Chris Rowly GDT: Toronto Bluebirds vs Pittsburgh Freebooters. 1.07pm.

[Omar]

Wow....after Refs blunders yesterday guess we're due.

[John_Havok]

Probably best to have him as like the number 8 guy. If they go into the year with him as a 5 the team is in a lot of trouble.

 

I guess I'm coming from the POV of next year being a transition year, not one where they think they'll be contending. Unless there are some pretty monumental moves that get this team significantly younger, I don't see 2018 going much differently than this year

[John_Havok]

Yup. Roids give as much as a 5% increase in bat speed as well

 

Source?

[Abomination]

I guess I'm coming from the POV of next year being a transition year, not one where they think they'll be contending. Unless there are some pretty monumental moves that get this team significantly younger, I don't see 2018 going much differently than this year

 

A blister free Sanchez, a mostly healthy season from Travis, and the addition of Otani, would help a ton.

[John_Havok]

A blister free Sanchez, a mostly healthy season from Travis, and the addition of Otani, would help a ton.

 

Well, both Travis being injury free and an Otani addition would indeed be monumental.

[Omar]

Source?

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/3967fe78-e7f2-99df-3d122bd4d1ae028b/

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/14/sports/baseball-taking-a-swing-with-steroids.html

 

http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2005/01/baseball_yes_st.php

[Bobthe4th]

A blister free Sanchez, a mostly healthy season from Travis, and the addition of Otani, would help a ton.

 

JD either being healthy or traded for a haul too.

[John_Havok]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/3967fe78-e7f2-99df-3d122bd4d1ae028b/

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/14/sports/baseball-taking-a-swing-with-steroids.html

 

http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2005/01/baseball_yes_st.php

 

None of those links provide any evidence, just speculation.

 

And don't get me wrong. I agree with the logic that more muscle could increase bat speed, but the 5% number is just an educated guess.

[Omar]

None of those links provide any evidence, just speculation.

 

And don't get me wrong. I agree with the logic that more muscle could increase bat speed, but the 5% number is just an educated guess.

 

Force = Mass x Accelleration Look at obp and ba and hits of players on roids that also went up along with home runs.

 

''Steroids make your hands faster in that they increase muscle in your forearms and pectorals and numerous muscle sets involved in hitting a baseball,'' said Dr. Charles Yesalis, professor of health and human development at Penn State.

 

If we dont believe experts well then....

Edited August 12, 2017 by Omar

[EdwinsParrot]

GG

 

Lmao gibby at the end there

[Bobthe4th]

GG

 

Lmao gibby at the end there

 

Haha thought the same

 

"Hey congrats pal"

[Spanky99]

Atta boys Birds! GO Indians Go!!!

[jays4life19]

Atta boys Birds! GO Indians Go!!!

 

Huge Indians game tonight! I'll be watching.

[Spanky99]

Huge Indians game tonight! I'll be watching.

 

Same.

[burlingtonbandit]

I guess I'm coming from the POV of next year being a transition year, not one where they think they'll be contending. Unless there are some pretty monumental moves that get this team significantly younger, I don't see 2018 going much differently than this year

 

If they don't think they will contend they should trade a bunch of guys. Everything they've done points to them not blowing it up.

[wk680]

Nice debut for Rowley. Obviously would have been even better with a catcher who can properly receive the pitches. Hopefully he can provide some of that much needed pitching depth in 2018 and who knows maybe even a bit more........

[John_Havok]

Force = Mass x Accelleration Look at obp and ba and hits of players on roids that also went up along with home runs.

 

''Steroids make your hands faster in that they increase muscle in your forearms and pectorals and numerous muscle sets involved in hitting a baseball,'' said Dr. Charles Yesalis, professor of health and human development at Penn State.

 

If we dont believe experts well then....

 

Did you miss the part where I said I agree with the logic but just don't see where they're pulling the 5% from?

[Omar]

Did you miss the part where I said I agree with the logic but just don't see where they're pulling the 5% from?

 

Hey man I'm trying to not come across as pedantic but did you check and listen to the first link in Scientific American where they state that Prof Tobin's work is the result of in depth number crunching? It's not speculative.

 

The physics and physiological research can be summed up as 10% muscle mass increase leads to up to 5% increase in bat speed which correlates to a 4% inrease in exit velocity.

 

An excerpt:

 

Tobin initially argues that a 10 percent increase inmuscle mass leads to the batter supplying a 10 percentgreater force to the bat, resulting in a 5 percent increasein bat speed. The argument is essentially oneof energy conservation, where the work done by thebatter in applying a force to the bat over a fixed distanceis converted to kinetic energy of the bat. Since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the velocity,a 10 percent greater force leads to a 5 percenti ncrease in bat speed. In a “Note added in proof,”Tobin revises his estimate downward to 3.8 percent,based on Robert K. Adair’s argument that the workprovided by the muscles is converted to kinetic energythat is shared between the bat and some fractionof the body mass of the batter, mainly the arms.2 Theessential point is that both the bat and the batter’sarms are moving. Therefore not all of the work providedby the body muscles goes into kinetic energy inthe bat, and a fraction must also go into kinetic energyof the body. In an unpublished article that I haveposted on my website,3 I have estimated that onlyabout half the kinetic energy goes into the bat. Withthe additional assumption that half of the batter’s presteroidweight is muscle, Tobin and I both agree that a10 percent increase in muscle mass can lead to abouta 3.8 percent increase in bat speed.

[Spanky99]

Did you miss the part where I said I agree with the logic but just don't see where they're pulling the 5% from?

 

JH... you came across as he pulled it out of his ass, and now has pulled said links, out of his ass! You kind of got REKT, imo. Sorry man... Omar was a boss.

[John_Havok]

Hey man I'm trying to not come across as pedantic but did you check and listen to the first link in Scientific American where they state that Prof Tobin's work is the result of in depth number crunching? It's not speculative.

 

The physics and physiological research can be summed up as 10% muscle mass increase leads to up to 5% increase in bat speed which correlates to a 4% inrease in exit velocity.

 

An excerpt:

 

Tobin initially argues that a 10 percent increase inmuscle mass leads to the batter supplying a 10 percentgreater force to the bat, resulting in a 5 percent increasein bat speed. The argument is essentially oneof energy conservation, where the work done by thebatter in applying a force to the bat over a fixed distanceis converted to kinetic energy of the bat. Since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the velocity,a 10 percent greater force leads to a 5 percenti ncrease in bat speed. In a “Note added in proof,”Tobin revises his estimate downward to 3.8 percent,based on Robert K. Adair’s argument that the workprovided by the muscles is converted to kinetic energythat is shared between the bat and some fractionof the body mass of the batter, mainly the arms.2 Theessential point is that both the bat and the batter’sarms are moving. Therefore not all of the work providedby the body muscles goes into kinetic energy inthe bat, and a fraction must also go into kinetic energyof the body. In an unpublished article that I haveposted on my website,3 I have estimated that onlyabout half the kinetic energy goes into the bat. Withthe additional assumption that half of the batter’s presteroidweight is muscle, Tobin and I both agree that a10 percent increase in muscle mass can lead to abouta 3.8 percent increase in bat speed.

 

Right, theory. And the theory is not supported by actual data, just by math and their own estimations.

 

So again, I point out that what they have is a theory, and not proof. His article is unpublished and therefore not peer reviewed. It's educated guessing

[John_Havok]

JH... you came across as he pulled it out of his ass, and now has pulled said links, out of his ass! You kind of got REKT, imo. Sorry man... Omar was a boss.

 

Read it Spanky. The whole thing. They(the supporting links) pulled 5% out if their ass. Their own article guessed that it might be as high as 3.8% assuming more than a few estimes and guesswork is correct.

 

It's not legit. It's educated guesswork.

[Omar]

Right, theory. And the theory is not supported by actual data, just by math and their own estimations.

 

So again, I point out that what they have is a theory, and not proof. His article is unpublished and therefore not peer reviewed. It's educated guessing

 

The article was published in the American journal of Physics in 2008....a peer reviewed publication. I have the copy in my basement somewhere and you're tempting me to go on a scavenger hunt.

 

Where do you get the it is not supported by actual data? just math?

[Spanky99]

Read it Spanky. The whole thing. They(the supporting links) pulled 5% out if their ass. Their own article guessed that it might be as high as 3.8% assuming more than a few estimes and guesswork is correct.

 

It's not legit. It's educated guesswork.

 

Well, if it didn't pander to usefulness, it would be allowed. Something here, doesn't compute. See ball hit ball is a skill. that's why I agree, Bonds is the best ever.

[Omar]

The article was published in the American journal of Physics in 2008....a peer reviewed publication. I have the copy in my basement somewhere and you're tempting me to go on a scavenger hunt.

 

Where do you get the it is not supported by actual data? just math?

 

It was also published in the Baseball Research Journal a year later in 2009.

[bones10]

Well, if it didn't pander to usefulness, it would be allowed. Something here, doesn't compute.

 

Steroids are illegal for public consumption arent they?

[Spanky99]

Steroids are illegal for public consumption arent they?

 

lol... whoosh!

[John_Havok]

The article was published in the American journal of Physics in 2008....a peer reviewed publication. I have the copy in my basement somewhere and you're tempting me to go on a scavenger hunt.

 

Where do you get the it is not supported by actual data? just math?

 

If you find the article and show me they tested actual players batspeed per and post steroid, I'll concede defeat.

 

As I said from the get go, I agree with premise that more muscle mass should equal more bat speed. My only point of contention is the 5% you posted, and the article you posted for support itself initially said 5%, but was then revised and only came up with 3.8%, and that final number came down to multiple assumptions, including estimates on how much kinetic energy was tranferred and how much presteroid weight is muscle mass. Those assumptions would have to be 100% accurate for 3.8% to be factually correct.

 

That's my point. It's a guess. Educated... but still a guess.

[John_Havok]

Well, if it didn't pander to usefulness, it would be allowed. Something here, doesn't compute. See ball hit ball is a skill. that's why I agree, Bonds is the best ever.

 

They touched on it in some of his links. Pretty much everyone on steroids said they felt invincible while using. It's also proven to help muscle recovery.

[Spanky99]

If you find the article and show me they tested actual players batspeed per and post steroid, I'll concede defeat.

 

As I said from the get go, I agree with premise that more muscle mass should equal more bat speed. My only point of contention is the 5% you posted, and the article you posted for support itself only came up with 3.8%, and that final number came down to multiple assumptions, includimg as estimate on how j7ch energy was tranferred and how much presteroid weight is muscle mass.

 

That's my point. It's a guess. Educated... but still a guess.

 

If you find the article and show me they tested actual players batspeed per and post steroid, I'll concede defeat.

 

How is that possible?

[Omar]

For further reading check out

 

The Physics of Baseball by Prof Robert Adair (chapter 6 is about bat weight, bat speed and presents in precis form the where the up to 5% number comes from.

 

https://www.amazon.ca/Physics-Baseball-Revised-Updated-Expanded/dp/0060084367

 

....only if you like math, science and unsupported theories.