Posted by: ray porco () on Mon Aug 22 16:32:16 2005

Jack,

You don’t need me to tell you this, but you are a good man.
You piss me off sometimes when you ignore me, or answer for me, or give up on a discussion by “agreeing to disagree”, but two things I am indebted to you for – you have taught me, and you have allowed me to have a voice.


That said.

Your quote:

“I find no discrepancies in what I stated and the principles contained in http://www.batspeed.com/research08.html & http://www.batspeed.com/research10.html. Therefore, it would be helpful Ray if you would point them out.”




At

http://www.batspeed.com/research08.html

you write:


“Torque is the result of forces being applied to the bat from opposing directions that causes an object (the bat) to rotate about a point BETWEEN the two hands.”


And at

http://www.batspeed.com/research10.html

the figure in the lower right hand corner shows a batter with green arrows for the top and bottom hand that I assume are indicating the direction of force for each hand, and from the picture, one would also assume that they are applying force from opposite directions “about a point BETWEEN the two hands”.


Further, at


http://www.batspeed.com/research10.html

you give as an example:

“when loosening a lug nut with a 4 prong tire wrench, you push down with one hand while pulling up with the other (torque).”

Again this is an example of two hands applying force in opposite directions about a pivot point BETWEEN both hands.




I don’t see these as examples of an “oar lock”.

If I were to envision an “oar lock” example, I would not see a pivot point between the hands, rather one hand acting as the pivot.
Oar lock = pivot.
Pivot = one of the hands.
Oar lock = one of the hands.

And at:

http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/output/22688.html

you agree.

Your quote:

“The right hand would then be serving the function of the oarlock.”


I mean it’s your website, and your theory, but don’t you see how confusing this can be to a reader.