Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Tue Apr 20 00:32:36 2004

>>> Jack and BHL, I wish you two could hash out the comparisons and contrasts of your views on this subject. I think it would be enlightening to all. In the interest of having a serious discussion, though, I would request the webmaster to not allow the discussion to be interupted with side issues, insults, etc. It would be great for others to join in the dialog, but it would be helpful to the dialog for the webmaster to be very cautious in allowing posts that are even in the slightest sarcastic, irrelevant, mean-spirited, etc. Allowing one sarcastic comment to be posted results in someone else wanting to "get even". Let's just hash this thing out based on a relevant and respectful dialog.
> > > > >
> > > > > Who goes first, Jack or BHL? <<<
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Jose
> > > > >
> > > > > BHL and I have presented our views on this subject in great detail. Nothing new is being uncovered and nothing is gained by rehashing old views. The bottom line is what I stated in a post below. --- “BHL believes all hitters should be taught to pull all pitches. - I believe that although great hitters have mechanics that allow them to successfully pull outside pitches, the swing mechanics used by most hitters would breakdown when attempting to pull balls on the outer part of the plate.
> > > > >
> > > > > I see nothing that can be gained by restating our known positions on pulling outside pitches. Therefore, unless something new is presented, I will not OK a post to this thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jack Mankin
> > > > >
> > > > Hi Jack,
> > > >
> > > > I am going to present a geometric argument for my viewpoint, specifically as it pertains to bat length, plate size, and increasing radial arc, based on the assumption that the bat-head will travel the same number of degrees on all three pitches (i.e., 225 degrees on inside, middle, and outside pitches). Early tomorrow morning, I will post the specific calculations. I can't wait until tomorrow...
> > > >
> > > > BHL
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I will now post my calculations that show why pull hitting does not exacerbate swing tendencies. We will see that, by keeping the rate of angular displacement at a constant (i.e., 225 degrees), the batter need only widen the circumference of bat-head rotation to ensure that he or she can hit to the “natural” field with regularity.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, effective pull hitting dictates that the batter stand at the proper distance from the plate. Suppose, for instance, a softball player uses a 34-inch, 26-ounce Worth EST Extra. My recommendation is that he or she stand at least 34 inches off the back edge of the inside corner. Now, many individuals are going to posit that such a move will make it more difficult to hit outside pitches. If we put geometry before instinctual criticism, the distance of the plate with actually force the batter to realize that, in order to be successful, the bat-head must be accelerated in a circle.
> > >
> > > For the sake of simplicity, all pitches will be thrown around shoulder height, since the clearest way to demonstrate my argument is to depict a way arcing parallel to the ground. Functionally, though, the hitter would most likely hit pitches in which the bat head swept in arc tilted 45 degrees to the ground.
> > >
> > > In all scenarios, the batter is a right-handed hitter whose bat-head begins pointing in the direction of the third base line, but, at contact, swings all the way around 225 degrees to a position 45 degrees between the first and third base line.
> > >
> > > Since I advocate looking in, and adjusting out, for the reason that the hitter does not gain as much angular displacement on these pitches, and, hence, must be quicker with the bat. The finer details as to why this true will surface near the conclusion of my argument.
> > >
> > > On all pitches, the bat must travel 225 out of 360 degrees to pull pitches to left, or .625 of a whole circle. The number must be multiplied by the product of twice the radial lever--the whole circumference—times pi.
> > >
> > > 2(34 in.)(.625)(pi) = 42.5 in (pi), or a circumference of approximately 133.52 inches.
> > >
> > > On the pitch over the plate, the only variable in the calculation will be the increased width of the circumference, resulting from a moderate amount of casting. Hence, the bat-head will travel out half the length of a seventeen-inch plate, or 8.5 inches, which, when added to 34 inch bat, increases the lever-arm to 42.5 inches.
> > >
> > > 2(42.5)(.625)(pi) = 53.125 in (pi), or a circumference of approximately 166.90 inches.
> > >
> > > On outside pitches, since the entire plate must be covered, the circumference will widen even more. Specifically, if we take the sum of the length of the plate, and the plate, we get a radial arm of 51 inches.
> > >
> > > 2(51 in.)(.625)(pi) = 63.75 (pi), or a circumference of approximately 200.28 inches.
> > > According to the rules of physics, since the outside pitches necessitate using a wider circumference than those middle-in, the bat has more time to accelerate, meaning that these balls will pulled harder than inside pitches. This means that all pitches can be pulled. It is advantageous to use this modality all the time.
> > >
> > > Case closed.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > BHL
> > > Knight1285@aol.com
> > >
> > > As for who I am, my name is Geoff, and I hold an M. A. in English Literature, and am going into doctoral studies in this very area. I remember that when I started the Independent League, there were many athletes better than me. One of nicest compliments I ever received though, was how I used the gifts the Lord gave me to achieve.
> > >
> >
> > Don't factor in the very short reaction times a baseball hitter has, his ability to process what he sees, where it is and what swing is needed where and how. Of course, those calculations may not be in your favor. Those calculation would not lead to 'case closed' so let's leave them out.
> >
> > And, how many times will you close the case. It's been 3 or 4 already. Sounds to me like even you aren't convinced.
>
> Hi Teacherman,
>
> I am convinced, and my next step happens to be arguing for hitters to use longer bats in order to enhance the proper circulat hand path.
>
> Sincerely,
> BHL
> Knight1285@aol.com
>
> P.S. Here, on Batspeed.com, facts substantiated by calculations are far better than obstinate opinions supported by gut premonitions.

Hi Jack, here is my analysis on how selecting the longest possible bat enhances pull hitting:

One way to facilitate the development of all pull hitters is by encouraging them to use the longest lever that they can possible use. Specifically, I advocate using longer bats for three reasons: 1) it is easier to cover the plate when one chooses a longer lever over a shorter radial arm; 2) it is easier for a longer bat to swing out in an arcing motion, as opposed to a shorter bat, which tends to be whipped in a curvilinear fashion, thereby losing circular momentum; and, finally, 3) it is easier to gain angular speed when one uses a longer bat in lieu of a shorter one.

One interesting fact pertaining to bats is that the majors allow levers to “be up to 42 inches long” (Ferroli 69). The raison d’ etre for mentioning this triviality is to show that using a shorter bat hinders plate coverage. “And it just doesn’t add up” (70).

One can demonstrate the advantage of using long levers by placing an ashtray on a ruler, and attempting to balance the object. “If you shift the pencil, or prop, to a point nine inches from the ash tray end, reducing the short end of the ruler to only three inches, the finger pressure needed to balance the ruler is three times the length of the short arm” (Mann 118). One can apply this to bat length selection by realizing that gripping a long lever lightly will tend to arc the bat-head outwards, and assist with angular momentum (Mankin).

Inversely, using a shorter lever works against angular velocity. The “‘law of the lever’” (Mann 118) states that “If you shift the pencil to a point three inches from the ash tray end, the finger pressure needed to bring the ruler to balance will be only one-third the weight of the ash tray” (118-9). This is analogous to a batter possessing too much control over the bat; as a result, the hitter attempts to manipulate the bat-head by a linear push, which attains little radial deviation (Mankin).

Finally, one can prove that a longer bat accumulates more circular velocity than a shorter bat by increasing the bat length, and noting the corresponding increase in bat-head circumference. Here is an edition of my most recent post on the issue:

I will now post my calculations that show why pull hitting does not exacerbate swing tendencies. We will see that, by keeping the rate of angular displacement at a constant (i.e., 225 degrees), the batter need only widen the circumference of bat-head rotation to ensure that he or she can hit to the “natural” field with regularity (BHL).

Nevertheless, effective pull hitting dictates that the batter stand at the proper distance from the plate. Suppose, for instance, a softball player uses a 34-inch, 26-ounce Worth EST Extra. My recommendation is that he or she stand at least 34 inches off the back edge of the inside corner. Now, many individuals are going to posit that such a move will make it more difficult to hit outside pitches. If we put geometry before instinctual criticism, the distance of the plate with actually force the batter to realize that, in order to be successful, the bat-head must be accelerated in a circle (BHL).

For the sake of simplicity, all pitches will be thrown around shoulder height, since the clearest way to demonstrate my argument is to depict a way arcing parallel to the ground. Functionally, though, the hitter would most likely hit pitches in which the bat head swept in arc tilted 45 degrees to the ground (BHL).

In all scenarios, the batter is a right-handed hitter whose bat-head begins pointing in the direction of the third base line, but, at contact, swings all the way around 225 degrees to a position 45 degrees between the first and third base line (BHL).

Since I advocate looking in, and adjusting out—for the reason that the hitter does not gain as much angular displacement on these pitches, and, hence, must be quicker with the bat—we will begin our examination of pull hitting by taking a look at the angular displacement on inside pitches. The finer details as to why this true will surface near the conclusion of my argument (BHL).

On all pitches, the bat must travel 225 out of 360 degrees to pull pitches to left, or .625 of a whole circle. The number must be multiplied by the product of twice the radial lever—the whole circumference—times pi (BHL).

2(34 in.)(.625)(pi) = 42.5 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 133.52 inches (BHL).

On the pitch over the plate, the only variable in the calculation will be the increased width of the circumference, resulting from a moderate amount of casting. Hence, the bat-head will travel out half the length of a seventeen-inch plate, or 8.5 inches, which, when added to 34 inch bat, increases the lever-arm to 42.5 inches (BHL).

2(42.5)(.625)(pi) = 53.125 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 166.90 inches (BHL).

On outside pitches, since the entire plate must be covered, the circumference will widen even more. Specifically, if we take the sum of the length of the plate, and the plate, we get a radial arm of 51 inches (BHL).

2(51 in.)(.625)(pi) = 63.75 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 200.28 inches (BHL).

According to the rules of physics, since the outside pitches necessitate using a wider circumference than those middle-in, the bat has more time to accelerate, meaning that these balls will pulled harder than inside pitches. This means that all pitches can be pulled. It is advantageous to use this modality all the time (BHL).

Now let’s substitute a 34-inch bat with one that is 42 inches, and see if the extra eight inches makes any difference:

On pitches on the inside corner, we calculated that using the shorter bat would yield
a circumference of 42.5 in. (pi), or roughly 133.52 inches. Suppose, though, that we use the longer lever.

2(42 in.)(.625)(pi) = 52.5 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 164.93 inches. 52.5 in. (pi) – 42.5 in. (pi) = 10 in. (pi), an increase of roughly 31.42 inches. This is a 22.35 % increase in bat-head circumference.

On pitches down the middle, the original bat yields a circumference of 53.125 (pi), or roughly 166.90 inches. If we increase the size of the arm, and tack on the 8.5 inches de facto for slight barring, we get the following:

2(50.5 in.)(.625 pi) = 63.125 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 198.3 inches. 63.125 in. (pi) – 53.125 in. (pi), we get an increase of 10 in. (pi), or roughly 31.42 inches. This is in increase of 18.82 %.

Finally, on pitches on the outside corner, our original calculation gave us a circumference of 63.75 in. (pi), or roughly 200.28 inches. Adding 17 inches to the new lever gives us a new calculation:

2(59 in.)(.625 pi) = 73.75 in. (pi), or a circumference of approximately 231.69 inches. 73.75 in. (pi) – 63.75 in. (pi) = 10 in. (pi), or roughly 31.42 inches. There is a 15.69 % increase in bat-head circumference.

Of course, the batter would also have to move eight more inches off the plate.

Sincerely,
BHL
Knight1285@aol.com

P.S. Here are my “Works Cited”:

BHL. “My Calculations.” Mon. Apr. 18, 21:54:23: 2004.

Ferroli, Steve. “Hit Your Potential.” Chicago: Masters, 1998.

Mankin, Jack. “Test the ‘Crack of the Whip’ Theory.” http://www.batspeed.com/research02.html. 1999.

Mann, Arthur. “How to Play Winning Baseball.” New York: Grosset; Dunlap, 1953.