The physicists say it ain't so

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 04:23 AM

As usual my fellow physicists have solved a complex issue with some very simple and easily understood calculations...sort of

.

Check the lightweight comment in Nature, and the referenced article on batting physics in the attached zip.

So Sosa cheated, but was too dumb to realize it has no effect

. Or he knew it had no effect and did it just for the thrill of breaking the rules. Or...

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 04:25 AM

Attachment - missed it 1st time.

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 05:36 AM

Sorry the original physics article is too large, but you can get it from

arts2.zip

Springtime_for_Hunter · 06-12-2003, 05:45 AM

Sigh. Again they ignore the secondary effects entirely. Yes, corking isn't going to increase the force imparted to the ball in a collision. That's hardly unintuitive, given F=ma and a fairly consistent elasticity. But, increased "bat speed" does give two secondary effects:

1: The batter may be more likely to make "solid contact" as "bat speed" increases (this is the conventional wisdom, anyway, and I can personally attest that very low "bat speed" makes it darn hard to hit.). Obviously, if the batter hits the ball better, it's going to go farther.

2: A ball struck with higher "bat speed" is more likely to be pulled. Since the fences are shorter towards the foul poles, this would result in more balls becoming home runs, despite traveling the same distance.

Basically, while an equal collision will generate approximately equal results, there's no evidence that a batter using a corked bat and one using an uncorked bat will have equal collisions. If a batter who is corking is hitting the ball better -- regardless of how far it flies -- it's an advantage. While bat speed and mass are equivalently important in determining where the ball will go as the result of a collision, they are not of equal importance when it comes to the skill of creating a favorable collision.

Sorry for being off-topic here, but this psuedo-physics has been annoying me for a while, and I took the opportunity to vent.

kq76 · 06-12-2003, 06:02 AM

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?

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 07:11 AM

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. His point, in my opinion, would be that although bat speed is increased by corking, the effect is counterbalanced by the change in mass distribution. You can see the importance of this in the performance of different Aluminium bats.

However, I agree entirely that he has neglected how the flight/direction of the ball could also be affected by corking - which is why I attached 'sorf of' at the end. Also what about vibrational effects? more vibration would mean it is much more difficult to hit the sweet spot etc. As always science raises more questions than it answers.

Springtime_for_Hunter · 06-12-2003, 07:42 AM

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.

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 07:56 AM

Agreed - from reading in detail, nowhere does he make a conclusion in that paper that increasing bat speed at the expense of mass would have no effect. In fact he seems to emphasize the importance of bat speed in future lab tests.

I wonder whether his statement that corking is not important reported in the media (and that Nature article) is taken out of context. Something along the lines of 'If we consider only the collision, corking will have little or no effect...'

Wouldn't be the first time the media just takes the part that attracts the headlines.

On another issue - is bat speed really that important to striking out, surely timing and hand-eye coordination are more relevant. I would think that a faster bat would perhaps increase your chance of swinging early, as well as reducing your chance of swinging late.

kq76 · 06-12-2003, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by suurimonster
On another issue - is bat speed really that important to striking out, surely timing and hand-eye coordination are more relevant. I would think that a faster bat would perhaps increase your chance of swinging early, as well as reducing your chance of swinging late.

If he swings faster than his eye, that would probably be bad.

But as long as the eye is faster, I would assume a faster bat would be better.

suurimonster · 06-12-2003, 08:58 AM

But the most important thing is just to judge the speed of the ball, and start swinging at the right time. If you know your own bat speed, it doesn't matter if it is fast or slow (within certain professional limits). The ball is never so fast that your swing, however slow, cannot make contact if you swing at the right time. I would say knowing your own swing speed and having an eye for pitch speed makes for less Ks.

Gastric ReFlux · 06-12-2003, 10:22 AM

I just always wanted to know how someone with a round bat can hit a round ball square.

bsbll_n_mn · 06-12-2003, 10:26 AM

i like sosa

KurtBevacqua · 06-12-2003, 10:29 AM

With technology in bat making improved, why not just order a lighter bat? Granted, the lighter bat will lose weight in the handle, thus making it have a shorter life. But I have to thinl a bat company can take as much weight off this way as can be gained by drilling out a small portion of wood and replacing it with cork.

I think it's all psychological. The player thinks he can gain an edge, and to him, that's really all that's important. Whether a physical advantage is actually gained is almost irrelevant.

For pitching, on the other hand, there is definite proof a doctored baseball makes a difference. Guys found doing that deserve as much, if not more punishment than guys with corked bats.

Gastric ReFlux · 06-12-2003, 10:33 AM

Well that's what the bat companies have done a lot of. The bats today have much thinner handles and thicker barrels, distributing the weight more towards the end of longer bats.

Last week I went into a sporting goods store and picked up a 34-inch bat that was much lighter than the 33-inch Johnny Bench model of my youth.

Some have even proposed that to help reduce the offensive explosion of the lat 10 years that bat specifications be changed to make the handles thicker again. It could be done in a gradual process, so as not to suddenly wipe out hitters.

kq76 · 06-12-2003, 10:38 AM

Wow, a serious post by Gastric! Quick, tell all the OTers!!

tcblcommish · 06-12-2003, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
I just always wanted to know how someone with a round bat can hit a round ball square.

HAH, I have wondered that also

KWhit · 06-12-2003, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by suurimonster
But the most important thing is just to judge the speed of the ball, and start swinging at the right time. If you know your own bat speed, it doesn't matter if it is fast or slow (within certain professional limits). The ball is never so fast that your swing, however slow, cannot make contact if you swing at the right time. I would say knowing your own swing speed and having an eye for pitch speed makes for less Ks.

But if your bat speed is faster, then you have more time to see the ball before you have to start your swing.

It's possible that someone with a corked bat will make contact with a ball that he would miss without the cork due to the faster bat speed.

Smellyface · 06-12-2003, 11:13 AM

Ted Williams always said that the single most important thing in hitting is bat speed. And i think he would know a thing or two about hitting.

obaslg · 06-12-2003, 11:56 AM

While timing is a big issue in making contact, it's obviously not the only one. Contact depends on when you swing and where you swing.

When the batter swings at the pitched ball, the trajectory of which is at least partially unknown when he begins his swing, he unconsciously makes minute changes in his swing in an effort to hit the ball - isn't that what eye-hand coordination is?

If he uses a lighter bat, he's presumably better able to make those unconscious adjustments quickly. With solid wood, the batter has to give up surface area - another big factor in the "where you swing" - for that benefit, as was mentioned. If he can keep surface area constant while decreasing mass, he has an advantage in making contact.

The question, then, is whether the contact advantage and the ability to pull makes up for the loss in mass.

KWhit · 06-12-2003, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by obaslg
The question, then, is whether the contact advantage and the ability to pull makes up for the loss in mass.

Every player I've heard interviewed about the issue would answer that with a resounding "yes".

06-12-2003, 04:23 AM	#1
suurimonster Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 64	The physicists say it ain't so As usual my fellow physicists have solved a complex issue with some very simple and easily understood calculations...sort of . Check the lightweight comment in Nature, and the referenced article on batting physics in the attached zip. So Sosa cheated, but was too dumb to realize it has no effect . Or he knew it had no effect and did it just for the thrill of breaking the rules. Or...

06-12-2003, 05:45 AM	#4
Springtime_for_Hunter All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 846	Sigh. Again they ignore the secondary effects entirely. Yes, corking isn't going to increase the force imparted to the ball in a collision. That's hardly unintuitive, given F=ma and a fairly consistent elasticity. But, increased "bat speed" does give two secondary effects: 1: The batter may be more likely to make "solid contact" as "bat speed" increases (this is the conventional wisdom, anyway, and I can personally attest that very low "bat speed" makes it darn hard to hit.). Obviously, if the batter hits the ball better, it's going to go farther. 2: A ball struck with higher "bat speed" is more likely to be pulled. Since the fences are shorter towards the foul poles, this would result in more balls becoming home runs, despite traveling the same distance. Basically, while an equal collision will generate approximately equal results, there's no evidence that a batter using a corked bat and one using an uncorked bat will have equal collisions. If a batter who is corking is hitting the ball better -- regardless of how far it flies -- it's an advantage. While bat speed and mass are equivalently important in determining where the ball will go as the result of a collision, they are not of equal importance when it comes to the skill of creating a favorable collision. Sorry for being off-topic here, but this psuedo-physics has been annoying me for a while, and I took the opportunity to vent. __________________ "Only the utterly impossible, the inexpressibly fantastic, can ever be plausible again" Red Smith, New York Herald-Tribune, October 4, 1951

06-12-2003, 06:02 AM	#5
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,031	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? __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

06-12-2003, 10:29 AM	#13
KurtBevacqua Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 2,968	With technology in bat making improved, why not just order a lighter bat? Granted, the lighter bat will lose weight in the handle, thus making it have a shorter life. But I have to thinl a bat company can take as much weight off this way as can be gained by drilling out a small portion of wood and replacing it with cork. I think it's all psychological. The player thinks he can gain an edge, and to him, that's really all that's important. Whether a physical advantage is actually gained is almost irrelevant. For pitching, on the other hand, there is definite proof a doctored baseball makes a difference. Guys found doing that deserve as much, if not more punishment than guys with corked bats. __________________ "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man" - William Graham Sumner

06-12-2003, 10:38 AM	#15
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,031	Wow, a serious post by Gastric! Quick, tell all the OTers!! __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

06-12-2003, 05:36 AM	#3
suurimonster Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 64	Sorry the original physics article is too large, but you can get it from arts2.zip

06-12-2003, 07:11 AM	#6
suurimonster Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 64	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. His point, in my opinion, would be that although bat speed is increased by corking, the effect is counterbalanced by the change in mass distribution. You can see the importance of this in the performance of different Aluminium bats. However, I agree entirely that he has neglected how the flight/direction of the ball could also be affected by corking - which is why I attached 'sorf of' at the end. Also what about vibrational effects? more vibration would mean it is much more difficult to hit the sweet spot etc. As always science raises more questions than it answers.

06-12-2003, 07:56 AM	#8
suurimonster Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 64	Agreed - from reading in detail, nowhere does he make a conclusion in that paper that increasing bat speed at the expense of mass would have no effect. In fact he seems to emphasize the importance of bat speed in future lab tests. I wonder whether his statement that corking is not important reported in the media (and that Nature article) is taken out of context. Something along the lines of 'If we consider only the collision, corking will have little or no effect...' Wouldn't be the first time the media just takes the part that attracts the headlines. On another issue - is bat speed really that important to striking out, surely timing and hand-eye coordination are more relevant. I would think that a faster bat would perhaps increase your chance of swinging early, as well as reducing your chance of swinging late.

06-12-2003, 08:58 AM	#10
suurimonster Minors (Single A) Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 64	But the most important thing is just to judge the speed of the ball, and start swinging at the right time. If you know your own bat speed, it doesn't matter if it is fast or slow (within certain professional limits). The ball is never so fast that your swing, however slow, cannot make contact if you swing at the right time. I would say knowing your own swing speed and having an eye for pitch speed makes for less Ks.

06-12-2003, 10:22 AM	#11
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I just always wanted to know how someone with a round bat can hit a round ball square.

06-12-2003, 10:26 AM	#12
bsbll_n_mn Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 593	i like sosa

06-12-2003, 10:33 AM	#14
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	Well that's what the bat companies have done a lot of. The bats today have much thinner handles and thicker barrels, distributing the weight more towards the end of longer bats. Last week I went into a sporting goods store and picked up a 34-inch bat that was much lighter than the 33-inch Johnny Bench model of my youth. Some have even proposed that to help reduce the offensive explosion of the lat 10 years that bat specifications be changed to make the handles thicker again. It could be done in a gradual process, so as not to suddenly wipe out hitters.

06-12-2003, 11:13 AM	#18
Smellyface Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Illinois Posts: 211	Ted Williams always said that the single most important thing in hitting is bat speed. And i think he would know a thing or two about hitting. __________________ Corked Bat Baseball League

06-12-2003, 11:56 AM	#19
obaslg All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 887	While timing is a big issue in making contact, it's obviously not the only one. Contact depends on when you swing and where you swing. When the batter swings at the pitched ball, the trajectory of which is at least partially unknown when he begins his swing, he unconsciously makes minute changes in his swing in an effort to hit the ball - isn't that what eye-hand coordination is? If he uses a lighter bat, he's presumably better able to make those unconscious adjustments quickly. With solid wood, the batter has to give up surface area - another big factor in the "where you swing" - for that benefit, as was mentioned. If he can keep surface area constant while decreasing mass, he has an advantage in making contact. The question, then, is whether the contact advantage and the ability to pull makes up for the loss in mass. __________________ Realy good musition of many insterments, including the hyperbolic vitriol.