I saw a game last week where the pitcher tried the move and would've had the guy picked off first except that he didn't throw the ball to first because he just assumed the move wouldn't work.

I saw it work on Rickey Henderson. In 1999, I think.

So, has any one ever see it work?

I can't think of too many times Roger Clemens was in a first-and-third situation and didn't try it. I never recall it working for him.

My crazy notion: I'd like to see the impact of there being no balk rule, but in conjunction with a limit on pickoff attempts. Like, in spring training.

Limiting pick off attempts would be an outright disaster. I'm surprised how often I see it proposed on this site.

I worked at it some and probably not enough, but think about it....If a RHP had a killer Andy Pettite move, why wouldn't it work? It's almost unfair, hence why it's sort of a sneaky way to get it done.

How would a Pettitte-like move to third work? No one has their third baseman hold the runner like a first baseman does, so it seems to me that developing a killer pickoff to third would be hard to do. That's a lot of moving parts for my liking.

I distincly remember Doug Jones making it work against the Mariners when he was with the A's. Maybe 99?

I remember it so clearly because I thought, "That never works...Holy #### he got him!"

Ah, but there's also no balk rule!

I think this is the aforementioned Mitch Williams pick off, though the details in the article arent 100% conclusive,

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/1989_649524/first-place-cubs-pick-off-expos-cardinals-loss-to.html

http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl/1989_649524/first-place-cubs-pick-off-expos-cardinals-loss-to.html

Leave it alone. It's not a problem. MLB is just handing the players association a bargaining chip for nothing. Plus, isn't it possible that the threat of a first to third move has some effect on the runners in a first and third situation? Leave it alone. It's not a problem.

The notion that this move never works is one of the dumbest cliches in baseball. The success rate is terrible, sure, but I've seen it work many, many times. Glad to read this thread and find so many examples.

This is not the venue to debate this critical issue, hopefully Henry Waxman will call for Congressional hearings.

Faking to first is already a balk.

Not if you step off the rubber first. If faking to first was always a balk, then faking to third, wheeling around and NOT throwing to first would already be against the rules.

If they're going to change anything about the balk rules, then they should clean up the whole thing. If the thought process is that this move, which is clearly about deceiving the runner on first, is against the spirit of the rules, then why stop there? On the other hand, technical balks that don't have anything to do with deceiving anybody get called all the time. Does a pitcher really gain any advantage if his feet get tangled (or if he wiggles his hands a little) when he's just trying to step off the rubber? Why not just let a pitcher ask for time instead of making him do some silly dance steps?

My crazy notion: I'd like to see the impact of there being no balk rule, but in conjunction with a limit on pickoff attempts. Like, in spring training.

With no balk rule, there would be no need for pickoff attempts. When the runner breaks for second, the first baseman yells to the pitcher to warn him. The pitcher, free from the balk rule, fakes a pitch, turns, and throws out the runner by 30 feet easily.

Eliminating the balk rule would eliminate the stolen base. Nobody would steal in those conditions, at least not until teams start employing catchers who can't throw - which there will be a greater incentive to do, once stolen bases cease.

Everything about it stinks.