Marbleheader mentioned in P&G that part of Jim Rice's decline was due to trouble he had with his eyesight. I wasn't aware of this, can anyone elaborate?
What role did eyesight play into JimEd's decline?
- Thread starter glasspusher
- Start date
I remember that he wore eyeglasses off the field but refused to wear them while he played. Something about sweating too much so they wouldn't stay on properly or they fogged up too much. Guess he wasn't comfortable wearing contacts either.
Having myopia or similar problems means you can't pick up the ball out of the pitcher's hand - giving you even less time to understand the trajectory and spin.
However, I also can't imagine that something as simple as corrective lenses would have saved/extended his career and he simply refused to wear them or couldn't figure it out. There are some vision problems which corrective lenses will not fix that affect your ability to hit a baseball.
It's also worth noting that without a .340 BABIP in 1986 his decline wouldn't look so precipitous or unusual, except that it started too young. As well, outside of a return to form in 1983, his 80's career is a pretty different player than the 75-79 peak.
However, I also can't imagine that something as simple as corrective lenses would have saved/extended his career and he simply refused to wear them or couldn't figure it out. There are some vision problems which corrective lenses will not fix that affect your ability to hit a baseball.
It's also worth noting that without a .340 BABIP in 1986 his decline wouldn't look so precipitous or unusual, except that it started too young. As well, outside of a return to form in 1983, his 80's career is a pretty different player than the 75-79 peak.
Last edited:
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Rice tried wearing eyeglasses in the 1988 season, but ditched them mid-way through the season, which incidentally coincided with a brief revival at the plate.
His eyesight was a story among the local media at the time. In his last season, he gave a cryptic response to a reporter's question in which he replied he could not see the ball. But the reality was that he was a shell of himself by that point, and could barely run the bases without getting hurt.
His eyesight was a story among the local media at the time. In his last season, he gave a cryptic response to a reporter's question in which he replied he could not see the ball. But the reality was that he was a shell of himself by that point, and could barely run the bases without getting hurt.
I remember adjustments he made, such as choking up in 1986, brought his average back up that year. Never heard about the eyesight stuff until recently, but that was pre-internet and I was in NJ. He was never chatty with the press, probably the reason for the lack of detail. Perhaps when he tried making adjustments it was too little to late, and the physical stuff had caught up with him as well as his eyesight. Articles I've looked at the past couple of days mention eyesight issues but don't go into detail at all.
The glasses stuff was long before 1988. His vision was a known issue as early as 1979.
Whiteside, Larry. Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext); Boston, Mass. [Boston, Mass] 12 Aug 1982: 1.
In 1988 he was denying having vision problems.
Shaughnessy, Dan. Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext); Boston, Mass. [Boston, Mass] 07 May 1988: 25.
Whiteside, Larry. Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext); Boston, Mass. [Boston, Mass] 12 Aug 1982: 1.
In 1988 he was denying having vision problems.
Shaughnessy, Dan. Boston Globe (pre-1997 Fulltext); Boston, Mass. [Boston, Mass] 07 May 1988: 25.
He probably could have been a slam-dunk HOFer had he addressed his vision problems when they first cropped up.
This is an old but good article that I think relays the importance of eyesight to hitting
"The results of visual acuity testing were most surprising. Certainly we felt that professional baseball players must have excellent visual acuity, but we were surprised to find that 81% of the players had acuities of 20/15 or better and about 2% had acuity of 20/9.2 (the best vision humanly possible is 20/8). The average visual acuity of professional baseball players is approximately 20/13! Similar results were noted on distance stereo acuity testing. Seventy-eight percent of the professional baseball players were tested with superior stereo acuity this far exceeded the results on the general population. Our research clearly shows that baseball players have much superior distance stereo acuity. In fact, there was a three-fold difference between the number of baseball players achieving superior stereo acuity when compared to the number from the general population."
"A slight improvement in a hitter’s visual mechanics (allowing for an earlier recognition of where it is and what it is) is crucial to long-term hitting success at the college and professional level. The following techniques will allow hitters to improve their visual game."
"Game observations of hitter’s ocular (eye) actions have allowed us to classify professional hitters into three visual categories as they approach an at-bat. Certain hitters exhibit a catatonic (fight) approach to the at-bat; exerting maximum visual concentration and maintaining an intense desire for achievement. The second category we have called the fright approach, which consists of a paralysis of action; just staring at the pitcher; immobilized to effectively recognize where the ball is coming from and what type of pitch is being thrown. Hitters with high strikeout totals and/or missing breaking balls by significant margins are typically found in these two visual categories. The syntoxic (flow) approach involves pursuing the at-bat with the least amount of pressure or tension, flowing with it, not becoming upset if the atbat is difficult. Classic behavioral medicine tells us that a psychological acceptance of a visual task will make it less stressful. It is no coincidence that hitters that genuinely enjoy the challenge of an atbat see the ball sooner and clearer as a result. The eyes are no different then other hitting muscles. Increased tension and over-exertion (bug-eyes) will decrease focus flexibility and restrict eye movement."
http://xtremesight.com/documents/A Visual Profile of Major League Hitters.pdf
My guess is that when a hitter has learned an approach like those described above it is hard to change when the vision starts to go, Seeing with glasses is different then seeing without and different than seeing with contacts. My personal experience is that glasses increase acuity but decrease contrast. Contacts I find seem to increase contrast and I find that my night vision is better.
"The results of visual acuity testing were most surprising. Certainly we felt that professional baseball players must have excellent visual acuity, but we were surprised to find that 81% of the players had acuities of 20/15 or better and about 2% had acuity of 20/9.2 (the best vision humanly possible is 20/8). The average visual acuity of professional baseball players is approximately 20/13! Similar results were noted on distance stereo acuity testing. Seventy-eight percent of the professional baseball players were tested with superior stereo acuity this far exceeded the results on the general population. Our research clearly shows that baseball players have much superior distance stereo acuity. In fact, there was a three-fold difference between the number of baseball players achieving superior stereo acuity when compared to the number from the general population."
"A slight improvement in a hitter’s visual mechanics (allowing for an earlier recognition of where it is and what it is) is crucial to long-term hitting success at the college and professional level. The following techniques will allow hitters to improve their visual game."
"Game observations of hitter’s ocular (eye) actions have allowed us to classify professional hitters into three visual categories as they approach an at-bat. Certain hitters exhibit a catatonic (fight) approach to the at-bat; exerting maximum visual concentration and maintaining an intense desire for achievement. The second category we have called the fright approach, which consists of a paralysis of action; just staring at the pitcher; immobilized to effectively recognize where the ball is coming from and what type of pitch is being thrown. Hitters with high strikeout totals and/or missing breaking balls by significant margins are typically found in these two visual categories. The syntoxic (flow) approach involves pursuing the at-bat with the least amount of pressure or tension, flowing with it, not becoming upset if the atbat is difficult. Classic behavioral medicine tells us that a psychological acceptance of a visual task will make it less stressful. It is no coincidence that hitters that genuinely enjoy the challenge of an atbat see the ball sooner and clearer as a result. The eyes are no different then other hitting muscles. Increased tension and over-exertion (bug-eyes) will decrease focus flexibility and restrict eye movement."
http://xtremesight.com/documents/A Visual Profile of Major League Hitters.pdf
My guess is that when a hitter has learned an approach like those described above it is hard to change when the vision starts to go, Seeing with glasses is different then seeing without and different than seeing with contacts. My personal experience is that glasses increase acuity but decrease contrast. Contacts I find seem to increase contrast and I find that my night vision is better.
Last edited:
I always thought is was his vision issue just exacerbated the normal mid-30s decline. Probably cost him getting to 400 HRs.
Thanks to everybody for their replies- I didn't know about the eyesight part of Jim Ed's decline. His swing and the core strength he had to execute it was unique. I could see when that started going downhill, he'd have problems. He got away with a lot of otherwise bad form because he was so damn strong.
I am not an ophthalmologist- my doctorate is in another field, but I make my own telescopes as a hobby, including grinding and polishing the optics. I have been somewhat shocked over the years at the knowledge(or lack thereof) of vision and optics even by ophthalmologists. 20/20 vision isn't perfect, IIRC about 5% of the general population has 20/10. My sister had better than 20/10 until her late 20s, and then poof, she went myopic big time (eventually had it corrected). I wonder how Jim Ed's vision went, and if it was as sudden as my sister's. I had 20/10 vision into my 30s, now even in my early 50s (I'm probably 20/30 now) I can have my mild astigmatism corrected to about 20/15 in the daytime, but with my above telescope hobbies I have also been able to quantitatively document the degradation of my own vision. My eyes are still pretty good, but they're not as good as they used to be. I wonder how Ted or Yaz' eyes held up over their playing careers.
I remember Reggie Jackson, who wore glasses the second half of his career, showing that you didn't need perfect eyesight to get the job done. He said he could always tell a slider was coming based on the rotation of the ball ("seeing the dot").
I am not an ophthalmologist- my doctorate is in another field, but I make my own telescopes as a hobby, including grinding and polishing the optics. I have been somewhat shocked over the years at the knowledge(or lack thereof) of vision and optics even by ophthalmologists. 20/20 vision isn't perfect, IIRC about 5% of the general population has 20/10. My sister had better than 20/10 until her late 20s, and then poof, she went myopic big time (eventually had it corrected). I wonder how Jim Ed's vision went, and if it was as sudden as my sister's. I had 20/10 vision into my 30s, now even in my early 50s (I'm probably 20/30 now) I can have my mild astigmatism corrected to about 20/15 in the daytime, but with my above telescope hobbies I have also been able to quantitatively document the degradation of my own vision. My eyes are still pretty good, but they're not as good as they used to be. I wonder how Ted or Yaz' eyes held up over their playing careers.
I remember Reggie Jackson, who wore glasses the second half of his career, showing that you didn't need perfect eyesight to get the job done. He said he could always tell a slider was coming based on the rotation of the ball ("seeing the dot").
As someone who wore glasses, it was pretty obvious that Jim Rice needed to wear something to help his eyesight when he batted. It was kind of sad because I always liked him.