CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Baseball Prospectus home
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article
Premium Article Player Profile: Nomar ... (03/19)
<< Previous Column
Premium Article Under The Knife: Sprin... (03/09)
Next Column >>
Premium Article Under The Knife: Break... (03/22)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Transaction Action: Na... (03/19)

March 19, 2010

Under The Knife

Frickin' Laser Beams, Part III

by Will Carroll

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

Subscribe for $4.95 per month
Recurring subscription - cancel anytime.

a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Purchase a $39.95 gift subscription
a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

It's been over a month since my LASIK surgery, time enough for my eyes to heal and for me to adjust to my new vision. A one-month checkup at the 20/20 Institute, where I had my elective procedure, showed that my right eye was better than 20/20, but my left (dominant) eye was slightly less than 20/20. Given my previous prescription, this is a success. While I could elect to have a second "touch- up" procedure, that's something for another day. Knowing that I can read, drive, and perform all of my daily activities without glasses makes this enough of a success for me.

But is it a success for baseball? That remains to be seen. Now let's be clear: I'm a baseball writer, not a baseball player, so these tests are really poor proxy for an actual baseball player. Still, I was curious to do some form of before-and-after testing. After consulting with several specialists in the field and some baseball officials, we decided that a two-fold test would be the best possible solution. Each would be done before and after, in as identical of conditions as possible.

The first test is one of visual acuity, adjustment, and reaction time. Designed initially to gauge the effect of time on pilots, this test was done on a computer. As I saw certain events, I tapped the corresponding button. I had to adjust to movement, clarity, and several other factors. This test is very standardized and easy to correlate results before and after. The second test was a bit more subjective and had to be altered due to my color blindness. Several baseball teams use a training device that fires baseballs with a colored dot on them. The player "reads" the dot, calls it out, and in many cases, hits the pitch. We made the alteration of putting one of four symbols on the ball—an X, an O, a triangle, and a squiggle. 

Prior to my procedure, I performed each of these tests both with and without my glasses. As expected, I did significantly better with glasses. While my reaction time did not change on a computerized test, my acuity and adjustment were both nearly twice as good with glasses than without. On a portion of the test designed to bring words into focus, the improvement with glasses was almost three times relative to no glasses. Given my prescription, the test's proctor told me there were well within expected ranges and that my reaction times were "very good." 

In the baseball portion of the test, the results were even clearer, so to speak. I was able to identify only six of 25 symbols correctly without glasses, but I got 14 correct with glasses. At the batting cage, we decided to try something we hadn't planned. Using a pitching machine that was able to throw both changeups and curves, I grabbed a bat. This was less scientific and more about seeing if I could do what a player would need to do. It's one thing to pick out a squiggle at a ball coming in at 75 mph, and it's another one entirely to pick up the spin and put the ball in play. 

Since I didn't have to worry too much about location—it's a pitching machine, not a pitcher­—we decided that I would both try to call out the pitch type and make contact. On 25 pitches, broken down 15, five, and five, I was able to correctly identify two without glasses and made contact on six. This is an intriguing result on the surface, but of those six, all were fastballs. With little motion, I was able to hit, but I was unable to make adjustments. None of the fastballs I hit came after one of the other pitches, indicating that I could time up the fastball even when I didn't recognize it. With my glasses on, the results were better, but no scouts would be impressed. I picked up 13 correct pitch types while making contact on seven. 

After being cleared at my one-month appointment, I went back and on successive days and repeated the tests. The results were as expected. With my surgically enhanced vision, the results were directly in line with my corrected (glasses) vision. The slight improvement in the results of the computerized test showed that my brain was adjusting to the new vision. While corrective lenses are very good, they still create an additional layer of complexity for the brain to deal with in translating what the eye is seeing. This is especially true for objects in motion. The curvature of the lens and loss of some peripheral vision creates the deficit. My improved scores were promising.

In the batting cage, however, came the real test. Using the same pitching machine, same lighting condition, and even going so far as to wear the same things and use the same bat in order to eliminate as much variance as possible, I stood in. I picked up the correct symbol on 16 of 25 balls. While subjective, I also felt I was picking them up more clearly and further out. That would show more when I picked up the bat. Again, using conditions as similar to the initial test as possible, I stood in. I was able to pick out the proper pitch type 15 times while making contact nine times. I again felt as if I was picking up the spin in the same way I had been with the symbols, which made me wonder if the pitching machine was actually a hindrance.

I also wasn't sure that was enough. As I was swinging the bat, a local high school pitcher had been tossing a pen in the lane next to me. Anyone who knows me knows I'm competitive and I wanted a chance to hit real pitches. Sure, I might have had to basically call him out, but as long as he didn't bean me, it was going to be a good test. This wasn't planned, and certainly a 15-year-old is going to be very inconsistent, but I wanted to know if I was correct—could I pick up the spin "out of his hand"? The clear answer was yes. I was able to identify 22 of 25 pitches correctly1. (It could be 23. He threw a slider that I called fastball and it hung.) Granted, these pitches were perhaps a bit slower than the machine and less consistent, but if I could do it, it showed that using the pitching machine might actually be a hindrance in determining pitch type.

The conclusions are hardly scientific, but nonetheless intriguing. The improvements were subtle, going from glasses to post-LASIK vision, but both are designed to leave the vision "normal," not to make it superhuman. This is in line with the findings we had in our first article, where it was difficult to find any sort of improvement in pre- and post-LASIK batting. Baseball players have incredible vision that allows them to perform feats most of us simply cannot. As Brian McCann showed last year, the very odd shift from LASIK back to glasses—the result of an eye infection—wasn't devastating. He was able to continue playing at an MLB level, though there was some drop-off. Whether that's more on the switch to glasses or the infection is impossible to tell.

In other words, Greg Maddux might be right. LASIK may be more about convenience than performance. Maddux said in 1999, "But I went in before the surgery 100 percent convinced that it's not going to make me a better pitcher. I didn't do it to become a better pitcher. I did it for me. I did it for the same reason I got a golf membership, or got married (laughs), or bought a car. I did it for those reasons. I did it for pure convenience for me." LASIK won't turn me into a major league hitter—or anyone else. In fact, it may not even give much of an advantage, if at all. 

It comes down to comfort and convenience, I believe. Baseball players are creatures of habit, so a small change often creates a tension, either positive or negative. My experience with the operation has been nothing but positive, making me believe that the largely positive results on the field are the result of players having similar experiences to mine off the field. While there's never likely to be a large-scale, scientific study on this topic, I think that the performance enhancement aspects are minimal, but that the lifestyle enhancement aspects make it worthwhile for many.


1 It's even less scientific, but I stood about fifty feet away from Octavio Dotel while he threw a bullpen session at the Pirates' spring training camp in Bradenton, Fla. While he was calling his own pitches, I could clearly see the differing spin. I was able to get a better look at pitches during a pen session by Brian Bass. He was working on a sinker and I could pick up the spin from just behind the catcher.

Related Content:  The Call-up

14 comments have been left for this article. (Click to hide comments)

BP Comment Quick Links


FYI, the footnote 1 in-line text is broken.

Mar 19, 2010 09:26 AM
rating: 0

Great article!

Mar 19, 2010 10:45 AM
rating: 0

Interesting article ... but are we also going to get an analysis of player injuries? There are many of them!

Mar 19, 2010 12:03 PM
rating: -1

no dryness? that's my fear. (that and getting a flap cut in my eyeball.)

Mar 19, 2010 12:31 PM
rating: 0
BP staff member Will Carroll
BP staff

Slight. After a month, I could go a whole day without using the artificial tears, but bit more comfortable if I do. Seldom times where I think "my eyes are dry", but preventive care is a good thing.

Mar 19, 2010 12:35 PM
BP staff member Dave Pease
BP staff

I had LASIK ten years ago. No problems other than slight haloing at night for the first few months, and my vision is still outstanding.

Mar 19, 2010 14:08 PM

50% of patients get dry eye lasting at least 1 month:

Mar 23, 2010 07:36 AM
rating: 0

Very interesting - I hope to be able to afford the surgery one day myself. Do you think your before tests would have been different if you wore contact lenses instead of glasses?

Mar 19, 2010 13:25 PM
rating: 0
BP staff member Will Carroll
BP staff

Not sure. I dont think so. Correction is correction.

Mar 19, 2010 14:26 PM

I was thinking about the peripheral vision that you get with contacts

Mar 19, 2010 15:03 PM
rating: 0
BP staff member Will Carroll
BP staff

No, I dont think so. You don't use your peripheral vision to pick up the ball. Maybe for a pitcher on the mound watching a guy over at first ... or a catcher.

Mar 19, 2010 21:18 PM
Brian Kopec

Wait...15 year olds throw sliders?

Mar 19, 2010 22:09 PM
rating: 0

Not sure what kind of machine you were hitting against, but my experience against the machine is that it is absolutely a hindrance to pitch recognition. Your eyes use more than just spin to identify pitches: arm speed, wrist angle, trajectory. They all figure into your mind's recognition patterns (this is why a good change up is thrown with the same arm speed).

Mar 21, 2010 16:33 PM
rating: 0
Brock Dahlke

Will, you say that "Baseball players have incredible vision that allows them to perform feats most of us simply cannot".

I say that it may have more to do with how fast and how well a players brain interprets what his eyes are seeing into the motor skill of swinging the bat. I agree that players need to have very good vision to succeed, but its the brain that is the incredible part.

Mar 21, 2010 19:52 PM
rating: 0
You must be a Premium subscriber to post a comment.
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!
<< Previous Article
Premium Article Player Profile: Nomar ... (03/19)
<< Previous Column
Premium Article Under The Knife: Sprin... (03/09)
Next Column >>
Premium Article Under The Knife: Break... (03/22)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Transaction Action: Na... (03/19)

Premium Article Minor League Update: Games of Thursday, May ...
Premium Article What You Need to Know: Bummed!
Premium Article The Prospectus Hit List: Friday, May 22
West Coast By Us: Day 1: In The Land Where E...
Premium Article Rubbing Mud: The Quarter-Season Odds Report
West Coast By Us: Taco the Town
Going Yard: The Near Perfection of Pederson

Prospectus Q&A: Terry Francona
Premium Article Transaction Action: American League
Premium Article Transaction Action: National League
Premium Article Player Profile: Nomar Garciaparra

2010-03-24 - Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: Boston Red Sox
2010-03-23 - Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: New York Yankees
2010-03-22 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Breaking Down Breakdowns
2010-03-19 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Frickin' Laser Beams, Part ...
2010-03-18 - Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: Los Angeles Dodgers
2010-03-17 - Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: Arizona Diamondbacks
2010-03-16 - Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: Colorado Rockies

2010-04-02 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Camp Casualties
2010-03-31 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Late Spring Training Hurts
2010-03-22 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Breaking Down Breakdowns
2010-03-19 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Frickin' Laser Beams, Part ...
2010-03-09 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Spring Injury Roundup
2010-02-18 - Premium Article Under The Knife: Hitting the Floor
2010-02-05 - Under The Knife: Team Health Reports 2010