congress of Japanese Society of Biomechanics. Aichi, Japan, 8–10 September 2010, p. 117. (in Japanese).

12.

Takebayashi

Masu

Tanaka

, et al. Characteristic of the trunk and limbs movements during throwing in baseball catchers. Tokyo J Phys Edu, Health Sport Sci 2014; 5: 1–8, http://tokyo-taiikugakkai.jp/wp-content/uploads/9e2ac2145a7f974492759940b208ea11.pdf (accessed 22 May 2019).

13.

Ozeki

Yakyū ryoku sutoppuwotchi de wakaru ‘nobiru jinzai’. Tokyo: Kodansha, 2006. (in Japanese).

14.

Kawamura

Kyatchā no kagaku. Tokyo: Yosensha Publishing, 2015. (in Japanese).

15.

Hatori

Miyazaki

Analytical study of catcher’s throwing technique to the second base. Bull Tokyo Gakugei Univ Sect V 1982; 34: 203–211. (in Japanese).

16.

Shimoyama

Shimada

Kawamura

, et al. Significance of long-distance play catch as speed training in a baseball pitcher. Jpn J Coach Stud 2013; 27: 59–66. (in Japanese).

17.

Kawabata

Urata

Ito

Time analysis of the catcher’s throwing motion to second Base. Jpn J Coach Stud 2013; 26: 197–202. (in Japanese).

18.

Takahashi

Fujii

, et al. Hoshu no surōingu dōsa ni kansuru kisoteki kenkyū. In: Proceedings of the 49th conference of Japan Society of Physical Education, Health and Sport Sciences. Ehime, Japan, 5–7 October 1998, p. 371. (in Japanese).