This just arrived. Anything new?

[greymule]

meaningful data cannot be gathered

The more I think about "studies" of wood versus metal bats, the more I think a scientific study would be more than just difficult and expensive. It might be impossible. Without two large comparison groups—one using metal bats and one using wood bats—of equal ability, using the same balls on the same fields, playing at the same time of day during the same conditions, the same lighting, the same degree of competitiveness, and over a period of time, the methods for the weighting of the data would be too complex and open to "confounding." And since the players chose to play in the wood-bat league or the metal-bat league (for reasons we don't know), we still don't have random assignment. Forget it. Nobody has done a remotely scientific study of metal versus wood bats.

We also have the issue of metal bats not being remotely uniform. A $25 metal bat is a metal bat. A $400 juiced-up rocket is also a metal bat. So you'd have to account for even more uncertainty.

It's hard enough to do a scientific study even when everything is in place. So we're left with "I heard about a guy who got his face smashed by a [fill in the blank] bat, and . . ."

Be extremely wary whenever you hear someone say, "Studies show. . . ."

This is why every advocacy group has "studies" to support its position.

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by LakeErieUmp

Ray Chapman was hit in the head with a pitched ball and died. Tony Conigliaro was hit in the head with a pitched ball and did not. There is no way Carl Mays threw a 1920 baseball faster than Jack Hamilton threw the more tightly wound 1967 version. Sometimes it is not just velocity. Things happen. Sad, but they happen. Anecdotal incidents really don't determine whether metal bats are inherently more dangerous.

Chapman was not wearing a helmet, and the baseball was so dirty that he never saw it coming.

Conigliaro was struck on the cheek, and was not wearing a helmet with an ear-flap. Still, he returned to the game a year and a half later.

Studies show that balls coming off a metal bat achieve significantly higher velocities. See the study I linked to, as well as the 2001 Journal of Applied Biomechanics study.

Anecdotal evidence is valuable in conjunction with those studies. Common sense dictates that a higher velocity equates to lesser reaction time and harder impact.

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by greymule

meaningful data cannot be gathered

The more I think about "studies" of wood versus metal bats, the more I think a scientific study would be more than just difficult and expensive. It might be impossible.

I meant that meaningful data concerning injuries cannot be gathered. There have indeed been comprehensive studies of wood versus metal bats. See the article I linked to, and the 2001 Journal of Applied Biomechanics study -- the latter being the definitive study.

[greymule]

I meant that meaningful data concerning injuries cannot be gathered.

Yes, I was agreeing with you. I'm going to check your links.

[LakeErieUmp]

There is this disclaimer smack in the middle of the Kettering study link:

[COLOR="Red"]Disclaimer: While the results were not published in peer-reviewed research journals until 2000-2001, the data for the Crisco-Greenwald batting cage study was collected during 1997-1998. The bats used in this study were manufactured before the NCAA implemented its current performance limits which restrict the performance of an aluminum bat through (i) the "minus-3" Length-weight rule, (ii) the BESR test (ball exit speed ratio), and (iii) the lower limit on moment-of-inertia. Thus, the bats used in this study are not representative of aluminum bats allowed for use at high school and college levels under current NCAA rules. None of the 5 aluminum bats in this study would be legal today. The batted-ball speeds measured in the Crisco-Greenwald study are significantly higher than batted-ball speeds obainted with bats which currently pass the NCAA performance standards. The data from the Crisco-Greenwald study should NOT be used to argue against the use of aluminum bats because this data does not represent the status of bat performance under current NCAA rules. No bat which currently passes the NCAA performance standards will perform as high as the best metal bats in the Crisco-Greenwald study.[/COLOR]

[Jim Porter]

Originally Posted by LakeErieUmp

There is this disclaimer smack in the middle of the Kettering study link:

Yes there is, concerning the Crisco-Greenwald study. But the NCAA length/weight rule does not significantly alter center-of-mass, moment-of-inertia, trampoline effect, or the distribution of mass -- all of which the Kettering study explains in detail.

[LakeErieUmp]

Yes, SA, it was red in the original. My computer skills are lacking!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Jim Porter

There is a certain umpire on this forum (I won't mention his name -- he can say who he is if he wants) with whom I worked an MSBL (28+) game in Massachusetts one day a couple of years ago. He was the base umpire in, "B," and had a rocket smashed at him off a metal bat.

He had no chance to get out of the way. The best he could do was turn slightly. The ball nailed him in the wallet -- as I recall it actually broke his credit cards and driver's license in half. He also said he had a pretty good welt there for days afterwards.

That never would've happened with a wooden bat. He would've had the time to avoid the ball had it come off a wooden bat.

There's little doubt in my mind that metal is more dangerous.

I have never seen a ball come off a bat hotter before or since. It's the only instance of batted ball umpire interference I've been involved with since I umpired my first game in 1983.

I had time to turn my *** cheek and that's it. The only reason my wallet was in my pocket in the first place was that we weren't in a terribly nice neighborhood, so my usual "leave keys, wallet, etc. in the car" didn't happen that day.

There's no way that ball comes off as hot with a wood bat.

I work and assign a 44-team wood bat league. If they ever go back to metal, I'd stop umpiring. All these 3-1, 4-3 ballgames over in 2:10 would be 12-10 3:30 slugfests. No thanks.

[lawump]

This post will likely add nothing to this thread, but here goes:

I was watching the USC vs. UNC super regional this w/e on TV. In either game 2 or 3, there was an inning were USC F8 and F9 made back-to-back spectacular catches.

Anyways, the catch made by F9 is the one that still sticks out in my mind. During live action, when the ball was hit I said to myself, "good pitch, he got it on the hands." I even thought to myself, the very next second, "its a metal bat it'll probably be caught at straight-away depth instead of in shallow right field."

Next thing I know, F9 is make a spectacular catch leaping and crashing into the outfield wall.

Now that's what's crazy about metal bats. I watched the replay several times, and my initial reaction was correct: contact with the pitch was made no where near the part of the bat we normally consider the "sweet spot". Nevertheless, it resulted in a near home-run and/or extra-base hit. If using a wood bat, I'm convinced the B/R would have been "sawed off" and it would have been a pop up in shallow right field...and the bat would have likely been broken.

As an umpire...safety issues aside (which can be debated forever)...this is why I hate metal bats. They cause games to go on forever, and frankly F1's who make a good quality pitch often still give up a hit.

[ozzy6900]

As far as wood vs metal bats, it doesn't matter what hit the ball when the ball hits you! It hurts, it causes damage and it can be deadly. But what is more amazing is how a person stands less than 60 feet away after releasing a projectile traveling 90 plus MPH toward another person swinging an object 70 plus MPH (in the opposite direction of the projectile) with intention of reversing that projectile at a comparable speed!

In other words, part of being a pitcher is knowing that you are in harm's way - that's a fact that you cannot dispute! What does matter is how quickly that projectile reaches the pitcher - and again the fact remains that metal bats can do this faster than a wood bat. That is why BESR was invented!?!

Regards

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by Jim Porter

Yep, Herb Score -- a Major League pitcher who was indeed struck in the face from a line drive off a wooden bat. Herb Score, who also recovered his full vision and returned to play professional baseball again.

Yeah, he recovered full vision, but his speech was affected. When broadcasting, he would say, "he hits a wong fwy ball to weft field."