vivii ૮₍ ˶ᵔ ᵕ ᵔ˶₎ა ♡

Maybe a long shot but is anyone who follows me here capable of endorsing me to upload to stats section of arxiv ?

i know that looking at evenly spaced frames like this gets ruined by spin decay but there’s still definitely reorientation happening on the sinker

skubal sinker

skubal slider

the cease looks good for about 3 frames and then starts to lose it

here i grabbed every n frames, with n chosen so that frame 1 and frame 1+n have the same seam orientation. this changeup looks like it’s translating when i move through the pictures

cease slider, not so much

@lephysichien.bsky.social degrom changeup, very stable

a secret third source of catch prob that i have puts it at 10%, and while i try my best to factor in the wall properly there’s a fundamental issue due to ball tracking getting funky the farther out from home (and higher above the ground) it gets
i think it hits the wall here and should be a solid 0%

i made a website for my new fielding win probability stat, with a leaderboard & individual play breakdowns :)

situational-fielding.streamlit.app

an extremely easy task for a video game developer tbh

find the fraction of ball flight time the ray cast from the fielder’s head to the ball intersects the lights or the sun and toss it into the formula

i refuse to believe the TJ is cause of the scrider. i refuse to believe it’s uniquely bad for ur ucl

inb4 someone tells me some relief pitcher i don’t know on like, the giants throws a screwball 10% of the time

had to delete a tongue-in-cheek devin williams hate post cause it reached 1000 likes.
critical support to the only screwballer in the league even if he refuses to recognize that he is

we should have a double first base but not with all of those weird college rules, just treat it as one big base

posting the “i had code for collision efficiency” image first

yes probably. EV-wise (which i should’ve just shown in the first place) it looks more like a simple shift downwards

love it!
i calculated the MOI ratio to be in the 98% range, which i think might be able to get you something like 0.5 to 1 mph extra bat speed, approximating it as all circular motion and equal KE.

so something interesting i saw last night is that keeping the max width the same 2.625” but scaling the length of the bat, the EV benefit only appears with the 33” bat

on twitter someone shared this paper which used a genetic algorithm to search for “optimal designs” in a FEM package. they allowed non circular cross sections which look fun. i haven’t read the paper but i have a hunch these would be very prone to breaking

mdpi-res.com/d_attachment...

this bat’s MOI about the COM is 97% that of a normal shaped bat with the same length & mass, 98% around a more realistic axis.
that’s rooughly comparable to changing the mass by 1 oz

oh that’s a good point. i used the length of the bat to set the scale, which i assumed to be 33” (which was just a guess based of a google search for “jazz chisholm bat”)
doing that i get a max width of 2.8”
32” gives 2.7” and 31” gives 2.63”
so that suggests it’s actually 31”

i mean, i spent weeks coding a hammer and a golden nail showed up out of nowhere

i took the profile by counting pixels in this. i assumed 33” and 30 oz. just a guess but being exact isn’t really the point

here r the normal modes. the fundamental isn’t affected very much, higher order modes are affected more but they contribute less

my simulations agree that jazz’s sweet spot is shifted down, but nothing crazy!

i don’t think those will get up to the right impact velocities because the pitch speed is too low

i think it would be way more interesting if COR falls off rapidly at high impact velo, I kinda hope that’s true.
The best way to know is to find someone with an air cannon that can get the ball up to that speed. that would be way easier than trying to simulate it from first principles