Little League -vs- Cal Ripken

[rbgrubbs]

This weekend I watched a little of both the Cal Ripken and the Little League world series on TV. It brought up two points of debate that I wanted to get the baseball minds on this sites opions on.

1) what format is better, the shorter bases & mound of little league or the longer bases/mound and lead-off of Cal Ripken.

2) If the champs of both tourneys faced of in a best of seven series...4 of one rule (say Cal Ripken) and 3 of the other (little league) what team would win? why

[tg643]

Before I start I'm going to remind posters not to confuse 50/70 travel with 50/70 re ball. If you've seen both, there's a huge difference.

Which format is better? It doesn't really matter. It's preteen kids on a smaller than normal size field. Keep in mind watching either WS you're watching the best of the best of rec ball, not typical Anytown USA rec ball.

Regardless of the playing rules, the athletes will ultimately prevail by high school. Some call 50/70 "real baseball." I've seen some very sloppy 50/70 rec games I attribute to open bases. With closed bases the pitcher can focus on pitching rather than worrying about a runner dancing off first. I've never seen a kid who played LL have trouble learning how to take a lead or hold a runner when they were older.

If the two WS champions played the more talented team with deeper pitching would most likely in. The kids on teams in the LLWS are typically also playing 50/70 travel ball as are the CR kids. There wouldn't be an adjustment issue putting the LL'ers on the 50/70 field.

At eleven and twelve my son played LL and 50/70 travel. The travel was better baseball because it was travel caliber players. With kids who can play, the 50/70 is a better format. But it doesn't make the kids better players down the road. Moving to the 60/90 field is one of the great dividers of contenders and pretenders when moving on in the game, not preteen open or closed bases.

[Ursa Major]

1) what format is better, the shorter bases & mound of little league or the longer bases/mound and lead-off of Cal Ripken.

Hands down it's Cal Ripken, in my opinion. For starters, you bring real baserunning into the mix. Also, pitchers are a little further away, so kids can actually swing, rather than sticking their B-1's out in the hope that a backspinned bunt will fly over the fence. Fielding in CR becomes more realistic, as fielders have time to actually make a play, rather than having to scoop and throw in one motion in order to catch speedy runners on 60-foot basepaths, like in college softball.

And, frankly, the exposure that the LLWS gives to players and parents has led to such an overzealous focus on winning, that LL has had to become incredibly bureaucratized in order to prevent cheating. Where winning doesn't mean quite so much, it's easier to just choose sides and send 'em out to play.

2) If the champs of both tourneys faced of in a best of seven series...4 of one rule (say Cal Ripken) and 3 of the other (little league) what team would win? why

I'd say the Ripken guys for one reason -- because they don't have the exposure of LL, they have to expand their geographic territory in order to fill out a team. So, it's easier to pack a roster with cherry-picked superstars from a wider geographic area. We know a number of kids who went to the Ripken WS four years ago and they reported that the Mexican team essentially was a nationwide all-star squad.

[sntslilhlpr6601]

I think they both have their places.

The 50-70 field makes for a better ball game but only if the talent level is up to par.

And there are a heck of a lot more softball fields for little leaguers to play on then there are mid-size baseball fields.

I don't enjoy watching the LLWS much anymore for many reasons, but one of them is because those kids are too damn good for that small of a field(and so are the bats). But for your normal everyday rec league it's perfectly fine.

[Jake Patterson]

This weekend I watched a little of both the Cal Ripken and the Little League world series on TV. It brought up two points of debate that I wanted to get the baseball minds on this sites opions on.

1) what format is better, the shorter bases & mound of little league or the longer bases/mound and lead-off of Cal Ripken.

I believe Cal Ripken is better with more size fields... The problem is most communities would have difficulty affording.

2) If the champs of both tourneys faced of in a best of seven series...4 of one rule (say Cal Ripken) and 3 of the other (little league) what team would win? why

I feel given the same conditions neither program would stick out.

[mudvnine]

Before I start I'm going to remind posters not to confuse 50/70 travel with 50/70 re ball. If you've seen both, there's a huge difference.

Which format is better? It doesn't really matter. It's preteen kids on a smaller than normal size field. Keep in mind watching either WS you're watching the best of the best of rec ball, not typical Anytown USA rec ball.

Regardless of the playing rules, the athletes will ultimately prevail by high school. Some call 50/70 "real baseball." I've seen some very sloppy 50/70 rec games I attribute to open bases. With closed bases the pitcher can focus on pitching rather than worrying about a runner dancing off first. I've never seen a kid who played LL have trouble learning how to take a lead or hold a runner when they were older.

If the two WS champions played the more talented team with deeper pitching would most likely in. The kids on teams in the LLWS are typically also playing 50/70 travel ball as are the CR kids. There wouldn't be an adjustment issue putting the LL'ers on the 50/70 field.

At eleven and twelve my son played LL and 50/70 travel. The travel was better baseball because it was travel caliber players. With kids who can play, the 50/70 is a better format. But it doesn't make the kids better players down the road. Moving to the 60/90 field is one of the great dividers of contenders and pretenders when moving on in the game, not preteen open or closed bases.

Excellent "tg", I agree with you 100% . . . as I was about to type the exact same thing.

[jbolt_2000]

Before I start I'm going to remind posters not to confuse 50/70 travel with 50/70 re ball. If you've seen both, there's a huge difference.

Which format is better? It doesn't really matter. It's preteen kids on a smaller than normal size field. Keep in mind watching either WS you're watching the best of the best of rec ball, not typical Anytown USA rec ball.

Regardless of the playing rules, the athletes will ultimately prevail by high school. Some call 50/70 "real baseball." I've seen some very sloppy 50/70 rec games I attribute to open bases. With closed bases the pitcher can focus on pitching rather than worrying about a runner dancing off first. I've never seen a kid who played LL have trouble learning how to take a lead or hold a runner when they were older.

If the two WS champions played the more talented team with deeper pitching would most likely in. The kids on teams in the LLWS are typically also playing 50/70 travel ball as are the CR kids. There wouldn't be an adjustment issue putting the LL'ers on the 50/70 field.

At eleven and twelve my son played LL and 50/70 travel. The travel was better baseball because it was travel caliber players. With kids who can play, the 50/70 is a better format. But it doesn't make the kids better players down the road. Moving to the 60/90 field is one of the great dividers of contenders and pretenders when moving on in the game, not preteen open or closed bases.

I agree with this as well! It's not so black and white as to which is better. There are alot of variables when comparing the two.

I would also like to note - It doesn't make a player better/worse talent wise, but I believe it does help with their baseball acuity, being on the bigger field, open bases. With that said, LL Inc started a 50/70 pilot program in 2010 for 12 y.o. So they do see the value in the open bases.

[tominct]

Who would win....I'm biased, but.....I'm a CR adminstrator and the mananger of our most recent 12 team that competed in our State tournament, losing to the eventual New England representative in the CRWS. In addittion, my team played the "B" team from the league that produced the New England Regional LL Champion, and I saw that team up close in the sectionals. I would love to see that team play our CR State Champion. I would give the CR team the advatntage on the bigger field, but the short distance and lack of running would give the LL team the advantage on the small field. The CR catcher was excellent, with a cannon and he would neutralize the LL team should they try to run on them, but I can't say if that is true for the LL catcher (if he would even catch for that team on the bigger field (see below)). Also, the swings on the CR team were exceptional up and down the lineup, and in CR (all-stars) not everyone has to play!

In all fairness it is a very different game. My team played a season of mostly 50/70 games, but some teams we scheduled during the summer only had 60 ft fields, so if we traveled to their place we'd play that way. My kids hated it, they would tease the other team in the dugout (not within earshot but only to each other) about how this was "baby-ball!" When I say they hated, I mean they hated it! Kids like to run and they LOVE to steal, or attempt to steal. The 60 ft game eliminated that element, but also reduces the necessity for having a top-notch catcher with an arm. When we played 60 foot I was able to supplement my catcher spot with kids that would never catch in a 70 foot game, they couldn't make the throw. On the little diamond that's pretty much a non-issue. Also, making the pitchers focus on something OTHER than throwing the ball only helps their development in my opinion.


Rec 50/70 is an aquired taste. A single or walk is normally a triple, so hitting becomes both more important (man if you can hit!) but less too, because its very easy to score without the benefit of a hit.

Moreover, and then I will be quiet, 70 foot adds so much to the kids' experience and learning. Now they have to defend the bunt better, they have to know some second base pickoffs, they can leave early, get in rundowns, in general, make plays.

For what is is worth, if you ask the kids...NO BRAINER! Cal Ripken!

[tominct]

We know a number of kids who went to the Ripken WS four years ago and they reported that the Mexican team essentially was a nationwide all-star squad.

If memory serves me correctly (and I am just to lazy and have been sitting here too long to go to CR site and find out for certain) Mexico won it again.

[virg]

This weekend I watched a little of both the Cal Ripken and the Little League world series on TV. It brought up two points of debate that I wanted to get the baseball minds on this sites opions on.
1) what format is better, the shorter bases & mound of little league or the longer bases/mound and lead-off of Cal Ripken.
2) If the champs of both tourneys faced of in a best of seven series...4 of one rule (say Cal Ripken) and 3 of the other (little league) what team would win? why

I can't answer these questions, won't try, and want only to inject a realistic observation that might help you understand question #1 better. The LL infield dimensions and pitching distance were designed for men's softball long before LL was born. The fields and their dimensions were already there. LL was 'designed' to suit existing infields. As LL grew and men's fps declined, it was convenient.

That's the LL design the kids [and their instruction] must conform and adapt to. CR might have
designed better.

[skipper5]

IMO the advantages of 50/70 for pre-teens are overstated.

I happen to coach in a Ripken town, not LLI.

We have a very strong Ripken program, both rec and all-stars. A half hour away is a town with a similarly strong LL program.
Our 11-12yo rec and allstars play 50/70 open bases, their 11-12yos play 46/60 closed bases.

Every fall, the two towns meet each other for the first time when graduating 12s compete against each on the 60/90 diamond. Even though our guys have a year's headstart dealing with open bases, the 46/60 kids from the other town seem to pick up everything REAL fast. (and I know for a fact that they don't have any prior 50/70 experience.)

[tominct]

The advantages of CR are not in the "output." It isn't about "does it make the player better?" What makes a player better is more reps.....

BUT IT IS MORE FUN FOR THEM!

Tom

[Jake Patterson]

The advantages of CR are not in the "output." It isn't about "does it make the player better?" What makes a player better is more reps.....

BUT IT IS MORE FUN FOR THEM!

Tom

Tom,
As you probably know us northern guys (For those who don't know I live about 30 miles north of Tom) up here play LL... While I agree that CR's field sizes make more sense - I also agree that good baseball is good baseball. Reps, good technique, good coaching, etc., is what makes it good...... or bad.

[tg643]

Who would win....I'm biased, but.....I'm a CR adminstrator and the mananger of our most recent 12 team that competed in our State tournament, losing to the eventual New England representative in the CRWS. In addittion, my team played the "B" team from the league that produced the New England Regional LL Champion, and I saw that team up close in the sectionals. I would love to see that team play our CR State Champion. I would give the CR team the advatntage on the bigger field, but the short distance and lack of running would give the LL team the advantage on the small field. The CR catcher was excellent, with a cannon and he would neutralize the LL team should they try to run on them, but I can't say if that is true for the LL catcher (if he would even catch for that team on the bigger field (see below)). Also, the swings on the CR team were exceptional up and down the lineup, and in CR (all-stars) not everyone has to play!

In all fairness it is a very different game. My team played a season of mostly 50/70 games, but some teams we scheduled during the summer only had 60 ft fields, so if we traveled to their place we'd play that way. My kids hated it, they would tease the other team in the dugout (not within earshot but only to each other) about how this was "baby-ball!" When I say they hated, I mean they hated it! Kids like to run and they LOVE to steal, or attempt to steal. The 60 ft game eliminated that element, but also reduces the necessity for having a top-notch catcher with an arm. When we played 60 foot I was able to supplement my catcher spot with kids that would never catch in a 70 foot game, they couldn't make the throw. On the little diamond that's pretty much a non-issue. Also, making the pitchers focus on something OTHER than throwing the ball only helps their development in my opinion.


Rec 50/70 is an aquired taste. A single or walk is normally a triple, so hitting becomes both more important (man if you can hit!) but less too, because its very easy to score without the benefit of a hit.

Moreover, and then I will be quiet, 70 foot adds so much to the kids' experience and learning. Now they have to defend the bunt better, they have to know some second base pickoffs, they can leave early, get in rundowns, in general, make plays.

For what is is worth, if you ask the kids...NO BRAINER! Cal Ripken!

My son played LL, LL all-stars and in a USSSA 50/70 Sunday doubleheader travel league at 11U and 12U. The purpose of the travel league was to play better than rec competition concurrently with the LL season to prepare the potentiall LL all-stars for all-star play. The travel roster was the sixteen players most likely to make the twelve man LL all-star roster. The kids didn't have any trouble going back and forth between the two field sizes. They never discussed which was better ball other than the talent level between their LL regular seasoin teams and the travel team. They just went out and played the game.

Each year before the LL all-star tournament we played the local CR all-star team and annihilate them. It's about talent, not field size and rule sets in kiddie ball. The high school team recently won the conference title. Both programs feed the high school. Two thirds of the varsity played LL. One third played CR. It's about talent, not field size and rule sets in kiddie ball. I saw both 46/60 and 50/70 as kiddie ball (referred to as baby ball in the previous post). It's not big boy ball until hitting the 60/90 field.

Add to post: More than talent over field size and rule sets, preteen ball is about having fun, learning and mastering the basic fundmantals of hitting, fielding and throwing regardless of field size, so they can move on to the 60/90 field, find out if they can succeed and learn how to play the game on a full size field.

[Jake Patterson]

My son played LL, LL all-stars and in a USSSA 50/70 Sunday doubleheader travel league at 11U and 12U. The purpose of the travel league was to play better than rec competition conurrently with the LL season to prepare the potentiall LL all-stars for all-star play. The travel roster was the sixteen players most likely to make the twelve man LL all-star roster.

To me this is wrong on so many levels...