Basic Batsmanship

Yup, TR I have seen some amazing swing descriptions. Can't even understand half of it.

Willie Mays was the guy who taught me this swing style.

I had never heard the word centripetal before then.

We were sitting in the park next to his building in the Bronx. Might have been Seton Park, I don't recall. I was doing something similar.

I tried keeping it simple but folks asked for deeper explanations.

Like I say, some will get it and some won't.

TR,

You still didn't answer my question.

How is the weather in your area?

.

quote:

Originally posted by Quincy:
Willie Mays was the guy who taught me this swing style.

I had never heard the word centripetal before then.

We were sitting in the park next to his building in the Bronx. Might have been Seton Park, I don't recall. I was doing something similar.

I tried keeping it simple but folks asked for deeper explanations.

Like I say, some will get it and some won't.

TR,

You still didn't answer my question.

How is the weather in your area?

.

Wasn't Willie the one that taught Einstein the Theory of Relativity?

Which Tricep?

No offense to Willie but he never used a word as big as centripetal, much less know what it meant


The weather up here--it is great--how is it in Tampa ?

Always good down here unless there's a hurricane.

I thought he was mispronouncing some word, but he is smarter than you'd expect. Sure surprised me that he was so friendly.

That New Haven Series should be a happening then. I'll look forward to how the games go.

Getting tired of this quack's bull$hit:

centripetal

1. Moving or directed toward a center or axis, particularly one around which an object is spinning.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/centripetal

Exactly how does a bat swing have any movement towards the body?

Quincy

I know nothing about a New Haven series---just so you know our team does not even play in Connecticut

And I really am not concerned about your weather---why are you concerned the weather up here?


Thanx
Z-Dad---if I said that I would get bashed---nice to know others see him for what he is

Now on the 19th page let me quote what QUINCY said in his opening line on page one

" A well hit ball will travel faster than one not hit well"=== OMG---I never knew that---Quincy the Assumed Hitting Expert may truly be Quincy ME, "ME= Mostly Erroneous" or delusional

There are a few college teams getting together for some New Haven Series.

I had heard that it would be a rainy day so I wasn't expecting to hear anything tonight about the games. Since it is nice, I'll hope that the players who have been getting raves are as good as I've heard.

I appreciate the info.

.

I dont know about New Haven - or Groton - or Kalamazoo - but here in the Carolinas - the weather is fine.

The clouds seem to be moving centripetally.

LOL

Okay, here we go guys! The Physics of the swing are below. No "centripetal" in here anywhere. Nice illustrations too!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque

Good try.

Torque is force exerted to the center. (As in Torque wrench)

Centrifugal force is force exerted outward as the result of circular motion..

Centrifugal force is centripetal force less string tension.

.

Quincy


Did you ever play baseball after LL level?

quote:

Originally posted by Quincy:
Good try.

Torque is force exerted to the center. (As in Torque wrench)

Centrifugal force is force exerted outward as the result of circular motion..

Centrifugal force is centripetal force less string tension.

.

Okay, I'll simplify it for you. The swing is an applied LINEAR FORCE using TORQUE physics. Contact point is the T = MOMENT ARM FORCE formula.

The Physics of Baseball

...it's actually a pretty interesting read.

The real equation:

BCI = SAHI + RLAWD
----------------------
(SH+SG)^2


Ball comes in = Swing and hit it + run like a wild dog divided by (some heart and some grit) - both to the second power.

Enrico Fermi taught me that.

LOL

Its hahaha

z -

to keep the bat connected to/driven by body rotation, you need to exert centripetal force by "keeping the hands in". If the hands get away from the body due to lack of centripetal force, the bathead turns more slowly.

You need to keep rotating and keep the hands in until contact or you will decelerate before contact which is bad for timing and power.

Let's see.....the launch of a swing takes .2 seconds or less....Generally believed to be 4 to 5 frames of 30 frames per second video.

And micmeister wants to sell "constant acceleration" in that time period.

Constant acceleration over .2 seconds.

Good luck.

The swing is an instantaneous launch and spend. I would say that means the "effort" that actually launches the swing....not the separation and stretch creation....happens very very suddenly. I'm not sure how many frames of video that is. My guess is about 2....I doubt if it can be done in 1.....with the other 2 or 3 frames being "autopilot" energy creation wise and the fine tuning of the moving of the hands which are rotating barrel to the path of the ball.

quote:

to keep the bat connected to/driven by body rotation, you need to exert centripetal force by "keeping the hands in". If the hands get away from the body due to lack of centripetal force, the bathead turns more slowly.

You need to keep rotating and keep the hands in until contact or you will decelerate before contact which is bad for timing and power.

I agree to a point.
This is what Bond does on the inside pitch.
But an outside pitch, There has to be some Hand, Arm, and Weight adjustment.
It's not bad timing, Just adjusted timing.
and yes you lose acceleration.
Thats why you should drive the outside pitch to the opposite field.
EH

quote:

Originally posted by Chameleon:
Let's see.....the launch of a swing takes .2 seconds or less....Generally believed to be 4 to 5 frames of 30 frames per second video.

And micmeister wants to sell "constant acceleration" in that time period.

Constant acceleration over .2 seconds.

Good luck.

The swing is an instantaneous launch and spend. I would say that means the "effort" that actually launches the swing....not the separation and stretch creation....happens very very suddenly. I'm not sure how many frames of video that is. My guess is about 2....I doubt if it can be done in 1.....with the other 2 or 3 frames being "autopilot" energy creation wise and the fine tuning of the moving of the hands which are rotating barrel to the path of the ball.

You still haven't answered the question. If it an instantaneous launch and spend, what frame of the Pujols clip is this happening and at what point can he let go of his top hand and still get the same results? Autopilot means on it's own.

Letting go of the top hand is a joke. Off topic. Stupid. Ridiculous. Irrelevant to the discussion.

This is like talking to a 3rd grader.

Someone who has never experienced effortless power.

Here is a hint...

Autopilot energy creation wise.

Read the posts.

quote:

Originally posted by Chameleon:
Letting go of the top hand is a joke. Off topic. Stupid. Ridiculous. Irrelevant to the discussion.

This is like talking to a 3rd grader.

Someone who has never experienced effortless power.

Here is a hint...

Autopilot energy creation wise.

Read the posts.

If the top hand is not pushing through contact, why would it need to hold the bat? You may need to take a step up to talk to a 3rd grader.

Not off topic,it has been stated that the power is coming from centripetal force or whatever.The top hand means nothing.


A video was even posted that was said to have the hitter letting go before contact(which he wasn't ) that resulted in a homerun,but I have seen plenty on here that see something from video that isn't there.

quote:

Originally posted by micmeister:
If the top hand is not pushing through contact, why would it need to hold the bat?

You've been told the answer to this probably 10 times. Or more.

It isn't my problem that you don't/won't get it.

quote:

Originally posted by Chameleon:

quote:

Originally posted by micmeister:
If the top hand is not pushing through contact, why would it need to hold the bat?

You've been told the answer to this probably 10 times. Or more.

It isn't my problem that you don't/won't get it.

Maybe I just need to be told by someone who speaks English, huh? It's very possible that I may come over to you guys' side if someone could demonstrate it for me in person, but you are right, I don't get it.

Seems to me that pujols and bonds have alot in common.There might even be a little tension in there somwhere.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Chameleon:
Someone who has never experienced effortless power.



Talk about nonsense! What the hell is effortless power??? Why is there a ban on steroids if the swing is effortless??? Their is no power without effort! Now, how you generate the effort or power is another question. Why did Ted Williams squeeze a rubber ball constantly if not to build strength in his fingers, wrists and forearms?

quote:

Originally posted by tfox:
Seems to me that pujols and bonds have alot in common.There might even be a little tension in there somwhere.

Yep! Those forearms aren't bulging from taking a ride, lol! No effort there either!

When I see this,I remember back to the first or second day of my son's hitting lessons when the instructor told him that the front elbow and bat should be in a straight line at contact.

Pujols hasn't gotten to contact yet but it is obvious that when the bat gets to contact,the elbow will be in a straight line with the end of the bat.


Seems that they have this working pretty well.

quote:

Originally posted by tom.guerry:
You need to keep rotating and keep the hands in until contact or you will decelerate before contact which is bad for timing and power.

You mean, using the bottom hand as a lever while being able to hold a rolled towel under your front armpit? Tom, do you believe the top hand extends through contact or do you believe it's job is over after the "instantaneous launch and spend" as Chameleon says?

quote:

Originally posted by tom.guerry:
z -

to keep the bat connected to/driven by body rotation, you need to exert centripetal force by "keeping the hands in". If the hands get away from the body due to lack of centripetal force, the bathead turns more slowly.

You need to keep rotating and keep the hands in until contact or you will decelerate before contact which is bad for timing and power.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. FFS, at least take a high school physics class before you pull stuff out of your arse.

OK, for a baseball swing, centripetal force IS applicable when:

A batter holds the bat slack at arms length and only uses the body to rotate the bat around him. The arms act as a tether and the tension in the arms is centripetal force. Whoopee!

Anyone know a MLB player that swings like that? None, because you simply cannot harness the energy of centripetal force in a bat swing.

For a baseball swing, centripetal force ISN'T applicable when:

Any MLB player takes a swing.

Simply put, a MLB player will exert energy to force the bat/arms/hands in a direction which ISN'T toward the center. Just because the batter rotates, uses a circular hand path, torques, does not mean the energy is directed inward just because there looks like an axis. The axis is an imaginary center of the direction of the bat swing.

The bat/arms/hands obtain force to go in X direction, a straight line. In order to move the bat/arms/hands in a path that resembles rotation you need to change the direction of that straight line. So the batter must exert energy in Y direction to alter the previous direction and constantly keep doing so to make the bat path resemble a circular motion. None of this energy is towards the center.

Think of it in another way. The body rotates and the bat/arms/hands gain momentum from that. If the batter exerts no force, i.e. let's the arms extend and go slack then there is centripetal force to keep the bat in a circular path. No batter does that.

Instead, the batter expends all his energy to accelerate the bat/arms/hand in the general and curved direction to the pitch.

If you could understand vectors you would see that any centripetal energy expended inward and perpendicular to the vector of the bat path will not accelerate the bat. Energy expended in a vector at an angle to the vector of the bat path will accelerate the bat.

Centripetal Force:

------>
   |    
   |    ------>
   |       |    
   |       |    ------> (No Acceleration)
   V       |       |
 Center    |       |
           V       |
         Center    |
                   V
                 Center

What MLB players do:
------>
   \   --------->
    \       \    ----------------> (Acceleration)
     >       \            \
              >            \
                            >  

You can only accelerate if energy is added to the bat at a slight angle to the original direction.

Dang, it seems every quack who tries to sell stuff has this need to use fancy terms they have no clue about to try and fool others into thinking they have the next big Wonder swing.

P.S. To the Mod, sorry I'm so combative. I just have a thing against charlatans.

Doggone it ZDad, I've been reading this thread all along for entertainment value and you had to go on and ruin it didn't ya.

Motion along a curve or through a circle is always caused by a centripetal force.

This is a force that pushes an object in an inward direction.

The moon orbits the earth in a circular motion because a force of gravity pulls on the moon in an inward direction toward the center of its orbit.

In a roller coaster loop, riders are pushed inwards toward the center of the loop by forces resulting from the car seat (at the loop's bottom) and by gravity (at the loop's top).

.

Consider an object moving in a circle of radius r with constant angular velocity.

The tangential speed is constant, but the direction of the tangential velocity vector changes as the object rotates.

Definition: Centripetal Acceleration

Centripetal acceleration is the rate of change of tangential velocity:

Note:

The direction of the centripital acceleration is always inwards along the radius vector of the circular motion.

In general, a particle (bat head) moving in a circular path experiences both angular acceleration and centripetal accelaration

.

quote:

Originally posted by micmeister:

Talk about nonsense! What the hell is effortless power??? Why is there a ban on steroids if the swing is effortless??? Their is no power without effort! Now, how you generate the effort or power is another question. Why did Ted Williams squeeze a rubber ball constantly if not to build strength in his fingers, wrists and forearms?

This board doesn't need me to point out your lack.

You do a great job of it.

Just as I suspected....you have no clue about what effortless power is.

It is truly amazing how the cyberspace gurus invent all these new "buzz" words to make themselves look smarter than anyone else

Hitting a baseball is still "see the ball- hit the ball"---a hitter is will always be a hitter and some others won't---that is why in MLB there are guys who hit over .300 every year and there are others who are .250 to .275 hitters

Who has ever had eyes like Ted Williams?
Who has a bat as quick as Bonds?
Who has the patience of Bonds at the plate?

A lot of what makes a hitter a hitter is God Given !

Me thinks some want to make hitting too scientific when it isn't

I agree totally with you TR.

I tried to avoid technical or anatomical terminology.

Had I said something like "Gravity makes a ball move downward'" and gotten the same questions imagine how complex it would have gotten since we still do not completely understand gravity.

Considering that we do not have a reasonable understanding of such things as gravity, magnetism or even electricity, trying to explain centripetal accelleration has been just as complex.

There are many things in Nature beyond our current understanding, but they are undeniable.

.

Quincy

I will ask you again---what age group are you teaching hitting to ? Do they understand you?

And please do not patronize me with your cyberspace gibberish---I am too mature for that despite what you and the lizard and the dog might think---the game of baseball is not as scientific as you three want to make it.

Interesting thought just crossed my mind Quincy---you sound a lot like the Vincentian Priests I had at St Johns University--they taught the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and if you asked about the philosophy of Aristotle or Plato for example their answer was simple " we don't talk about that--we teach the philosophy of Aquinas"---thus I got my degree in Math with a minor in philosophy and religion ( based on Aquinas)--- you truly remind me of their thinking--- as I matured I realized that all it was very simply BRAINWASHING---this is it kid--this is what we teach