Quote:
Originally posted by kq76
S4H, what is your opinion on the theory that a ball hit by a faster bat will more likely be a long line drive than a long arching drive?
|
Gee, i don't know. Intuitively, it would make sense. However, I would guess it's at least counterbalanced -- and possibly overbalanced -- by a natural increase in the uppercut of a player who knows he's corking, and believes it will help him hit more home runs. But that's just a wild theory off the top of my head. Unless someone ever has the chance to study several hundred corkers in controlled circumstances, I doubt we'll ever know the answer to that.
Quote:
Originally posted by suurimonster
I think it can hardly be called pseudo-physics. Did you actually take a look at the analysis he presents? The physics is sound and in-depth.
|
It's not "sound and in depth" if you completely ignore a component of the system -- in this case the batter. The only thing they've proven is that, given identical situations, a corked bat won't provide much benefit, if any. To reason from that that corking is pointless is bad science -- because faster bat speed changes the situation. It makes the hitter more likely to make good contact, less likely to strike out (another benefit, and probably the most significant), and may give him an extra split-second to judge pitches (thereby increasing BB, among other things). None of these are reflected in a collision study.
Adair does make a decent point (elsewhere) that a similar effect can be achieved by using a smaller or shaved-down bat. However, then you gain the advantage of bat speed by trading off for a reduction of surface area. Corking offers the best of both worlds.