51–60 of 432 posts
Cool but this article is AI slop. It's borderline unreadable, though I guess it looks great to Google.
I caught on when I realized the same sentence was being written for the fifth time.
I've always wondered what the technological development of F1 would look like in other sports. This feels pretty close.
There are stories like this in marathon running shoes (something like 3D printed to the athlete's exact gait and basically last just a single race) and swimming (the michael phelps olympics dolphin suit). I'm sure cycling and golf have been doing things like this since forever.
This seems to most help with guys who were hitting the ball most often not at the sweet spot. By moving the sweet spot to where they are hitting the ball, they might gain some power. A bat needs to be round, a solid piece of wood, less than a certain length and less than a certain diameter. The actual shape is not defined.
It's interesting to me, who is not a baseball player but a software engineer, that even at the level of professional sports the solution is not to just train the athletes to swing the ideal bat "correctly" but to redesign the bat to be sub-optimal but such that when the players use it "wrong" the right thing happens. The physicists and swing coaches and trainers and teammates have probably been telling Volpe and Chis…
It’s the single hardest skill in competitive team sports in my opinion.
> Know what the difference between hitting .250 and .300 is? It's 25 hits. 25 hits in 500 at bats is 50 points, okay? There's 6 months in a season, that's about 25 weeks. That means if you get just one extra flare a week - just one - a gorp... you get a groundball, you get a groundball with eyes... you get a dying quail, just one more dying quail a week... and you're in Yankee Stadium.
(Crash Davis)
If only the Yankees get access to it (e.g. they patented it and won't let other teams use it) then I could see it as an unfair advantage. In most other areas of America life, though, this innovation would be allowed or even celebrated. I imagine it will go the way of the brilliant strategic innovation a few years back of shifting defenders heavily depending on the batter's statistical hitting patterns. It'll get bann…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
its less about even taper and more about moving weight/center of mass around. Youth bats have been doing that for quite a while. Camwood bats is a great example of moving weight around. In their case, its a training bat.
Can you take it a step further with uneven wood density? Like growing the tree with part of the branch under compression.
If only the Yankees get access to it (e.g. they patented it and won't let other teams use it) then I could see it as an unfair advantage. In most other areas of America life, though, this innovation would be allowed or even celebrated. I imagine it will go the way of the brilliant strategic innovation a few years back of shifting defenders heavily depending on the batter's statistical hitting patterns. It'll get bann…
> If home runs happen all the time, they lose their excitement. TV ratings show otherwise - in every instance so far, HRs put butts in seats, and defense makes people change the channel. TV and ballpark analytics show this to be true. The common thought is that's why the league ignored abuse during the steroid era so much. edit - This is also the driving force behind multiple 'juiced ball' conspiracy theories.
It's not about watching home runs; it's mostly about watching a competitive game.
I've always wondered what the technological development of F1 would look like in other sports. This feels pretty close.
I guess other (banned) examples would be the LZR swim suits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LZR_Racer) and the Nike Vaporfly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_Vaporfly_and_Tokyo_2020_O...)
I think I am also right in saying that you can buy a road bike that is better than the ones permitted in the Tour de France.