Is throwing a slider safe for a HS Freshman?

[Roothog66]

Be careful how you interpret the results. It says, "this study did not indicate that either pitch was more stressful or potentially dangerous for a collegiate pitcher." This is not saying that the study indicates the curve ball isn't more dangerous. It may sound like semantics, but in statistical studies there's a huge difference. It's very difficult to find a statistically significant difference, especially with such a small sample. I'm not saying the curve is more dangerous, but I know for youth pitchers I'd rather fall on the side of caution and not allow them to throw curves until HS. It makes sense that the motion for a curve would put pressure on the growth plates in elbows.

Please see the more extensive 10 year study on youth pitchers described above. It's more relevant and more conclusive. What seems to make sense isn't always true. That's why we test things in a lab setting. I'm not trying to put you on the spot, but if you have time, explain here exactly why the curve puts more pressure on the growth plates than a fastball. Explain how the kenetic chains are different in a way that makes one far more dangerous than the other. Then explain why, in a study of over 400 youth pitchers, no correlation could be found. While 400 isn't as many as a lot of us would like, presidential elections are accurately predicted with smaller sample sizes.

[Roothog66]

Here is a copy of the abstract from Nissen's study which does define the supination in a curve ball:

Abstract
BACKGROUND: The incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in adolescent baseball players is rapidly increasing. One leading theory about this increase is that breaking pitches (such as the curveball) place increased moments on the dominant arm and thereby increase the risk of injury.

HYPOTHESIS: There is no difference in the moments at the shoulder and elbow between fastball and curveball pitches in adolescent baseball pitchers.

STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS: Thirty-three adolescent baseball pitchers with a minimum of 2 years of pitching experience underwent 3-dimensional motion analysis using reflective markers aligned to bony landmarks. After a warm-up, pitchers threw either a fastball or curveball, randomly assigned, from a portable pitching mound until 3 appropriate trials were collected for each pitch technique. Kinematic and kinetic data for the upper extremities, lower extremities, thorax, and pelvis were collected and computed for both pitch types. Statistical analysis included both the paired sample t test and mixed model regression.

RESULTS: There were lower moments on the shoulder and elbow when throwing a curveball versus when throwing a fastball. As expected, speed for the 2 pitches differed: fastball, 65.8 +/- 4.8 mph; and curveball, 57.7 +/- 6.2 mph (P < .001). Maximal gle-nohumeral internal rotation moment for the fastball was significantly higher than for the curveball (59.8 +/- 16.5 N.m vs 53.9 +/- 15.5 N.m; P < .0001). Similarly, the maximum varus elbow moment for the fastball was significantly higher than for the curveball (59.6 +/- 16.3 N.m vs 54.1 +/- 16.1 N.m; P < .001). The wrist flexor moment was greater in the fastball, 8.3 +/- 3.6 N.m, than in the curveball, 7.8 +/- 3.6 N.m (P < .001), but the wrist ulnar moment was greater in the curveball, 4.9 +/- 2.0 N.m, than in the fastball, 3.2 +/- 1.5 N.m (P < .001). Relatively minor motion differences were noted at the shoulder and elbow throughout the pitching motion, while significant differences were seen in forearm and wrist motion. The forearm remained more supinated at each point in the pitching cycle for the curveball but had less overall range of motion (62 degrees +/- 20 degrees ) than with the fastball (69 degrees +/- 17 degrees ) (P < .001), and the difference in the forearm pronation and supination moment between the pitches was not significant (P = .104 for pronation and P = .447 for supination). The wrist remained in greater extension during the fastball from foot contact through ball release but did not have significantly different total sagittal range of motion (53 degrees +/- 11 degrees ) when compared with the curveball (54 degrees +/- 15 degrees ) (P = .91).

CONCLUSION: In general, the moments on the shoulder and elbow were less when throwing a curveball than when throwing a fastball. In each comparison, the fastball demonstrated higher moments for each individual pitcher for both joints.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings based on the kinematic and kinetic data in this study suggest that the rising incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in pitchers may not be caused by the curveball mechanics. Further evaluation of adolescent and adult baseball pitchers is warranted to help determine and subsequently reduce the risk of injury.

[Roothog66]

If you read the whole report, it even puts in doubt the longheld notion that pronation is superior to supination in terms of injury.

[scorekeeper]

Why take a chance at all? No pitching until 16. That would work.

Why none at all. Just limit them. Of course those limits would never satisfy some people, but they’d satisfy me in my role as a parent.

You conveniently ignore the crux of the bizarre argument. It isn't that an increased number of pitches equals an increase in danger - we all agree on that. It's his bizarre logic that being good will lead to more pitching and, therefore, a youth pitcher shouldn't throw the curve - not because it's a danger, but rather because it is effective and that will lead to success and that success will lead to overuse. My point is that he has always maintained that kids under 16 shouldn't throw breaking stuff, but his reason as to WHY has changed. Mainly because he no longer feels comfortable arguing that it is because the mechanics of a curve lead to increased risk of injury.

It wouldn’t make any difference what he said or what he did. You’re convinced he’s some kind of quack because you want kids to be able to throw any pitches that make them successful.

I mention credientials because in an earlier post you called it research by "some people." That's all. I don't see the logic in ignoring studies done by well-qualified people just because they don't confirm your longheld belief system. We should be concentrating on the one thing that has been confirmed to increase the risk of injury - high pitch counts.

Your logic doesn’t make any sense at all to me. Unless I’m wrong, your teams play in venues where there aren’t pitch count limits, and unless you live in Vt or NYC, there aren’t any pitch counts in HS. So although you holler PITCH COUNTS you don’t vehemently support them. It sounds like your idea is to just trust the coach and everything will be all right.

As a matter of fact, I never limited my son to not throwing curves. I didn’t have to. He was extremely successful from 10 until he got into HS with his FB CU, although most people were convinced he threw a curve. The coach would call a curve and he’d throw his best CU. The coach would call a change, and he’d throw it a little different. The objective is to get batters out, not see who can throw the best curve.

[scorekeeper]

Azmatsfan,

That’s pretty much what one of the people who carried out the study said. Words have meaning, and the meaning of what those words said isn’t that any pitch is less or more dangerous than another. Its too bad more people can’t understand that.

[mudvnine]

CONCLUSION: In general, the moments on the shoulder and elbow were less when throwing a curveball than when throwing a fastball. In each comparison, the fastball demonstrated higher moments for each individual pitcher for both joints.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings based on the kinematic and kinetic data in this study suggest that the rising incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in pitchers may not be caused by the curveball mechanics. Further evaluation of adolescent and adult baseball pitchers is warranted to help determine and subsequently reduce the risk of injury.

Root, I by no means ever try to claim to be a "pitching coach", but with enough medical training to make me dangerous (18 year LACo. paramedic) , and my basic understanding of how developing players throw/pitch, it gives me pause to read that type of "conclusion" and "clinical relevance".

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most "adolescent baseball players" supinate their FBs also....and slow their arm speed down to "control" their CBs? If these are both statements are deemed correct, what other "conclusion" and "clinical relevance" would one expect to read.

Both pitches are supinated (sure one intentionally and potentionally more than the other), one is done faster/harder, and thus with more force, so why wouldn't we expect the "kinematic and kinetic data suggest that the rising incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in pitchers may not be caused by the curveball mechanics" rather than the FB?

[Dirtberry]

Mud,

Great post, a man who gets it!!!!

The answer, all supinated pitches are just as injurious as the next.
Dr.Marshall has been saying this for 40 years and Dr.Adams study pretty much proved it. If the forearm fly’s out supination is intuitive.

Roothog66,

“If you read the whole report, it even puts in doubt the longheld notion that pronation is superior to supination in terms of injury.”

If the report relied upon applied anatomy instead of stress calcs they would not be guessing at it. Supination “ballistically hyper extends” the elbow, pronation does not, it is as simple as that.

[daque]

"...don't most "adolescent baseball players" supinate their FBs also....and slow their arm speed down to "control" their CBs?"

Only those with poor technique which may well be most.

[Roothog66]

Root, I by no means ever try to claim to be a "pitching coach", but with enough medical training to make me dangerous (18 year LACo. paramedic) , and my basic understanding of how developing players throw/pitch, it gives me pause to read that type of "conclusion" and "clinical relevance".

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most "adolescent baseball players" supinate their FBs also....and slow their arm speed down to "control" their CBs? If these are both statements are deemed correct, what other "conclusion" and "clinical relevance" would one expect to read.

Both pitches are supinated (sure one intentionally and potentionally more than the other), one is done faster/harder, and thus with more force, so why wouldn't we expect the "kinematic and kinetic data suggest that the rising incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in pitchers may not be caused by the curveball mechanics" rather than the FB?

No. Fastballs are almost always pronated (at least after release).

[Roothog66]

Azmatsfan,

That’s pretty much what one of the people who carried out the study said. Words have meaning, and the meaning of what those words said isn’t that any pitch is less or more dangerous than another. Its too bad more people can’t understand that.

Which is EXACTLY my point. What is yours?

[Roothog66]

Why none at all. Just limit them. Of course those limits would never satisfy some people, but they’d satisfy me in my role as a parent.



It wouldn’t make any difference what he said or what he did. You’re convinced he’s some kind of quack because you want kids to be able to throw any pitches that make them successful.



Your logic doesn’t make any sense at all to me. Unless I’m wrong, your teams play in venues where there aren’t pitch count limits, and unless you live in Vt or NYC, there aren’t any pitch counts in HS. So although you holler PITCH COUNTS you don’t vehemently support them. It sounds like your idea is to just trust the coach and everything will be all right.

As a matter of fact, I never limited my son to not throwing curves. I didn’t have to. He was extremely successful from 10 until he got into HS with his FB CU, although most people were convinced he threw a curve. The coach would call a curve and he’d throw his best CU. The coach would call a change, and he’d throw it a little different. The objective is to get batters out, not see who can throw the best curve.

Who ther he!!! said I think he's a quack? I'm using his organization's work to support my point. It's Andrews organization that concluded there is no evidence that curves provide more stress to the arm than fastballs. Are you actually reading my posts? It's you who want to ignore his work and say it doesn't matter.

Because I'm from an area that doesn't use pitch counts in there limits, I'm against them? I do however think that their current use is too simply applied to be of maximun use.

[skipper5]

mud:
"Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most "adolescent baseball players"... slow their arm speed down to "control" their CBs?"

Where I live, most do. Perhaps not in East Cobb or So Cal.

[Roothog66]

SK,

Here's how the exchange has gone so far:

Me: Here's a study of college pitchers that concludes there is no support for the hypothesis that curveballs put more stress on the arm than fastballs.

You: Well that was only 21 pitchers and the study was by "some people." Besides, they are grown men. A study of young pitchers would be different.

Me: Here's a study done by ASMI on 400+ pitchers age 9-14. It comes to the same conclusion.

You: I don't have any pevidence to support my position, but it's obvious that people like you will use anything to back up your position because it's what you want to believe.


I'm a little perplexed. I have always valued your contributions to this forum quite a bit. In fact, more than 95% of the posters her. I've used much of the info you've provided. You've always seemed quite logical in your reasoning. That's why I'm a little surprised. If you want to say, "well, I'd rather be safe than sorry and will wait for more data," well, then ok, I can respect that. However you take every piece of evidence I provide and twist it. And, yes, the ASMI research does conclude that curves are not more dangerous than fastballs. Dr. Andrews DOES NOT say that curveball mechanics are dangerous. He once did, but has reversed that position. He says overuse is dangerous. Curveball pitchers are more effective than those who do not throw curves. Effective pitchers are overused. Therefore, the safest pitchers are those who do not use the curve because they are less effective. Less effective pitchers don't get called upon to pitch as much. Therefore, it's safer to avoid the curve and be mediocre so you aren't overused. Yes, I find that bizarre. However, it's asinine to think I would classify Andrews as a quacka nd then use his work to support my position.

[Roothog66]

Root, I by no means ever try to claim to be a "pitching coach", but with enough medical training to make me dangerous (18 year LACo. paramedic) , and my basic understanding of how developing players throw/pitch, it gives me pause to read that type of "conclusion" and "clinical relevance".

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but don't most "adolescent baseball players" supinate their FBs also....and slow their arm speed down to "control" their CBs? If these are both statements are deemed correct, what other "conclusion" and "clinical relevance" would one expect to read.

Both pitches are supinated (sure one intentionally and potentionally more than the other), one is done faster/harder, and thus with more force, so why wouldn't we expect the "kinematic and kinetic data suggest that the rising incidence of shoulder and elbow injuries in pitchers may not be caused by the curveball mechanics" rather than the FB?

Even if true, the rate of injury was found to be 5%. While that number may be insignificat to the 5% who are injured, it is statistically insignificant. At least not significant enough to demand action.

[daque]

How do the studies you cite define, "curve ball" for the purpose of the study?

[mudvnine]

No. Fastballs are almost always pronated (at least after release).

Are you stating theory of what should be, or reality of what most likely "is", when speaking of developing "adolescent baseball players"?

[Roothog66]

Are you stating theory of what should be, or reality of what most likely "is", when speaking of developing "adolescent baseball players"?

Looking at slow mo video of my players, I've never seen one supinate a fastball.

[Roothog66]

How do the studies you cite define, "curve ball" for the purpose of the study?

They are self reported. I've answered this before. It doesn't matter. Here is why. Could we not assume, out of 400+ youth pitchers reporting that they throw a fastball that at least a majority supinate (since that is how most of us teach it)? Can we not also assume that at least some use what many on here call "poor mechancis" when they say that a correctly thrown curveball is safe, but a badly thrown one is dangerous? So, unless almost all of the pitchers throw a "correct" curve, then we can say adding in the poor mechanics did not effect the results. If you are suggesting that every pitcher in the study who thinks he is throwing a curve is actually NOT supinating, I think that experience tells us that is highly unlikely and almost statistically impossible.

For an account of stress involving curves that ARE defined and the actual supination recorded and taken into account, please scroll up and look at the abstract from the Nissen studies. (post #177)

[Roothog66]

Are you stating theory of what should be, or reality of what most likely "is", when speaking of developing "adolescent baseball players"?

I'm not saying you are wrong. Personally, I haven't given it much thought because I've never encountered anyone making this claim before. I do, however, have tens of thousands of photos of youth pitchers at all phases of the release and I can take a closer look.

[mudvnine]

Even if true, the rate of injury was found to be 5%. While that number may be insignificat to the 5% who are injured, it is statistically insignificant. At least not significant enough to demand action.

Hmmm, unless I'm reading it wrong, I don't see anywhere that percentages of injuries are reported in the "results", "conclusion", or "clinical relevance" of the report you posted as proof......where can I find it in there?

But Root, here's the problem with the study, as I see it. From my youth playing days, had I been surveyed in that study, I would have been classified as one of the "non-injured" (or however they defined no surgery), as I pitched until my freshman year of HS, much of the time with elbow pain (that I quietly attributed to the CB, because that's when I felt it the most) that was simply treated with ice and sometimes even rest if I was lucky.

After HS, I continued to experience elbow pain when throwing with friends, or at pickup baseball/softball games (IOWs, didn't play in college), with the elbow pain showing up in a lesser number of throws as the years went on.....until the point that I now can't throw over 100' without significant pain in my elbow.

I've all but quit trying to throw BP to the HS kids, and playing catch with my HS senior is pretty much a waste of his time, other than simply him spending quality time with pops, laughing at the old man trying to reach him 120' away (which I can't, as it hurts too damn much to exert that kind of force to get it that far).

So while kids are young they might not necessarily feel the effects of a CB (or FB for that matter) right away to move the needle on a study, I can assure you that they are not without injury caused by bones banging around in there. I'm no doctor, but I sure as heck can feel what was going on in my own arm, and I sure as hell don't want to be a contributing cause of it to happen to one of my players.

My youngest (kid mentioned above) does pitch in relief at the HS, and does throw a CB if you will...one that is more of a "grip" CB that he throws the same as his FB, with pronation.....but now I have to question with I'm calling "pronation", after reading Dirt's post here on "forearm flyout end of range of motion supination at drive and release"

I always made sure he pronated on the follow-through, but never bothered (wasn't educated enough) to look at where he was at "drive and release"......I think it's very obvious toggling between the two drive and release frame of d-mac's son clip in another thread. At first look, I thought he "pronated" his pitch, but from drive to and at release, there are obvious supination forces at work there in that video clip.

Maybe not the same as supinating a CB from drive continuing through the follow-through, but supination forces happening in that particular video nonetheless.....

[scorekeeper]

Root,

You’re getting excited because people don’t agree with your position. That’s life, so you better get used to it if. The studies you seem to put so much faith in are good for what they do, but they don’t provide the final answers.

What you’re doing is trying to state what Dr. Andrews believes, and that’s not a good thing to do unless it’s a position statement he’s written. Rather than argue with a bunch of folks like myself, why not contact him or ASMI people directly and hash it out with them? That’s one thing I’ve always admired about Doc Marshall. He will take the time to talk to you, and people who do that, almost always come away with a much better understanding of what he believes and why, than arguing on some bulletin board.

I don’t want to argue with you about this any longer because its obvious you refuse to understand that I believe my reasons for not having kids throw curves are just as valid as yours for letting them throw whatever they want without worry. This is similar to the argument on HSBBW where one of the old timers there believes it’s a waste of time for HS pitchers to work on or throw a CU, because that won’t help them get a ‘ship or get drafted. Many there all PO’d at me because I won’t admit that I’m wrong because they’re right.

Personally, I couldn’t care less what you do as a coach because there’s nothing I can do about it. All I know is, our two philosophes don’t coincide, and I always prefer to err on the side of caution because I CAN’T trust that all coaches know enough to protect the kids. It’s the same with rest between outings for pitchers, or any other pitching limitations. Do whatever you please, but I strongly suggest you communicate directly with Dr. Andrews rather than continuing to try to interpret why he says the things he does.

[scorekeeper]

My youngest (kid mentioned above) does pitch in relief at the HS, and does throw a CB if you will...one that is more of a "grip" CB that he throws the same as his FB, with pronation.....but now I have to question with I'm calling "pronation", after reading Dirt's post here on "forearm flyout end of range of motion supination at drive and release.

I always made sure he pronated on the follow-through, but never bothered (wasn't educated enough) to look at where he was at "drive and release"......I think it's very obvious toggling between the two drive and release frame of d-mac's son clip in another thread. At first look, I thought he "pronated" his pitch, but from drive to and at release, there are obvious supination forces at work there in that video clip.

Maybe not the same as supinating a CB from drive continuing through the follow-through, but supination forces happening in that particular video nonetheless.....

I’ve always wondered how 12/6 rotation can be put on a pitched/thrown ball when the forearm is pronating. The best I can see is the forearm has to be neutral at release to get the 12/6 rotation.

[Roothog66]

Hmmm, unless I'm reading it wrong, I don't see anywhere that percentages of injuries are reported in the "results", "conclusion", or "clinical relevance" of the report you posted as proof......where can I find it in there?

But Root, here's the problem with the study, as I see it. From my youth playing days, had I been surveyed in that study, I would have been classified as one of the "non-injured" (or however they defined no surgery), as I pitched until my freshman year of HS, much of the time with elbow pain (that I quietly attributed to the CB, because that's when I felt it the most) that was simply treated with ice and sometimes even rest if I was lucky.

After HS, I continued to experience elbow pain when throwing with friends, or at pickup baseball/softball games (IOWs, didn't play in college), with the elbow pain showing up in a lesser number of throws as the years went on.....until the point that I now can't throw over 100' without significant pain in my elbow.

I've all but quit trying to throw BP to the HS kids, and playing catch with my HS senior is pretty much a waste of his time, other than simply him spending quality time with pops, laughing at the old man trying to reach him 120' away (which I can't, as it hurts too damn much to exert that kind of force to get it that far).

So while kids are young they might not necessarily feel the effects of a CB (or FB for that matter) right away to move the needle on a study, I can assure you that they are not without injury caused by bones banging around in there. I'm no doctor, but I sure as heck can feel what was going on in my own arm, and I sure as hell don't want to be a contributing cause of it to happen to one of my players.

My youngest (kid mentioned above) does pitch in relief at the HS, and does throw a CB if you will...one that is more of a "grip" CB that he throws the same as his FB, with pronation.....but now I have to question with I'm calling "pronation", after reading Dirt's post here on "forearm flyout end of range of motion supination at drive and release"

I always made sure he pronated on the follow-through, but never bothered (wasn't educated enough) to look at where he was at "drive and release"......I think it's very obvious toggling between the two drive and release frame of d-mac's son clip in another thread. At first look, I thought he "pronated" his pitch, but from drive to and at release, there are obvious supination forces at work there in that video clip.

Maybe not the same as supinating a CB from drive continuing through the follow-through, but supination forces happening in that particular video nonetheless.....

That's the Nissen study. I posted three. Look at the youth study from ASMI. Sure the study is limited, but it is what's out there. There aren't many other methods that could do any better. The point is that the only studies done so far were done with the purpose in mind of proving that the curve produces more force and is more dangerous than the fastball. They were unable to do so.

[Roothog66]

Root,

You’re getting excited because people don’t agree with your position. That’s life, so you better get used to it if. The studies you seem to put so much faith in are good for what they do, but they don’t provide the final answers.

What you’re doing is trying to state what Dr. Andrews believes, and that’s not a good thing to do unless it’s a position statement he’s written. Rather than argue with a bunch of folks like myself, why not contact him or ASMI people directly and hash it out with them? That’s one thing I’ve always admired about Doc Marshall. He will take the time to talk to you, and people who do that, almost always come away with a much better understanding of what he believes and why, than arguing on some bulletin board.

I don’t want to argue with you about this any longer because its obvious you refuse to understand that I believe my reasons for not having kids throw curves are just as valid as yours for letting them throw whatever they want without worry. This is similar to the argument on HSBBW where one of the old timers there believes it’s a waste of time for HS pitchers to work on or throw a CU, because that won’t help them get a ‘ship or get drafted. Many there all PO’d at me because I won’t admit that I’m wrong because they’re right.

Personally, I couldn’t care less what you do as a coach because there’s nothing I can do about it. All I know is, our two philosophes don’t coincide, and I always prefer to err on the side of caution because I CAN’T trust that all coaches know enough to protect the kids. It’s the same with rest between outings for pitchers, or any other pitching limitations. Do whatever you please, but I strongly suggest you communicate directly with Dr. Andrews rather than continuing to try to interpret why he says the things he does.

SK,

Wow. You keep this up. I don't ahve a problem with Dr. Andrews or ASMI. They HAVE stated what they conclude. You just don't want to believe it. Not only do you ignore it, but you act as if ASMI says the opposite of its clearly defined conclusion. I'll stop beating a dead horse. It's a FACT that the only studies out there support the position I'm taking. I have challenged you or anyone else not to tell me how you think the study is flawed, but provide clinical research (ANY CLINICAL RESEARCH) that backs up your position. Obviously, you can't because the studies have been done and they do not back you up.

By the way, your reasons aren't as valid as mine. Mine are supported by clinically researched evidence. Yours are supported by myth. I don't take issue with your positions as much as the bizarre use of logic you employee. But, if you say your done with this topic, I, too can leave it alone.

[mudvnine]

That's the Nissen study. I posted three. Look at the youth study from ASMI. Sure the study is limited, but it is what's out there. There aren't many other methods that could do any better. The point is that the only studies done so far were done with the purpose in mind of proving that the curve produces more force and is more dangerous than the fastball. They were unable to do so.

I have not a single doubt that the studies proved exactly what they set out to prove, but what I don't believed they proved is the actual bone on bone kinesiological movements/impingements (ie. wear) placed upon the bones/cartilages of the elbow, between the two different pitches.

I just believe that with all of the modern motion sensing/mapping equipment available out there today, that a much more concise study should be able to be done, rather than simply measuring "force" as the only thing being looked at, and as a result definitive conclusions being made upon them.

Call me "cautious", but when it comes to young players' arm, and from my own personal experience of where I've ended up, I sleep much better, "being safe than sorry.....but also understand that that is just my personal opinion, and hold nothing against those who feel differently.