Baseball vs. Softball Swing

[Gone in 2.6]

So in short.... does a riseball actually rise?

What I've gathered from these posts, it would appear not. And yet everyone seems to think the answer is yes.

So is the "hop" merely an optical illusion?

And if the answer is no, then are they simply high fastballs with a bit of kick due to the spin? Or just high fastballs that a lot of girls can't lay off?

Yes.

[ssarge]

What I've gathered from these posts, it would appear not. And yet everyone seems to think the answer is yes.

The "posts" are pretty much just one guy's opinion - namely me.

But I would urge you to look at PROFILE angle video before making your own determination.

Best regards,

Scott

[nohesitation]

So in short.... does a riseball actually rise?

Ssarge,
If you look at NASA’s baseball simulator. Set speed to 70mph, ball rotation at 1700rpm with 89 deg. rise spin. Set release angle at 6 deg., and release height at 26” then set at sea level, on a hot humid day. Then because the distance is set at 60.5 feet, project the top of the zone back to 43’. I would say the path of the ball looks very flat or slightly down (I’ll give you that). But look at the catchers view, the ball is moving up for 80 to 90 percent of the time. Take the reaction time into play and that pitch is nasty.
Now set everything back: 62 mph, 1200 rpm, 7 to 8 degree release angle and the arc gets a more downward angle through the zone. But look at the catchers view. You still get the benefits of illusion, if you will, of the rise. These are all pitches a umpire could call a strike. However, the simulator is using a 5 oz. ball instead of 6.5 to 7oz. softball and of course softballs diameter is bigger , all effecting the physics of ball flight.
Now all the formulas are on the NASA site and if someone that is good with that stuff is willing to figure it out, that would be the end of the big question: Can a softball rise through the zone given reasonable speed and spin.
70 mph?
1700 rpm?
89 degree rise spin?
26” release height?
At optimum release angle?
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/short.html

[CharlieHough]

I fold..........................COCKTAILS!

[CharlieHough]

before i folded........I told my DD......lay off the 0-1 change and the 0-2 rise........and hit the crap out of the 2-0 or 3-1 strike.

Problem solved.

Touch em all.

[ssarge]

I would say the path of the ball looks very flat or slightly down (I’ll give you that). But look at the catchers view, the ball is moving up for 80 to 90 percent of the time. Take the reaction time into play and that pitch is nasty.

Agree with all of that. Especially the part about the pitch being nasty. You'll get absolutely no argument from me about that.

As I've often said, I almost wish the pitch WAS moving up, instead of just looking as if it does. It seems to me it is easier to hit reality than an illusion.

But please don't miss my point.

The predicate of my posts was a response to the sentiment that different hitting mechanics are appropriate for FP than for BB, because pitch trajectory is different.

I don't believe that. It DOES look different - at least when the pitch is coming at you (not in the profile). But it isn't, so I think the same mechanics are appropriate. Even if the pitch was moving upwards slightly, the same mechanics would be appropriate.

And that's my point. Anyone who interprets my comments as disparaging of the riseball, or interprets me to be saying it isn't a bitch of a pitch, is missing my point.

Best regards,

Scott

[ssarge]

before i folded........I told my DD......lay off the 0-1 change and the 0-2 rise........and hit the crap out of the 2-0 or 3-1 strike.

Problem solved.

Very, very few riseballs are thrown for strikes. Most hitters would be ahead in the long run if they laid off of all of them.

WAY easier said than done.

Best,

Scott