The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Baseball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 04, 2009, 03:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Cool

Well, this should be fun this season. From the IHSA (Illinois) website:

Quote:
1/23 Illegal BAts

Boys Baseball

Coaches,

It is very important that you notify your baseball players that two bats have the BESR certification but are illegal by rule since they are not round on the handle. The Vendeta bat has a square spot in the handle and the Vector has holes in the handle that created a flat spot and both bats have been identified by the NFHS as Illegal bats.
JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 04, 2009, 08:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Jerry City, Ohio
Posts: 394
In Ohio we are lucky to have Kyle McNeely (chair of NF Baseball Rles Committee) to go to for answers. I talked with him last week at our state rules interpreters meeting.

Mattingly bat: Legal

Reebok Vector O: Illegal. Only because Reebok failed to present the bat to BESR certification committee. Reebok was notified on Thursday January 22 by NF rules committee the bat was illegal.

DeMarini Vendetta: Illegal. The handle is not smooth, nor cylindical. It has raised rails.

Additionally, those of you who have said the "smooth, cylider" part of bat definition only applies to the barrel are dead wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 04, 2009, 08:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
The only reason for all of this horse$&it is to make sure that us officials don't ever run out of anything to argue about among ourselves.

Last edited by Kevin Finnerty; Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 09:00pm.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 05, 2009, 10:22am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl H. Long View Post
In Ohio we are lucky to have Kyle McNeely (chair of NF Baseball Rles Committee) to go to for answers. I talked with him last week at our state rules interpreters meeting.

Mattingly bat: Legal

Reebok Vector O: Illegal. Only because Reebok failed to present the bat to BESR certification committee. Reebok was notified on Thursday January 22 by NF rules committee the bat was illegal.

DeMarini Vendetta: Illegal. The handle is not smooth, nor cylindical. It has raised rails.

Additionally, those of you who have said the "smooth, cylider" part of bat definition only applies to the barrel are dead wrong.
Is the NFHS going to issue this to the states? I talked with my State Director yesterday and he said we were going to wait on something from NFHS. He is not going to declare them legal or illegal until/unless NFHS does.
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 05, 2009, 05:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Dover, DE
Posts: 103
Send a message via Yahoo to Delaware Blue
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daryl H. Long View Post
In Ohio we are lucky to have Kyle McNeely (chair of NF Baseball Rles Committee) to go to for answers. I talked with him last week at our state rules interpreters meeting.

Mattingly bat: Legal

Reebok Vector O: Illegal. Only because Reebok failed to present the bat to BESR certification committee. Reebok was notified on Thursday January 22 by NF rules committee the bat was illegal.

DeMarini Vendetta: Illegal. The handle is not smooth, nor cylindical. It has raised rails.
I just saw a memo written on NFHS letterhead dated today (February 5) that was sent to Member State Association Executive Directors. It states that both the DeMarini Vendetta and the Reebok Vector "...have been found rule-compliant by the NFHS for use in high school baseball..."
__________________
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 05, 2009, 06:52pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delaware Blue View Post
I just saw a memo written on NFHS letterhead dated today (February 5) that was sent to Member State Association Executive Directors. It states that both the DeMarini Vendetta and the Reebok Vector "...have been found rule-compliant by the NFHS for use in high school baseball..."
$ound$ like they've been approved for use by the NFH$
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 05, 2009, 08:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Dover, DE
Posts: 103
Send a message via Yahoo to Delaware Blue
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty
$ound$ like they've been approved for use by the NFH$
Came from our high school Interscholastic Athletic Association State Director by way of my association president. Sure looked official to me.
__________________
Bill
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old Thu Feb 05, 2009, 08:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY state
Posts: 1,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delaware Blue View Post
Came from our high school Interscholastic Athletic Association State Director by way of my association president. Sure looked official to me.

Okay...the chair of the FED rules committee rules the bats illegal and a piece of FED letterhead states that the bats are legal.

I hope y'all don't mind some of us waiting until FED speaks with one voice,
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 01:33am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Mill, SC
Posts: 770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Finnerty View Post
$ound$ like they've been approved for use by the NFH$
You mi$$ed one. I gue$$ the NFH$ didn't get a$ much a$ they wanted.
__________________
Andrew Senger
Webmaster: RefVB.com
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 06:06am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Dover, DE
Posts: 103
Send a message via Yahoo to Delaware Blue
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrUmpire View Post
Okay...the chair of the FED rules committee rules the bats illegal and a piece of FED letterhead states that the bats are legal.

I hope y'all don't mind some of us waiting until FED speaks with one voice,
What I saw came from Elliot Hopkins. I believe he is the NFHS director of educational services and liaison to the Baseball Rules Committee.
__________________
Bill

Last edited by Delaware Blue; Fri Feb 06, 2009 at 06:17am.
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 09:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Legal?

I also posted this on NFHS forum: Can you please show some documentation that this is correct? I cannot find anything on the FED website or anywhere else that this is correct.
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 09:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,895
I can't wait to let a kid use one.
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old Fri Feb 06, 2009, 01:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 685
Response

The New York State Baseball Umpires Assn has posted a notice on their web site saying the message is from FED.

Kevin, the bat is so expensive, some schools and parents may buy it and then not let anyone use it at that price.
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 12:51am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 329
Well, it's a little slow here on a Friday night, so.....

A couple of pages back, dash_riprock suggested that adding holes to the Reebok bat was silly. MTD. Sr. took him to task, asserting that dash hadn't learned fluid mechanics. dash invited MTD to provide a calculation of drag, but instead got a (wrong) explanation of ball-bat collisions.

Dash was right-- there is little benefit to adding holes to the bat handle. The drag on a cylinder is proportional to the area times the velocity squared. Since the handle moves roughly at 1/3 the speed of the barrel, and the area is perhaps 1/10 that of the barrel, in rough terms the air resistance of the handle is about 1% that of the barrel. Reducing that 1% to perhaps 0.8% is a very small effect.

And the ball-bat collision stuff? MTD starts with the assertion that the collision is elastic. But it isn't. A baseball has a coefficient of restitution of around 0.45 at typical collision velocities, and is limited by rule to 0.565 at 60 mph (less than bunting speed). All the subsequent discussion of conservation of energy and momentum, and sums of velocities is inappropriate for inelastic ball-bat collisions.

Finally, this assertion: "The mass of the bat is much greater that the mass of the ball and it only takes a small increase in a bat's velocity to greatly effect the amount of momentum transfered from the bat to the ball." is way wrong.

If the collision were elastic, a 1 mph increase in bat speed would give a 2 mph increase in ball exit speed. But since the COR is about 1/2, the actual effect is 1 mph in bat speed gives about 1 mph in ball exit speed.
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old Sat Feb 07, 2009, 12:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,057
Send a message via Yahoo to UmpJM
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Reed View Post
Well, it's a little slow here on a Friday night, so.....

A couple of pages back, dash_riprock suggested that adding holes to the Reebok bat was silly. MTD. Sr. took him to task, asserting that dash hadn't learned fluid mechanics. dash invited MTD to provide a calculation of drag, but instead got a (wrong) explanation of ball-bat collisions.

Dash was right-- there is little benefit to adding holes to the bat handle. The drag on a cylinder is proportional to the area times the velocity squared. Since the handle moves roughly at 1/3 the speed of the barrel, and the area is perhaps 1/10 that of the barrel, in rough terms the air resistance of the handle is about 1% that of the barrel. Reducing that 1% to perhaps 0.8% is a very small effect.

And the ball-bat collision stuff? MTD starts with the assertion that the collision is elastic. But it isn't. A baseball has a coefficient of restitution of around 0.45 at typical collision velocities, and is limited by rule to 0.565 at 60 mph (less than bunting speed). All the subsequent discussion of conservation of energy and momentum, and sums of velocities is inappropriate for inelastic ball-bat collisions.

Finally, this assertion: "The mass of the bat is much greater that the mass of the ball and it only takes a small increase in a bat's velocity to greatly effect the amount of momentum transfered from the bat to the ball." is way wrong.

If the collision were elastic, a 1 mph increase in bat speed would give a 2 mph increase in ball exit speed. But since the COR is about 1/2, the actual effect is 1 mph in bat speed gives about 1 mph in ball exit speed.
Oddly, I think I actually understood (sorta' ) what Dave Reed said here, and found his argument compelling.

Nicely done.

JM
__________________
Finally, be courteous, impartial and firm, and so compel respect from all.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DeMarini Bats Ed Maeder Softball 10 Fri Apr 27, 2007 02:05pm
New Demarini on ASA's Banned List IRISHMAFIA Softball 10 Mon Mar 22, 2004 04:24pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1