Quote:
Originally Posted by RchW
These are great questions. Let me try to answer without writing a novel. 
What you saw were two variations of bunting. Bunting for a hit and sacrifice bunts. Sacrifice bunts are, as you saw, used to advance a runner or runners into scoring position. We could have a long discussion on the correct use of this strategy ( does it work, batter type, what inning, current score etc) but the concept is simple. You give up an out with the expectation that you have a better chance to score (in dispute). Sacrifice bunts are controversial because the perception of success far exceeds actual success.
Bunting for a hit is an underused strategy especially in the current era. Bottom line is if you are a fast runner and the infield is playing normal or back you could get 30 hits a season from it. I expect fake bunts (complimentary strategy) and bunting for hits to make a comeback next season to combat infield shifts and IF who play deep.
Hit and run is a strategy used to help steal bases and/or prevent double plays on ground balls. It's a high risk high reward strategy and requires a batter who can make contact even with a pitch out of the strike zone. The key component in a hit and run is that the batter will try to hit the ball no matter where it is if the runner goes. It is count dependent ie you don't usually H&R with 2 strikes. The ideal H&R is a ground ball that passes by the spot vacated by the 2B (or the SS). H&R is not normally used with power hitters who hit fly balls and line drives. Also note that H&R does not require a fast runner. Even if not successful it may move a slow runner up a base like a sacrifice.
The rule that you could overrun 1B came in 1870. Details are sketchy but it may have been brought in to increase scoring via more hits. Remember outs at first base on a hit ball are by force not tag so hits may have been very scarce when you had to slow down at 1B. In 1848 the rules were changed to require fielders to have possession of the ball in order to get an out and that only runners at 1B could be forced. It seems obvious in today's game that if you could not overrun 1B hitting and scoring would be reduced significantly. |
Hi. New to the forums myself.
As for bunting, BIll James has proven that giving up an out just to advance the runner to second is usually a very bad idea. Some may argue against that. A better usage of the sacrifice bunt, is if you have a medium or slowish runner on first, less than two outs, and the worst hitter in your lineup at bat. Usually the pitcher in the MLB. This is to avoid the double play, with the added bonus of getting the runner to second. According to Bill James, there is a slightly better chance for a runner on second to score, than there if he were on first. IMO it is almost always better to give up one out, than to potentially end up with two.
For myself, the bunt-for-hit is more of an instinctual thing. If I see the third baseman playing back a bit, and I get a strong feeling that I can make it, I will attempt the bunt.
In associate with the bunt-for-hit. If you plan it out correctly, this is a great chess-like strategy:
As a leadoff hitter, you could attempt the bunt-for-hit. If it works, awesome! If not, that's ok too.
In your second at-bat, you would show the bunt to pull the infielders in, but fake it at the last second and attempt a slap hit for a dumpy little Texas-leaguer just over the infielder's heads. It's a lot of fun when you pull it off.