Posted by: Jeff M () on Wed Apr 21 20:11:35 2004

BHL,
> > I really enjoy reading your posts, and I think you are a valuable addition to this board...and many of your ideas are insightful. Be careful when using geometry to support your theory on pull-field-orientation. Calculations need to be based on actual positions, and you should consider quantifying your baselines. For example I would make a statement that "return to perpendicular" equals a position/point/location where the bat and pitched ball intersect/impact with a 90 degree interior angle. I would then further state that the azimuth/bearing/line of the pitched ball be dependant on the release point off the mound...which then depends on the height/wing-span and other characteristics of the pitcher. Then I would clarify/identify the actual offset to the center strike-zone and check the bearing back to the release point. Once the bearing of the pitched ball is known, we can then calculate the location/deflection/angle/bearing of the bat at a point perpendicular to the pitch bearing. For example...the pitch bearing of a RH pitcher setup on the outside edge of the rubber...delivering a ball intended to intersect the outside black against a RH batter...with no horizontal movement/break factored will be different than that of a LH pitcher doing the same move with similar mechanics...from the opposite side of the rubber...still ending with a pitch on the outside black. Also, and in part based on the above...and in an attempt to agree with your theory (in part), I offer that a RH pitcher delivering a middle plate pitch to a RH batter will result in a exit bearing slightly left of centerfield. The last thing I would advise against is the "casting" indications that you stated in the posts below...try to fix a central location of your impact radius point...focus on a deflection angle (off true perpendicular) of + 3 degrees-45 minutes and then back out your bat length, point of impact on the bat, hand location and so on. This will get your radius "close" and then you can fit your curves to a model...and calculate your total arc length. I'm not sure where maximum batspeed occurs in your model, but factor in some point along the arc where you feel good that the speed will still end with a point of reference...lets say a distance of 360-feet for arguments sake. I think you (BHL) are on the right track with your PFO but take a look at your model and see if an outside pitch really has to be sent to the pull field. Why can't you adjust for an impact position short of perpendicuar?
> > Just my thoughts.
> > Jeff M
>
> jeff, good post, i think....since i need brushing up on my math i can't really comment on yours or BHK's math, other than to say that the discussion is potentially highly productive...i disagree with melvin....i don't think that introducing math or science into the discussion ( flawed or not) constitutes the board being "hijacked"..to the contrary, this introduction enhances the discussion....
>
> adair wrote "the physics of baseball" which jack has analyzed parts of in the past....bahill & a co-author wrote "keep your eye on the ball", and it is 10x more in depth in the science of contacting the ball/flight of the batted ball than adair's book....
>
> there could be a lot of fruitful discussion on just one chapter of bahill's book...in the chapter he demontrates MATHEMATICALLY AND SCIENTIFICALLY that contacting the ball 1/4 to 1/2 inch below center will cause the ball to take a home run trajectory....skeptics might argue how difficult that would be to consistently target the ball in that optimal spot (although steve garvey and others have done so)...the point is, the thesis of this one chapter would provide a wealth of material for meaningful discussion...again, science and math contributes to, does not detract from meaningful discussion...
>
> last point..."see if an outside pitch really has to be sent to the pull field. Why can't you adjust for an impact position short of perpendicuar?"....i agree that for the os pitch to be contacted effectively the ball needs to come in farther, and the ball should not be pulled...however, there is one problem and that is ELEVATION....in many cases the hitter is contacting the pitch with swing still in DOWNSWING MODE....this can be corrected by hitting the inside part of the ball, result being , using batspeed.com's jargon, being slightly more "linear" and slightly less "rotational"...if i had the background in biomechanics/anatomy, i could eadily prove my point.....

You made your point very clear,,,and without the phd...hitting can be both a science and an art, and as such hitters need to take advantage of all their tools. Great hitters stay alive in the box by being able to see the ball & anticipate location. 90+mph FB on OS black is just to hard a pitch to pull...for me anyway. That said...BHL might be a very good hitter, and who know's...maybe he can turn on a Williams OS FB with his 45 inch bat. Maybe Jack can host a batspeed.com expo this fall, and we can all sit behind the fence while BHL takes his reps....picture this...BHL with his oversized bat taking BP against a jugs cranked at 100 MPH with low seamed balls. Then picture Teacherman & Doug & Jack and oh yea Tom Guerry all making comments on why BHL seems to be just a tad behind the mark. Calculate that!
Just my thoughts.
Jeff M