AJSM signin
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
First published on October 31, 2005, doi:10.1177/0363546505280431
This version was published on March 1, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/3/423    most recent
0363546505280431v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fleisig, G. S.
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, J. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fleisig, G. S.
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, J. R.
Related Collections
Right arrow Elbow
Right arrow Shoulder
Right arrow Baseball
Right arrow Biomechanics
Right arrow Kinematics and kinetics
The American Journal of Sports Medicine 34:423-430 (2006)
© 2006 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Kinetic Comparison Among the Fastball, Curveball, Change-up, and Slider in Collegiate Baseball Pitchers

Glenn S. Fleisig, PhD*, David S. Kingsley, Jeremy W. Loftice, Kenneth P. Dinnen, MS, Rajiv Ranganathan, Shouchen Dun, MS, Rafael F. Escamilla, PhD and James R. Andrews, MD

From the American Sports Medicine Institute, Birmingham, Alabama

* Address correspondence to Glenn S. Fleisig, PhD, American Sports Medicine Institute, 833 St. Vincent’s Drive, Suite 100, South Birmingham, AL 35205 (e-mail: glennf{at}asmi.org).

Background: Controversy exists about whether breaking pitches are more stressful than are fastballs. Previous biomechanical studies compared kinematics but not kinetics.

Hypothesis: Elbow and shoulder forces and torques are statistically different among the fastball, curveball, change-up, and slider.

Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods: Twenty-one healthy collegiate pitchers were studied with a high-speed automated digitizing system. All subjects threw fastballs (n = 21), most threw curveballs (n = 20) and change-ups (n = 19), and a few threw sliders (n = 6). Wrist, elbow, and shoulder kinetics were calculated using inverse dynamics. Nine kinetic and 26 kinematic parameters were compared among the different pitch types using repeated-measures analysis of variance.

Results: At the shoulder, internal rotation torque, horizontal adduction torque, abduction torque, and proximal force were significantly less in the change-up than in the other 3 pitches. Shoulder horizontal adduction torque was greater in the fastball than in the curveball and slider. Shoulder proximal force was greater in the slider than in the curveball. Elbow proximal force was less in the change-up than in the other 3 pitches. Elbow varus torque was greater in the fastball and curveball than in the change-up. Elbow flexion torque was greater in the curveball than in the change-up. The curveball and change-up demonstrated kinematic differences from the fastball, consistent with previous studies.

Conclusion: There were significant kinematic differences between the fastball and curveball but few kinetic differences. The change-up had lower joint kinetics, lower angular velocities, and different body positions than the other 3 pitch types had. Results for the slider were inconclusive because of small sample size.

Clinical Relevance: Because the resultant joint loads were similar between the fastball and curveball, this study did not indicate that either pitch was more stressful or potentially dangerous for a collegiate pitcher. The low kinetics in the change-up implies that it is the safest.

Key Words: elbow • shoulder • wrist • force • torque • kinematics • pitching • biomechanics




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am J Sports MedHome page
S. Dun, J. Loftice, G. S. Fleisig, D. Kingsley, and J. R. Andrews
A Biomechanical Comparison of Youth Baseball Pitches: Is the Curveball Potentially Harmful?
Am. J. Sports Med., April 1, 2008; 36(4): 686 - 692.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Sports MedHome page
S. Dun, D. Kingsley, G. S. Fleisig, J. Loftice, and J. R. Andrews
Biomechanical Comparison of the Fastball From Wind-Up and the Fastball From Stretch in Professional Baseball Pitchers
Am. J. Sports Med., January 1, 2008; 36(1): 137 - 141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JBJSHome page
G. Treme, J. A. Hart, and M. D. Miller
What's New in Sports Medicine
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., March 1, 2007; 89(3): 686 - 696.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Sports MedHome page
S. J. Olsen II, G. S. Fleisig, S. Dun, J. Loftice, and J. R. Andrews
Risk Factors for Shoulder and Elbow Injuries in Adolescent Baseball Pitchers
Am. J. Sports Med., June 1, 2006; 34(6): 905 - 912.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.