Biomechanical Comparisons Among Fastball, Slider, Curveball, and Changeup Pitch Types and Between Balls and Strikes in Professional Baseball Pitchers
- PMID: 28968139
- DOI: 10.1177/0363546517730052
Biomechanical Comparisons Among Fastball, Slider, Curveball, and Changeup Pitch Types and Between Balls and Strikes in Professional Baseball Pitchers
Abstract
Background: In professional baseball pitchers, pitching biomechanics have not been examined for the slider, and the only known study for the curveball and changeup examined limited kinetics. Moreover, no known studies have investigated pitching biomechanics between strikes and balls. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to compare pitching biomechanics in professional baseball pitchers among the fastball, slider, curveball, and changeup and between balls and strikes. It was hypothesized that pitching kinematics and kinetics would be similar among the slider, fastball, and curveball; shoulder and elbow forces and torques would be significantly lower in the changeup; and pitching biomechanics would be similar between balls and strikes.
Study design: Controlled laboratory study.
Methods: Among 18 professional baseball pitchers, 38 reflective markers were positioned on the body and each player threw 32 to 40 maximum effort pitches-consisting of the fastball, curveball, slider, and changeup pitch types-from a regulation mound to a catcher. The markers were tracked by 18 high-speed 180-Hz cameras, and data were processed and run through a computer program to calculate 25 kinematic parameters, 7 kinetic parameters, and 4 temporal parameters for each pitch type and for both strikes and balls. A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance ( P < .01) was used to assess pitching biomechanical differences among pitch type and pitch result (balls vs strikes).
Results: During arm cocking, elbow varus torque was 8% to 9% greater in the fastball and slider compared with the changeup, shoulder horizontal adduction torque was 17% to 20% greater in the slider and curveball compared with the changeup, and shoulder anterior force was 13% greater in the curveball compared with the changeup. During arm deceleration, elbow flexor torque was 9% to 14% greater in the fastball compared with the curveball and changeup, and elbow and shoulder proximal forces were 10% to 14% greater in the fastball, slider, and curveball compared with the changeup. At ball release, forward trunk tilt was 16% to 19% greater in the fastball and curveball compared with the changeup, contralateral trunk tilt was 26% to 41% greater in the curveball compared with the slider and changeup, knee flexion was 18% greater in the changeup compared with the fastball, and the knee extended 7° more from lead foot contact to ball release in the fastball compared with the changeup. During arm cocking, pelvis angular velocity was 7% to 8% greater in the fastball compared with the curveball and changeup, and upper trunk angular velocity was 5% greater in the fastball compared with the changeup. During arm acceleration, shoulder internal rotation angular velocity was 6% to 7% greater in the fastball, slider, and curveball compared with the changeup, and ball velocity at ball release was 11% to 18% greater in the fastball compared with the slider, changeup, and curveball and 6% greater in the slider compared with the curveball. For all the kinematic, kinetic, and temporal parameters, analysis showed no significant differences between balls and strikes and no significant interactions between pitch type and pitch result.
Conclusion: Nearly all kinetic differences among pitch types occurred between the changeup and the remaining 3 pitch types. Shoulder and elbow forces and torques and injury risk were greater among the fastball, slider, and curveball compared with the changeup but were similar among the fastball, slider, and curveball. Body segment and joint positions were similar among all pitch types at lead foot contact and at maximum shoulder external rotation; however, at ball release, throwing a fastball and curveball resulted in greater knee extension and more forward and contralateral trunk tilt compared with throwing a changeup and slider. Movement speeds for the pelvis, upper trunk, and shoulder were greatest in the fastball and least in the changeup and were generally similar among the fastball, slider, and curveball. The timing of when pelvis, upper trunk, elbow, and shoulder velocities occurred among the fastball, slider, curveball, and changeup was similar, and no kinematic or kinetic differences were noted between throwing balls and strikes.
Clinical relevance: The results from the current study will help clinicians understand differences in pitching biomechanics in professional baseball pitchers among the fastball, slider, curveball, and changeup; the study provides limited insight into shoulder and elbow injury risk associated with different types of pitches.
Keywords: balls; pitch results; pitching; professional baseball pitchers; strikes.
Similar articles
-
Kinetic comparison among the fastball, curveball, change-up, and slider in collegiate baseball pitchers.Am J Sports Med. 2006 Mar;34(3):423-30. doi: 10.1177/0363546505280431. Epub 2005 Oct 31. Am J Sports Med. 2006. PMID: 16260466
-
A biomechanical comparison of the fastball and curveball in adolescent baseball pitchers.Am J Sports Med. 2009 Aug;37(8):1492-8. doi: 10.1177/0363546509333264. Epub 2009 May 15. Am J Sports Med. 2009. PMID: 19448049
-
Biomechanical Analysis of Weighted-Ball Exercises for Baseball Pitchers.Sports Health. 2017 May/Jun;9(3):210-215. doi: 10.1177/1941738116679816. Epub 2016 Nov 1. Sports Health. 2017. PMID: 27872403 Free PMC article.
-
Youth Baseball Pitching Mechanics: A Systematic Review.Sports Health. 2018 Mar/Apr;10(2):133-140. doi: 10.1177/1941738117738189. Epub 2017 Nov 1. Sports Health. 2018. PMID: 29090988 Free PMC article.
-
Baseball pitching biomechanics in relation to pain, injury, and surgery: A systematic review.J Sci Med Sport. 2021 Jan;24(1):13-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.06.015. Epub 2020 Jul 1. J Sci Med Sport. 2021. PMID: 32636133
Cited by
-
Leveraging graph neural networks and gate recurrent units for accurate and transparent prediction of baseball pitching speed.Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 5;15(1):7745. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88284-x. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID: 40044722 Free PMC article.
-
Muscle Activity Characteristics of the Pronator Teres during Throwing in Baseball Pitchers: A Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Feb 19;11(4):618. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11040618. Healthcare (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36833152 Free PMC article.
-
Game-Day Pitch and Throw Count Feasibility Using a Single Sensor to Quantify Workload in Youth Baseball Players.Orthop J Sports Med. 2023 Mar 21;11(3):23259671231151450. doi: 10.1177/23259671231151450. eCollection 2023 Mar. Orthop J Sports Med. 2023. PMID: 36970319 Free PMC article.
-
Peak Elbow Flexion Does Not Influence Peak Shoulder Distraction Force or Ball Velocity in NCAA Division I Softball Pitchers.Orthop J Sports Med. 2022 Jan 17;10(1):23259671211067828. doi: 10.1177/23259671211067828. eCollection 2022 Jan. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022. PMID: 35071659 Free PMC article.
-
Collegiate baseball pitchers demonstrate a relationship between ball velocity and elbow varus torque, both within and across pitchers.Sports Biomech. 2024 Dec;23(12):3103-3111. doi: 10.1080/14763141.2023.2205380. Epub 2023 Apr 28. Sports Biomech. 2024. PMID: 37114500
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources