PDA

View Full Version : Baseball Myths on Mythbusters

terpkristin
08-08-2007, 08:34 PM
Interesting episode so far.
.
.
.
spoiler space
.
.
.
So far, balls stored in humidors generally, all else being equal, fly shorter distances (somewhat intuitive). Also, corking your bat actually causes (again, all else being equal) the ball to come off your bat at a slower speed than a normal bat.

/tk
Crapshoot
08-08-2007, 08:35 PM
Without looking at the spoilers, I hope they highlight the corked-bat issue - another example of people not understanding the impact.
Pyser
08-08-2007, 08:37 PM
did that really need a spoiler tag?

anyone catch the onion this week where they did a story about how people were upset with the 7th harry potter book because it contained spoilers?
terpkristin
08-08-2007, 08:39 PM
did that really need a spoiler tag?

anyone catch the onion this week where they did a story about how people were upset with the 7th harry potter book because it contained spoilers?

eh. i figured better safe than sorry. didn't want to "ruin" it in case people wanted to get it from the show.

/tk
path12
08-08-2007, 08:39 PM
Have they busted the myth about Richie Sexson being able to hit?
sabotai
08-08-2007, 09:26 PM
Damn, I missed it. Guess I'll have to cross my fingers and hope I catch one of the 9000 replays they'll show of it.
Karlifornia
08-08-2007, 09:27 PM
Damn, I missed it. Guess I'll have to cross my fingers and hope I catch one of the 9000 replays they'll show of it.

lol
DanGarion
08-08-2007, 09:35 PM
I'm not watching it unless they prove that steroids actually make an impact on hitting homeruns.
stevew
08-08-2007, 09:38 PM
Hopefully they did a segment on Vernon Wells' 119 million dollar contract. .754 OPS....woot...
Abe Sargent
08-08-2007, 09:48 PM
I thought it was an okay episode.
NoMyths
08-08-2007, 10:05 PM
No myths!
Radii
08-08-2007, 10:16 PM
I enjoyed it, but Mythbusters is one of my favorite shows, so that's nothing new.
cuervo72
08-08-2007, 10:32 PM
Without looking at the spoilers, I hope they highlight the corked-bat issue - another example of people not understanding the impact.

Right - all about bat speed.
st.cronin
08-08-2007, 10:45 PM
Bat speed is part of it, there's also bat control. Its much easier to control a lighter bat.
gstelmack
08-09-2007, 08:49 AM
Bat speed is part of it, there's also bat control. Its much easier to control a lighter bat.

And they start off the episode by pointing out that there is nothing in the rules against using a lighter bat...
st.cronin
08-09-2007, 04:10 PM
And they start off the episode by pointing out that there is nothing in the rules against using a lighter bat...

Of course, a lighter legal bat is almost always a SMALLER bat, in terms of hitting area.
CU Tiger
08-10-2007, 07:05 PM
the thing I was most disappointed in was the hiting the cover off the ball.

they claim to have busted that one.

But... as many kids who grew up playing sandlot baseball can attest its very easily repeatable. just not with 1 hit. In days gone by a baseball wasnt replaced every pitch. in fact 5 balls were generally used for an entire series or more. So it wasnt 1 impact that blew the cover off but rather a series of impacts that weakened the stitching and 1 final impact that did it in.
CamEdwards
08-10-2007, 09:59 PM
TK,

Thanks for starting a thread on this. I meant to write earlier, but I got home from work and was able to catch the 1 a.m. replay of this episode. Very cool, and I would have missed it if not for you.
terpkristin
08-11-2007, 09:15 AM
TK,

Thanks for starting a thread on this. I meant to write earlier, but I got home from work and was able to catch the 1 a.m. replay of this episode. Very cool, and I would have missed it if not for you.

My pleasure. :) Glad to be of help every now and again. :)

/tk
gstelmack
08-11-2007, 10:15 AM
the thing I was most disappointed in was the hiting the cover off the ball.

they claim to have busted that one.

But... as many kids who grew up playing sandlot baseball can attest its very easily repeatable. just not with 1 hit. In days gone by a baseball wasnt replaced every pitch. in fact 5 balls were generally used for an entire series or more. So it wasnt 1 impact that blew the cover off but rather a series of impacts that weakened the stitching and 1 final impact that did it in.

Yeah, I think they misinterpreted it a bit. But they did a good job of showing what it takes with a new ball. It's not that interesting if you destroy all the stitching first as OF COURSE the cover will come off.

The humid ball tests were interesting. Stealing was interesting, although it overlooks the fact that sliding is often used to make it harder to tag you. As was the corked bat one where they showed it actually ABSORBS energy and hurts your hitting, although they should also have tested how much of a bat speed increase it generates. I suspect we'll get a "revisited" episode for many of these.
Toddzilla
08-11-2007, 04:46 PM
Fer crying out loud, it would have helped immeasurably if either one of those donkeys knew even the slightest thing about baseball. Sheesh.

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/1350/39120007tg9.jpg
saldana
08-12-2007, 11:50 AM
the only thing i was disappointed with was for the sliding vs stopping one, i would have liked if, after they tested from first to second, if they had then tested whether sliding into first is faster than running through the bag.
gstelmack
08-12-2007, 01:34 PM
the only thing i was disappointed with was for the sliding vs stopping one, i would have liked if, after they tested from first to second, if they had then tested whether sliding into first is faster than running through the bag.

Is that really debatable though?

Also might be worth checking the website, as they often leave a variety of tests off the actual show due to time. They may have tested it, found the blindingly obvious result, and focused on other issues.
saldana
08-12-2007, 07:40 PM
Is that really debatable though?

Also might be worth checking the website, as they often leave a variety of tests off the actual show due to time. They may have tested it, found the blindingly obvious result, and focused on other issues.

i think it is...they didnt prove any negative acceleration as a result of sliding...they proved it happened if you didnt slide...i would have liked to see if there was a difference between running through and sliding....i am pretty sure i know what the result would be, but the data would have been nice to see.
RPI-Fan
08-12-2007, 09:11 PM
Is that really debatable though?

Also might be worth checking the website, as they often leave a variety of tests off the actual show due to time. They may have tested it, found the blindingly obvious result, and focused on other issues.

It must be debatable, as you still see big-leaguers occasionally slide into first on groundballs with no apparant throwing error.