Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Tue Mar 6 23:00:57 2007

> Interesting analogy. I wonder which is the more accurate punch...the hook or the straight jab? If your life depended on hitting the target, which punch would you throw? If both the straight jab(which by the way requires some hip rotation) and the hook were thrown at the same time, which would get to the target first? jima

Hi jima,

I think you meant to say a cross, or a straight punch. Both the straight punch and the hook utilize a commensurate amount of hip gyration, although what makes a hook more pernicious is it's ability to gsin speed over a longer period of time.

Let us make a mathematical comparison. If a straight punch travels a foot, the punch will have enough time to gain a sufficient amount of momentum to do some damage. Now, in order to appreciate the hook, multiply that number, the diameter, by 2 pi, and divide it by 2, since a hook constitutes only half of a circle. I get a distance of 15.71 inches, a differential of 5.71 inches. By further dividing the aforementioned diameter by the half-circumference, my calculator indicates that all straight punches have 63.66 percent the power of hooks, which means, when put another way (subtract this number from 100, since per cent--cent being a Latin derivative--means per hundred). I get the following answer: a hook is 36.33 percent more powerful that a straight punch in all case scenarios, assuming both punches are thrown with equal force.

What does this mean for hitting, though? It means that if I hit a ball 350 feet with a straight hand path that ball will travel 477 feet. Since all handpaths are curvilinear, though, the distinction sometimes becomes blurred.

However, the downside of a hook is it takes more time to accelerate, and, therefore, takes a longer time to hit its target point. Nevertheless, a hook is a more forceful punch than a straight punch. To answer your first question, then, if my life were threatened, and I could get away with a straight punch, I would just knock the guy flat. However, if it were a survical-of-the-fittest scenario, I would be forced to throw a hook, since that punch might procure my survival.

When applied to baseball, I think firing straight into the ball can drive the ball 350+ feet consistently. However, if the wind was blowing in, and turning 350+ shots into 320 foots out, I would definitely use a hook in the handpath to attempt to overcome this obstacle.

Hope this makes sense.

Best,
BHL