[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kaliix

Jeff, I actually said I was calling you a name and you say, if this isn't name calling, I don't know what is... What?!?

I believe you are trolling but let's try this one more time. The medical community doesn't have to sign off on anything. We are not talking about concussions. We are talking about the ability of two different protective mask designs to resist, deflect, absorb or do anything but not transfer energy to the head. This is a very measurable effect. Something transfers energy or it doesn't. If it does, how much? You place sensors at various points and hit the maks from all directions. You get quantifiable data as a result and you can determine with scientific accuracy how well a mask protects from the force of a baseball hitting it.

Remember you started this thread. From what I understand this was not a hot topic of conversation outside of the "Mask vs. Helmet" discussion that has been had several times on this board. These discussions never change anyone's mind or changes. Obviously this is a very emotional discussion for you.

Originally Posted by Kaliix

The whole process is not nearly as hard as you make it out to be. Biomechanical engineers, et al. have been crash testing cars for years and have gotten very good at figuring out how to make crash dummies replicate almost exactly how the human body responds to various types of impacts. I feel confident in saying this as the National Geographic Channel just aired a special detailing the various types of impacts that different martial artists can deliver. They hired crash test experts (biomechanical engineers and the like) to run their tests. They do impact measuring for a living, every day, and can accurately measure exactly how the human body reacts to impact, whether it be from an automobile or fist, elbow, knee, etc. Measuring a baseball hitting a mask from various angles at various speeds would be right up their alley and just wouldn't be that damn hard to figure out.

What does this have to do with baseball and the likelihood of concussions?

Originally Posted by Kaliix

Now I am NOT saying that we understand exactly why people get concussions or why they affect some and not others. But we can measure the kind of forces delivered and we can compare how those forces would be withstood by different types of masks. That part isn't hard.

Wait a minute; you had all the facts right?

Originally Posted by Kaliix

The fact that two independent labs said that the traditional mask and the hockey style mask have roughly the same protective qualities in terms of baseballs hitting them means that the tests are confirmed and reproduceable. We know exactly what kinds of forces the helmets/masks will withstand and how much force will be transferred to the head. What happens after that is not so certain in terms of how concussions happen, their effects short term vs. long, etc.

You obviously do not know much about studies. Usually you need more that two studies and the studies have to use the correct methodology.

Originally Posted by Kaliix

More to the point, a HSM covers more of the head. If a ball hits the back of an unprotected head, your gonna get hurt. If a broken bat hits you upside your unprotected head, you will get hurt. If you have an HSM and those things happen, in the same way, you likely suffer nothing more than you would if you got tagged with a foul ball while behind the plate, maybe less. Ergo, the HSM is safer.

You are? Wow, considering I saw a guy get hit on the top of the head with a pitched baseball, he continued the game and had no affects from the baseball.

Originally Posted by Kaliix

That's all I'm saying Jeff, the HSM is a helmet designed to protect from impact. Take a foul ball straight back with either a traditional mask or an HSM and you will be protected in relatively the same way. How much that hit effects you is certainly debatable, but the transfer of energy will be roughly the same with either one. And it is entirely measureable.

You are right you have all the answers in front of you.

Originally Posted by Kaliix

Getting hit anywhere in the head but in the front is not that common an occurence. But if it happens, you will not be protected with a traditional mask. It is a relatively minor risk statistically speaking, so I completely understand umpires not rushing to wear HSM. But if that statistically minor chance happens to you, it isn't so minor. Depending on where you work, the chances might increase and so for some of us, we choose to wear an HSM (their are other reasons, but whatever).

Once again, you know.

Originally Posted by Kaliix

As I said before, I am not trying to convert you. I just like a good discussion and I want the facts straight. You are under this delusion that we can't quantify the differences between the protective qualities of the two styles of masks. It just ain't so. We can and we have. Straight on hits, both styles offer the same protection. In the less likely event that you get hit some where else on your head (that is to say, the side, top or back) you are still protected with an HSM and not protected with a traditional mask.

Capiche?

I did not say we could not quantify data. This shows that this is a very emotional thing for you. You sound like you are going to get on a tower and start shooting people because they do not believe in your way of thinking. Relax man, it will be OK.

Peace