Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Sat Jun 10 17:32:39 2006

> >>> Mr Mankin,
>
> That is a totally unfair criticism of Nyman. He did not even mention the word torque in the quote from Grand Slam Man. He did NOT say that he 'claims that his swing supplied sufficient torque at contact to snap off two wood bats at the handle.' The word torque was not mentioned.<<<
>
> Hi JJA
>
> “The word torque was not mentioned,” but surely you are not denying that Nyman has repeatedly claimed that torque (forces applied at the handle from opposing directions) is not a factor in the swing. For obvious reasons, he would not use the word “torque.” However, there is no force he could apply, other than torque (top-hand driving forward – bottom-hand pulling rearward), that could snap the handle after the bat made contact with the bag.
>
> Jack Mankin

Hi Jack,

I agree with JJA; one cannot "read into an experiment" too much without running into problems. Jack, I checked GSM's quote, and then visited Nyman's site. According to Nyman, the faster the one swings, the more energy that is being used; the more energy that is being expended, the faster the bag accelerates. Following scientific logic, the greater the acceleration, the harder the bat will hit the bag at impact. This means that 45 mph batspeed will hit the bag with less energy (and less vibration) than 75 mph batspeed.

For example, in crash tests, cars crashing into an object 15 mph might have fender damage, whereas cars crashing into an object 100 mph will be totaled.

Best,
BHL
Knight1285@aol.com

P.S. Jack, I mean no disrespect whatsoever--I am just trying to clarify what is actually said on Paul Nyman's site.