Rising fastball

[BigUmp56]

Okay, I get it now. All of the studies done by so many repected physicists were part of a conspiracy to refute your nonsense. They all came to the same conclusions, so they must be duplicating each others research methods.

I like how you ignore Fulds findings on the myth of a rising fastball, yet discuss his contentions on curve balls. I though we were discussing why it's impossible for a baseball thrown overhand to escape it's initial velocity vector and actually rise. I could debate you all day on the effectiveness of hitting a good curveball. It would only be a waste of my time though, as I doubt you've ever stood in a batters box and looked dead red when a pitcher capable of bringing it at 90+ throws an ungodly bender. I have, and it wasn't pretty. The only thing an average hitter will track is his way back to the dugout.


Tim.

[Kaliix]

SAump,
you have absolutely no understanding of the concept of lift. You keep trying to sound intelligent and instead you are showing futher proof of how ignorant you are.

A ball travels better in warm air because the air is less dense so there are less molecules of "air". With less "air" there is less resistance in the air so the ball travels further as air resistance decreases velocity. This less dense air however counteracts lift in planes. The less air passing over the wing, the smaller the amount of lift that is generated. That is why there is no lift in space, because there is no molecules of air.

You are darn funny though...

Originally Posted by SAump

I understand that cold air is more dense, but cold dense air sinks and dampens LIFT. I am trying to explain LIFT which requires warm juicey air that RISES. Say an airplane or helicopter has a max altitude or ceiling. My experience is that the colder the air, the lower the ceiling. The warmer the air, the higher the ceiling. Warm humid air provides the MOST LIFT. Glider pilots love spring and summer because of strong winds in the spring and strong thermal uplifts in the summer. Same with baseball, most batters have warning track power (300 feet) on cooler nights. But once summer time rolls around, the ball takes off 30 to 100 feet further and the number of home runs CLIMB. I think a MLB pitcher has less MOVEMENT on his fastball on a cool night. Once he gets the sweat rolling off the bill of his cap, you know he's warmed UP enough to get a RISE or 2. If any of this is wrong, let me know because I may have messed UP.

[gsf23]

You know, this whole thing is very easy to prove.

Get a pitcher who claims to throw a "rising fastball". set him up on a mound with two strings set in front of him. If he can throw a ball that travels under the first string and then over the second string, then I will believe in a rising fastball.

Or just take high-speed film from the side and show me a rise in trajectory. I've yet to even see something as simple as this.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by Kaliix

SAump,
you have absolutely no understanding of the concept of lift. You keep trying to sound intelligent and instead you are showing futher proof of how ignorant you are.

A ball travels better in warm air because the air is less dense so there are less molecules of "air". With less "air" there is less resistance in the air so the ball travels further as air resistance decreases velocity. This less dense air however counteracts lift in planes. The less air passing over the wing, the smaller the amount of lift that is generated. That is why there is no lift in space, because there is no molecules of air.

You are darn funny though...

I appreciate the simple lecture on air density but the real argument is more complicated and off topic. The air over Denver can be colder and less dense than the air over SA simply because of altitude. A baseball will travel farther in Denver SIMPLY because of the light air, but the pitcher's MOVEMENT will also be dampen by the same light air. Pitchers struggle in Denver because their sinkers don't sink and their sliders don't slide (except this year). The PILOT was correct in his assessment of density but he did not mention all the other factors that are just as vital to LIFT.

Other characteristics in AIR also play a vital role in determining the LIFT capability of AIR such as altitude, density, pressure, temperature, humidity, ozone, smog, polutions, etc. The actual number of AIR molecules remains CONSTANT or near constant thanks to our protective ATMOSPHERE. The THICKNESS between molecules increases or decreases in distance. Does SA have a polution problem in the summer or winter? I would say the summer polution level prove those molecules are closer together in that hazy SA AIR. Most of you already ignore LIFT so asking you to accept its presence in the summer air SEAMS to be a waste of my time.

[SAump]

I will now recollect the details of ONE of many visits to a local batting cage. One machine was set at 80 mph. I was told that a handheld radar was used to confirm that 80 mph speed setting. After inserting 2 tokens, the machine would toss 10 yellow dimpled batting cage baseballs every 6 seconds. The rotating arm (lever) would rebound violently after a toss and then rise at a prescribed rate, pick up another baseball and toss it towards the strike zone. As I stood in the batters box swinging at pitches that would enter the strike zone, I quickly recognized some pitches were high and others were low.

After a few rounds of batting practice it became very clear that only half of the 10 pitches were actually groved right down the middle of the strike zone. The range or variance between max and min height must have been over two feet. I find it very difficult to believe that a rotating mechanical arm would actually vary spin rate between pitches to account for this vertical range. Therefore, I must assume that GRAVITY is the CULPRIT. My test confirm that gravity does not treat each pitch equally. Can GRAVITY and SPIN discriminate against yellow dimpled baseballs. Could each yellow dimple baseball actually have individual characteristics to account for this large variance? After investingating the predicted flight path using the standard equations of motion, I found that these equations only provide a realistic MODEL. The equations are USELESS for predicting the actual location of each individual pitch. They serve as an average barometer of what might happen on an ideal pitch.

I gathered my results into 3 seperate categories. Those pitches 1 standard deviation above average, those pitches within 1 standard deviation of average, and those pitches 1 standard deviation below average. Feeling that I did my best to classify each pitch location, my results indicate the following conclusions. Half the pitches were grooved into the stike zone. These pitches appear to FLY STRAIGHT. Some of the pitches ROSE above normal. These pitches appear to RISE on their way to the plate. Some of the pitches FELL below normal. These pitches appear to SINK on their way to the plate. SEEING IS BELIEVING

It is the belief of this AUTHOR that these results can be duplicated by physics experts across the nation. It is the belief of this author that every psychologist in the nation will also confirm the same results with thorough scientific follow-UP testing and analysis of REALTIME DATA. The MYTH of a RISING FASTBALL NOT RISING should become an OLD WIVES TALE. CAUTION: more money is needed to test whether some people continue to believe OLD WIVES TALES after reading the results of this investigation. PERCEPTION IS NOT ACTUALLY SEEING, PERCEPTION IS BELIEVING RISE IS NOT POSSIBLE.

[Kaliix]

Or maybe it could just be that the release angle of each ball was different? And perhaps that a ball thrown with a steep enough release angle will rise at the beginning of it's initial trajectory path? No, that would be too easy wouldn't it!?!?

Dude, you are a hoot! Now gravity isn't a constant after all. It varies between pitches. Wow, you need to apply for a Nobel or something because that is one fantastic discovery that truly contradicts centuries of understanding of gravity and physics.

Oh, and I love that you threw in that big "standard deviation" word. It gave the whole paragraph a much needed academic feel.

You kill me.... ROTFLMAO!!!!!

Originally Posted by SAump

I will now recollect the details of ONE of many visits to a local batting cage. One machine was set at 80 mph. I was told that a handheld radar was used to confirm that 80 mph speed setting. After inserting 2 tokens, the machine would toss 10 yellow dimpled batting cage baseballs every 6 seconds. The rotating arm (lever) would rebound violently after a toss and then rise at a prescribed rate, pick up another baseball and toss it towards the strike zone. As I stood in the batters box swinging at pitches that would enter the strike zone, I quickly recognized some pitches were high and others were low.

After a few rounds of batting practice it became very clear that only half of the 10 pitches were actually groved right down the middle of the strike zone. The range or variance between max and min height must have been over two feet. I find it very difficult to believe that a rotating mechanical arm would actually vary spin rate between pitches to account for this vertical range. Therefore, I must assume that GRAVITY is the CULPRIT. My test confirm that gravity does not treat each pitch equally. Can GRAVITY and SPIN discriminate against yellow dimpled baseballs. Could each yellow dimple baseball actually have individual characteristics to account for this large variance? After investingating the predicted flight path using the standard equations of motion, I found that these equations only provide a realistic MODEL. The equations are USELESS for predicting the actual location of each individual pitch. They serve as an average barometer of what might happen on an ideal pitch.

I gathered my results into 3 seperate categories. Those pitches 1 standard deviation above average, those pitches within 1 standard deviation of average, and those pitches 1 standard deviation below average. Feeling that I did my best to classify each pitch location, my results indicate the following conclusions. Half the pitches were grooved into the stike zone. These pitches appear to FLY STRAIGHT. Some of the pitches ROSE above normal. These pitches appear to RISE on their way to the plate. Some of the pitches FELL below normal. These pitches appear to SINK on their way to the plate. SEEING IS BELIEVING

It is the belief of this AUTHOR that these results can be duplicated by physics experts across the nation. It is the belief of this author that every psychologist in the nation will also confirm the same results with thorough scientific follow-UP testing and analysis of REALTIME DATA. The MYTH of a RISING FASTBALL NOT RISING should become an OLD WIVES TALE. CAUTION: more money is needed to test whether some people continue to believe OLD WIVES TALES after reading the results of this investigation. PERCEPTION IS NOT ACTUALLY SEEING, PERCEPTION IS BELIEVING RISE IS NOT POSSIBLE.

[SAump]

I have often stated that warm air has special qualities not found in cold air. I would list some of those qualities AGAIN but I know some of you would NOT know the difference anyway. It was surprising when I was floored with the latest DENSITY argument supporting LIFT to be found in COLD AIR. Si I posted this message to announce some surprising news for the very first time about WARM air.

WARM 100 mph air is full of ELECTRICITY. There is lots of anticipation about tapping into that source of alternative fuel. The funny thing is that cold air does not contain LARGE amounts of electricity so one cannot move north of the border to investigate LIGHTNING. Lightning occurs with much frequency during the summer months as WARM air mass thunderstorms roll across the US. However, the occurence of lightning diminishes greatly during the winter months as the warm surface air masses are replaced with colder surface air masses during frontal passages. Why doesn't the LIGHTNING show UP for winter ball? I suppose it catches a LIFT on the WIND headed southward. Lightning and LIFT don't particularly favor cold air.

I know some of you will ignore the importance of this new information. I know some of you will ignore the relevance of tapping that lightning found in a SHOULDER. But it is obvious to me, you don't know much about LIFT.

[BigUmp56]

If annoying was money....................



Good God Man!


Tim.

[jxt127]

http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/edu/ltg/

Lightning occurs less frequently in the winter because there is not as much instability and moisture in the atmosphere as there is in the summer. These two ingredients work together to make convective storms that can produce lightning. Without instability and moisture, strong thunderstorms are unlikely

[SAump]

Or maybe it could just be that the release angle of each ball was different?

Why would you suspect a different release angle? The arm on the batting machine provides a very stable release angle because of GRAVITY. The effect of a ball not settling to the bottom of a very slow mechanical rotating "hand" would be hard to prove. The machine is bolted down and consistently releases pitch after pitch at a constant 80 mph speed.
-----------------
And perhaps that a ball thrown with a steep enough release angle will rise at the beginning of it's initial trajectory path? No, that would be too easy wouldn't it!?!?

To easy? No, that would concur with my point all along. The ball rises above initial trajectory at the beginning, the middle and end because it is traveling 100 mph upon release and 99 mph at the plate. Those of you who are looking for a DIP must be disappointed with LIFT.
-----------------
Dude, you are a hoot! Now gravity isn't a constant after all. It varies between pitches. Wow, you need to apply for a Nobel or something because that is one fantastic discovery that truly contradicts centuries of understanding of gravity and physics.

Yep, I have said it all along and can easily prove it. Gravity acts differently on all pitches, bullets, shells, and bombs. Thank GOD for GPS and LASERS that aim STRAIGHT because the PARABOLIC GRAVITY CURVE was never that GOOD an AIM with the pitches, bullets, shells, and bombs. Quantity tossed always won out over quality of tosses using those older PHYSICS books.
-----------------
Oh, and I love that you threw in that big "standard deviation" word. It gave the whole paragraph a much needed academic feel.

Good, because I have stated at least 9 different reasonable PROOFS and BIGUMP56 still repeats his same old tired WIVES TALE. Some of you may remember 1) the baseball strikeout records, 2) logical reasoning of FOUR primal directions, 3) sexual bias between softball and hardball, 4) aerodynamics characteristics of winged-FLIGHT, 5) fluid dynamic effects of airflow (HPG is PRIMARY force) around a baseball, 6) Air resitance affecting kinetic energy from light boomerang to baseball to heavier football, 7) mathematical proof that gravity's role on 100 mph fastball isn't the same as a 70 mph fastball, 8) the role of LIFT exisiting in our WARM atmosphere, and 9) a statistical argument for RISE. Now those 9 items are the ones I remember over the last 5 months. How many have I failed to discuss. I am sure that, along with the proofs, I gave countless number of examples. I guess your next question would ask me to list them all too.
--------------
You kill me.... ROTFLMAO!!!!!

I did the best I could.

[SAump]

Post # 100.

If I can't say it, then I will let some others say it for me. I just found these forums that also cover the basics. I don't know why a degree in PHYSICS makes one such a stubborn skeptic. I thought I would let these sites speak for themselves. Try to have an open mind when reading through the discussions and form your own opinion. Please listen to what the other side has to say and don't necessarily dismiss the possibility of a RISING FASTBALL.

http://www.pitching.com/forums/print...&threadid=1839

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthr...582#post989582

[Kaliix]

I'll let it die now, as it is obvious that you are totally clueless. Enjoy having the last word...

[SAump]

"Tom Seaver is an excellent example. Seaver had a high rising fast ball that started out a little above the batter's belt and kept rising. Most batters could not catch up to it but had to offer at such pitches. If Seaver were pitching today, he would have to adjust to the smaller strike zone and would be a different pitcher."

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseb...d_Harold11.stm

[SAump]

"Gooden reached new heights in 1985, winning the Cy Young award with the "pitcher's Triple Crown," leading the NL in wins (24-4), ERA (1.53), and strikeouts (268). His 16 complete games also led the league, and his rising fastball and snapping curve dominated NL hitters. Curveballs are referred to by ballplayers as "Uncle Charley," but Gooden's was called "Lord Charles." The shy but poised Gooden was the toast of New York; the only fault that could be found with him was that his big motion meant he had trouble holding runners close to first base. But the Mets, trying to protect their young superstar's future health, gave pitching coach Mel Stottlemyre the assignment of making Gooden less reliant on throwing hard. Perhaps it was that; perhaps it was hitters learning to lay off his rising fastball, which was often above the strike zone."

[greymule]

Why wouldn't photography prove this one way or the other? It couldn't be all that complicated, especially with today's technology.