The Physics of Baseball

beatleadam writes "After seeing Randy Johnson of the Arizona Diamondbacks pitch a perfect game (coverage here), I searched Slashdot in the hopes of reading more about what the Slashdot readers thought of this feat of athleticism and science and to learn more about the physics of baseball (More information to be found here and here). As nothing was posted, I submit for your viewing pleasure a "course" in the Physics of Baseball and the subtle science that is pitching."

Red Sox Fan

[_PimpDaddy7_]

Ask any Red Sox fan about baseball, they will tell you laws of physics do not apply as the Bambino curse is the ONLY law in the land of Boston Red Sox :)

As a sidenote, watch the movie Still We Believe for an inside view of how Boston fans related to the Boston Red Sox.

And the only people who can really relate to us are Chicago Cubs fans.

Accelerating

[WhatsAProGingrass]

In one of the many links.
"The ball is still traveling along an almost straight line, and it may even still be accelerating."

Now I understand that when a ball slows down, its accelerating in a negative direction (Depending on your view I guess). But i'm pretty sure they are talking about the ball going faster and faster as it travels. With my limitied knowledge of physics, I don't see how a ball can just accelerate with no force applied to it.

Re:A perfect game?

[kalidasa]

Nope. That would be a sort of Sidd Finch Zen ultra-perfect game. In The Curious Case of Sidd Finch, the title character, an American brought up on a Buddhist monastery who pitches 130 mph fast balls, pitches one game: 80 strikes. He walks off the mound before throwing the last strike to complete the game, as a kind of Zen gesture.

Re:Forget baseball.

[TopShelf]

The most interesting physics phenomenon in hockey has got to be the slapshot. Watch one in slow motion, and you'll see the shooter strike the ice with the blade of his stick several inches before the puck. As the motion continues, the stick bends backwards, building up tension that is released on the follow-through. Together with a wrist-roll that keeps the blade in contact with the puck for a longer period of time, you get a tremendous transfer of energy that launches a 100-mph whirling dervish at the net. The most amazing thing is the aim that top snipers achieve while doing all this.

Cameron judges balls differently

[sabernar]

Mike Cameron on the Mets does it differently. He's trained himself since a very early age to see the ball off the bat and then estimate where it will land. He then runs as fast as he can to that spot, and lo and behold the ball is there for him. He doesn't actually watch the ball in flight, but he knows where it will land quicker than other outfielders. That's why he's far and away the best centerfielder (and outfielder in general) in baseball.

Re:Baseball happens in the real world...

[aliens]

Ugh they're also the most highly addicting!

Me: "Sure I'll join your little fantasy league, I don't know baseball all that much but I like stats"

Me (2 months later): "Oh dear god who do I start? This batter is better under windy conditions against this pitcher when the announcer has more barritone voice, but the other is batting .400!"

Perfect games more common now than before

[call -151]

There is an interesting NYT op-ed [nytimes.com] today noting that perfect games seem to be more common now.
From 1900-1960, there were four; since then, there have been 11. Michael Coffey attributes the increase to:

• More emphasis on individual performance in the post-1975 free-agency era and greater media coverage overall
  
• The expansion of the number of teams to thin out hitting talent.
  

Apparently, when Cy Young pitched his perfect game in 1904, he wasn't even aware until the last out that he had a perfect game going (the term in fact did not even exist at the time.) These days, if someone takes a perfect game into the sixth inning, it's mentioned on all the broadcasts of the other games and on any of the "sports news" programs that are on at the time.

It's not clear if these are the most important contributing factors but I think these are some reasonable points.

Re:Perfect games more common now than before

[Fearless Freep]

The expansion of the number of teams to thin out hitting talent.

I keep hearing expansion being used to explain why there are more homeruns and less complete games due to thinning pitching talent

From 1900-1960, there were four; since then, there have been 11. Michael Coffey attributes the increase to:

And Nolan Ryan got seven of those eleven, so I don't think it really says anything

Re:Baseball happens in the real world...

[hackstraw]

I'm not sure if I agree. Basketball has lots of stats as well. So does football, and tennis has gotten pretty cool with the overlay plots of serves and points won.

The difference is that baseball is much slower and they have time to spit out a bunch of numbers at you to fill time. Also, baseball is a _very_ superstitious behavior from a psychological point of view. The stats can be viewed as part of the superstition. From this link [essortment.com]:

B.F. Skinner, a famous psychologist, demonstrated that you can create superstitious behavior in animals. When an animal is placed in a Skinner box, that contains a device which can automatically dispense food and food is given to the animal every five minutes regardless what the animal does; the animal will typically develop a superstitious behavior. This will occur when for example the animal happens to pick up its right foot just as food is delivered: the animal will then repeat this behavior, which will be intermittently reinforced. In this manner the superstitious behavior will become well established.

Baseball is filled with random reinforcers which contributes to the superstitious behaviour. You have ppl, doing all of these nervous ticks, spitting, scratching, hand signals, random fights, wiggling around at the plate and mound, and apparently the numbers at the bottom of the screen have affected you and others as well.

Cricket Bowling

[pavon]

On a realated note the economist recently had an interesting article [economist.com] about cricket and recent controversy over one of the more important rules - the bowler (pitcher) is not allowed to straighten his arm when delivering the ball. Some are claiming that new bowlers are breaking this rule and other question whether the rule itself might actually contradict physics. Being an American who didn't know much about cricket I found the article to be thouroughly amusing. That game could never exist here in the states.

Re:A perfect game?

[CFTM]

If my memory serves me, I believe SI actually published an article about Sidd Finch 15-20 years ago. It was right around April Fools Day so its authenticity is up for speculation but he has become something of an American Folk Legend ... even if he is a brit :)

"Interception math"

[Reziac]

A few people, and some dogs (most individuals of the Retriever breeds) have an innate talent for being able to intercept an object on the fly. Others (most people, and most dogs outside of the Retrievers) have to learn the skill, and may or may not be able to learn it to a useful degree. It's as if some brains process the "interception math" (essentially trigonometry) automagically, others don't have the talent but can learn it as a skill, and still others can't see the math at all.

I've noticed that having this skill is very much true with the best outfielders -- they don't have to stand there eyeballing the descending ball, they just run to the spot and there it is. Same with wide receivers in football, perhaps even more so since the QB often throws on the run, whereas the batted baseball comes from a known position (as Satchel Paige said, "Home plate don't move").

In fact, one could apply this to anything in sports that involves intercepting moving objects of variable trajectories, and distinguish the good from the great by their ability to use it. Positions like shortstop, where the batted ball can be on you in a fraction of a second, likely need even more of an innate talent for "interception math".

Re:Diving for a ball

[cens0r]

Of course, if you're ozzie smith you just reach behind your body in mid dive with your bare hand and grab the ball on a weird hop, land, bounce up, and throw the guy out. Still the greatest thing I've ever seen in baseball.

Sliding

[blair1q]

One of the links says:

"Does sliding help a runner to get to second base any faster? Of course not."

And then goes on to almost figure out that yes, it does.

Sliding allows the runner to run faster until he's very near the base. But he's going so fast he'll go past it if he doesn't slide. The steeper his deceleration, the longer he was going at full speed, and the shorter his total time getting to the base. That's the part the link forgot.

If he could reliably collide with the fielder to shed his inertia, he'd do that, instead, because it'd allow him full speed until he's right on the base.

Re:Red Sox Fan

[Galvatron]

(the first rule of being a Mets or Red Sox fan is that you hate the Yankees)

This kind of thing has always made me wonder why Giants and A's fans have such an amiable relationship.

Adair has the slider wrong

[andykuan]

I love the Adair book except that he got the slider wrong. A slider is thrown like a football -- it should have a tight spiral the axis of rotation of which is down and away from batters (assuming righty on righty). Hitters are told to look for a "red dot" (seen at the near end of the rotational axis) in order to spot an incoming slider.