Rising fastball

[SanDiegoSteve]

I'm no freakin' Galileo, but I would say that if a pitch that starts out at 90 mph, loses 9% of its speed, and ends up at 81 mph, that leads me to believe that 90 mph fastballs must start out at about 99 mph in order to arrive at the plate at 90 mph, thus being un-hitable for SAUmp.

[SAump]

Wow, did you happen to notice the tail lights on the end of that baseball light UP. A ball released at 100 mph would NOT slow down to 91 mph. DO you now believe outfielders that release the ball 240 feet from the plate are now posting speed records of 127 mph upon release. YOU would definitely notice the tail end of that baseball RISE.

[SanDiegoSteve]

SA,

I was being facetious (or sarcastic, I can't tell which) when I said that, because I don't believe that a pitch loses 9% of its velocity in 60 feet. I think a pitch released at 90 mph arrives at the plate at 90 mph. I was just trying to find a speed of a pitch you couldn't hit at your advanced state of decomposition.

[NIump50]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

SA,

I was being facetious (or sarcastic, I can't tell which) when I said that, because I don't believe that a pitch loses 9% of its velocity in 60 feet. I think a pitch released at 90 mph arrives at the plate at 90 mph. I was just trying to find a speed of a pitch you couldn't hit at your advanced state of decomposition.

I can't prove it with the law of physics, but last year during winter practice they put a gun on my son, aimed near the release point, and clocked him at 75-77 on his fastball. And no it wasn't rising.
When we pointed the gun nearer the catcher he was clocking at 73-75.
Very unscientific, but I think the ball loses some velocity, certainly not 9%.

[SAump]

Originally Posted by NIump50

I can't prove it with the law of physics, but last year during winter practice they put a gun on my son, aimed near the release point, and clocked him at 75-77 on his fastball. And no it wasn't rising.
When we pointed the gun nearer the catcher he was clocking at 73-75.
Very unscientific, but I think the ball loses some velocity, certainly not 9%.

The faster the pitch, the less likely to lose speed due to increased inertia. A radar takes an average scan and is accurate to + or - 1 mph because the baseball or vehicle maintain a constant speed during that 1/2 second measurement. So if this POPULAR MECHANICS article is so OFF the MARK; wouldn't it be a logical conclusion that the rest of this MYTH is BUSTED.

Yet a quick search of the internet turned up some new articles that were not there 4 to 5 months ago. Here is another version of the same point made on this website.

http://www.girls-softball.com/2006/0...rs-rising.html

We are not alone.

[SAump]

I don't know how many times someone on this site has stated that a round object doesn't behave as a wing. Well, one of you better write the folks at NASA cause they now have a flight simulation software program written for a BASEBALL.

http://www.microsoft.com/education/fastball.mspx

download the FoilSim program from http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/aerosim/

I always hear the BS from the peanut gallery when I am wrong. I love the sound of silence when I am RIGHT.

[SAump]

Wait a minute, same story from different researcher.

Are these guys being paid for duplicating research. I think that is cause for early dismissal. I understand the need to publish or perish, but this looks like down right plagerism. Perhaps I'll write a paper and sell it to leading researchers around the country every 6 months so they could pass it off as their independent research. NO, I wouldn't do that.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12424508/

It would be even more suspect if this same stuff is published by another leading reseacher from another well-respected university in a few more months. Real geeks are more intelligent than this.

[fwump]

SAump,

I have to chime in on this one. I am a private pilot and I work for a major airline as an FAA certified Flight Dispatcher. You have stated more that once in your arguments supporting the "rising fastball" the idea that warm humid air at sea level creates more resistance against the ball because the air is "thick".
You should realize that warm humid air is actually less dense than cool dry air. One of the problems we deal with each and every day during the warm days of summer how high temperature effects aircraft performance. Because air becomes less dense as the temperature increases the there are fewer molecules of air flowing over the aerodynamic sufaces of the aircraft (wings). This creates less lift which then requires a longer take-off roll and often requires the pilots to use greater amount of thrust from the engines to accomplish a safe lift-off and climb. This problem is compounded by the altitude above sea level of the airfield.
So to say that air resistance creates "lift" on thrown sphere and to support that argument by also arguing that warm, humid "thick" air increases the effect is simply a spurious argument. Cooler dryer air has much more density that warm humid air. Your "rise" phenomenon, if true, would be more likely on a cool dry evening than a hot humid afternoon.
I should also point out that, as all residents of Texas know, warm air holds more moisture and is much more unstable as cool dry air. Air-mass thunderstorms that develop most afternoons in July and August attest to that fact.

Mike

[Justme]

Originally Posted by fwump

SAump,

I have to chime in on this one. I am a private pilot and I work for a major airline as an FAA certified Flight Dispatcher. You have stated more that once in your arguments supporting the "rising fastball" the idea that warm humid air at sea level creates more resistance against the ball because the air is "thick".
You should realize that warm humid air is actually less dense than cool dry air. One of the problems we deal with each and every day during the warm days of summer how high temperature effects aircraft performance. Because air becomes less dense as the temperature increases the there are fewer molecules of air flowing over the aerodynamic sufaces of the aircraft (wings). This creates less lift which then requires a longer take-off roll and often requires the pilots to use greater amount of thrust from the engines to accomplish a safe lift-off and climb. This problem is compounded by the altitude above sea level of the airfield.
So to say that air resistance creates "lift" on thrown sphere and to support that argument by also arguing that warm, humid "thick" air increases the effect is simply a spurious argument. Cooler dryer air has much more density that warm humid air. Your "rise" phenomenon, if true, would be more likely on a cool dry evening than a hot humid afternoon.
I should also point out that, as all residents of Texas know, warm air holds more moisture and is much more unstable as cool dry air. Air-mass thunderstorms that develop most afternoons in July and August attest to that fact.

Mike

So after all of this bantering back and forth the question still remains:

Can a human throw a rising fastball assuming absolutely perfect atmospheric conditions?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

If so, can it be proved scientifically?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

Oh crap, that’s two questions isn't it…..sorry!

[SAump]

Originally Posted by fwump

SAump,
I have to chime in on this one. I am a private pilot and I work for a major airline as an FAA certified Flight Dispatcher. You have stated more that once in your arguments supporting the "rising fastball" the idea that warm humid air at sea level creates more resistance against the ball because the air is "thick".
You should realize that warm humid air is actually less dense than cool dry air. One of the problems we deal with each and every day during the warm days of summer how high temperature effects aircraft performance. Because air becomes less dense as the temperature increases the there are fewer molecules of air flowing over the aerodynamic sufaces of the aircraft (wings). This creates less lift which then requires a longer take-off roll and often requires the pilots to use greater amount of thrust from the engines to accomplish a safe lift-off and climb. This problem is compounded by the altitude above sea level of the airfield.
So to say that air resistance creates "lift" on thrown sphere and to support that argument by also arguing that warm, humid "thick" air increases the effect is simply a spurious argument. Cooler dryer air has much more density that warm humid air. Your "rise" phenomenon, if true, would be more likely on a cool dry evening than a hot humid afternoon.
I should also point out that, as all residents of Texas know, warm air holds more moisture and is much more unstable as cool dry air. Air-mass thunderstorms that develop most afternoons in July and August attest to that fact.
Mike

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.

[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.