Slowly, but surely, what started as slight concern about maple bats has grown into a full-grown issue. The furor is thus: maple bats splinter and spray far more than their ash counterparts, while the performance advantages that many players believe maple afford them are largely imaginary. (Baseball players are kooks like that.) Still, good luck convincing them. Consider Cal Ripken and Harold Reynolds -- not players, per se, but former ones -- as among the "no-big-deal" chorus:
"I think they might be making a little bit too much out of it," Ripken said Tuesday.That would be all well and good, lads, except the science -- explained pretty clearly in this passionate Jeff Passan piece -- is straightforward. Ash bats crack. Maple bats break. And neither is better than the other at enhancing power. It's really not so hard, nor is it worth risking lives over.
"They don't use as thick a handle anymore and the bats are a lot lighter. ... The head of the bat is a lot bigger, and it's going to break," Reynolds said. "I don't think it's maple or whatever substance they might be using to make the bat. I think it's more in the design that the players are using now."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-02-2008 @ 7:56AM
nigelallistair said...
"That would be all well and good, lads, except the science -- explained pretty clearly in this passionate Jeff Passan piece -- is straightforward. Ash bats crack. Maple bats break. And neither is better than the other at enhancing power. It's really not so hard, nor is it worth risking lives over."
It's funny how you're all down with the science and its ability to prove safety or danger for participants where it concerns baseball bats... but there you are, every week, making an embarrassing kook of yourselves over "MMA". Good thing there's no science proving that vicious beatings upside the head "risks lives", huh?
Oh, brother.
Reply