NASA and riseballs

[Lefty's Dad]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Sorry

[Hitmechanic]

Hitmechanic... Anyway.. I do not think a 1700 RPM softball spin is humanly possible.

I read a good fastball pitcher develops 1800 rpm at 100 mph and the ball rotates 16 times to the plate. I didn’t have any data on a softball. I’m with you; I see the ball jump also. The pitch may jump because the uneven laces create erratic lifts? But the pitch needs more lift force to rise.

My bad...I was thinking 1700 RPS.

[Hitmechanic]

It is my understanding that to throw a "rise ball" (i.e. "ski slope rise", not a angular low-to-high fast ball), the toss would have to be 75 MPH with a 88 RPM backspin. I also understand only three people in the world have been documented as accomplishing this toss. Two males and one female. The "King" did it and I forgot who the other two were.

You are probably remembering the right number, but the wrong acronym. 88 RPS (revolutions per SECOND, not per minute). Or roughly 5500 RPM. Which I understand is about what it is required to overcome the 7oz lift requirement that nohesitation laid out in his post above.

(88 RPM would be less than 1 revolution in the 0.45 second flight of a typical FP riseball).

The 1700rpm is about the outer envelope for a female ptcher. 1200-1500 is more typical for good pitchers. Probably could quibble on this a littl, but whatever - it isn't going to get anywhere close to 5500.

Best regards,

Scott

I'm pretty sure you can get up to 5492RPMs if your DD uses one of those fancy schmancy balls on a stick.....

Okay Sam...let's keep it clean...LOL!

[nohesitation]

The pitch may jump because the uneven laces create erratic lifts? But the pitch needs more lift force to rise.

If it did, there would be way to hide it from profile angle video.

When I said jump I meant to the side. Like a curve or screw movement. You couldn’t see that movement from profile, only from the top and/or really good behind the plate. Sometimes the ball breaks early in the curve sometimes late, and sometimes it slides, but the jump is like the ball is trying to curve but it gives up and flattens out . The cork screw fastball has that jump. They use the lift term for curve forces also, Quote from the NASA site:
“For a curve ball, the direction of the lift force is used to move the ball parallel to the surface of the earth, from side to side.”

[ssarge]

When I said jump I meant to the side. Like a curve or screw movement. You couldn’t see that movement from profile, only from the top and/or really good behind the plate. Sometimes the ball breaks early in the curve sometimes late, and sometimes it slides, but the jump is like the ball is trying to curve but it gives up and flattens out . The cork screw fastball has that jump. They use the lift term for curve forces also, Quote from the NASA site:
“For a curve ball, the direction of the lift force is used to move the ball parallel to the surface of the earth, from side to side.”

OK, I gotcha. You're right, the good ones do move laterally. However, lateral spin (as opposed to "pure" backspin) will further limit the upward lift. Everything is a tradeoff, I guess.

Best regards,

Scott

[Intel]

Ask your really smart NASA expert to give you the calculation and the physics for when you hold a cat in the air with their back to the ground and you let go, why the cat does not land on their back. The answer is their no equation that can determine how a cat lands on its feet. Then go home raise the cat and drop it and watch it land on its feet.

In the 1980's engineers at MIT, Caltech and NASA determined with the help of some CRAY4 super computers that a phase radar was mathematic impossibility. In 1987 the Soviet Union deployed the first phase radar system in East Germany.

The point is simple, not everything can be defined by a law of physics or mathematic equation.

[ssarge]

The point is simple, not everything can be defined by a law of physics or mathematic equation.

Yeah, maybe, though things like lift are pretty well understood. Got us to the moon and back.

But ignoring all THAT - it's still really hard to argue with the profile angle video. Gotta WANT to believe to do that, IMO. As opposed to just accepting the fairly obvious conclusion that there is at least some illusion effect when the ball is coming at you.

(And at the very least, the discourse on this topic over the past 2-3 years has seen the nature of the argument change. The widely held belief a few years ago was that the best riseballs went up like they were climbing an elevator shaft. Or hopped over the bat like the ball was made of flubber. Now the argument is more like the fluttering of the seams, etc.)

In my mind, the ILLUSION makes the ball even harder to hit. I'd personally prefer to hit a ball that is REALLY rising then one which gives the appearance of rising. It seems to me that reality - whatever it may be - is easier to perform against than something imagined.

So if I was a riseball pitcher, I'd REVEL in this. Often doesn't seem to be the response though.

Best regards,

Scott

[nohesitation]

Ask your really smart NASA expert to give you the calculation and the physics for when you hold a cat in the air with their back to the ground and you let go, why the cat does not land on their back. The answer is their no equation that can determine how a cat lands on its feet. Then go home raise the cat and drop it and watch it land on its feet.

In the 1980's engineers at MIT, Caltech and NASA determined with the help of some CRAY4 super computers that a phase radar was mathematic impossibility. In 1987 the Soviet Union deployed the first phase radar system in East Germany.

The point is simple, not everything can be defined by a law of physics or mathematic equation.

I’ve committed softball heresies. Maybe I should burn all my emails. Or start writing backwards using a mirror to hide the text. Maybe ssarg and I should have discussed pitch angle discreetly. If you follow the threads back to Baseball vs. Softball you will see I was questioning ssard also, pertaining to the rise ball. Before we start sacrificing any cats to question ballistic flight, I suggest we go in this direction. The real question now is regarding optimum swing angle. It seems the bat must follow the angle of the pitch, to maximize good contact. Lets assume most pitches enter the strike zone at 5 to 10 deg angle. That would mean that the swing should mimic that angle? However, going back to ballistic flight, the optimum angle for the furthest distance is 45 deg. Now you have created another problem, swinging at 45 deg angle is going to make it tough to make contact. So do you compromise optimum distance and swing at 35 deg.? 20 deg.? 10 deg.? Hitters with good foot speed 5 degs? Hitters with medium foot speed 10 deg.?, and the rest 20 deg.? I’am finding it hard to make a good argument for the level swing, (except for riseballs thrown up in the zone at 80mph or whatever). Unless you like grounders. Also I know all this heated discussion pertains to swing mechanics. There is a lot of talented instructors teaching hitting and they all have good reasons with experience guiding them. The hot buzz words are rotational, linear, baseball vs. softball swings, level swing, down swing, up swing.
Let me end with a quote from Ted Williams; The Science of hitting,
“ If there is such a thing as a science in sport, hitting a baseball is it. As with any science, there are fundamentals, certain tenets of hitting every good batting coach could tell you. But it is not an exact science. Much of it has been poorly defined, or not defined at all, and some things have been told wrong for years.
The consequence is a collection of mistaken ideas that batters parrot around. I know because I’m as guilty as the next guy.”

[slider201]

In the 1980's engineers at MIT, Caltech and NASA determined with the help of some CRAY4 super computers that a phase radar was mathematic impossibility. In 1987 the Soviet Union deployed the first phase radar system in East Germany.

My dad was working on phase array radar in 1963 for the U.S. He has a U.S. patent on it. They had to wear BA masks to work on it due the arsenic vapors given off by new things called transistors. U.S. had it a lot earlier than 1987.

[Intel]

The radars yes, the controls no. Everyone knew from the late 50's that phase radars were possible, controlling the intersections was the draw back.