What's the Subtle Difference between the 'Run and Hit' and the 'Hit and Run?'

[Brian McKenna]

Is there a difference in strategy? objective?

[azmatsfan]

A "Hit and Run" is put on with the intention of the batter to put the ball into play. The runner will usually peek at the batter to see where he hits the ball and the batter will swing at pitches outside the strike zone to protect the runner.

A "Run and Hit" is just a straight steal where the batter is hitting away. The batter isn't expected to swing at a ball in the dirt to protect the runner, but he's not taking the pitch either. The runner treats it as a straight steal and won't peek at the hitter.

[Brian McKenna]

I've read though that the "run and hit" was first used to capitalize on the bat control of certain batters. Any pluses there?

[Ursa Major]

A "Run and Hit" is just a straight steal where the batter is hitting away. The batter isn't expected to swing at a ball in the dirt to protect the runner, but he's not taking the pitch either. The runner treats it as a straight steal and won't peek at the hitter.Azmat, how does this differ from a straight steal? Most of the time (unless you've got a premier basestealer on base), the batter has the option during a straight steal to swing even though the runner is moving (but he'd better not hit a line drive on the infield.) I've mostly heard the term "run and hit" used to correct the fact that the term "hit and run" is a misnomer, as in that play the runner is supposed to take off before the ball is hit.

[swingbuilder]

There is no need to swing at a ball in the dirt on a hit and run. Its a tough ball to handle for most catchers anyway. Especially in LL to college. The run and hit is just that. Run and hit. Its a straight steal by the runner and a regular swing by the hitter. No attempt to hit behind the runner. Just center the ball. The runner is getting a good lead and jump and must still look in on his way to 2nd base.

On the hit and run. The runner must not get picked off. He must take a comfortable lead and not start to 2nd until he knows the balls headed to the plate. No pickoff attempt. The hitters job IS NOT to protect the runner. Its to hit the ball behind him WITH authority. To get the runner to 3rd and to even give him a chance to score. The hitter must be swinging on the pitch, WITH intent, but should not swing at any pitch that would be difficult for the catcher to handle. A tough ball to handle will allow the runner to be safe at 2nd base. Now a single will score the run or a passed ball will put the runner at 3rd base or even stealing 3rd base since its the easiest base to steal.

The hitter should never put himself in the hole by swinging at pitches that the catcher cant handle well and have a chance to throw out the runner.

[korp]

hit and run: the runner is running and the hitter must swing and try and put the ball in play .... usually used for slower runners and a good contact hitter at bat. Usually you won't have as much of a lead compared to when stealing and ideally your goal is to advance the runner to third and have a guy on first with one swing of the bat. It also prevents double plays since the runner is running MOST of the time anyways.

run and hit: the runner is running but is more like a straight steal, the batter does not have to swing unless they get a good pitch .... usually you only do it with a runner you would normally steal with and hitter doesn't have to be a good contact hitter.


The run and hit differs from a straight steal because generally on a straight steal you don't want to swing if the runner already has the base stolen but you would if they aren't close enough to the bag and will get thrown out. A run and hit you would like the play to keep going if the batter gets a decent pitch but you will take the stolen base.

[azmatsfan]

The hitters job IS NOT to protect the runner. Its to hit the ball behind him WITH authority. To get the runner to 3rd and to even give him a chance to score. The hitter must be swinging on the pitch, WITH intent, but should not swing at any pitch that would be difficult for the catcher to handle.

What you just described is protecting the runner. Maybe we have different definitions of "protect the runner". Obiviously not at a ball in the dirt or over the catcher's head. But if it's a pitch near the zone he needs to try to at least foul it off. A pitch taken will most likely lead to an out at 2nd.

[swingbuilder]

No its not! Protecting a runner by a hitter is swinging through the zone with no intent to make contact to keep the catcher in the croach as long as possible so that he can not come out of his stance early to get the ball. Thats protecting the runner.

In a hit and run situation. There IS NO protecting the runner. The hitters job is to hit the ball, behind the runnner, with authority, if possible.

On a straight steal by the runner. Its the hitters job to PROTECT the runner UNLESS he see's that he got a great jump and can steal the bag without being protected by swing through the zone without the INTENT to make contact!!

[azmatsfan]

No its not! Protecting a runner by a hitter is swinging through the zone with no intent to make contact to keep the catcher in the croach as long as possible so that he can not come out of his stance early to get the ball. Thats protecting the runner.

In a hit and run situation. There IS NO protecting the runner. The hitters job is to hit the ball, behind the runnner, with authority, if possible.

On a straight steal by the runner. Its the hitters job to PROTECT the runner UNLESS he see's that he got a great jump and can steal the bag without being protected by swing through the zone without the INTENT to make contact!!

I guess we have different definitions of "protecting the runner".:shrug:

[swingbuilder]

Thats fine. A hitter does not protect a runner in a hit and run. His job his to hit the darn ball, correct?

[azmatsfan]

Thats fine. A hitter does not protect a runner in a hit and run. His job his to hit the darn ball, correct?

Yes. Which is what I said in my original post.

A "Hit and Run" is put on with the intention of the batter to put the ball into play.

I think my use (or misuse?) of the phrase "protecting the runner" is where the misunderstanding started.

[korp]

Technically hitting the ball is protecting the runner from getting thrown out..... but the intention is to get the runner to third so you hit it in the hole, on a hit and run you must swing unless the ball is obviously going to get away from the catcher or will not have a play so if its high or extremely low -- swing through the ball -- obviously if its in the dirt though the catcher most likely won't have a play.

[swingbuilder]

Technically its NOT. And NO don't swing at a ball that the cather can't handle. As the hitter would be giving away a strike for NO GOOD REASON and put himself in a position to have to swing at a pitchers pitch.

Protecting the runner, TECHNICALLY, is swinging through the ball and missing it so that the runner can steal 2nd base or even 3rd base. It makes the catcher have to stay in behind the dish where he can't come out early to get the ball.

There is no protecting the runner on a hit and run or run and hit. The job of the hitter in both situations is to make contact with the ball and put it in play.

[azmatsfan]

Korp has it right. He's using the same definition of "protecting the runner" as I was. I hadn't heard the term used the way you are, but that's OK. I suppose swinging to force the catcher to delay his throw is protecting the runner in a sense.

There is no protecting the runner on a hit and run or run and hit. The job of the hitter in both situations is to make contact with the ball and put it in play.

Based on our definition of the term, hitting "to make contact with the ball and put it in play," is the definition of protecting the runner. The way you're defining "protecting the runner" is completely different.

[korp]

Technically its NOT. And NO don't swing at a ball that the cather can't handle. As the hitter would be giving away a strike for NO GOOD REASON and put himself in a position to have to swing at a pitchers pitch.

Protecting the runner, TECHNICALLY, is swinging through the ball and missing it so that the runner can steal 2nd base or even 3rd base. It makes the catcher have to stay in behind the dish where he can't come out early to get the ball.

There is no protecting the runner on a hit and run or run and hit. The job of the hitter in both situations is to make contact with the ball and put it in play.
Do you understand fully the reason why you do a hit and run? Its to move the runner up so if you swing and miss ... your down a strike so what you just moved the runner up and have a shot to move him to third or to get a run. I am not saying you should swing at a pitch in the dirt or one obviously going to the backstop ... but if you do not swing at a pitch and the catcher gets it in college or beyond you will be riding the bench. Just an FYI here the goal of hit and run / run and hit are NOT the same approach. You want to drive the ball to a gap in a run and hit because you are looking for a good pitch otherwise generally swing through ... in a hit and run you have to deal with what you are given and want to hit the ball in the hole where the man covering the base was (right side is ideal). I do not understand why you are saying on a steal the hitter must only swing through ... if you get a pitch you can hit in the gap why in the heck would you not swing? and you give a runner straight steal because they have the ability to swipe the bag on their own otherwise you would call a hit and run or nothing at all.

'Protecting the runner' means you are protecting them from a play so yes hitting the ball on a hit and run is protecting them TECHNICALLY.

[swingbuilder]

I disagree.....a hitter should not swing through on a hit and run or run and hit...only on a straight steal.

[korp]

I disagree.....a hitter should not swing through on a hit and run or run and hit...only on a straight steal.
I do agree never on a run and hit because you are looking for a good pitch ... but I was always taught on a hit and run to swing no matter what and I don't feel swinging through on a straight steal is mandatory but it is an option.

[swingbuilder]

Again, and understand here. I dont care what you've been taught. Its possible you were taught wrong.

It is not the hitters goal to protect the runner on either a hit and run or run and hit. There goal is to drive the baseball with contact in fair play. With the Hit and run. It should be an attempt to hit behind the runner. With run and hit it should be to hit the ball where its pitched.

The only time you would protect a runner as a hitter is on a straight steal of 2nd or 3rd base and the ball is right down broadway or high. Then the hitter should swing through the pitched ball. However, if the hitter see's that the runner got a great jump then he should take the pitch. If he see's the ball will also be unhandable by the catcher based on location of the pitch then he should also take the pitch.

Now the runner is in scoring position for the hitter to have a chance to score him with a hit.

At no time is it the job of the hitter to swing and miss on a hit and run.

[mudvnine]

Just an FYI here the goal of hit and run / run and hit are NOT the same approach. You want to drive the ball to a gap in a run and hit because you are looking for a good pitch otherwise generally swing through ... in a hit and run you have to deal with what you are given and want to hit the ball in the hole where the man covering the base was (right side is ideal).It is not the hitters goal to protect the runner on either a hit and run or run and hit. There goal is to drive the baseball with contact in fair play. With the Hit and run. It should be an attempt to hit behind the runner. With run and hit it should be to hit the ball where its pitched.

Ok guys, let me get this straight, you have two different signs for basically the same offensive play; that being the runner is going on the pitch and the hitter is attempting to put the ball in play, preferably behind the runner?

Swing, with either "play" wouldn't it be preferable to hit behind the runner, but in both cases, aren't you pretty much dictated "to hit the ball where its pitched" instead of trying to do too much with the hit and run and swinging through the ball?

I think you're both missing the most important part of both plays and that is to get the ball hard on the ground to keep out of the double play and at least advance the runner if you can't get the ball through the infield and have to give up an out. Not too many times will you see either (even though I believe they are synonyms for the same play) called with one or more outs in an inning.

If you do have two different plays that you guys are calling, what are the factors or game situations that you use to determine which play to call? Sounds as if you might be getting caught up in the minutia. JMO

[korp]

Mudvnine, I said in the earlier post the point is to move up the runner on both ... just simply on a run and hit you DO NOT have to swing aka being more selective but still trying to put the ball in play. Swingbuilder sorry but you are wrong .. with your theory a pitch outside the plate is grounds for a take even though its a hit and run you are choosing not to swing ... definitely not correct since the catcher can handle the ball but you have no chance of hitting it. I never said its not possible to be taught something wrong, have sorted through plenty of that but this is basic strategy and your not accounting for things like pitchouts. Lastly again ... a run and hit is a more selective process at the plate for a good pitch (yes hit an outside pitch opposite field ect.) but you are not going to swing at a borderline pitch most of the time like you would on a hit and run.

[mudvnine]

OK korp, but when do you call for a "run and hit" versus the "hit and run", or the "run and hit" versus a "straight steal", what are the game situations that dictate one over the other? Do you really have a "run and hit" sign for your team in your play calling arsenal?

[azmatsfan]

Again, and understand here. I dont care what you've been taught. Its possible you were taught wrong.

It is not the hitters goal to protect the runner on either a hit and run or run and hit. There goal is to drive the baseball with contact in fair play. With the Hit and run. It should be an attempt to hit behind the runner. With run and hit it should be to hit the ball where its pitched.

The only time you would protect a runner as a hitter is on a straight steal of 2nd or 3rd base and the ball is right down broadway or high. Then the hitter should swing through the pitched ball. However, if the hitter see's that the runner got a great jump then he should take the pitch. If he see's the ball will also be unhandable by the catcher based on location of the pitch then he should also take the pitch.

Now the runner is in scoring position for the hitter to have a chance to score him with a hit.

At no time is it the job of the hitter to swing and miss on a hit and run.

From "The Language of Baseball - Dictionary and Research Guide":

Protect the runner:
to try to hit a pitch so that an advancing base runner is not caught stealing; for example, during a hit-and-run play.

http://www.123exp-baseball.com/t/02684546713/,protect%20the%20runner,protect%20the%20runner

Apparently Korp and I aren't the only ones who understand this definition of protecting the runner.

[swingbuilder]

I had both calls. I used hit and runfor a guy who had bat control. I used run and hit for a guy who didn't. More of a free swinger, a pull hitter. I spent hours and weeks and months on "team offense". Had some very productive D1 teams. even stole 200 bases one season with a .337 Bavg.

I taught hitters to take the pitch out. All my runners got great jumps and for the most part I would only use the two calls with runners who had instincts. I prefered to use and had way more success with the delayed steal for the slower runners and less instinctual guys. For that matter we never did have a sac bunt. All our bunts were to get a hit even while moving runners up. I hated to give away an out and for that matter a strike. So we didn't!

I prefered my runners % of success over a pitch out on a hit and run over the college pitcher and catcher being able to execute.

As I said to begin with. The hit and run would be to hit the ball behind the runner. I didnt teach hit it on the ground. I taught drive it the other way. Had lots of success and even many HR's on the call. As for the run and hit I was after the base but used it with a hitter who had been slumping or had lost his aggressiveness or to get a hitter back in the grove. I didn't want him to try and do to much. I just wanted him to know he was swinging on the pitch, if it was a pitch up. We always took pitches down even when behind in the count. We educated the hitters and they educated themselfs. They talked to each other between innnings and in the dugout. They knew the umpires zone.

I wanted my hitters protecting themselfs. In other words get the 1st pitch up thats a pitch they could handle and have a great hack at it. Was far better than swinging at CB and sliders down in zone that were pitchers pitches. So we rarely protected a runner on a straight steal....BUT NEVER did any protecting of a runner on a hit and run or vice versa. The hitter was there to drive the pitch or take a bad pitch. We felt the catcher had no chance to get us and the numbers showed that. 200 SB's in one D1 season.

[mudvnine]

As for the run and hit I was after the base but used it with a hitter who had been slumping or had lost his aggressiveness or to get a hitter back in the grove. For that reason and that reason only I can agree with your "run and hit", I've done the same thing with the hit and run to get guys going. I wanted to get their slump out of their heads and have them concentrate on making contact and getting the ball on the ground, if they hit behind the runner all the better. Even grounding out when moving the runner gave them confidence that they could control their bat and boosted confidence because they had been successful in their quest.

I like the ball on the ground behind the runner, because I don't want the double-play line drive, or the long fly where my runner has to return to his previous base (I like using the hit and run with a runner on second also) and coming away with nothing.

Two years ago I gave a HS kid who had been in a terrible slump the hit and run, he promptly hammered the pitch over the right field fence, as he came around third he apologized for "not getting the ball on the ground" . . . I told him I'd forgive him this time. His next at bat I gave him the hit and run with nobody on base, he started laughing, I wiped off the sign and he hit a blistering line-drive to the right fielder for the final out of the inning. Back in the dugout while getting his glove, he thanked me for the sign saying he was still laughing and not thinking about his slump or even hitting for that matter.

Sometimes hitting is far more mental then physical. :) :cap:

[swingbuilder]

I agree Mud and would have enjoyed playing for you!!!!!

[CoachB25]

I seldom used the hit and run but did have a signal for it. I typically used the run and hit. I didn't have anyone protecting anyone. In HS ball, having a hitter who could consistently hit behind the runner on various pitches is rare. Not impossible but rare. Therefore, I let them do what they practiced most. Run and hit. I asked this of my hitters, look for a pitch that you can drive opposite. If you don't get it, that wasn't your "plan" for that pitch and so, don't swing. For the runner, steal that darn base. I want you on second. This requires having players that have discipline. I agree with swingbuilder that swinging at pitches that are in the dirt is a waste. Where he and I would disagree is the borderline ball up. I wanted my players to swing at that ball in a hit and run since that pitch is the easiest for a catcher to handle and throw a runner out on.

The approach you take with your team then depends upon your personnel. I've always had kids that had speed and we are listed in the top 3 teams in stolen bases in a year. I might add that this approach also has to fit your personality. The run and hit, IMO, requires more discipline and athleticism. It also require a little more aggressiveness on the part of the coach. Thoughts on this?

[korp]

Yes there is a sign. Basically a run and hit / straight steal you want a good base stealer because there is more of a chance the catcher will be able to make a throw but the runner has a good chance of taking the bag because of his ability. Hit and runs generally you won't have your fastest runner on but that doesn't mean you won't use it in that situation and a good contact hitter at the plate. Since in a run and hit you aren't as free swinging they do not have to be as good of a contact hitter. Its true that hit and run can assist in getting out of a slump .. why? because you are not thinking crush the ball, you are thinking move the runner up hit to the right side. The reason why players stay in slumps is because they begin to second guess themselves and think too much ... which will clog their brains at the plate into either being too conservative or too aggressive.

[swingbuilder]

25...I dont agree with you much..but I'll side with you here on your coaching philosphy over this matter.