Comparison of base running in baseball players and track-and-field athletes

doi:10.4236/health.2011.31005

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Vol.3, No.1, 26-31 (2011) Health

doi:10.4236/health.2011.31005

Comparison of base running in baseball players and

track-and-field athletes

Kazuyoshi Miyaguchi1*, Shinich Demura2, Kazuya Nagai3, Yu Uchida3

1Liberal Arts Education Center, Ishikawa Prefectural University, Nonoichimachi, Japan; kazu1060@lapis.plala.or.jp

2Graduate School of Natural Science & Technology, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan

3Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan

Received 12 October 2010; revised 28 October 2010; accepted 1 November 2010.

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to examine the relationship be-

tween sprint ability and base running of baseball

players and track-and- field (T&F) athletes, and to

identify the association between sprint ability and

running skill on base running. The subjects were 25

male university baseball players and 15 male T&F

athletes without baseball experience. The straight

sprint time of 54.8 m and 1 09.6 m (co rre spo nding to

the distance to second and home) was measured.

In the home run test, the times to reach each base

were measured. In the second base run test, the

actual running distance and 3 m section time

around the first base were measured. Base running

efficien cy was obtained by dividing the base runnin g

time by the straight sprint time. T&F athletes

showed h igher values than baseba ll players only in

the 109.6 m straight sprint time (P < 0.05, ES=1.35).

Baseball players were significantly superior to T&F

athletes in terms of base running efficiency. As for 3

m section times, baseball players showed signifi-

cant and higher values. The straight sprint time

showed significant and high correlations (r = 0.87,

0.90) between the 109.6 m run and the run home

and between the 54.8 m run and the second base

run in baseball players, but not in T&F athletes. It

was found that superior sprint ability does not al-

ways lead to good base running. In base running, it

is important to run outward to some extent. In par-

ticular, the skill acquisition of base running in 3 m

sections around the base will contribute to short-

ening base running time.

Keywords: Sprint Ability; Running Skill; Efficiency;

Baseball

1. INTRODUCTION

Baseball competition roughly con sists of four motions

of hitting, throwing, catching, and running. Above all,

running speed plays an important role because it is in-

volved in both offense and defense [1]. Especially in

offense, an individual’s base running skill greatly influ-

ences scoring. Superior base running makes up for infe-

rior batting power. If base running is inferior even if

batting power is superior, the team cannot score effec-

tively.

Base running consists of the three elements of starting,

sprint ability, and rounding the bases. Because players

must go through a base arranged in the top of the square

in base running, they are demanded to be skilled in

rounding the bases while touching the bag as well as

being able to sprint in a straight line (sprint ability).

Hence, it is important for baseball players not only to

have great sprinting ability, but also to have base running

skill. In other words, players must determine the course

by themselves while rounding the bases, suppressing the

outward trajectory and slowing down. This is a skill

peculiar to baseball, and it is very different from track

and field even t running in which the course is prescribed

beforehand [2]. Hence, we hypothesized that baseball

players have skill due to connecting in sprint ability to

base running effectively more than T&F athletes.

Usually, in base running to the second base through

the first base, it is recommended that players run straight

to about 4 m in front of the first base and then to veer 1m

outside on route to the next base. On the other hand,

Hatori [3] examined differences of base running between

groups that had baseball experience and those who did

not, and reported that the 50 m sprint showed a signifi-

cant correlation with running to second in the former

group, but not in the latter group, and that the relation-

ship of base running time with base running distance

was significantly different between both groups.

Various information has been reported on base run-

ning as stated above. However, although there are many

reports based on experiential know ledge and observa tion,

little has been reported on base running efficiency and

K. Miyaguchi et al. / Health 3 (2011) 26-31

base running skill with respect to sprint ability. This

study, therefore, aimed to examine the relationship be-

tween sprint ability and base running of baseball players

and T&F athletes, and to identify the effect of sprint

ability and running sk ill in base running.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Experimental Approach to the Problem

To examine the relationsh ip between sprint ability and

base running of baseball players and T&F athletes, in

this study, the straight sprint time of 54.8 m and 109.6 m

(corresponding to the distance to second and home) was

measured. Additionally, in the home run test, the times to

reach each base were measured. In the second base run

test, the actual running distance and 3 m section time

around the first base were measured. Base running effi-

ciency was obtained by dividing the base running time

by the straight spri nt time.

2.2. Subjects

The subjects were 25 male university baseball players

with at least 7 years of baseball experience or more

(mean age 19.7 ± 0.7 yr, height 1.73 ± 0.05 m, body

mass 65.8 ± 6.4 kg, and careers 10.0 ± 1.6 yr) and 15

male T&F athletes without baseball experience (mean

age 19.3 ± 1.0 yr, height 1.73 ± 0.04 m, body mass 64.8

± 5.2 kg, and careers 5.9 ± 2.4 yr). There were insignifi-

cant differences between both groups in terms of physi-

cal characteristics. The position breakdown of the base-

ball players was seven pitchers, one catcher, seven in-

fielders and eight outfielders. The breakdown according

to the events for T&F athletes were six sprinters, two

hurdlers, two jumpers, and two combined competition

athletes. Informed consent was obtained from all sub-

jects after a full explanation of the experimental study

and its procedures. This study was approved by the Hu-

man Rights Committee of Kanazawa University

2.3. Running Test

1) Straight sprint test

The straight sprint time of 54.8 m (corresponding to a

run to second base) and 109.6 m (correspond to running

home [rounding the bases]) were measured. After

warming up, the subjects started by the signal of the

starter’s gun from standing posture with jogging shoes.

In each straight sprint test, the transit time of 27.2 m,

54.8 m, and 82.2 m corresponding to the distance of

running to first-third base and 109.6 m was measured by

stopwatch (SEIKO, SEKSVAS005). In consideration of

the influence of fatigue, each run test was performed

twice after sufficient rest (15 minutes). All intra-class

correlations (ICCs) were larger than 0.86. The mean of

two trials was used for the analysis.

2) Base running test

The subjects performed running to second and run-

ning home with running shoes. From a standing posture,

they started by the signal of the starter’s gun and ran at

full speed to each distance with all effort. A timekeeper

was deployed at the first base, second base, third base

and home base for running home, and the time to pass

each base was measured. In running to second, a time-

keeper was deployed on the second base and the time to

arrive at the second base was measured. Furthermore,

the actual running distance between home and first base

and between first and second base was measured, and

the 3 m section time around the first base was measured

with a measurement device [Speed trap : Apollo] with an

infrared sensor.

The running distances from home to first base and

from first to second base were calculated as follows: the

most outside footprint was assumed as a top and it was

calculated from the total distances of two hypotenuses of

connecting top and each base (Pythagorean Theorem)

(Figure 1). Because of evaluating the 3 m section time

around the first base, the measure points of 3 m away

from the first base was set up on the home-first section

and first –second section. In running to second base, the

time for the athletes’ torso to move from the first point to

the second point was measured (Figure 2).

Each base running test was performed twice after a

sufficient rest (15 minutes). All ICCs were larger than

0.79 and there were not significant differences between

trials. In addition, the ICC of the 3 m section time in

running to second was 0.76 in the baseball players, but

0.60 in T&F athletes. The mean of two trials was used

for the analysis. The decreased rate to straight sprint in

base running time was assumed to be the base running

efficiency. In fact, this was obtained by dividing base

running time by straight sprint time. For example, the

second

first

home

=(27.4-b)

=(27.4-f)

Running distance from first to second＝e+h

Running distance from home to first ＝a+d

Figure 1. Measurement method of running distance.

K. Miyaguchi et al. / Health 3 (2011) 26-31

second

first

home

3 m

Tester

Figure 2. 3 m section around first base.

base running efficiency for running home was obtained

by dividing base running time for running home by the

109.6 m run time. In addition, each section of 0 m~27.2

m, 27.2 m~54.8 m, 54.8 m~82.2 m and 82.2 m~109.6 m

in the 109.6 m run was regarded as the first to fourth

section, and the each efficiency value was calculated by

dividing the base running time of each section by the

above section time.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The reliability of each test was examined by ICC. The

t-test was used to reveal the mean differences for each

measurement value between baseball players and T&F

athletes. The relationship between base running time and

straight sprint time, and 3 m section time or running dis-

tance were examined using Pearson's correlation coeffi-

cient. Additionally, in running home and the 109.6 m run,

two-way analysis of variance (Two-way ANOVA) was

used to reveal the mean differences among sections (first

section, second section, third section , and fourth section)

and groups (baseball players and T&F athletes) with the

repeated measures. Tukey HSD test was used for multi-

ple comparison tests if ANOVA showed a significant

main effect. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05.

3. RESULTS

Table 1 shows the resu lts of the straight sprint test and

base running test in both groups of baseball players and

T&F athletes. As for sprint time, T&F athletes showed

higher values than baseball players only in 109.6 m run

(P < 0.05, ES = 1.35). Tab l e 2 shows the results of the

t-test to reveal the mean difference of base running effi-

ciency between both groups in running to second and

home. Baseball players were significantly superior to

Table 1. Result of the straight sprint test and base running test

for both groups.

Ta b le 2. Result of the t-test to reveal the mean difference be-

tween both groups for base running efficiency.

Mean SDMean SDES

Run to second / 54.8 m sprint1.100.031.150.043.95*1.33

Run home / 109.6 m sprint1.140.021.220.065.92*2.00

ｔ-value

ES: effect size *：p<0. 05

Baseball (n=25)T & F (n=15)

T&F athletes in both base running efficiencies (P < 0.05,

run to second: ES = 1.33, run home: ES = 2.00).

Table 3 shows the results of the t-test to reveal the

mean difference in running distances of every section

and the total distance between bo th groups in running to

second. Baseball players showed significant short dis-

tances in base running from first to second base and in

total distance, but not in base running distance from

home to first base. As for differences in the 3 m section

time around the first base between both groups, baseball

players showed significant and higher values and ES

(1.17) was large (baseball players: 0.86 ± 0.08 sec.

T&F athletes: 0.95 ± 0.08 sec).

Table 4 shows the results of ANOVA on the differ-

ence in base running efficiency for every section be-

tween both groups. There was no significant interaction.

Baseball players were significantly superior to T&F ath-

letes in base running efficiency. Significant differences

were found among sections and multiple comparison

tests showed that the difference of the first section was

the smallest and then the fourth section and the differ-

ence was largest for the second and the third sections.

The straight sprint time showed significant and high

correlations (r = 0.87, 0.90) between th e 109.6 m run and

the run home and between the 54.8 m run and the run to

second in baseball players, bu t not i n T&F athl et es. Table

5 shows correlations between the run to second running

distance and 3 m section time in both groups. The run to

second showed significant and high correlations with 3 m

section time in both groups. Only in baseball players did

the run to second showed significant and negative corre-

lation (r = -0.4 2) wi t h ru nni n g di st ance.

4. DISCUSSION

Generally, T&F athletes are superior to baseball play-

ers in straight sprint ability. In the presen t 109.6 m sprint

test, T&F athletes were faster than baseball players.

However, there was an insignificant difference between

K. Miyaguchi et al. / Health 3 (2011) 26-31

Table 3. Result of t-test to reveal the mean difference of running distance between both groups.

Baseball (n = 25) T&F (n = 15)

Mean SD Mean SD t-value ES

Home-first (m) 27.95 0.16 27.83 0.20 1.95

First-second (m) 28.14 0.27 28.68 0.31 5.50 * 1.84

Total distance (m) 56.08 0.31 56.61 0.27 4.39 * 1.47

ES: eff ect size * : p<0.05.

Table 4. Result of ANOVA on the difference in base running for every section between both groups.

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 F-value Post-hoc,HSD

Mean SD Mean SD MeanSDMeanSD F1:Group F2: Sec-

tion

Baseball(n =

25) 1.03 0.02 1.24 0.03 1.220.061.120.06 F132.81 * Base-

ball<T&F 1<4<2,3

T&F(n = 15) 1.08 0.04 1.33 0.08 1.320.111.180.08F2140.15*

F3 1.44

* : p<0.05.

Table 5. Correlations between the times running to second and running distance and a 3 m section between both groups.

Baseball (n = 25) T&F (n = 15)

Runnning distan ce Section t ime Runnning distance Section time

Run to second -0.42* 0.76* 0.35 0.85*

* : p<0.05.

both groups in the 54.8 m sprint test. Because the 54.8

m sprint test is a short distance, the performance of the

acceleration phase following a start influences time

greatly. Bert et al. [4] reported that the height of a ver-

tical jump with counter movement is a useful index for

the performance of a 30 m sprint following a start. From

the characteristics of baseball, it is inferred that baseball

players have superior leg muscle power. Therefore, it is

very likely that a significant difference was not found

between both groups in the 54.8 m sprint. Tsuchie [5]

reported that persons performing sprint training techni-

cally have superior ability to maintain their own maxi-

mum sprint speed due to the low digression rate of

speed. Thus, in the case of the present subjects, it is

inferred that the difference was not found in the 54.8 m

sprint ability between both groups. In a subsequent

phase, however, the T&F athletes were superior to the

baseball players because of the ability to maintain the

maximu m spee d .

On the other hand, as for running to second and ho me,

there was no significant difference between both groups.

However, baseball players were superior to the T&F

athletes in base running efficiency. This means that when

comparing base running time with straight sprint time,

the digression rate of speed was smaller in baseball

players as compared with T&F athletes. Therefore, it is

considered that the baseball players run to the next base

effectively, or the T&F athletes could not exert sprint

ability enough while base running.

In addition, in base running efficiency for each section,

the second and third sections were the least in both

groups. For this reason, it may depend on the sudden

direction change that is demanded in addition to the

movement required when passing a base. The second

and the third sections of the 109.6 m sprint correspond to

the top speed phase from the second acceleration in

sprint race [6]. And these sections are the fastest sections

with enough acceleration.

However, in the same sections in running home, the

base runners regulate a step to go through a base, and

need to take the course of base running with enough

rounding because of advancing to the next base. Hence,

it is possible that they cannot perform the acceleration

enough or maintain the accelerated speed. From the

above reason, it is inferred that the base running effi-

ciency of the second and the third sections was low.

Only in baseball players did the straight sprint time

show a high relationship (r = 0.87 and 0.90) between the

109.6 m run and the run home and between the 54.8 m

run and the run to second. Hatori [7] reported that 50 m

sprint time showed significant and moderate correlations

(r = 0.63) with each base running time, supporting the

present results.

Because baseball players are well experienced in run-

ning to the next base while maintaining a high speed, it

is possible that straight sprint time showed high rela-

K. Miyaguchi et al. / Health 3 (2011) 26-31

tionship with base running time. On the other hand, al-

though T&F athletes have superior straight sprint ability

as compared with baseball players, it is inferred that be-

cause they cannot efficiently exert this sprint ability in

base running, the relationship between straight sprint

time and base running time was low.

In this study, characteristics of base running method

were examined by measuring the running distance of

running to second and the 3 m section time around the

first base. The run to second showed a high relationship

with the 3 m section time in both groups. This suggests

that the runner's skill is closely related with base runn ing

time regardless of expertise, or that the person is an in-

experienced baseball player when going through a base.

As for the 3 m section time, the baseball players were

superior to the T&F athletes (ES = 1.15). This suggests

that they can run to the next base while maintain ing their

speed because of having skillful base running technique

from experience. In contrast, the T&F athletes cannot

exert their own sprint ability enough because of insuffi-

cient base running skill.

Greg [8] stated that the followin g is impor tant fo r b ase

running: 1) When approaching the base, one must lean

one’s body to the inside of the field, using the inside and

outside edges of their feet. 2) One must maintain accel-

eration and stride length, and not to increase the number

of steps near the base. 3) One must kick the ground with

the ball of the foot and to go through the base with

swinging arms to maintain speed and power. Also Mi-

zuno [9] stated that the first base provides a role such as

the start block of track-and-field. It is likely that 3 m

section time of baseball players was fast because they

have learned the above base running technique. In the

conventional baseball playbook, going through a base

with the left foot has been recommended, but recently

there have been few reports proposing going through a

base with the right foot. Actually, many baseball players

in this study went through a base with the right foot.

From now, examining more effective base running me-

thod will be necessary.

As for the distance to second, baseball players had a

shorter distance than T&F athletes in base running dis-

tance from first to second base, but not in base running

distance from home to first base. From this, it is inferred

that the T&F athletes rounded out greatly after having

gone through first base. On the other hand, the run to

second in baseball players showed a negative correlation

with running distance. This may mean that if the base

running time is short, the runnin g distance is long.

Hatori [3] reported that the relationship between run-

ning distance and base running time was positive in

those who are inexperienced at baseball, but negative in

players with experience. The present findings supported

the above. It was suggested that running the shortest

distance is not always ideal for base running, and run-

ning the cour se with ro unding to some extent co ntributes

to shortening total distance and time as a result.

By comparing T&F athletes and baseball players, it

was found that superior sprint ability does not always

lead to good base running. It is inferred that the T&F

athletes cannot exert sprint ability with poorly-trained

base running skills whereas baseball players go through

a base smoothly and can maintain maximum speed. In

base running, it is important to run with rounding to

some extent. In particular, the skill acquisition of base

running in 3 m sections around the bases will lead to

shortening the base running time.

Professional baseball is a sport in which running

speed plays an important role. Because running speed is

the only common denominator of both offense and de-

fense, Professional Major League Baseball (MLB)

scouting agents emphasize a running speed when evalu-

ating talent [10]. However, the faster players do not al-

ways participate at the major-league level (highest level

in professional baseball). Data collected on 210 profes-

sional players in the 30- and 60- yd dash showed that the

fastest players were at the AA level (second to lowest

level in professional baseball)[11]. The above means that

the players who can use their own running speed in both

offense and defense can play a more active part in the

upper levels. Therefore, as for base running, players

must train to raise running speed. And it will be neces-

sary for coaches to measure the times of straight line

runs and base runs regularly, and give feedback to the

players about this information to confirm base running

efficiency.

REFERENCES

[1] Coleman, A.E. (2007) Running Speed in Professional

Baseball. Strength & Conditioning Journal, 29, 72-76.

[2] Young, W. and Farrow, D. (2006) A Review of Agility:

Practical Applications for Strength and Conditioning.

Strength & Conditioning Journal, 28, 24-29.

doi:10.1519/1533-4295(2006)28[24:AROAPA]2.0.CO;2

[3] Hatori, Y. (1978) A study on base-running of baseball (2):

On base-running between home base and second base in

novice and advanced subjects. Bulletin of Tokyo Gakugei

University Series, 30, 245-251.

[4] Bert, C., Rahmani, A., Dufour, A.B., Messonnier, L. and

Jacour, J.R. (2002) Leg strength and stiffness as ability

factors in 100 m sprint running. The Journal of Sports

Medicine and Physical Fitness, 42, 274-281.

[5] Tsuchie, H. (2007) Physical and technical factors effect

to each phase of sprint running. Research Quarterly for

Athletics, 75, 2-11.

[6] Delecluse, C. H., Van Coppenolle, H., Willems, E., Van

Leemputte, M., Diels, R. and Goris, M. (1995) Influence

of high resistance and high velocity training on sprint

performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exer-

cise, 27, 1203-1209.

K. Miyaguchi et al. / Health 3 (2011) 26-31

doi:10.1249/00005768-199508000-00015

[7] Hatori, Y. (1977) A study on base-running of baseball:

On base-running between home base and second base in

trained subject. Bulletin of Tokyo Gakugei University Se-

ries, 29, 173-178.

[8] Greg, F. (2007) Improving Your Base Running Speed.

NSCA’s Performance Training Journal, 6, 10-13.

[9] Mizuno, M. (2009) The run in the baseball. Training

Journal, 31, 19-24.

[10] Coleman, G. (2000) 52-Week Baseball Training. Human

Kinetics, Champaign.

[11] Coleman, A.E. and Laskey, L.M. (1992) Assessing run-

ning speed and body composition in professional base-

ball players. Journal of Applied Sports Science Research,

6, 207-213.