Posted by: Jack Mankin (MrBatspeed@aol.com) on Wed Dec 31 00:10:45 2008

>>> see

http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/18794.html

##

Now JJA the engineer is trying to clarify Mark's remark:

JJA:The Mankin post was rather off-topic, but I'll make one comment on it. Mankin does appear to have changed his views on the so-called "top hand torque". At one time he insisted that 50% of the bat speed was due to torque but numerous reputable researchers as well as posters (Adair, Booth, Nyman, Joof, many others) have demonstrated that this assertion is a complete fallacy. In response to this irrefutable evidence, he has apparently changed his view and no longer makes this claim (at least according to several people who have PM'd me). This may be what Guerry is referring to. As a regular batspeed poster you might ask him what percentage of bat speed is due to torque to get a clarification on where he currently stands on the issue.

-JJA

My recollection was JJA got confused and got his equation wrong. <<<

Hi Tom

You are correct once again. Tom Waz and Mike Myers and other engineers e-mailed me regarding the post of JJA. They were quite surprised an engineer would not know the correct equation for calculating velocities for forces applied. I would have though after reviewing Tom's equations, he would understand his miscalculation. I guess not. Makes one wonder doesn't it?

You can relate the following to JJA -- When I stated that about 50% of the bat speed attained came from torque, I was referring to a batter with a good CHP. Torque would account for a greater percentage for batters with a straighter hand-path -- less bat speed induced from the pendulum effect.

Jack Mankin