Baseball and Self Defense

Sorry, no video for this week. Things got in the way. I’ll resume next week!

Wait. Wut? What does baseball have to do with self defense? It comes from a fantastic article in “The Athletic” titled “Missing Bats: How An Obsession With Strikeouts Upended The Balance of Baseball.” This article explores how an obsession with maximizing strikeouts at all costs has changed baseball and relies heavily on sabermetrics. As I read this article, I saw some analogies to self-defense that can be drawn from it.

Let’s set this up.

The conventional wisdom in the industry, however, suggested that only a certain type of pitcher could chase whiffs. The pitcher needed to harness elite weapons like Koufax or boast remarkable stamina like Ryan or pitch from a hellacious angle like Johnson. The average man could not produce those results — even if a studious, dedicated pitcher could figure out how to get into advantageous counts.

See the above article.

As the article notes, the traditional view was that “power pitchers” were the only ones capable of high strikeout rates.

The conventional wisdom in the industry, however, suggested that only a certain type of pitcher could chase whiffs. The pitcher needed to harness elite weapons like Koufax or boast remarkable stamina like Ryan or pitch from a hellacious angle like Johnson. The average man could not produce those results — even if a studious, dedicated pitcher could figure out how to get into advantageous counts.

See the above article.

What is the idea behind pushing for more strikeouts?

That was not exactly a secret. In “Moneyball,” published in 2002, the author Michael Lewis had highlighted the work of sabermetrician Voros McCracken, who discovered that pitchers had little control of the results once a ball was put in play. As that theory took root, pitchers used the PITCHf/x data to hone the most direct method to regain some measure of control.

“If you want to be an effective pitcher at the major-league level, what’s the most effective thing to do? Don’t let guys get on base,” Click said. “What’s the most effective way to do that? Don’t let them hit the ball.”

See the above article.

Ah, now let’s apply that to self-defense. Specifically, let’s apply “Pitchers had little control of the results once a ball was put into play.”

Before I go any further, I should note that there are reams of data to support the above statement. In contrast, there isn’t whole lot of sabermetics in the area of self defense. However, I will draw inexact inferences from baseball.

We have little control once we get involved in a violent situation. Yes, our training may save our asses. But things can go sideways in a New York minute. What if the other person has a knife? A screwdriver? A gun? Several buddies? You don’t know.

The most control you have is up to the moment that the shit hits the fan. Conflict avoidance and de-escalation are key. But they don’t always work.

Back to baseball. The article delved into developing pitchers with high strikeout rates. It is surprising that baseball organizations have failed to develop such pitchers.

For much of the sport’s history, a pitcher’s repertoire often stemmed less from his physical capabilities and more from his organization’s preferences. Some teams emphasized changeups and curveballs. Others favored sliders and sinkers. The Rays tended to instruct pitchers to attack hitters on a vertical plane rather than a horizontal plane, because the strike zone was taller than it was wide. But one size did not fit all. Anyone who has attempted to fit a square peg into a round hole can understand why this paradigm was not ideal. Yet few challenged it, in part because it was unclear how to formulate a precise plan for an individual.

See the above article.

This brings to mind the scene in “Enter the Dragon,” where numerous karateka surrounded Bruce Lee during his famous fight scene with Bob Wall. These karateka represented the cookie cutter “classical mess” that Bruce railed against.

I’ve always believed those trained in cookie-cutter martial arts will fare poorly in self-defense situations. It appears that pitchers pitching to their organization’s preferences did not do well.

Sophisticated sabermetrics appeared to offer answers to pitching coaches.

While poring through the information, Kalk applied the Nash equilibrium, a game-theory concept gleaned from the world of mathematics, which posited that an individual could formulate an optimal strategy no matter the strategies of the opponents. Applied to baseball, the principle suggested each pitcher possessed an ideal, individualized mixture of pitches. The percentages depended on the strengths and weaknesses of each pitcher.

Click on the link to the article at the beginning of this post.

The article provides an example.

What Kalk discovered was that very few, if any, big-league pitchers approached this equilibrium. One of the first to come close was James Shields, a pitcher with a plethora of weapons. Shields could throw three different types of fastballs and an elite changeup. After a rocky season in 2010, though, Tampa Bay officials suggested he throw his curveball more often. Shields raised his curve usage from 13.5 percent to 21 percent in 2011 and achieved the best results of his career, making the All-Star team and leading baseball with 11 complete games.

See the article

Man, all that based on statistics! I wish that we all had detailed data to enhance our self defense repertoire! Now, to the nitty gritty of the article in terms of individualizing the development for pitchers.

What Bannister decided was that conventional wisdom had led pitchers astray. They chased outdated ideals rather than utilizing their own individual gifts. They pocketed excellent offspeed pitches while using shoddy ones to excess. And most importantly, to Bannister, they threw far too many fastballs. “My mission for years has been to reduce fastball usage,” Bannister said. (Consider the mission accomplished: The league-wide fastball percentage fell from 57.8 percent in 2011 to 48.1 percent; for the past two seasons, for the first time in the pitch tracking era, hitters were more likely to see an offspeed pitch than a fastball.)

From the article.

I love that baseball organizations have embarked on individual development based on a pitcher’s strengths and weaknesses rather than pigeonholing them into “outdated ideals.”

It’d be great if the martial arts industry would do the same thing. Some do. But, to a large extent, individual development in martial arts schools is rare. Frankly, instructors don’t have the time or attention when teaching 30 students in a class.

Given that I have focused primarily on private lessons for the past five years, I have often considered personal development.

My clients are different from each other. I often teach them the same material but individualize it for them. For example, Mario is as strong as a bull. Why should I take that away from him? It’s his best physical attribute. Why not use his strength as the centerpiece and give him non-strength options as the situation calls for it?

Speaking for myself, my age and my right hip replacement have dictated that I change my tools. For instance, I have eliminated the side kick from my self-defense repertoire. First, it’s too telegraphic. Second, my hip, while substantially recovered, isn’t going to generate much power. I only practice knee strikes, front kicks, and oblique kicks (both the stomping and soccer-style versions). Those kicks are much quicker than the side kick.

From a self-defense perspective, you should consider your age, size, strengths, and weaknesses when crafting your self-defense repertoire. The late Professor Remy Presas taught Professor Chuck Gauss differently than he did Professor Ken Smith, due to their size differences.

Perhaps one should consider the following:

Bannister thought more pitchers should follow a philosophy culled from video games called “min-maxing.” It made sense on an intuitive level: Throw your best pitches as much as possible and your worst pitches as rarely as possible.

From the article

Unfortunately, we martial artists don’t have access to the reams of data baseball organizations have. On the other hand, critical self-analysis can guide you to the optimal self-defence repertoire, as I did for myself.

What do you think of the connection between baseball and self defense? I want feedback on this. Thanks in advance!

Before you venture into the wild jungle of the Internet, might I persuade you to fuel my caffeine addiction? Your kindness could be the very thing that keeps the keyboard clacking and the ideas flowing!

I need your help defraying the increasing expenses of the blog/website.

I’ll recognize you for your contribution. 😉

A huge thank you in advance!