University of Sydney swing study

[BadMonkeys]

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/44.BatSwing.pdf

This is a scientific paper published on the swing from 2009. Maybe it has been discussed or read over by some of you before. Can anyone translate or summarize it into English? I want to better understand what it is saying but I don't seem to be able to on my own.

Thanks

 

[softballphreak]

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/44.BatSwing.pdf

This is a scientific paper published on the swing from 2009. Maybe it has been discussed or read over by some of you before. Can anyone translate or summarize it into English? I want to better understand what it is saying but I don't seem to be able to on my own.

Thanks

This sounds like a task for jbooth with accompanying rdbass gifs?

 

[jbooth]

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/44.BatSwing.pdf

This is a scientific paper published on the swing from 2009. Maybe it has been discussed or read over by some of you before. Can anyone translate or summarize it into English? I want to better understand what it is saying but I don't seem to be able to on my own.

Thanks

They did not get into any bio-mechanics regarding HOW to swing the bat, it is only a study of the physics forces and movements that occur in a swing.

Basically, it confirms that you keep the hands back, keep them close to the body and throw the barrel.

It confirms that the handle moves in a arc around the body, and that the barrel is torqued in an arc around a spot between the hands.

It confirms that the arms do not pull or push the bat, they pull inward (centripetal force), to create angular momentum and tangential acceleration. This is why you see MLB hitters with both arms bent at contact on good swings. They are preventing the bat from getting away from them. (Go off on a tangent.)

It states that you hold the 90 degree angle early, and then apply a torquing force, and then release the force just prior to contact. This is what MLB hitters describe as lag the barrel, and then throw it. It is also why they sometimes throw it into the stands. They turn, and then use hand force to snap the barrel, but stay loose at contact.

It confirms that you need to do everything that Ted Williams taught. Get the hips and shoulders rotating, keep the hands in close and use the wrists and hands.

 

[softballphreak]

They did not get into any bio-mechanics regarding HOW to swing the bat, it is only a study of the physics forces and movements that occur in a swing.

Basically, it confirms that you keep the hands back, keep them close to the body and throw the barrel.

It confirms that the handle moves in a arc around the body, and that the barrel is torqued in an arc around a spot between the hands.

It confirms that the arms do not pull or push the bat, they pull inward (centripetal force), to create angular momentum and tangential acceleration. This is why you see MLB hitters with both arms bent at contact on good swings. They are preventing the bat from getting away from them. (Go off on a tangent.)

It states that you hold the 90 degree angle early, and then apply a torquing force, and then release the force just prior to contact. This is what MLB hitters describe as lag the barrel, and then throw it. It is also why they sometimes throw it into the stands. They turn, and then use hand force to snap the barrel, but stay loose at contact.

It confirms that you need to do everything that Ted Williams taught. Get the hips and shoulders rotating, keep the hands in close and use the wrists and hands.

I've seen batters hit hard liners with the hands separated sometimes 3 to 4 inches. Is there an optimum separation distance between the hands, or should there be no separation at all?

 

[GunnerShotgun]

I think the study generated more questions than answers for the researchers.

 

[Greenmonsters]

The swing(s) analyzed wouldn't be considered representative of the prototypical HLBB swing

As noted in Cross's paper

"The video was taken in a laboratory, the
batter swung at an imaginary ball, and the batter kept both
feet firmly planted on the floor at marked positions under the
camera. The batter was instructed to swing the bat as fast as
possible and to swing in a horizontal plane at waist height
after releasing the bat from his shoulder."

 

[BadMonkeys]

The swing(s) analyzed wouldn't be considered representative of the prototypical HLBB swing

As noted in Cross's paper

"The video was taken in a laboratory, the
batter swung at an imaginary ball, and the batter kept both
feet firmly planted on the floor at marked positions under the
camera. The batter was instructed to swing the bat as fast as
possible and to swing in a horizontal plane at waist height
after releasing the bat from his shoulder."

I thought that stood out too. The quality of the model. Was he allowed to lift any part of the foot off the floor during the swing. The description almost sounds like he was instructed to drop the hands to the swing plane but the chart of the barrel path indicates otherwise.

 

[jbooth]

The swing(s) analyzed wouldn't be considered representative of the prototypical HLBB swing

As noted in Cross's paper

"The video was taken in a laboratory, the
batter swung at an imaginary ball, and the batter kept both
feet firmly planted on the floor at marked positions under the
camera. The batter was instructed to swing the bat as fast as
possible and to swing in a horizontal plane at waist height
after releasing the bat from his shoulder."

I was just waiting for a response like this.

It doesn't matter. You seem to not be able to grasp the fact that the basic physics principles are the same whether you analyze Barry Bonds or a AA hitter.

It's true that a 7 year-old beginner's physics might be different, but not those of a pro. It's clear from the diagrams that the hitter that they analyzed moves in the pattern that all good hitters do.

They analyzed the shoulders, arms, hands and bat paths. Which paths that they showed, do you believe to be different from the HLBB swing?

What parts of the analysis do you believe to be incorrect?

 

[jbooth]

I thought that stood out too. The quality of the model. Was he allowed to lift any part of the foot off the floor during the swing. The description almost sounds like he was instructed to drop the hands to the swing plane but the chart of the barrel path indicates otherwise.

That would only affect the acceleration rates, and maybe certain force amounts. It would not affect the basic conclusions. This study comes to the same conclusions that MANY previous ones have.

I assume that due to your admitted lack of knowledge of physics, that you can't comprehend that the fundamentals of angular momentum, centripetal force and tangential acceleration are not greatly affected by the difference between Barry Bonds' swing, and any reasonably proficient pro swing. You can't seem to separate the bio-mechanics from the physics.

And, you make yourself appear foolish when you question the conclusions of dozens of studies like this that all state the same facts. These are scientific people who have carefully analyzed it using expert knowledge of physics, yet you seem to think they're wrong, even though you admit to having little knowledge of the science.

I don't have their level of knowledge, but I have enough to comprehend what they presented and know that it is not totally wrong. They admit it is complex and they don't have all the answers, but they sure as heck aren't way off the mark.

 

[BadMonkeys]

I assume that due to your admitted lack of knowledge of physics, that you can't comprehend that the fundamentals of angular momentum, centripetal force and tangential acceleration are not greatly affected by the difference between Barry Bonds' swing, and any reasonably proficient pro swing. You can't seem to separate the bio-mechanics from the physics.

And, you make yourself appear foolish when you question the conclusions of dozens of studies like this that all state the same facts. These are scientific people who have carefully analyzed it using expert knowledge of physics, yet you seem to think they're wrong, even though you admit to having little knowledge of the science.

Huh? What did I write that could have possibly lead you to all that?
And I was feeling guilty I used a period instead of a question mark!

This happened to be the first study I read. I asked for translation. I didn't question the conclusion. I thought that some of the set up stood out. And that a part of the description of the set up could have been interpreted to mean something else.