Of course it will never happen but which of the two options would you say would be the ulimate perfect game?
2007-05-07 05:35:15 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
I would say "81 strikes, or 27K's" would be the more perfect game. Basically this is saying that as a pitcher, you are unhittable. I feel there would be much more luck involved if a pitcher threw 27 pitches, for first-pitch outs, whereas 27K's is pure domination
2007-05-07 05:41:43 · answer #1 · answered by jeff g 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the rationalization that it somewhat isn't the case is with the help of the fact batters ought to destroy each and every perfect game by only staring at a pitch bypass by. A pitchers activity is to maintain as many runners off the bases as a threat. this implies no longer permitting them to get on by walks, blunders, or hits(or previous balls on strike 3). If no one gets on base no runs can score so the pitcher did his activity completely. a perfect game is likewise an achievment by that distinctive pitcher's protection; except the pitcher struck out all 27 batters, which might by no potential take place (somebody could lay down a bunt to verify that did no longer take place). it appears that evidently 27 pitches ought to be perfect game yet while that grew to become into the case there could by no potential have been a perfect game in MLB history.
2016-10-30 13:35:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
81 strikes easily. At least that is possible lol.. I just could never see 27 batters in a row swinging at the 1st pitch and making an out. At least with the 27 k's its something possible. I mean what's the record currently.... 22 K's in a game...
2007-05-07 05:43:42 · answer #3 · answered by m_torres10 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely 81 strikes, 27K's. This option means the pitcher did everything to earn the perfect game. First pitch outs means the batter may have swung at a bad pitch, and it also relies on the pitcher's team making plays for the outs.
Would be great to see wouldn't it?
2007-05-07 05:42:50 · answer #4 · answered by El_Refe 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nothing is more perfect than 27 outs in a row. A good pitcher does not rely on striking out all his batters. He has 8 other fielders behind him to get outs.
A pitcher can and does "set up" a batter with the location of his pitches to make the hitter do something that the pitcher wants. He can throw a pitch that is recorded a ball and it can be more effective than a strike down the heart of the plate.
No such discussion in my opinion. A perfecto is a perfecto.
2007-05-07 07:40:21 · answer #5 · answered by Chuck A 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Since the question is a matter of personal opinion, there is no definitve answer. Major League Baseball (mlb) recognizes a perfect game as one with no hits, walks or errors. Both would qualify as perfect games, although the one with 27 K's would set the new record for strikeouts in a game surpassing 20 by Kerry Woods and Roger Clemens. It would be the first perfect game since Randy Johnson's in the 2003 or 04 season.
2007-05-07 05:45:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
as far as statistics go, the 81 strikes and 27 punchouts look better on your resume than no ko's and just a no-hitter but if you strike everybody out that you face... man, that's impressive... it'll garner more attention b/c simply put, you got those guys out and they didn't get themselves out by mistake!
2007-05-07 05:41:55 · answer #7 · answered by greaterrome 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
27 k's, because a 27 pitch game would require luck with your fielders..
2007-05-07 09:02:57 · answer #8 · answered by John L 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd go with the all-K's game. It'd be purely pitcher/catcher, and the other seven guys get to stand around and think about their next at-bat.
The tension in the ninth inning would be fantasmagorgasmic.
2007-05-07 05:44:28 · answer #9 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
81 strikes, 27ks
2007-05-07 05:40:07 · answer #10 · answered by doctorslapnut 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋