Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

Did Pitchers of Yesteryear Throw With "Much Less" Velocity Than They Do Today?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by davewashere View Post
    LOL. What's really interesting is that there's evidence humans are capable of running considerably faster than that. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/wuss_men/
    Let me first make this clear, I don't doubt that Bolt or some one else could run even faster.
    But this guy has to be kidding, he can tell the speed or that aboriginal man by his foot prints, are you buying, I'm not.

    Comment


    • I haven't read the article but yest you can compute the speed of a creature based on the footprints.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Ubiquitous View Post
        I haven't read the article but yest you can compute the speed of a creature based on the footprints.
        I'm speaking of this particular case, 20,000 years ago.Figures for speed are arrived at by " estimating" leg length by foot size, key word estimating and also factoring in stride length.

        Obviously stride length can be measured with accuracy but leg length is an estimate, not accurate enough to measure a number, speed.

        In the past this method has been used to "estimate" speed of some dinosaurs. In some cases after a speed was reached it was noted that it might not be accurate because the leg length of that dinosaur could not be certain.

        I'm not accepting, his conclusion, could be slower could be faster than the number he gives.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by davewashere View Post
          LOL. What's really interesting is that there's evidence humans are capable of running considerably faster than that. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/19/wuss_men/
          What was so ironic is that just 21 days after that post regarding running 100 meters Usain Bolt broke the 100 m world record.
          Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
            What was so ironic is that just 21 days after that post regarding running 100 meters Usain Bolt broke the 100 m world record.
            This guy is on another planet, all by himself.
            When he's out there it seems the only real race is for second place.

            Comment


            • Does anyone have any detailed info on the design of the apparatus that timed Bob Feller at 98.6 mph? From what I understand they used army ordinance equipment called the Sky Screen Chronograph. It was designed to measure the velocity of artillery shells. From what I've found from Internet sources this device had an accuracy of 1/10,000th of second. But here is the kicker. The 98.6 mph reading is supposed to be the velocity as the ball crossed home plate! Doesn't a baseball lose about 8 mph from when the ball leaves the pitcher's hand to when it crosses home plate? That would imply that Feller threw that pitch at about 106-107 mph.
              Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 03-05-2010, 02:11 PM.
              Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

              Comment


              • Thats true. I saw a test (data) run on W.Johnson by a bullet mfgr (I think) that yielded results in feet per second which calculated out to a value below 90 mph, but that too was not likely the initial velocity. I believe that I posted the details on this somewhere here. I will see if I can dig that out.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bill Burgess View Post
                  There are few ways to measure velocity, but every once in a while, there occurs other ways. For example:

                  Batters facing Walter Johnson often alleged that they could not actually see the ball. Umpire Billy Evans admitted that even he couldn't tell if the ball was crossing the plate or not. Quite an admission.

                  Batters often admitted that they couldn't tell if they were swinging over the ball, under the ball, or anything. Even Babe Ruth told of his first AB against Johnson in 1915. He says he stepped into the batters box. Bam, bam, bam. Back to the dugout. Easiest victim Walter ever had. Babe never swung, never saw any pitches. But he heard something swish by. He told the ump that the pitches sounded high.

                  Another batter, I think it was Jimmie Dykes was, was batting agaisnt Walter and his arm comes down. Jimmie is waiting and the ball never arrives. Then the catcher is returning the ball. Jimmie turns to the ump, with questioning eyes. The ump tells him to take his base. Huh? says Jimmie. The ump then informs him that if he doesn't think the ball clipped him, feel his bill cap.

                  Jimmie does and the bill is turned all the way around. Jimmie turns white. Never even saw a ball! Only Nolan Ryan was that fast in modern times.
                  No one ever alleged they couldn't even see a ball. So I equate Johnson with Ryan. Ryan was timed over 100 mph.

                  Feller was time at 98.6. Body temperature. Many equated Feller with Grove. But no one ever claimed that they couldn't follow Feller's pitches. So I measure Johnson over 100. With Ryan.

                  When Feller came along in '37, he electrified the BB world, with his 98.5 mph velocity. So that was the top rate for the BB world at the time.

                  Today, so many pitchers register over 98 on the radar gun, that I stopped counting. Rod Dibble, JR Richards were both over 100. Didn't create a stir then. But it would have in 1940. So that is one way to measure velocity by era. Today, I suspect that Clemens, Johnson, Martinez, Rivera, and lots of others could go over 100 perhaps several times a game.

                  If that were possible in 1938, they would have created the same stir as Feller did in '38.

                  Bill Burgess
                  I love these anecdotes and apocryphal stories, but I have one problem with them. If Johnson's fastball was so fast that the best batters and umpires could not track them, how did Johnson's catchers ever stand a chance? I believe that these stories are surely exaggerated. I will say this in agreement with you. Johnson might have had the fastest fastball relative to other pitchers ever. If he's throwing 93-95 and everybody else is topping out at 87-89, then it would be as if someone could throw 103 routinely in today's game when most everyone else is topping out in the 96-98 range.

                  Comment


                  • And wow, THIS thread has been resurrected! A few quick points that I believe need correcting from my prior comments...

                    -After doing some rather extensive newspaper research, Steve Dalkowski was attempted to be timed at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in Aberdeen, MD AT LEAST four different times. I've also spoken with Joe Ginsberg, who caught Steve on perhaps the best-covered test by the media. This one took place in June 1958. I was lucky enough to obtain a photograph of Steve pitching, taken by James Kelmartin of the UPI (RIP). I have been thus far able to confirm...
                    -Steve was pitching on one or perhaps two days rest at most. He had indeed started a game either one or two days earlier with the Knoxville Smokies.
                    -Steve could not get the ball into the chronograph measuring him for a minimum of 15 minutes.
                    -Steve WAS wearing spikes and pitching off a mound.
                    -Baltimore was angry because he'd thrown a slip pitch through the machine to get it to record a speed of 85.8 mph at a distance of 60'6" from home plate, repeating the test once the season had concluded (unsure of the exact date), in Spring Training 1959 (where he likely hit 93.4 or 94.3; I've found both figures), and a third test I have almost nothing on that occured in 1960.
                    -The device Steve was measured on was a lumiline chronograph; almost identical to the one Feller was clocked on in 1946. Unfortunately, in my studies of the lumiline chronograph (often incorrectly referred to as a "sky screen"; this is but one of two components that takes speed), I've come to be absolutely convinced that it had such a horrific margin of error that it was almost useless. The device was designed to function in a controlled environment and some factors that could throw timing off included wind conditions, an insect flying over the aft lumiline screen, dirt blowing across the field, and even clouds! I would extend this being basically useless to Feller's 98.6 mph pitch, as well. The problems with the device included speed readings taken of pitches that were literally 10 mph apart or more. Feller also registered in the high 80's during that same test where he hit 98.6! I believe Frank Gilbreth's studies of Art Fromme suffered from something similar, albeit far worse.
                    -Nolan Ryan was almost certainly clocked between 30 and 45 feet away from his hand, NOT at home plate. The people at Rockwell International had actually published this prior to their taking his speed on radar. The sports journalists seemed to merely assume it was home plate, and while a few very early articles say it was "about 45 feet" from Ryan's hand, they were soon after replaced by Ryan being clocked at home plate. In my mind, that pitch would have registered about 104 mph on a modern radar gun. Highly impressive? Yes. But as fast as either Dalkowski or Zumaya? I doubt it.
                    -Zumaya's pitches (and everyone else's these days, as well) are measured between point of release and about 10 feet away from the hand.
                    -Walter Johnson's pitching mechanics (which HAVE been recorded on video and have been slowed down, and have been looked at by a ton of people) likely didn't allow him to throw much faster than 92-93 mph at release. But then consider that due to the primitive nature of throwing mechanics at the time, the league average for fastballs was in the high 70's or low 80's. Here you have a guy about 10-12 mph faster than the league average, on pretty much every pitch. In terms of simply being "faster than his peers," Walter Johnson was probably unparalleled on a Major League level at any time in history. Why was he so fast with such a mechanically-weak delivery? It's possible he simply had a tremendous amount of "fast twitch" muscle fiber in his right arm, allowing him to generate greater arm speed.
                    -I firmly believe based on what I've gathered that Steve Dalkowski threw a minimum of 105 mph and a maximum of 109 mph. However, bear in mind I'm using the Zumaya release point. The studies performed by Dr. Glenn Fleisig on the human arm saying the UCL explodes at just over 100 mph (possibly 101 mph) are indeed dead on...if you're using home plate as the 100 mph barrier. A fastball loses about 10-11 mph of velocity from point of release to home. Therefore, it's perfectly anatomically possible for Steve to have thrown 100 mph at home plate. Most pitcher can generate neither the mechanics nor tolerate the pain threshhold it takes to reach these speeds. With regards to pitching mechanics, you'll see more about that in my book on Steve. However, I will say this: Steve was almost certainly hitting 90 mph at release with a twice-torn MCL during California Angels Spring Training of 1966. He was in extreme agony, but pitched anyway. With regards to pain threshhold, I believe Steve's was incredibly high.
                    "They put me in the Hall of Fame? They must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel!"
                    -Eppa Rixey, upon learning of his induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

                    Motafy (MO-ta-fy) vt. -fied, -fying 1. For a pitcher to melt down in a big game situation; to become like Guillermo Mota. 2. The transformation of a good pitcher into one of Guillermo Mota's caliber.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                      -Walter Johnson's pitching mechanics (which HAVE been recorded on video and have been slowed down, and have been looked at by a ton of people) likely didn't allow him to throw much faster than 92-93 mph at release. But then consider that due to the primitive nature of throwing mechanics at the time, the league average for fastballs was in the high 70's or low 80's.
                      Dalkowski, your passionate, meticulous research into the life and achievements of the eponymous baseball legend are always a highlight of my sporadic board lurking these days. You may yet do for Dalkowski what Bill Jenkinson has done for Ruth and other distance hitters.

                      However, in the five years plus since I originally posted this thread, I still have yet to see a convincing or well-thought out argument for the above claim. My research has found, among other things, way too many caved in batter skulls, broken arms, smashed ribs, ended careers, and other maiming/mangling physical traumae at the blow of wayward(?) twirler pitches to accept the early 20th century moundsman-as-soft-tosser model. (See post #16.)

                      It's well-established by now that, for various reasons, nearly all existing film (not video--a mid-20th century innovation) records of early 20th century baseball athletes are of extremely limited value for making determinations about player physical skills. Of far better utility are any surviving records of skill competitions in which definite measurements were made; such as the throwing contest figures I listed (also in post #16). If simple math based on his recorded best tells you that Honus Wagner (a position player) could demonstrably break 90mph on a hypothetical gun, it's all but certain that Johnson (as well as the other top speedballers of the day) were exceeding this implied figure by quite a wide margin.
                      Last edited by HitchedtoaSpark; 03-10-2010, 02:28 PM.
                      A swing--and a smash--and a gray streak partaking/Of ghostly manoeuvres that follow the whack;/The old earth rebounds with a quiver and quaking/And high flies the dust as he thuds on the track;/The atmosphere reels--and it isn't the comet--/There follows the blur of a phantom at play;/Then out from the reel comes the glitter of steel--/And damned be the fellow that gets in the way.                 A swing and a smash--and the far echoes quiver--/A ripping and rearing and volcanic roar;/And off streaks the Ghost with a shake and a shiver,/To hurdle red hell on the way to a score;/A cross between tidal wave, cyclone and earthquake--/Fire, wind and water all out on a lark;/Then out from the reel comes the glitter of steel,/Plus ten tons of dynamite hitched to a spark.

                      --Cobb, Grantland Rice

                      Comment


                      • Of course the average pitchers speed has increased as the 100m times have improved over the time. esp. I think todays pitchers can maintain speed longer.
                        But of course that doesn't mean all pitchers where really slow then, because velocity in throwing like 100m speed is more a talent then speed thing.
                        100m runners 80 years ago didn't run 11.0(jesse owens ran 10.2) and of course not all pitchers did throw in the 80s.

                        sure there where some guys who could top out in the low to even mid 90s although they might not have thrown it as consistently as todays pitchers who can maintain top speed for 5 or 6 innings.
                        I now have my own non commercial blog about training for batspeed and power using my training experience in baseball and track and field.

                        Comment


                        • You don't need to throw 100 mph to injure a human being.

                          Comment


                          • "However, in the five years plus since I originally posted this thread, I still have yet to see a convincing or well-thought out argument for the above claim. My research has found, among other things, way too many caved in batter skulls, broken arms, smashed ribs, ended careers, and other maiming/mangling physical traumae at the blow of wayward(?) twirler pitches to accept the early 20th century moundsman-as-soft-tosser model."

                            Here's the problem with this: do you recall Salomon Torres doing this...

                            http://reds.enquirer.com/2003/04/21/wwwred3a21.html

                            ...to Sammy Sosa's batting helmet? Well, Torres "only" threw that pitch at about 92 mph at release. And yet, he shattered Sosa's batting helmet. A collapsed skull (something roughly equivalent) doesn't need a fastball thrown at Zumaya/Dalkowski/Ryan/Randy Johnson velocity to collapse it. If you can shatter a pretty-flexible batting helmet with a 92 mph fastball, imagine what you can do to bones.

                            "It's well-established by now that, for various reasons, nearly all existing film (not video--a mid-20th century innovation) records of early 20th century baseball athletes are of extremely limited value for making determinations about player physical skills."

                            Usually. And if you mean try and extrapolate a speed from it, then forget it; you're totally right. But it does allow us to examine Johnson's pitching mechanics. He has no scapular load to speak of, does not have a particularly powerful arm action (NOT be be confused with arm speed), throws with a relatively stiff lower half, and his stride is almost non-existent. Therefore, we must take into account what things he DOES show. Relative to the rest of his mechanics, Johnson shows remarkable arm speed. He also shows very good (unusually good considering the time period) hip/shoulder seperation; that is to say, his hips are facing home plate far before his shoulders start to turn. He also has an aggressive follow-through. Although I have extreme difficulty buying something in the high 90's/low 100's from examining the biomechanical aspect of his delivery, I can bring myself to believe that if he had a very significant amount of "fast twitch" muscle fiber in his right arm, he could have been throwing in the low 90's.

                            Further, Johnson's speed WAS likely accurately tested at about 92-93 mph. How could this be? Especially seeing as it was 1912? Well, I happen to be a bigtime firearms enthusiast as well as a baseball enthusiast. That's why I don't believe any of the lumiline chonograph readings can be taken seriously. But recall the story of Johnson's speed being tested at the Remington-Union Metallic Cartridge Company's Bridgeport line drop chronograph in 1912. That device was A) very accurate and B) could not be moved. Therefore, it was functioning under the conditions for which it was designed. And that's exactly the problem with the line-drop chronograph from a military logistics standpoint: it's immobile, too large to be practical, and while it can take effective measurements, it can't be moved from place to place. Johnson had warmed up, but reports vary as to whether he was pitching off a mound or not. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he wasn't. Well, the Remington-UMC guys had set up the device to take measurements at 60 feet, but there was a problem: Johnson was a sidearmer and difficulty getting the ball through the shoulder-height measuring device (which was actually quite open, as Remington-UMC had designed it to measure anything up to 1 gauge punt shell loads [legal for "market hunting" at the time] from a gun with no choke at 50 yards; you're looking at something that had an opening several FEET wide). Therefore, for Johnson's pitching, the device was moved back to 75 feet. That may sound unbelievable, but it's actually not; though the device was initially placed at 60 feet away, it would have recorded the results of a pitch thrown at 45 feet. This is because the Remington-UMC line-drop chronograph was FIFTEEN FEET LONG and while the actual recorder was placed 60 feet away, it recorded speeds taken fifteen feet in front of it, to compensate for its gigantic size. This is well-documented based on firearms testing with the device and was well-known by 1912. Therefore, though almost certainly by chance, Johnson had the distinction of being the first pitcher measured at mound-to-home distance: 60 feet. His pitch speed registered at 122 feet per second; about 83.2 mph.

                            Given that a fastball loses 9-10 mph on its way to the plate, we safely say Johnson's pitch, for better or for worse, would probably have been clocked at 91-93 mph. Say he has no mound, though. So let's give him an extra 2 mph (this is the absolute most liberal measurement I can figure with no mound; and he may even have had a mound). You're looking at someone who is now throwing at maximum 95 mph on a modern radar gun on a remarkably accurate device that was sadly overlooked in its potential usefulness at the time (Bob Turley, who was timed at 93.8 mph on a magnetic oscillograph at release point, was also almost certainly throwing what he would have registered on a radar gun).

                            Interestingly, Johnson WAS supposedly measured on a West Point device 20 feet from his release point at 91.4 mph (which would give a similar speed; 93 mph). I know that West Point had a nearly identical device at the time, although supposedly, the historical details from that test don't seem to jive (it also had Christy Mathewson, who was completely worn out, and Smoky Joe Wood, who had injured his arm, as being timed), so that one must be either looked at with an enormous grain of salt or just discarded.

                            But there was another pitcher...a roughly average pitcher in terms of speed at the time, who was often described as being above average, though never as a fireballer...who took the Remington-UMC test and was measured at 45 feet: Nap Rucker. With the device placed 60 feet away and thus recording Rucker's fastball at 45 feet, he got one in at 113 fps; about 77.1 mph. We can probably give him about 6 extra mph, possibly even 8 if we don't think he was pitching from a mound. This means Nap Rucker was recorded on a very accurate device at about 85 mph on a modern radar gun, at maximum. If that's above average in 1912, then no wonder Walter Johnson is blowing everyone away.

                            Then there's this...

                            "Of far better utility are any surviving records of skill competitions in which definite measurements were made; such as the throwing contest figures I listed (also in post #16). If simple math based on his recorded best tells you that Honus Wagner (a position player) could demonstrably break 90mph on a hypothetical gun, it's all but certain that Johnson (as well as the other top speedballers of the day) were exceeding this implied figure by quite a wide margin."

                            Your throwing data is good, but you have to take into account the circumstances behind all of it; you can't just assume there was no wind and no running start or that Wagner was throwing from a crow hop. It's well known that Glen Gorbous took a running jump, was throwing into a 6 mph recorded wind, and had warmed up. He admitted to it. Wagner had also reportedly warmed up and was throwing into the wind from "a running start." But just what do we define as "a running start" and what as "into the wind?" Unfortunately, whatever that was, unlike the VERY precise data we have on Glen Gorbous, has been lost to history.

                            Then there's this: until the mid 1920's to early 1930's, pitching mechanics can't really be described as "modern" or really capable of producing as much speed from a biomechanical standpoint in terms of the arm actions, strides, leg drives, and (to an admittedly much-lesser extent) even the hip/shoulder seperations. That's why you all of a sudden start seeing so many "unbelievable, never-before-seen-speed" type pitchers from around that era. Dizzy Dean, Dazzy Vance, Lefty Grove...all these guys threw with reasonably modern mechanics compared to the Dead Ballers and all were quickly proclaimed to be the fastest pitcher in baseball the moment they showed up.

                            Personally, it's my belief that Bob Feller was probably the pre-WWII speed king (EDIT: or at least ONE OF the fastest pre-WWII; i.e. of the better-known guys). Why? Because in the (literally) dozens of rejected speeds he was recording on that chronograph before the "107 mph error," he was hitting somewhere in the high 80's. At 60'6". That translates into consistently throwing in the high 90's on a modern gun. Had he warmed up? Yes. Was he throwing off a mound? Yes. Was the chronograph mostly useless? Yes. But given that it had a 10-12 mph margin of error, Feller's 98.7 mph pitch was in actuality 86 mph at home plate AT WORST. That's about 95-96 mph on a modern radar gun, and that's the worst speed he could have recorded. To be honest, he was probably in the 98-100 mph range on a modern device.
                            Last edited by Dalkowski110; 03-10-2010, 08:45 PM.
                            "They put me in the Hall of Fame? They must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel!"
                            -Eppa Rixey, upon learning of his induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

                            Motafy (MO-ta-fy) vt. -fied, -fying 1. For a pitcher to melt down in a big game situation; to become like Guillermo Mota. 2. The transformation of a good pitcher into one of Guillermo Mota's caliber.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Ubiquitous
                              You don't need to throw 100 mph to injure a human being.
                              What's it like arguing with yourself?


                              Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                              Here's the problem with this: do you recall Salomon Torres doing this...

                              http://reds.enquirer.com/2003/04/21/wwwred3a21.html

                              ...to Sammy Sosa's batting helmet? Well, Torres "only" threw that pitch at about 92 mph at release. And yet, he shattered Sosa's batting helmet. A collapsed skull (something roughly equivalent) doesn't need a fastball thrown at Zumaya/Dalkowski/Ryan/Randy Johnson velocity to collapse it. If you can shatter a pretty-flexible batting helmet with a 92 mph fastball, imagine what you can do to bones.
                              Actually, you contradict your own point regarding the assumed velocity of old-time pitchers in selecting the instance of a 92-mph recorded pitch.

                              My beef is not with those whom--for whatever reason--claim that pitchers of a hundred years ago weren't quite as fast as today's equivalent specimen. Although I don't agree, and am confident that I have stated a persuasive argument as to why, it seems a reasonable presupposition in light of the groupthink that currently prevails regarding the assumed superiority of contemporary athletes. I do, however, quibble at the confidence and naivete of "high 70's/low 80's mph"--hardly more than batting practice speed--pronouncements as the likely threshold for hurlers of yore. The reasoning is so faulty and vulnerable to close scrutiny--bereft, as it is, of any actual or implied evidence--that I invariably shake my head at the scholarship void which gives asylum to such arrogance. (The argument invariably reminds me of the hypothetical which compares the size/stature of the average 21st century homo sapien with those of the early 19th; which is a difference of about six or more inches. Following from this model, human beings of the medieval period must have been midgets. [Wrong.])

                              Nobody here has said nor implied that a "Zumaya/Dalkowski/Ryan/Randy Johnson"-level fastball is required to break batter bones. However, I think we can agree that few instances can be called to memory of crushed temples, shattered jaws, fractured wrists, broken ribs occuring during batting practice sessions of any description (where pitches, alas, still occasionally go awry). There has to be a model intersecting the conditions of real-life (where pitches must be at least fast enough to cause serious bodily hurt, while preventing the necessary reaction time for successful dodge) on which to try the supposition if anything is to be proven. If you have few pitchers from a hundred years ago breaching the "high 70's/low 80's" threshold, how is it that you have so many recorded instances of serious batter injury, or even death, even from the most obscure of twirlers? How is it that Carl Mays was able to drill Ty Cobb in the ribs hard enough to have grievously fractured two of them if he was (extrapolating for his submarine delivery) chucking them in the high 60's/low 70's? Could the anonymous Ray White of the Columbia University nine have beaned Lou Gehrig in an exhibition game with such force as to reach the press box on the rebound if his fast one was, at best, "high 70's/low 80's"? (Weigh these considerations in light of the fact that both of these instances pre-date the era of the confidently dug-in batter--bisecting these events was the infamous Ray Chapman beanball fatality.) At this point, one must inevitably resort to impugning the eyesight and tracking ability of yesterday's batter in order for the argument to retain any water, which merely exposes the agenda of its proponent.

                              If you look at a history of serious, pitch-caused batter injury (such as that here on page 20: http://www.iihs.org/research/paper_pdfs/mf_0738.pdf), you'll find much the same description of trauma suffered, regardless of era. Unless we further wish to stretch this rubber band to intimate that players 100 years ago had more brittle bones than players today do, I think it's fair to conclude that pitches hurled from major league mounds have always been more or less commensurate in the speed and danger that they hold.


                              But it does allow us to examine Johnson's pitching mechanics. He has no scapular load to speak of, does not have a particularly powerful arm action (NOT be be confused with arm speed), throws with a relatively stiff lower half, and his stride is almost non-existent. Therefore, we must take into account what things he DOES show. Relative to the rest of his mechanics, Johnson shows remarkable arm speed. He also shows very good (unusually good considering the time period) hip/shoulder seperation; that is to say, his hips are facing home plate far before his shoulders start to turn. He also has an aggressive follow-through. Although I have extreme difficulty buying something in the high 90's/low 100's from examining the biomechanical aspect of his delivery, I can bring myself to believe that if he had a very significant amount of "fast twitch" muscle fiber in his right arm, he could have been throwing in the low 90's...

                              Then there's this: until the mid 1920's to early 1930's, pitching mechanics can't really be described as "modern" or really capable of producing as much speed from a biomechanical standpoint in terms of the arm actions, strides, leg drives, and (to an admittedly much-lesser extent) even the hip/shoulder seperations. That's why you all of a sudden start seeing so many "unbelievable, never-before-seen-speed" type pitchers from around that era. Dizzy Dean, Dazzy Vance, Lefty Grove...all these guys threw with reasonably modern mechanics compared to the Dead Ballers and all were quickly proclaimed to be the fastest pitcher in baseball the moment they showed up.
                              OK, first of all, I have never heard this latter claim, that "all of a sudden" there appeared in the mid-20's/early 30's scene a plethora of "unbelievable, never-before-seen-speed" pitchers. EVERY era has trumpeted a parade of "fastest evers", from the Jim Creighton to the present day (most not amounting to much). In Johnson's day alone, there were pitching on various rosters Rube Waddell, Smoky Joe Wood, Pete Alexander, Nap Rucker, Dazzy Vance, Bill Hallahan, Louis Drucke, Grover Lowdermilk, Marty O'Toole, and more arms that were considered the ultimate in speed.

                              Secondly, you again undermine your argument--here, in discussion of pitching mechanics--by bringing up Johnson, whom was considered in his time an outlier, a unique case in the matter of pitching mechanics. From professional top to bottom, Johnson always received an earful regarding the supposed "wrongness" of his mechanics (with an equal measure of stunned surprise that he was able to blaze them in just the same). Joe Wood, with his high leg kick and powerful, over-the-top motion (sound familiar?), was much more considered an object of standards and emulation. In point of fact, you are making the same mistake that certain authorities made in Johnson's day in assuming that speed is all mechanics; that there is only one universal, immutable, possible physical model to follow and adhere to. It is more than worth considering as an addendum that most authorities who saw Johnson, Grove, and Feller pitch during their prime years agreed that Johnson was the fastest of the three.

                              Further, Johnson's speed WAS likely accurately tested at about 92-93 mph...

                              [snip]
                              The dubiousness of ballistics equipment testing is thoroughly demonstrated by citing the fact that Mark Koenig, Yankee shortstop (never known as one of the top guns at his position), was in 1930 put through this same test and measured at just a few feet per second slower than Johnson. On the other hand, the great Lou McEvoy, New York super-ace, was recorded at a mere 150 ft/sec.


                              Your throwing data is good, but you have to take into account the circumstances behind all of it; you can't just assume there was no wind and no running start or that Wagner was throwing from a crow hop. It's well known that Glen Gorbous took a running jump, was throwing into a 6 mph recorded wind, and had warmed up. He admitted to it. Wagner had also reportedly warmed up and was throwing into the wind from "a running start." But just what do we define as "a running start" and what as "into the wind?" Unfortunately, whatever that was, unlike the VERY precise data we have on Glen Gorbous, has been lost to history.
                              Adair uses the term "crop hop" to indicate a running start, so that factor has been accounted for. On the existence of wind-aided throws, these are every bit as probable as wind-aided tape-measure home runs. However, we also have Wagner's throw of 399 feet, made eight years after his 403 foot toss, to reinforce these figures. (Of course, it's very easy to claim that this, like all other Paleolithic long-tosses, was also wind-aided; just as home run distances were once aided by wavering gravity and player footspeed times abetted by downhill-in-every-direction baseball diamonds.)
                              A swing--and a smash--and a gray streak partaking/Of ghostly manoeuvres that follow the whack;/The old earth rebounds with a quiver and quaking/And high flies the dust as he thuds on the track;/The atmosphere reels--and it isn't the comet--/There follows the blur of a phantom at play;/Then out from the reel comes the glitter of steel--/And damned be the fellow that gets in the way.                 A swing and a smash--and the far echoes quiver--/A ripping and rearing and volcanic roar;/And off streaks the Ghost with a shake and a shiver,/To hurdle red hell on the way to a score;/A cross between tidal wave, cyclone and earthquake--/Fire, wind and water all out on a lark;/Then out from the reel comes the glitter of steel,/Plus ten tons of dynamite hitched to a spark.

                              --Cobb, Grantland Rice

                              Comment


                              • What's it like arguing with yourself?


                                Pleasant and not as rude.

                                You made a statement about injuries and speed as if getting injured in those days happened because of pitch speeds that are comparable to nowadays. I disagree, because quite obviously you don't need someone to throw 95 mph to crush in a skull.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X