AboutTom Schott Expertise I will deal with the major leagues only from 19th century to present. I`m good on baseball history, records, statistics, ballparks. I don't do off-the-field stuff. Please if you already know the answer to the question, please don't ask it. I don't want to play "stump the expert."
Experience I've written on the subject, and I have substantial library of resources.
Organizations SABR
Publications Numerous encyclopedia, newspaper, magazine articles. One book, several book chapters.
Question Dear Tom: Nothing frustrates me more than what at times seems to be an amorphous strike zone. What IS the strike zone as defined by MLB today? Is it different for college and high school and little league? Obviously at the lower levels umpires are more generous to the pitchers to move games along. MLB seems to get ridiculous with deference to the hitters, specifically with the "high strike"--is it the "letters" or the armpits or the sternum? Some umps it seems as if it is the bottom of the rib cage. Please discuss--and thank you!
Answer Eddie,
There's nothing amorphous about the strike zone according to the rules.
Major League Baseball defines, in the most recent issue of its official rule book (Definition of Terms - 2.00), a baseball strike zone thus:
"The STRIKE ZONE is that area over home plate 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 knee cap. The Strike Zone shall be determined from the batter's stance as the batter is prepared to swing at a pitched ball."
What this means is the upper limit of the strike zone would be roughly the bottom of the letters. You're absolutely correct that the pitchers in MLB do not get the high strike. So what's amorphous is the strike zone as defined by the umpires. I think it's safe to say that very few of them call strikes much above the belt. Indeed, the belt appears to be the upper limit for the vast majority of umps. Which is a huge advantage for the hitters.
I have long contended that the game is consistently biased in favor of the hitter. Ever since 1968, when the mound was lowered, every change introduced, except maybe the oversized gloves for fielders, has tended to favor the hitters. I'm thinking specifically of the moved-in and lowered fences, the DH, the strike zone we've been discussing, the tendency to penalize pitchers for claiming the inside of the plate (umps quick to toss guys when batters are hit by a pitch), etc.
Like everything else about baseball, it eventually comes down to money. Baseball doesn't much care about the sophistication of the fans, just so long they bring money to the park. And these people want to see the long ball and plenty of scoring. So naturally, that's the way the game goes. For hard core fans like me and you, who enjoy the pitching aspect of the game . . . well, we're SOL for the most part.
