Thread: Albert Pujol's Unsual Grip

Originally Posted by Mr T

Getting confused again. I thought we had a great discussion about grip last week. First off, Jim's device sounds effective but I thought it promoted not using the muscle between the thumb and index finger.

And cshilt, if you are talking about increasing bat speed it makes sense to me but if I understand correctly the ball-bat collision lasts less than a millisecond and there is no "pushing" on the ball. The person could disappear the moment the bat connected to the ball, i.e. the grip at that point is meaningless.

Have you ever seen a bat go backwards at the point of contact? A little more resistance against that force equates to a little more power.

Originally Posted by cshilt

Have you ever seen a bat go backwards at the point of contact?

I have, so I would disagree with the thought that at contact the hitter could simply disappear and it would make no difference. Couple years ago while looking at slow motion video of my daughter I clearly seen the bat deflect after contact. Sometime after that we made acouple visits to a good hitting coach, changed her grip and I have not observed this since.

An explanation of that was in another thread. Either not enough bat speed or bat too light I believe.

Originally Posted by Mr T

Getting confused again. I thought we had a great discussion about grip last week. First off, Jim's device sounds effective but I thought it promoted not using the muscle between the thumb and index finger.

It promotes the proper grip by aligning the bat handle at the correct angle in the hand. The "trigger" finger position is a result of this angle. It engages the bottom three fingers in the grip in a more efficient and stronger way and it keeps the bat handle from getting too deep into the palm where the thumb and index finger meet.

It works! Anyone that has used it LOVES IT!

Originally Posted by Daddy O

I have, so I would disagree with the thought that at contact the hitter could simply disappear and it would make no difference. Couple years ago while looking at slow motion video of my daughter I clearly seen the bat deflect after contact. Sometime after that we made acouple visits to a good hitting coach, changed her grip and I have not observed this since.

In the book "The Physics of Baseball" the author seems pretty explicit on this issue. He talks about bat deflection, yet still claims that the bat could be considered a thrown object. I'm going with the Ivy League physicist on this one.

two things :
1) What about the grip used by the LSU player in the other thread rotational hitting: bat path is that what you're saying Pujols is doing?

2) Re: hitter disappearing at contact. I think that is a scientific hypothetical that is too abstract to apply to real life. the difference between the science of what actually happens vs the perception of it could interfere with actually making it happen. It would be appropriate if we were talking about building a batting machine, then that kind of science would be useful in the discussion.

At contact the energy is still being transferred to the bat. based on what I have seen and read, MY OPINION is that a reduction in that transfer of energy during the 1/2000 sec of contact will result in a less powerful hit. the transfer of energy is like a lightning bolt that connects from the earth, thru the batter and bat to the moving ball but is only connected for the fraction of a second. Nothing happens after contact but by having the batter "swing thru the ball" rather than stopping 1" after contact, it enables the human to deliver the maximum energy to the moving object for the fraction of a second (over a distance of 3/4") necessary.

What happens when ball meets bat?

Originally Posted by obbay

Nothing happens after contact but by having the batter "swing thru the ball" rather than stopping 1" after contact, it enables the human to deliver the maximum energy to the moving object for the fraction of a second (over a distance of 3/4") necessary.

What happens when ball meets bat?

The physics don't say that you should stop the bat 1" after contact. Instead, it says that you could let go of the bat at the point of contact.

That's a big difference.

The reason why you can do this is that, in a good swing, the bat has so much forward momentum, and the contact between the bat and ball is over so fast, that the bat doesn't have time to rotate around the ball.

As a result, the role of the grip isn't to provide strength at the point of contact. Instead, the role of the grip is to maximize the force of the whip that moves the bat head through the POC (and often focusing on creating strength at the POC will compromise whip, which is why many people hit better with a looser grip).

I believe many batters generate enough bat speed to overcome the incoming force of the ball. I also believe that many generate massive strength (relatively speaking) at contact to overcome the ball.

A VW can do massive damage to a parked car at a high rate of speed. A tractor trailer can do the same at 20 mph.

Would you rather be punched by Sugar Ray Leonard or Mike Tyson? You'll get the same result.

Originally Posted by Chris O'Leary

The physics don't say that you should stop the bat 1" after contact. Instead, it says that you could let go of the bat at the point of contact.

That's a big difference.

The reason why you can do this is that, in a good swing, the bat has so much forward momentum, and the contact between the bat and ball is over so fast, that the bat doesn't have time to rotate around the ball.

As a result, the role of the grip isn't to provide strength at the point of contact. Instead, the role of the grip is to maximize the force of the whip that moves the bat head through the POC (and often focusing on creating strength at the POC will compromise whip, which is why many people hit better with a looser grip).

Quoted for truth, or, what he said, or "this guy right here".

Originally Posted by softballphreak

I believe many batters generate enough bat speed to overcome the incoming force of the ball. I also believe that many generate massive strength (relatively speaking) at contact to overcome the ball.

A VW can do massive damage to a parked car at a high rate of speed. A tractor trailer can do the same at 20 mph.

Would you rather be punched by Sugar Ray Leonard or Mike Tyson? You'll get the same result.

Not a physicist, so take this with a grain of salt. But the way I understand this, a closer analogy along your lines would be to imagine a giant swinging the VW or tractor.

Say the giant could swing the VW at 80mph or the tractor at 20, and that they would have approximately the same amount of kinetic energy.

The question I think you need to ask is if the collision between the vehicle and whatever the giant swings it into (say he's hitting a giant version of one of those super bouncy balls) lasts half of a millisecond, does it matter how the giant is gripping the vehicle at the moment of impact?