Shattering Pitch Myths: Sliders Break More Than Fastballs
Pop Quiz:
For each pitcher, which pitch has more movement?
- Randy Johnson's slider or Randy Johnson's fastball?
- Brad Lidge's slider or Brad Lidge's fastball?
- Carlos Marmol's slurve or Carlos Marmol's fastball?
Let's start with a side view
Marmol and Johnson sling the ball, Lidge comes over the top. Unit's obviously taller than Marmol, so he's dropping his arm even lower than the Cubs set-up man.
The fastballs all look straighter, vertically, than the sliders. Remember though, gravity is pulling the ball downwards from the moment it leaves the pitcher's hand. Because they're thrown with back spin, fastballs can defeat gravity by six inches to a foot or more, while sliders often just follow the path gravity takes them on. In reality, the fastballs have less downward break than the sliders, which spin around a vertical axis.
The fastballs we're looking at here are four-seam fastballs, although Marmol's sample may actually be a mix of four- and two-seam. Lidge and Johnson do rely on the four-seamer, and the pitch we all call Johnson's "change-up" is nothing more than a two-seam fastball - or sinker - with something taken off.
A quick note on two-seam fastballs - Derek Lowe's "sinker" beats gravity by just an inch or two, so it seems to sink like mad. I'll have more on sinkers/two-seam fastballs and their four-seam cousin another time. How they behave (sink vs. tail vs. rise) has to do with grip and arm angle ... but I digress ....
Lidge and Johnson both have enough back-spin on their sliders, on average, to make them beat gravity by a couple of inches. The sliders, in actual play, seem to drop or sink. Why? Because the fastballs seem to be straight or rising - it's all relative.
We see the ball "drop" because we're expecting, without realizing it, the ball to have a lot of backspin. When a pitcher takes that spin off, gravity does its thing and the ball seems to drop. A curveball, with it's top/over spin does actually sink, but that's also for another day.
Gimme Another Break
That's just one perspective - vertical break. When people talk about "break" it is usually about the sweep of a slider or the amount of tail on a fastball. A Bird's Eye view will isolate those movements.
Randy Johnson's famous slider is just about straight as an arrow when viewed from above - no sweeping break. His fastball tails, in the opposite direction of what little break there is on the slider. I think most baseball fans are familiar with tailing fastballs, but have, collectively, underestimated just how much tail there is, even on the straighter fastballs, such as Brad Lidge's.
Lidge's slider is pretty straight, too, and his fastball, as a result of being thrown more over-the-top, ends up without much lateral movement. Still, there is more tail on the fastball than sweep on the slider. And that's with a four-seam grip and an overhand delivery.
Carlos Marmol, on the other hand, with his slurvey slider, which we now know actually does have greater-than-gravity sink on it, also gets some real break or sweep. Johnson's slider gets virtually no lateral spin movement, hence the straight line, and Lidge gets about a half an inch. Marmol, on the other hand, spins the ball such that it acquires over 5 inches of movement from the spin.
Anyone can see how nasty Marmol's pitch is, and everyone knows how great Johnson and Lidge's sliders are, but Randy and Brad get more tail on their fastballs than sweep on their sliders. A pitcher needs to go more towards the slurve/curve spectrum to beat the spin movement on their fastballs and make that pitch truly break.
How We See It
Even with a half-foot of sweep on his slider, Marmol's breaking pitch is no match for his fastball, which tails almost an inch more, and in the opposite direction. Relatively speaking, that's over a foot difference in break. That relative difference is probably where we get the magnitude of break from - "that slider broke six inches!". No, it was straight, but the fastball, that broke six inches. For whatever reason, we perceive fastballs as straight, and any other type pitch seems to be break, when, in reality, there may be an absence of break.
So, even Marmol's fastball gets more spin movement than his slurve - but why don't we "see" this as fans, with all those TV angles and replays? Why do fastballs look straight, even though they defy gravity and "break" laterally so much more than sliders, which are in reality, straighter? I'm saying that's what happens, and the opposite is what we see. I ask you, the reader, why?
Appendix
Here's a table that shows you the raw spin movement numbers reflected in the flight paths above.
Spin Movement
(inches; movement relative to the path taken by a pitch with no spin; negative values indicate movement to the catcher's left or, for vertical movement, drop beyond that predicted by gravity alone)
| Pitcher | Pitch | Lateral | Vertical |
| Johnson | Slider | -0.1 | 2.3 |
| Johnson | Fastball | 9.1 | 7.7 |
| Lidge | Slider | 0.4 | 1.3 |
| Lidge | Fastball | -4.4 | 9.5 |
| Marmol | Slurve | 5.8 | -1.8 |
| Marmol | Fastball | -6.6 | 8.2 |
4 recs |
45 comments
|
Comments
This is really great stuff
The two-seamer is my favorite pitch, so looking forward to future posts about it.
by Sokojoe on Apr 1, 2009 10:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps the angle of the TV cameras with regards to a pitcher's release point?
Maybe that, combined with the speed of the pitches, creates some sort of optical illusion for humans?
by jwiscarson on Apr 1, 2009 12:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think so
And some parks now have the centerfield camera truly centered, not over the pitcher’s right shoulder. Something to watch for.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 1, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My thought is that lefty sliders look to move a ton because the camera is over the right shoulder and the ball moves more across our field of vision than any other pitch, even though it's not breaking.
A lefty’s fastball tails, meaning it more moves directly away from the center field camera, making it seem like it’s not breaking much.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 1, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It took me over a year to see movement on lefty fastballs.
Now I can tell when a lefty has crazy movement, but until I really tried and saw some pitching without an angle I was always confused when people mention how much movement southpaws have.
by Daniel Berlyn on Apr 1, 2009 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't your first figure answer the question?
by NittanyCub on Apr 1, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Can you expand on that?
I’m not sure it does ….
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 1, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sliders are thrown a lot like...
… the “mysterious” gyroball which cuts through wind resistance because it spins like a bullet. The thing is that sliders really do move more than a fastball.
They have smaller Magnus effects because they react with the surrounding air differently. This is what the PITCHf/x numbers reveal. In reality, Sliders do have larger vertical drops than fastballs.
The lateral movement is mostly an illusion created by arm and camera angles.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 1, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What that second sentence is trying to say...
Sliders definitely move vertically more than fastballs.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 1, 2009 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
due to a lack of spin
which is not what most people think.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 1, 2009 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lack of back-spin.
Sliders spin just fine, but their spins typically have almost zero Magnus effect.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 1, 2009 6:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, exactly
I should also note, PFX underestimates the spin rate on sliders….
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 1, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off topic, but I use you as an anecdotal example for my friends a lot.
In reference to not really understanding what you’re saying so I can’t disagree with you, but you seem knowledgable, so I listen anyway.
by philkid3 on Apr 1, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
(As an example for why you can't just disagree with someone because you don't understand as much as they do.)
by philkid3 on Apr 1, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understood.
I still have trouble explaining things, but I’m getting better at it. I wrote a bit about sliders in the Magnus effect article a couple of weeks ago, and I think i explained things pretty well there.
Once you learn the stuff, it’s hard not to use the technical terms to describe things.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 1, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
On this note
I think images/video help explain these sorts of things very well, although it’s difficult to animate actions that can’t be easily captured on video.
Sometimes even the most direct explanations are confusing because most people don’t deal with this stuff on a daily basis. I ostensibly understood pronation and supination, but couldn’t easily explain them until I saw good examples of them in video. Same thing with horizontal abduction.
I’m a programmer, so I definitely understand your technical terminology frustrations (although my field isn’t anywhere near as bad as medicine).
by jwiscarson on Apr 1, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't meant as a criticism.
I don’t know if you can explain things better or worse, I may never understand.
by philkid3 on Apr 2, 2009 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know.
Part of my goal, though, is to make it easier to understand so that people will want to learn this stuff and stop trusting dogmatic baseball instruction.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 2, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I might have a reading comprehension problem here, but
Is the difference that fastballs are thrown with higher RPM. and hence feel more spin forces?
I’m floored by that bird’s eye pitchure of the sliders, it looks like they have barely any curvature at all.
Some people have 3 layers, like pie. Blog Blog Blog
by berselius on Apr 1, 2009 4:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure how the RPM compare, honestly, but the main difference is the angle of the axis of spin.
For fastballs, they mostly have backspin, making them “rise” (drop less), with a bit of sidespin to make them tail sideways.
A slider is more like throwing a football, I believe, a little bit off giving it a bit of break.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 1, 2009 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're mixing up your axes of rotation here
A football is more like a gyroball – the ‘sprialing’ action stabilizes the ball as it moves in the direction of the axis of rotation (and gives a much smaller drag force).
This just seems like it can’t be physically correct to me – the tailing action of a fastball comes from the slight tilt on the axis of rotation as it leaves the pitcher’s hand. From a Physics perspective, the only thing that I can think of that explains this difference in break is that sliders have a much smaller RPM than fastballs.
Some people have 3 layers, like pie. Blog Blog Blog
by berselius on Apr 2, 2009 2:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have you read this?
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/a-pitching-model-playing-the-slots1/
Indefensible resource – a serious omission to not have linked it originally. It does ruin the surprise on some arm angle stuff in future editions of this series, though….
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 2, 2009 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a great article
My problem is that these plots don’t seem to jive with the physics models used to decribe how spin forces work. In the lateral direction the only force that you get are spin forces and maybe wind – it seems very strange to me that fastballs have more lateral break since their spin force vector has a much smaller component in the lateral direction than a slider does, though from the figures in that article it looks like sliders have a bigger ‘bullet’ spin component than I thought.
Some people have 3 layers, like pie. Blog Blog Blog
by berselius on Apr 2, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Magnus effect.
The effect is greatest when the spin axis is perpendicular to the ball’s velocity vector. As these two lines become more parallel, the Magnus effect decreases until reaching zero at parallel (oerfect gyroball/bullet spin).
Also, velocity plays a very large role in the effect. The effect changes with the square of the magnitude of the velocity vector. A 99 mph fastball has a 21% greater Magnus effect than a 90 mph fastball thrown the same way (10% more velocity, 1.10 * 1.10 = 1.21).
The role of seem placement is also huge because the seems affect the thickness of the boundary layer.
by NoNameOnCard on Apr 2, 2009 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some sliders move laterally
Johnson’s seems to since he’s throwing it from such an extreme angle, and it contrasts with the extreme tail on his four-seam (resulting from his low arm slot). That four-seam tail says left-turn at Albuquerque towards the plate. The slider keeps going to El Paso.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 2, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the point of sliders was the lateral movement
Isn’t that why they’re called sliders?
Some people have 3 layers, like pie. Blog Blog Blog
by berselius on Apr 2, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They slide across the plate instead of tailing in
but they do not “break” across it, in most cases. I think the ones that really move laterally, courtesy of Magnus force, are low slot slurves/curves.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 2, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It seems like a few years ago, ESPN in particular experimented with the straight-over-the-pitcher’s-head camera angle rather than the over-the-shoulder look, but we don’t see it much anymore. I liked it before, and I’d like it even more after reading this.
Also, I’d like to see the same graphs for Mariano Rivera.
by Stylus Happenstance on Apr 1, 2009 4:35 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the problem is that then it cuts down on the view of the vertical break.
Baseball really wasn’t designed for TV.
by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Apr 1, 2009 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's on tap
for a future edition of Shattering Myths.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 1, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but that was usually too high up to see any vertical break.
On FSN about halfway through the year, certain teams started using centered camera’s that were a bit lower. The problem is that the pitcher’s head sometimes got in the way of the ball. After a slight adjustment period, I really enjoyed this view. I was very surprised at the vertical movement (and lack of vertical movement) of certain pitches. Pitcher’s whose fastballs were always said to be “straight as an arrow” were shown to have a good amount of break, just less than some others. I’m not sure if they’re planning on doing this view again this year, but I really hope they do.
by lookatthosetwins on Apr 2, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wanna nominate "control" subjects for Mo's cutter?
Who else has a cutter you want to see? I’m asking all of you … I’ll take nominations/suggestions for hanging curveballs (Zito and Rich HIll anyone?) sinkers (Lowe, Halladay, Webb, Marquis, Shawn Hill) as well as cutters (Mo, Danks).
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 2, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
curveballs -
adam wainwright?
Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.
by Felonius_Monk on Apr 17, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we see the break; I think we just don't talk about it like that.
Anyone who’s watched Maddux has seen a fastball “break”, obviously. I also remember reading an analysis and speculation why Marmol lost his dominance last spring: being that he started throwing more over the top to keep his velocity up (to counteract tiring in May/June) and he thus lost some of his fastball break.
I think we really just need to take the term “break” or “breaking pitch” or what-not out of the lexicon. Like a lot of things, it’s “traditional” and now outdated. Instead of “fastballs” and “breaking pitches” (which subconciously ingrains that fastballs don’t break), we should refer to them as “off-speed”, as a lot of people already do. Then, if we want to refer to the “break” we can say “tailed” if it’s towards the pitcher’s hand-side, “sink” if it drops, “rise” if it goes against gravity and…. I can’t think of anything other than “break” for those that go towards the glove-side of the pitcher, but I think that’d be too confusing. The opposite of “tails” so “heads” or maybe “nose”???
Marmol’s slider/curve pitch certainly noses and sinks, but his fastball rises and tails even more dramatically. I don’t know. lol Whatever.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
by tyger1147 on Apr 2, 2009 10:01 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sweep?
Sink, Rise, Tail, Sweep
it’s all relative …. Josh Kalk always felt, correctly, that cutter, slider, whatever. It’s “that pitch”. I used to ID my pitches with #‘s, but we love our labels, don’t we?
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 2, 2009 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can tell you from experience.
The “illusion” is not just in the TV angles. When you are at the plate, you can DEFINITELY see a slider’s horizontal movement, while a fastball appears straight. I won’t argue with the fact that a slider would look like a straight line with an over the lop view, but its still at an angle. A fastball appears to come straight from the mound to home plate, but thats obviously because you can’t stop the ball and measure from 30 feet out, so you won’t notice the few inches of tail. But a slider you can see the diagonal movement all the way to the plate.
Anyway, that’s my take. This makes perfect sense from a players’ perspective.
by Brendan Scolari on Apr 3, 2009 5:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point.
A fastball tails from its initial direction (which is from the side of the pitcher to the catcher), and ends up coming on the line straight from pitcher to catcher. A slider doesn’t break, so it remains headed at an angle across the hitter’s point of view, so it’s moving sideways.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Apr 3, 2009 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Randy Johnson's flight path shows that very well
see the comment above
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 3, 2009 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why a fastball looks straight though.
Because it does end up at two points straight (or nearly straight) across from each other, whereas a slider is diagonal from the release to the catcher’s glove.. I guess this isn’t technically break, but the slider does “move” more from a hitters perspective, otherwise it wouldn’t be hard to hit. That’s what they call spinners, it moves like a regular fastball instead of “sliding” across the plate.
by Brendan Scolari on Apr 3, 2009 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd think the backspin would be the problem
A slider that doesn’t “sink”, an inadvertent slutter as it were, would be a bad thing. To make the slider “move” the pitcher takes off the unwanted spin that prevents the pitch from taking its desired path.
by Harry Pavlidis on Apr 3, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
That’s true too. But also you’ll see sliders without a lot of horizontal movement. I realize this isn’t actual break, but the slider should move across the plate as well.
by Brendan Scolari on Apr 3, 2009 11:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
The slider is moving, it moves across the plate. Thats why its hard to hit. Well, that and the reduced speed.
by Brendan Scolari on Apr 3, 2009 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 









BtB on Facebook















