9yr old mound height

My question is does it really make a difference if he begins learning to pitch on a 10" mound and I have it as he gets older and advances…or should I just build a 6" for now. Thoughts on why and why it matters please.

higher mound more stress on arm. Makes no real difference for bullpen. Most field mounds have a bit hole in it so it looses a few inches. If you really want to get specific go look at the field ur going to play on. whats the height differnce form the rubber to heel plant. it may only be a few inches.

How does a higher mound put more stress on the arm, and why wouldn’t that hold true for a bullpen mound? I don’t understand why there wouldn’t also be a “big hole” on a small field mound too.

It’s a LL regulation height mound on the field that we will reform before the spring season.
Anybody have a link to plans to build a 6" mound?

[quote=“scorekeeper”]

How does a higher mound put more stress on the arm, and why wouldn’t that hold true for a bullpen mound? I don’t understand why there wouldn’t also be a “big hole” on a small field mound too.[/quote]

Any kind of mound, bullpen or field mound will but more stress on the arm the higher the mound thats why there are some that say bull pen on flats
There is a big hole because kids like to dig a hole in front of the rubber and it never gets refilled properly.

I don’t understand why the height makes any difference at all. Even when the mount height was 15”, the drop was 1” per foot. That’s the drop on the 10” mound today, and the 6” mound LLI, or on any other mound.

Are the people saying to take pens on flat ground advocating never taking a pen on a mound?

Well, never is might inclusive word, but I get your meaning. But my question wasn’t why there was a hole there, but why thinking there would be a bigger difference on a 10” mound than a 6” mound.

Back in the day, the height of the pitcher’s mound was fifteen inches, and I always threw from that height. Because I was a natural sidearmer I never had any difficulties or arm problems, and I remember how batters would constantly get all flustered and discombooberated, especially when I would crossfire my pitches. It’s too bad that the powers that be have seen fit to lower the mound—it takes away from a pitcher’s advantage. As for the hole in front of the mound—pitchers need to do a bit of groundskeeping in order to keep from falling into it! 8)

[quote=“scorekeeper”]
I don’t understand why the height makes any difference at all. Even when the mount height was 15”, the drop was 1” per foot. That’s the drop on the 10” mound today, and the 6” mound LLI, or on any other mound.

Are the people saying to take pens on flat ground advocating never taking a pen on a mound? [/quote]

Its just more stressful on the arm to throw downward or even straight compared to up ward.Put it this way. after warming up… do ten throws as hard as you can with an arc 30-45 degrees. next day throw ten as hard as you can straight. … next day ten down ward. you will note the difference. if not, your just built better then me.

Im not sayin never to bull pen on a mound , just respect it , it does have some wear and tear on the arm. like dont bull pen 2 day in a row on the mound or something.

[quote=“Plaz”]
Its just more stressful on the arm to throw downward or even straight compared to up ward.Put it this way. after warming up… do ten throws as hard as you can with an arc 30-45 degrees. next day throw ten as hard as you can straight. … next day ten down ward. you will note the difference. if not, your just built better then me.

Im not sayin never to bull pen on a mound , just respect it , it does have some wear and tear on the arm. like dont bull pen 2 day in a row on the mound or something.[/quote]

Maybe I don’t know how you’re getting that throwing off a properly sloped mound is thrown “down”? Its not as though we’re talking about trying to hit something 100’ over one’s head or something at one’s feet. What it takes to throw a pitch anyplace near the strike zone is a matter of release point controlled by a difference of milliseconds, not some huge change in total body mechanics.

Now I’m not at all saying I’m correct and you’re wrong, but I am saying I’ve never heard of anything to make me be concerned about throwing off a mound as compared to throwing off of flat ground. Perhaps the hosts of this site can offer some insight.

Just noodling around I found this;

Here is a link to the study if you want to drop a nickle;

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1279766&isnumber=28599

[b][i]23-Mar-2008 – A study involving several Major League Baseball pitchers indicates that the height of the pitcher’s mound can affect the athlete’s throwing arm motion, which may lead to potential injuries because of stress on the shoulder and elbow.

The study was led by William Raasch, M.D., associate professor of orthopaedic surgery at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, who also is the head team physician for the Milwaukee Brewers. Major League Baseball funded the study in an effort to help prevent injuries among professional baseball players.

The results of the study were presented at the 2007 MLB Winter Meetings at the joint session of the Major League Baseball Team Physicians Association and Professional Baseball Athletic Trainers Society.

The researchers recruited 20 top-level, elite pitchers from Major League Baseball organizations and Milwaukee-area NCAA Division I-A college pitchers for the study, which was conducted both during 2007 spring training in Arizona and at the Froedtert & Medical College Sports Medicine Center in Milwaukee.

“Our researchers employed a motion analysis system using eight digital cameras that recorded the three-dimensional positions of 43 reflective markers placed on the athletes’ bodies. Then we analyzed the pitching motion at mound heights of the regulation 10-inches, along with eight-inch and six-inch mounds, as well as having the athletes throw from flat ground,” Dr. Raasch explains.

The study focused on determining if there is increased stress on the shoulder or the elbow based on the height from which the pitcher has thrown. A kinematic analysis provided information regarding pitching motion (position and velocity), while the kinetic analysis determined the forces and torques generated at the shoulder and elbow.

“We found that compared to flat ground, pitchers using a 10-inch mound experience an increase in superior shear and adduction torque in the shoulder – meaning there’s a greater amount of stress on the joint surface and surrounding structures. That greater stress may result in injury to the shoulder including tearing of the rotator cuff or labrum which may result in surgery and long-term rehabilitation. It also can make it difficult for the athlete to replicate the same throw and develop a consistent strike,” Dr. Raasch says.

“The most notable kinematic difference was the increase in shoulder external rotation at foot contact. This probably represents a change in the timing of the foot contact relative to arm position, because the foot lands earlier in the pitch delivery during flat ground throwing than with a slope,” he says.
While the study did not result in enough data to recommend reducing the 10-inch mound height, which became standard in 1968 and also used in college and high school baseball, Dr. Raasch says the findings give trainers information that can help them determine if pitchers would be better off practicing on flat ground especially after an injury.

“Nolan Ryan, who played major league baseball for 27 years, often threw pitches more than 100 mph, even past the age of 40, and he liked to throw on flat ground in his waning years. I think others might follow his lead,” Dr. Raasch says. He adds that he hopes subsequent research during spring training in 2008 will provide even more valuable findings for baseball players and trainers. [/i][/b]

I’ve always heard the leverage difference means that it is adviseable to rest longer between mound pen sessions at full effort.

ASMI’s Dr Fleisig thought this;

[quote]I do not know of any scientific study on this topic with youth pitchers, but about ten years ago ASMI compared pitching on a mound to “crow-hop” throwing using college pitchers. Crow-hop throwing is similar to a two-step throw that an infielder might do across the infield after fielding a ground ball or an outfielder might do after catching a fly and trying to throw out a tagging runner. In this study, the differences in shoulder and elbow forces (and torques) between a 60-foot pitch from a mound and a 60-foot crow-hop throw were insignificant. There are a few more details about the study here on the www.asmi.org website.

Of course the study above does not answer your exact question because the flat-ground throws used were not pitches and the subjects were not youth.

So while I do not have scientific data comparing pitching from a mound and flat ground for youth pitchers, I can give you my opinions based upon the numerous, somewhat-related pitching biomechanics studies we have conducted over the years. My guess is that the forces on a youth’s arm would be similar between pitching on a mound and flat-ground, and that the bigger differences would be between the kid would good, efficient mechanics and the kid with poor, stressful mechanics . Furthermore, I believe that learning to pitch from a mound will be better because the pitcher would have a better chance to learn mechanics that would be proper as the pitcher advances to leagues from a mound. More specifically, a pitcher who learns from flat ground might develop improper stride length and improper timing between leg action and arm rotation once he/she starts pitching on a mound.

Again, it is unproven, but a summary of my opinion is this - youth pitchers should pitch from a mound because

I think the forces/torques are similar from a mound and flat ground.

I think the pitcher who learns on a mound to start has a better chance of learning proper mechanics he/she can use throughout his/her career.[/quote]

I know that MLB lowered the mound at the end of the 60’s to reduce the dominance of one Bob Gibson, so the leverage/torque thing may have had merit in their book.

Well far be it for me to question a 4 year old study done on 20 elite adult pitchers, done by a noted associate professor and head team physician of a MLB club. That should carry considerable weight. However, although ASMI seems not to have data conducted in a like study, since we’re discussing “kids” not ML pitchers, I think I’d lean toward Dr. Fleisig because he’s far more involved with children as opposed to adults.

I did a little noodling myself and found an article from an Apr 2006 issue of Every Day. In it Dr. Raasch answers some questions about the study. The following surprised me just a tad, but not because of anything other than the good Dr.’s apparent ignorance about the history of the game of baseball.

I don’t know how historically precise this is, but in general it does note that from 1903 to 1968 the mound height was 15 inches, which is decidedly more than the 10” currently in the rule books. http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/why-is-there-a-pitchers-mound-in-baseball-0910/

So if anything, rather than creating an environment that puts greater stress on the arm, it looks as though in 1968 MLB actually did just the opposite. And that seems to be at great odds with those who claim that today’s pitchers are significantly more injury prone, even though the workloads are less, the technology, nutrition, and medical advice is tremendously better, since the pitchers from 1903 thru 1969 seem to have suffered far less on far greater workloads, technology, and medical advice.

It would seem that rather than lower the mound, it might be a better idea to raise it.

Q. What’s the goal of the study?
The theory is that as you raise the mound, the motions that the arm goes through are changed, and can result in additional stress to both the shoulder and elbow. I’m not sure when the regulation mound height changed to 10 inches, but the height has been raised. So the question was, “Have we created an environment that now puts greater stress on the arm resulting in a higher incidence of injury?” We proposed looking at three different mounds — a 10-inch mound, which is regulation; an 8-inch mound; and a 6-inch mound — as well as having the athletes throw from flat ground.

The truth is, this is an area that needs at the very least, much more continuing study.

Interesting articles!!

Aside from physical effects on pitcher, wouldn’t lowering the mound in MLB allow higher scoring games, which would be good for fans? I saw that Atlantic league was experimenting with moving mound further from home, but wouldn’t lowering the mound be a better way to accomplish same goal of more runs per game on both sides?