All Big Issues
The Instigator
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

# Baseball is harder to play then tennis!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2

Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
 Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point Started: 3/2/2013 Category: Sports Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period Viewed: 2,627 times Debate No: 30899
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 Pro This is how the debate will go1. Acceptance2. Arguing 3. Arguing4. Arguing5.Closing remarks; no new ideas. We will be debating on the fact that baseball is a much harder sport to play than tennis.Report this Argument Con I accept. Let's do it.Report this Argument Pro To begin this debate, I will say that the statistics I have are from a 105 mph pitch and a 163 mph serve. Yes these are extreme numbers but they are the best of the best. So we are comparing the best at each sport so there is a constant. The constant is the best player. The first statement I will make is the fastest baseball ever pitched was 105 mph. The fastest tennis ball hit was 163 mph. Just by looking at these facts you would think that it would be much harder to hit the ball going 163 mph, but you have to take into account what you are using. MLB Rule 1.10(a) says "The bat shall be a smooth, round stick not more than 2 3/4 inches in diameter at the thickest part and not more than 42 inches in length. The bat shall be one piece of solid wood." The diameter of a baseball is 2.9 inches. That means for you to be able to get a solid hit the baseball has to hit the bat almost exact. Now on the other hand, a tennis ball's diameter is two and a half inches, a little bit smaller. But you have a racquet that can be up to 12½ inches wide. That means that you have almost a 5-inch margin from the middle, 2 and a half inches on each side of the middle, to be able to get a solid hit. Now on to the distance. A baseball mound to the back of the plate is 60 feet and 6 inches. Most batters stand about a foot in-front of the back of the plate. That would make the distance somewhere around 59 feet 6 inches. That is being measured by you back foot. In most batters stances there is about 2 to 3 feet between their feet. That means at the place where the ball would be best hit would be the middle of their stance so add another 1 to 1 and a half feet closer. Pitches will also stride towards the play when they pitch. Most pitchers strides are 100% of their body length. The average pitchers’ height is 6’3”. So take away another 6 feet. That means that the ball is traveling around 52 and half feet. Now that would make the ball traveling 146.666667 Feet Per Second. Distance divided by feet per second give you time. 52.5 ft / 146.66667 ft/s = 0.3579 seconds = time pitched ball to reach batter. That gives you less than a half a second to react to hitting the ball. Tennis players would stand around 78 feet apart. I got this from adding the two base lines. Now when the tennis player hits the ball and the ball hits the ground it is going to slow down significantly. It’s called friction. After a hit the tennis ball would slow down about 26 mph(http://tt.tenniswarehouse.com...). That would make the 163 mph serve now is 137. Again distance divided by feet per second 78 feet/ 198.000 feet per second = 0.4105. The baseball player will have much less time to react to the pitch and he will still have to hit with a considerable less surface area, which is to remind you 2 3/4 inches. For all of these reasons I uphold the affirmative.Here are my other sources.http://sports.yahoo.com......--pitchhttp://www.bloomberg.com...ervewww.thecompletepitcher.com/pitchers_stride.htm--stridehttp://wiki.answers.com......--height----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------www.thecompletepitcher.com/pitchers_stride.htm--stridehttp://wiki.answers.com......---height these two go together to get his distance towards the mound. Report this Argument Con Thanks again for this debate. Now for everybody watching he just threw out a whole bunch of numbers to you. You're all probably still trying to calculate what he was talking about. I will make this much easier for you. First I will address what you said before moving on. Firstly, how could you possibly sum up the entirety of tennis and baseball into returning one serve and hitting one pitch? That's the most absurd proposition I've ever seen. You not only sold the sport I am defending short, but also your own sport, baseball. However, I will get back to your points. Baseball's strike zone is drastically smaller than the server's "strike zone" in tennis which gives the batter the ability to rely on walks and take less chances swinging the bat. In tennis you have to react to a larger area and there are no strikes in tennis. If the returner misses the ball, he is "out" so to speak. You also failed to mention the fact that in tennis you have to get the ball over a three foot (wider at the sides) net and back down into a box. (http://www.google.com...) This requires insane speed, form, dip on the ball, and precision. The server also only has one chance to do this. (Barring a let. That is hitting the net and still putting it in the oppositions box.) As a baseball batter you also only have to hit from the side you are strongest at. In tennis you must react to the serve whether it is to your left or to your right. In baseball you begin in the batter's box in position to hit the baseball. In tennis you are fairly square with the server and after it is served you must turn your body to the side of the ball to return it. You said that in tennis the ball slows down upon impact with the surface. This is true. However, I fail to see how this makes hitting the ball any easier? Hitting a ball with a sudden change of speed takes much more skill than hitting a faster ball at a steadier pace. If Albert Pujols was at the plate and the pitcher threw him a 100 mph fastball that slowed down to 76 mph midway to home plate, he would surely strike out every single time. Now that you should realize that serving a ball in tennis is harder than hitting a single ball in baseball let's move on to other facets of the game that you failed to mention. Aside from just returning a serve in tennis you also have to maintain a rally and hit the winner. In order to do that you need to run to the ball, hit it, and keep doing that until you hit a winner. Hitting a ball on the run is obviously much harder than from a stationary position. (Don't believe me? Try hitting a golf ball while running up to it.) Doing this all the while placing it in the corners of a 27 foot wide box. You need more stamina, physical fitness, and skill at the sport of tennis.Report this Argument Pro I wasnt just summing up the entirety of tennis and baseball with those facts. I was just saying that it was much harder to hit the ball. Yes the strike zone is a much smaller area than the sever’s zone. You are wrong about, "You said that in tennis the ball slows down upon impact with the surface. This is true. However, I fail to see how this makes hitting the ball any easier? Hitting a ball with a sudden change of speed takes much more skill than hitting a faster ball at a steadier pace. If Albert Pujols was at the plate and the pitcher threw him a 100 mph fastball that slowed down to 76 mph midway to home plate, he would surely strike out every single time." I never said that hitting is made easier by the fact that is it slowed down. I was stating the fact that it requires less reaction time. Now on to you argument about how a batter would never hit a pitch that changed like that. Now you do realize there is one serve in tennis and the initial serve is power. In baseball the pitcher is in command of what will happen. For instance, the batter comes up to bat and the pitcher throw a 100 mph fast ball. Ok, the next pitch is a 76 mph change up. He can most defiantly hit the ball. The batter has to expect much much more that what a person returning a serve would have to. They have to react to so many different pitches. Change up, fastball, curveball, slider, splitter, knuckle ball, circle change, slurve. You cant do this to a person returning a ball it by a tennis player. Yes you might have to hit a ball with a little bit of spin but nothing like baseball. Now on to what you said about the net. In tennis, you have to hit it over the net, in baseball you have to hit it between 8 players. (not counting catcher since he is not a field player). This takes tremendous skill involving timing to hitting the ball. If you want to hit the ball “opo” to the opposite side if the field, you have to let the ball travel deeper into the plate before you can swing. Or if you want to pull it you have to sing earlier. Also you are wrong about the strike zone. Not every ball will go in the strike zone so you have to thing to yourself if it is a ball or strike which will take extreme skill. You dont have to think if the ball could possibly be in or out. The lines judges tell you if its out. "Aside from just returning a serve in tennis you also have to maintain a rally and hit the winner. In order to do that you need to run to the ball, hit it, and keep doing that until you hit a winner. Hitting a ball on the run is obviously much harder than from a stationary position. (Don't believe me? Try hitting a golf ball while running up to it.) Doing this all the while placing it in the corners of a 27 foot wide box. You need more stamina, physical fitness, and skill at the sport of tennis." Hitting the ball on the run is hard!!! But you have to do it in baseball as well. A bunt and run is when you are bunting the ball as you are running to first base. Now you are wrong about the area a tennis player has to cover when the ball is hit. A baseball player has to cover much more surface area than a tennis player when catching a ball. OHHHHHHH now you have to bring in the fact of catching the ball!!!! I will argue this in my next round. Report this Argument Con It sounded like you were summing up the entirety of baseball with those facts but I will take your word for it. "Now you do realize there is one serve in tennis and the initial serve is power." This is false. In tennis there are actually four types of serves you can use, generally. These serves are the kick serve, flat serve, slice serve, and underhand serve. http://en.wikipedia.org...(tennis) "For instance, the batter comes up to bat and the pitcher throw a 100 mph fast ball. Ok, the next pitch is a 76 mph change up. He can most defiantly hit the ball." Yes because it is an entirely different pitch. In tennis the change of speed is during one service, one ball. You are talking about two seperate pitches, I was stating it would be impossible to hit in the same pitch. "The batter has to expect much much more that what a person returning a serve would have to. They have to react to so many different pitches. Change up, fastball, curveball, slider, splitter, knuckle ball, circle change, slurve." All you just did was name the types of pitches. No pitchers use every single pitch. Roger Clemens, one of the greatest pitchers of all time used just two pitches when he came into the league. These pitches were the fastball and a breaking ball. Later in his career Clemens did begin to use a splitter, still totalling just three pitches. Not the eight you just mentioned. http://en.wikipedia.org... "If you want to hit the ball "opo" to the opposite side if the field, you have to let the ball travel deeper into the plate before you can swing. Or if you want to pull it you have to sing earlier." Tennis players do the same thing. "Not every ball will go in the strike zone so you have to thing to yourself if it is a ball or strike which will take extreme skill. You dont have to think if the ball could possibly be in or out. The lines judges tell you if its out." I don't even know what to say about this. Line judges act the same as the umpire. During the run of play both a tennis player and baseball player must make a decision and then the line judge or umpire make their official call. So I'm not sure what you were going for there. "Hitting the ball on the run is hard!!! But you have to do it in baseball as well. A bunt and run is when you are bunting the ball as you are running to first base." That is one instance which is rarely used anymore. In tennis it is every time a ball is hit. "A baseball player has to cover much more surface area than a tennis player when catching a ball." I would argue that on a ground ball the distance is actually probably greater in tennis but I cannot prove this. The only player that may cover more ground is an outfielder on a fly ball which tennis doesn't have since ever ball is drilled back and forth. Tennis is much harder than baseball.Report this Argument Pro "For instance, the batter comes up to bat and the pitcher throw a 100 mph fast ball. Ok, the next pitch is a 76 mph change up. He can most defiantly hit the ball." "Yes because it is an entirely different pitch. In tennis the change of speed is during one service, one ball. You are talking about two seperate pitches, I was stating it would be impossible to hit in the same pitch." It is the same concept as the ball slowing down. you will be expecting another 100 mph fastball. Then you have to adjust to a adjust to a slower pitch. "The batter has to expect much much more that what a person returning a serve would have to. They have to react to so many different pitches. Change up, fastball, curveball, slider, splitter, knuckle ball, circle change, slurve." All you just did was name the types of pitches. No pitchers use every single pitch. Roger Clemens, one of the greatest pitchers of all time used just two pitches when he came into the league. These pitches were the fastball and a breaking ball. Later in his career Clemens did begin to use a splitter, still totaling just three pitches. Not the eight you just mentioned. http://boston.redsox.mlb.com... Dice K has 6 pitches. Because of his variety it makes it extremely hard to hit. He has a four seam fastball, two seam, cutter, curve, slider, and change up. This variety makes you really wonder what will be coming. Therefore he will mix his pitches making you guess what is coming. He would throw you a fastball, then hit you with a curve, then keep mixed it up where you don’t know what will be coming. Because of this it will make it much harder to hit a baseball than a tennis ball. "Not every ball will go in the strike zone so you have to thing to yourself if it is a ball or strike which will take extreme skill. You dont have to think if the ball could possibly be in or out. The lines judges tell you if its out." I don't even know what to say about this. Line judges act the same as the umpire. During the run of play both a tennis player and baseball player must make a decision and then the line judge or umpire make their official call. So I'm not sure what you were going for there. In baseball the ball can be called a strike when it is outside of the strike zone. In tennis there is replay if I am not mistaken. Also it is much harder to judge if the ball is a strike in baseball. Just your head is facing the way the ball is coming from which makes it harder to see. In tennis your whole body is facing the right direction. You also will have much less time to react like I had stated in my previous argument. Now on to the argument about catching the ball. You don’t have to catch the ball in tennis so you cant contradict this. Therefore making this one of my strongest arguments. It is hard to catch a ball that is a fly ball in the outfield. You have to be able to judge the ball weather it well go over your head or if it will fall short. The average bat speed in the MLB is between 100 and 110. Now a ball being thrown 90 mph will jump off that bat really fast. Now think how hard it would be to catch a ground ball. You need to also be able to catch the ball with a backhand, running up on it, waiting on it, bare handing it, and when someone throws it to you. Also you have to throw a ball from 5 to 127 feet and 3 and 3/8ths inches in time to get a runner out. You have to have a lot of power the throw someone out from the third baseline to first. Or from behind the plate to second in time to throw out a runner sealing to second. Throwing a baseball with power and pace is hard to do if you haven’t done it a long time. It can be hard to make throws in time to get the runner out. Time in baseball is measured by the 60 yard dash which would be a sprint to 2nd. The average time in the MLB is 6.7 – 6.9 seconds. That means you have about 3 and a half seconds from when the ball is hit to get the runner out at first. You have to field the ball, come up to make the throw, and beat that time in around 3 seconds. Very hard. You also had no argument about the fact that a baseball player has to cover more surface area to field a ball. Because of all of these reasons there is no other vote but then saying baseball is a harder sport to play. Report this Argument Con "It is the same concept as the ball slowing down. you will be expecting another 100 mph fastball. Then you have to adjust to a adjust to a slower pitch." No. An entirely different pitch or serve is not the same as slowing down 26 miles per hour in one pitch. "http://boston.redsox.mlb.com...... Dice K has 6 pitches. Because of his variety it makes it extremely hard to hit. He has a four seam fastball, two seam, cutter, curve, slider, and change up. This variety makes you really wonder what will be coming. Therefore he will mix his pitches making you guess what is coming. He would throw you a fastball, then hit you with a curve, then keep mixed it up where you don"t know what will be coming. Because of this it will make it much harder to hit a baseball than a tennis ball." Dice K has a career 4.52 ERA, and a 1.42 WHIP. He's hardly difficult to hit off of. http://espn.go.com... "In baseball the ball can be called a strike when it is outside of the strike zone. In tennis there is replay if I am not mistaken. Also it is much harder to judge if the ball is a strike in baseball. Just your head is facing the way the ball is coming from which makes it harder to see. In tennis your whole body is facing the right direction. You also will have much less time to react like I had stated in my previous argument." No, there are only replays on challenges in tennis. http://en.wikipedia.org... "Now on to the argument about catching the ball. You don"t have to catch the ball in tennis so you cant contradict this. Therefore making this one of my strongest arguments. It is hard to catch a ball that is a fly ball in the outfield. You have to be able to judge the ball weather it well go over your head or if it will fall short. The average bat speed in the MLB is between 100 and 110. Now a ball being thrown 90 mph will jump off that bat really fast. Now think how hard it would be to catch a ground ball. You need to also be able to catch the ball with a backhand, running up on it, waiting on it, bare handing it, and when someone throws it to you. Also you have to throw a ball from 5 to 127 feet and 3 and 3/8ths inches in time to get a runner out. You have to have a lot of power the throw someone out from the third baseline to first. Or from behind the plate to second in time to throw out a runner sealing to second. Throwing a baseball with power and pace is hard to do if you haven"t done it a long time. It can be hard to make throws in time to get the runner out. Time in baseball is measured by the 60 yard dash which would be a sprint to 2nd. The average time in the MLB is 6.7 " 6.9 seconds. That means you have about 3 and a half seconds from when the ball is hit to get the runner out at first. You have to field the ball, come up to make the throw, and beat that time in around 3 seconds. Very hard." Could I please get a source or two for all of these numbers and calculations? "You also had no argument about the fact that a baseball player has to cover more surface area to field a ball." I didn't argue this because there is no evidence that I can find for this, so really you cannot make this claim for baseball either. Otherwise, it's purely an opinion. Catching the baseball hardly automatically makes baseball harder than tennis. You can't catch a ball in tennis because it isn't part of the rules. You also can't catch a ball in hockey, or soccer, or boxing, does that automatically make baseball harder? I don't see how catching a ball automatically makes baseball harder. There is no way for me to prove that catching a baseball is hard or not hard other than personal experience. Growing up I played baseball. I didn't ever practice and I made the little league all star teams all 5 years I played. I first picked up a baseball at a friend's game when their team was short a player. I got into the game, recorded 2 hits, and caught numerous balls. I was picked #1 overall for fall ball despite missing the try out. I was a natural at baseball. However, the first time I picked up a tennis racquet I felt like I had no coordination. I couldn't hit the tennis ball over the net. It took me days and days of playing before finally being able to return a basic serve. (This serve was probably about 50 miles per hour.) In my personal experience tennis is drastically harder than baseball. Back to the sport of tennis where I have barely even made any arguments, just countered your baffling ones. Tennis has many facets to the game, serving, returning, volleying, drop shots, placement and endurance to name a few. Games of tennis can last as long as 4-5 hours at a time constantly running back and forth. All tennis players are in top physical shape which you cannot say about all baseball players. (Manny Ramirez is the perfect example here.) You mention baseball players tracking down balls and making a catch, well tennis players do the same exact thing numerous times during one rally. They don't do it once then stand for the next hour or play, they hit the ball and run, hit and run, the duration of the match. I really can't stress the amount of footwork, endurance and hand eye coordination needed to play tennis.Report this Argument Pro since this is my last round and i cant bring any new ideas I will just argue my opponent’s statements in his 4th round. I hope my opponent will do the same. Now my opponent said that there where no replays in tennis he is sadly mistaken. “It was nearing 1 a.m. New York time on Sept. 7, 2001, when the first tremors of a substantial tennis meltdown shook the U.S. Open. Fiery American newcomer Andy Roddick and his 20-year-old Aussie rival Lleyton Hewitt were in the fifth set of their quarterfinal matchup, and the pair had been trading groundstroke after punishing, sweaty groundstroke for more than three and a half hours. But suddenly, when Roddick was serving at 4-5, fate and optical illusion teamed up to do a mean, baffling thing to the teenage home-country hero. A powerful cross-court forehand by Roddick just kissed the alley line furthest from the chair umpire, a neat trick that would move Roddick one point closer to the semifinal. Or, at least, that's what the linesman (and Andy Roddick) thought. Chair umpire Jorge Dias, from atop his perch on the other side of the court, saw something different. He overruled the line judge's call and awarded the point to Hewitt, sending Roddick into a tailspin of white-hot rage. Afterward, TV replays would show that the ball might have actually landed in. But five points later, a still-bewildered Roddick congratulated Hewitt on his victory and then trudged bitterly out of Arthur Ashe stadium. Fast-forward 11 years to the last match of Roddick's career—a fourth-round U.S. Open match against Juan Martin del Potro, just this Wednesday night. Early in the fourth set,Del Potro unleashed a monstrous first serve at 40-15. A line judge shouted that the serve was wide. Chair umpire Carlos Bernardes overruled, calling the serve an ace. Roddick disagreed. But instead of scoffing, or scowling, or hurling a racket, the American simply raised his right hand. "Mr. Roddick is challenging the call," said the loudspeaker. Both panting players turned toward the stadium's JumboTron to watch a neon yellow orb travel across the screen, finishing its journey just wide of a thick white stripe. The word "OUT" appeared. Roddick was right: The serve had been long.” http://www.theatlantic.com... So therefore I win that argument. He also used Wikipedia as a source which would also make his argument invalid. Here are the sources you want for the numbers. 60 yard dash http://speedendurance.com... Distance from 3rd to 1st. http://www.chacha.com... Bat speed http://www.chacha.com... “You can't catch a ball in tennis because it isn't part of the rules. You also can't catch a ball in hockey, or soccer, or boxing, does that automatically make baseball harder?” You are sadly mistaken again. In soccer the goalie can catch the ball, in hockey you can catch the puck, and in boxing you don’t even play with balls so why bring it into the argument. Hockey source http://voices.yahoo.com... “Back to the sport of tennis where I have barely even made any arguments, just countered your baffling ones. Tennis has many facets to the game, serving, returning, volleying, drop shots, placement and endurance to name a few. Games of tennis can last as long as 4-5 hours at a time constantly running back and forth. All tennis players are in top physical shape which you cannot say about all baseball players. (Manny Ramirez is the perfect example here.) You mention baseball players tracking down balls and making a catch, well tennis players do the same exact thing numerous times during one rally. They don't do it once then stand for the next hour or play, they hit the ball and run, hit and run, the duration of the match. I really can't stress the amount of footwork, endurance and hand eye coordination needed to play tennis.” Now this is his only valid argument and in the past debates I had contradicted what he had said so thank you for the debate. I enjoyed it. People please vote PRO. By reading the debate you can see that the PRO has proved that baseball his harder to play. Report this Argument Con I'd like to thank my opponent for this debate but now it is time for me to wrap this up I think. No, I will not bring in new arguments. Just address what has been previously said. Many things you just said were so false it's unbelievable actually. Not only that, you failed to address many of my points I brought up in the previous round. Replays in tennis. You said. "Now my opponent said that there where no replays in tennis he is sadly mistaken." That is either a terrible mistake or a bold face lie. This is what I said regarding replays the previous round. "No, there are only replays on challenges in tennis." I clearly say there are only replays on challenges in tennis. The quotes you brought up even had the word challenge in them. 'But instead of scoffing, or scowling, or hurling a racket, the American simply raised his right hand. "Mr. Roddick is challenging the call," said the loudspeaker.' This is your very own quote where they bring up challenging which I have confirmed they can do, yet you say I said there are no replays. That is false. I clearly said there are replays for challenges. You also said. "You are sadly mistaken again. In soccer the goalie can catch the ball, in hockey you can catch the puck, and in boxing you don"t even play with balls so why bring it into the argument." The keepers in both hockey and soccer have special rules set out for them. I am talking about the rules that are in the run of play. You chose to be completely ignorant to what I meant and everybody who is viewing this debate knows I meant. I could even go as far as to say you brought in a strawman argument. The reason I brought up Boxing is because catching a ball doesn't make a sport difficult. Many sports don't involve catching a ball and are very difficult. Then in regards to my points about tennis. "Now this is his only valid argument and in the past debates I had contradicted what he had said so thank you for the debate. I enjoyed it. People please vote PRO. By reading the debate you can see that the PRO has proved that baseball his harder to play." So your just not going to address anything I said about tennis? That seems odd to do during a debate. You also said "He also used Wikipedia as a source which would also make his argument invalid." Since when does Wikipedia as a source disqualify your argument? You used Chacha answers which is a random person answering another random person's questions. That is completely unreliable and should not, and really cannot, be used in a debate. I will show you other debates in which people use Wikipedia, however. http://www.debate.org... Those two debators have a total of 209 wins between them. They are both highly respected on debate.org Another debate where wiki was used: http://www.debate.org... That's another debate with highly respected debators. Feel free to go look at their records. I could go on and on about debates with wikipedia however I don't intend to waste any more time on such an outlandish statement like the one you make. The audacity to make such a statement after sourcing various statements with chacha.com. I now rest my case that tennis is harder than baseball. Please vote Con.Report this Argument
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by jduckjr 4 years ago
Well this is also on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Posted by JeremyMcNamee 4 years ago
I didn't say it's like Wiki, it's worse than Wiki. Not even on the same level.

http://www.chacha.com...

Seems legit...... -_____-
Posted by jduckjr 4 years ago
with my opponent saying that chacha answers is like Wiki all I have to say is, "ChaCha Guides are trained to find the correct answer from a reputable online source." http://www.chacha.com...
Also if Wiki is not allowed at most school as a reputable source and not allowed on paper why should it be allowed here.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
© 2017 Debate.org. All rights reserved.