ortiz hits one 514 feet

[bnorris85]

I know everyone is sick of redsox threads, but damn that is a shot....these damn games should be on tv

. Vernon Wells, the Toronto Blue Jays' center-fielder, was on deck when Ortiz connected.

"I was thinking 3-and-0, man, he might swing here and if he does it could be damage,'' Wells said. "When he hit it, you could do nothing but just laugh.

"I'd like to see where that goes in Fenway Park. I couldn't say anything to him. I laughed. I went to give him a knuckle after he hit it and he said, 'That's how we do it right there, Papi.'

http://www.boston.com/sports/basebal...a_sized_homer/

[RhodeyYankee2638]

thats it?

[bakntime]

Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638
thats it?

[WebsterMulligan]

Ortiz is in a zone, bigtime! I sure hope the off-season cools him off some.

[son of mel hall]

514 feet is amazing.

[FormerlyKnownAsMHHL]

Originally posted by RhodeyYankee2638
thats it?

i was hoping for a picture or soemthing.

[yeat]

http://www.csulb.edu/~ehobbs/ortiz-in-japan.html

[son of mel hall]

Originally posted by yeat
http://www.csulb.edu/~ehobbs/ortiz-in-japan.html

Thanks, that was a moonshot if I've ever seen one.

[Pomp]

Amazing the deal that the Red Sox signed him too...he could command much bigger $$$.

[tdel23]

I finally saw a replay of this moonshoot...the look on the pitchers' face was priceless

[nahzo]

What was Mick's record, in a season game? 620+ or something?

[JDPNYY]

Originally posted by nahzo
What was Mick's record, in a season game? 620+ or something?

I believe it was 565 feet in Washington against the Senators.

Although this site says he hit one 634 feet...

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseb...tures/experts/

[incarnadine]

I think Robert Adair (The Physics of Baseball) calculated that the farthest a batted ball could possibly go on the fly is 545 feet. So this homer is gettin' up there as far as scraping the theoretical roof.

[26 and counting]

Originally posted by incarnadine
I think Robert Adair (The Physics of Baseball) calculated that the farthest a batted ball could possibly go on the fly is 545 feet. So this homer is gettin' up there as far as scraping the theoretical roof.

What is his reasoning behind this? I'd like to know.

[ojo]

ball's weight, pitcher's velocity, bat's weight, and the only x factor would be the hitter's strength (bat speed).

so if you say a pitcher can only hit maximum 110 mph (has that even been done?), you have a 40 oz bat and a standard ball....you just have to factor in the fastest a batter can swing a bat.

there's then gotta be some sort of drag coefficient, too, right?

[FoulkeLore]

I'm thinking angle of trajectory would play a factor is well. I've heard that a baseball will travel it's farthest if hit/tossed at a 45 degree angle. If that's the case it would be a set variable in the equation. (45X or something like that)

[stevethesoxfan]

Originally posted by ojo
ball's weight, pitcher's velocity, bat's weight, and the only x factor would be the hitter's strength (bat speed).

so if you say a pitcher can only hit maximum 110 mph (has that even been done?), you have a 40 oz bat and a standard ball....you just have to factor in the fastest a batter can swing a bat.

there's then gotta be some sort of drag coefficient, too, right?

Plus there is wind effect, humidity, where on the bat the ball was hit, trajectory, etc.

I read somewhere (a Japanese baseball site???) that there is no standard Japanese ball. Most are lighter than MLB's. Some are virtually the same. The home team actually picks out the balls to be used in a game!!! I wonder which was the type that Ortiz hit -- and also if the MLB All-Star BP balls are non-standard, as it seems odd that there are so many 450 ft. bombs hit in those contests..

[Mattingly Sideburns]

Ortiz is the most likeable guy on the redsox right now. It kills me to see him hit against the Yankees, but who knew he would blossom this much?

The Twins are morons. He's even signed cheap through 06 or 07.

[Circle Change]

Originally posted by Mattingly Sideburns
It kills me to see him hit against the Yankees, but who knew he would blossom this much?

The Twins are morons. He's even signed cheap through 06 or 07.

How can you say "Who knew he would blossom this much" and then call the Twins morons? That's a little unfair. He was on the bench for the first couple months he was in Boston.

[Mattingly Sideburns]

Originally posted by Circle Change


How can you say "Who knew he would blossom this much" and then call the Twins morons? That's a little unfair. He was on the bench for the first couple months he was in Boston.

Matthew LeCroy. That's the alternative. The guy with a .300 OBP / .448 SLG the year before they let Ortiz go.

Ortiz was at .350/.500 with much greater consistancy when the Twins let him walk. It was stupid, compounded by the fact that Ortiz is now up around .380/.600.

[BroadwayBomber55]

I saw it and it was an absolute ripper.

I also saw Mark McGwire's 1997 HR in the old Seattle Kingdome against Randy Johnson, a 538-ft thumper.

[Murcer'swerebest]

Even worse is the story I read that Twins manager Tom Kelly used to get on Ortiz every time he took a big swing. The quote I saw in a newspaper from David Ortiz was something to the effect that " . . they wanted me to swing like a little b***h . . "

How the heck could anyone look at a guy that size and think "Wow what a good singles hitter he could be!!". What an amazingly poor judgement on the part of the Twins.

I have to say that the Twins are a team I really don't like. They have this odd smug attitude that they're playing the game "the right way". Yet, they've had tons of good corner outfielders but no good middle infielders for a couple years now. Shouldn't the "right way" bear some resemblance to a smart way? Trade an outfielder for a second baseman, for god's sake!

Also, the foundation of the Twins was the passel of high draft picks they built up by tanking 8 seasons in a row. From 1993 through 2000, the Twins didn't even try to compete. Not at all. They made no effort to field an even moderately competitive team while billionaire Pohlad pocketed his revenue sharing money. Yeah . . the, uh, right way.

[Snatch Catch]

Originally posted by Murcer'swerebest
Even worse is the story I read that Twins manager Tom Kelly used to get on Ortiz every time he took a big swing. The quote I saw in a newspaper from David Ortiz was something to the effect that " . . they wanted me to swing like a little b***h . . "

How the heck could anyone look at a guy that size and think "Wow what a good singles hitter he could be!!". What an amazingly poor judgement on the part of the Twins.

I have to say that the Twins are a team I really don't like. They have this odd smug attitude that they're playing the game "the right way". Yet, they've had tons of good corner outfielders but no good middle infielders for a couple years now. Shouldn't the "right way" bear some resemblance to a smart way? Trade an outfielder for a second baseman, for god's sake!

Also, the foundation of the Twins was the passel of high draft picks they built up by tanking 8 seasons in a row. From 1993 through 2000, the Twins didn't even try to compete. Not at all. They made no effort to field an even moderately competitive team while billionaire Pohlad pocketed his revenue sharing money. Yeah . . the, uh, right way.

I can remember following Ortiz when he came up with the Twins and he was a big time prospect. That being said, the guy was seemingly always injured and could never seem to really put it together. I absolutely do not blame the twins for letting him go: keep in mind that Ortiz sat on the free agent market for a significant amount of time before the Sox signed him. Anyone could have had him, and no one was touching him. As was mentioned earlier, even the Sox didn't sign him with the notion that he would be the player that he has become- they were platooning him with Jeremy Giambi, and Giambi was seen as the more valuable asset.

In no way are the Twins at fault in this situation.

[AusTexSoxFan]

It's hard to believe that Jeremy Giambi was starting ahead of Ortiz at the beginning of last season. The Sox Ortiz to a fairly cheap extension too this year. We are lucky to ahve him.
That dinger in Japan the other night was a monster but I agree with BroadwayBomber, Big Mac's bomb off of The Unit in the Kingdome was sick. I guess that's what happens to a 97-98 mph fastball that meets a bat swung by the arms of the Brawny papertowel guy.

[brosiusbuddy]

514 is impressive anyway you look at it, but remember, they are playing in Japan and the balls are a bit smaller and wound a bit tighter, hence they go farther. Remember when Tony Clark hit the ball off the teletron off the back wall of the Tokyodome? I'd mark that at close to 500

[pjfan]

to follow up on the funny Ortiz story:

during one of his first few games with Boston, he came to bat with a guy on 2nd. apparently, all he tried to do was hit the ball on the ground to the right side, just trying to advance the runner.

when he got back to the dugout, Grady told him that they didn't get him to advance runners, they got him to hit bombs. Ortiz said that since then, he's able to let loose

[cubswin]

Originally posted by Murcer'swerebest
...How the heck could anyone look at a guy that size and think "Wow what a good singles hitter he could be!!". ....

yeah, but with his speed, a single is like a double...

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by incarnadine
I think Robert Adair (The Physics of Baseball) calculated that the farthest a batted ball could possibly go on the fly is 545 feet. So this homer is gettin' up there as far as scraping the theoretical roof.

I've read Adair's book and I hate to say it, b/c the guy is a renown physicist, but he's wrong about a lot of things.

You CAN see a ball hit the bat, he say you can't.

It's not just the weight of the bat, it's the entire momentum of the bat and the hitter's force being applied through the bat over time that is imparted upon the ball.

A baseball hitting a bat is a somewhat inelastic reaction (it takes place over time) and thus requires some different assumptions than what Adair uses.

I have NO IDEA why Adair makes such errors. I think it his to do with a lack of understanding of the biomechanics of a baseball swing.

Also the weight of most major leagurer's bats is closer to the low to mid 30's oz. A 40 oz bat is heavy by today's standards.

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by ojo
ball's weight, pitcher's velocity, bat's weight, and the only x factor would be the hitter's strength (bat speed).
...

Bat speeed is not the only variable. Here's an example,

Attach to a pole a bat and spin it really quickly so it's going 80mph. Now throw a 90mph fastball at it. The ball will travel distance X.

Not attach at bat to the front of a bullet train going 80 mph. Throw a 90mph fatball at it. The ball will travel distance Y.

Both bats are going 80mph just before contact, however the bat just swinging around the pole will slow down signicantly during contact. But the bat attached to the train will not appreciably slow down druing contact and will apply more momentum to the ball.

This is because the reaction between the bat and the ball is somewhat inelastic, i.e. there is appreciable time when the ball and the bat are together. So what happens DRUING contact matters. Adair only pays attention to the speed of the bat just prior to contact.

[cubswin]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
I've read Adair's book and I hate to say it, b/c the guy is a renown physicist, but he's wrong about a lot of things.

You CAN see a ball hit the bat, he say you can't.

It's not just the weight of the bat, it's the entire momentum of the bat and the hitter's force being applied through the bat over time that is imparted upon the ball.

A baseball hitting a bat is a somewhat inelastic reaction (it takes place over time) and thus requires some different assumptions than what Adair uses.

I have NO IDEA why Adair makes such errors. I think it his to do with a lack of understanding of the biomechanics of a baseball swing.

Also the weight of most major leagurer's bats is closer to the low to mid 30's oz. A 40 oz bat is heavy by today's standards.

I haven't read it in years, but isn't what he says about the ball hitting the bat refuting the story about Ted Williams reading something on the ball as it hit the bat or something? Why do you think Adair is wrong?

And the momentum / hitter's force only matters in terms of bat speed and/or acceleration, I think -- which I believe he takes into account.

[cubswin]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
Bat speeed is not the only variable. Here's an example,

Attach to a pole a bat and spin it really quickly so it's going 80mph. Now throw a 90mph fastball at it. The ball will travel distance X.

Not attach at bat to the front of a bullet train going 80 mph. Throw a 90mph fatball at it. The ball will travel distance Y.

Both bats are going 80mph just before contact, however the bat just swinging around the pole will slow down signicantly during contact. But the bat attached to the train will not appreciably slow down druing contact and will apply more momentum to the ball.

This is because the reaction between the bat and the ball is somewhat inelastic, i.e. there is appreciable time when the ball and the bat are together. So what happens DRUING contact matters. Adair only pays attention to the speed of the bat just prior to contact.

isn't the train going to have a different result b/c of its weight?

[stevethesoxfan]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
Bat speeed is not the only variable. Here's an example,

Attach to a pole a bat and spin it really quickly so it's going 80mph. Now throw a 90mph fastball at it. The ball will travel distance X.

Not attach at bat to the front of a bullet train going 80 mph. Throw a 90mph fatball at it. The ball will travel distance Y.

Both bats are going 80mph just before contact, however the bat just swinging around the pole will slow down signicantly during contact. But the bat attached to the train will not appreciably slow down druing contact and will apply more momentum to the ball.

If a ball is on one train traveling East going 80 MPH, and a bat is on a train traveling West going 90 MPH, how much money is Scott Boras going to negotiate for the train conductors' contracts for doing such an incomparable job getting the trains to travel so quickly?

[WakefieldsKnuckler49]

Originally posted by stevethesoxfan


If a ball is on one train traveling East going 80 MPH, and a bat is on a train traveling West going 90 MPH, how much money is Scott Boras going to negotiate for the train conductors' contracts for doing such an incomparable job getting the trains to travel so quickly?

I just saw "trains going 90 MPH" and "Boras" in the same sentence and got excited for a second. But it wasn't as I had hoped..

[sox jedi 14]

Good stuff guys

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by cubswin
isn't the train going to have a different result b/c of its weight?

Well it's a combination of its weight and its engine. See the engine will be providing torque during the collision. So a train gliding along at 80 mph w/ it's engine off will not hit the ball as far as train speeding along @ 80 mph w/ it's engine providing torque. This is b/c the train w/ it's engine running will not slow down as much during the collision.

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by cubswin
I haven't read it in years, but isn't what he says about the ball hitting the bat refuting the story about Ted Williams reading something on the ball as it hit the bat or something? Why do you think Adair is wrong?

And the momentum / hitter's force only matters in terms of bat speed and/or acceleration, I think -- which I believe he takes into account.

Ted Williams and most recently, Edgar Martinez, who can read numbers off of tennins ball shot @ 150 mph when they hit his bat.

No, it's not just bat speed, bat weight and bat acceleration. The force and weight of the hitter and how long the bat and the ball are in contact will also effect how far the ball will go.

Look @ A-Rod's HR's. He doesn't actually swing very quickly, but he's strong, weighs like 230 and stays on the ball a long, long time. That's why the ball just flys off his bat.

For example, I doubt McGwire's bat was any quicker than say Bernie Willaim's, but McGwire hit the ball a lot farther.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
You CAN see a ball hit the bat, he say you can't.

I thought that Ted Williams himself debunked the notion that he could see the bat hit the ball.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
Ted Williams and most recently, Edgar Martinez, who can read numbers off of tennins ball shot @ 150 mph when they hit his bat.

Do you have any links for this? I'd always read the contention that the eye muscles couldn't move quickly enough through the angle necessary to track the ball to the bat.

Like this guy, an opthalmologist from Harvard:
http://www.frozenropes.com/articles/Scope_and_Rope.htm

Look @ A-Rod's HR's. He doesn't actually swing very quickly, but he's strong, weighs like 230 and stays on the ball a long, long time. That's why the ball just flys off his bat.

Why would greater muscular strength allow ARod to keep the bat on the ball longer than a weaker batter? Is it that the bat decelerates on contact with the ball, and then the batsman accelerates it, applying force to the ball while in contact?

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by incarnadine
Do you have any links for this? I'd always read the contention that the eye muscles couldn't move quickly enough through the angle necessary to track the ball to the bat.

Like this guy, an opthalmologist from Harvard:
http://www.frozenropes.com/articles/Scope_and_Rope.htm


Why would greater muscular strength allow ARod to keep the bat on the ball longer than a weaker batter? Is it that the bat decelerates on contact with the ball, and then the batsman accelerates it, applying force to the ball while in contact?

Here's a link: http://www.detnews.com/2000/sports/0.../d01-79183.htm

It doesn't specifically say that Edgar can read the number off the ball when it hits the bat, but I've heard him say during an interview he can when things are going really well. I believe he also says as much in the MLB basesball video "Hitters on Hitting."

Many ML players say they see the ball hit the bat. Now maybe they are mistaken, but it's really not that impossible to do. You know where contact is generally going to be and you don't just move your eyes, you move your head to track the ball. If you look at photos of hitters right at contact, they look like they're staring right at the ball, their heads are not in front of or behind it, they are right on it. Sammy Sosa: http://www.compcamps.com/camps2001/j...n2/14_game.jpg

I mean does anyone doubt that Andre Agassi or Roger Ferderer sees a 100+ mph tennis ball hit their racket? I don't & I've seen pictures of Roger returning a serve and his eyes are looking right at the ball when it hits the racket. Here's an example: http://www.estrellita62.de/roger_federer.jpg

The mechanics of a swing can move your head, but if you get good at tracking the ball and working out the kinks, you can see the ball hit the bat. I guess it could be some sort of optical illusion, but I don't believe it is.

The path the bat takes is mostly what determines how long the bat stays on the ball. So a good swing will have the bat on the ball a "long" time. That's really a funcion of technique more than strength.

But you are right A-Rod's strength allows him to keep the bat from decelerating all that much during contact. He's applying a strong force to the bat all through contact, which makes the ball go further. And his strength probably does allow his bat too keep pace with the ball a little longer too, extending the time of contact.

An analogy would be the difference between a jab and a right cross in boxing. A jab might move a little faster, but a right cross does a lot more damage, even though both arms weigh the same.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
I mean does anyone doubt that Andre Agassi or Roger Ferderer sees a 100+ mph tennis ball hit their racket?

Are tennis balls actually travelling at 100+ mph when they're returned? I know they leave Roddick's racquet at around 140mph, but the balls are fuzzy (lots of drag), they hit the ground in the service box (losing speed), and they travel pretty far and have time to declerate there (is baseline to baseline more than 60'6"?) I would guess they're travelling at a more pedestrian speed, but it's just a guess.

The mechanics of a swing can move your head, but if you get good at tracking the ball and working out the kinks, you can see the ball hit the bat. I guess it could be some sort of optical illusion, but I don't believe it is.

I'm still skeptical; could you really form an image of an event lasting .002 seconds?

I'd love to see a database of bat speed. Could they put a radar gun on the batter, so we can get an mph reading for the bat head (or sweet spot) during a swing? I'd love to see a correlation between bat speed and extrabase hits, or 0-2 swings (possibly slower, more cautious, contact over power). I don't even have a seat of the pants estimate for average MLB bat speed. 120 mph?

Also, at what angle of a swing does the bat reach maximum velocity? Is that a contributor to "pulled" homeruns? Do some batter hit with more power to the opposite field because the speed-curve of their swing peaks earlier than others?

[incarnadine]

Here would be a test:

• Cover a bat in pine tar.
  
• Get a ball which is divided into sectors, each of which has a different bright color painted on it.
  
• Have an Iron Mike groove a 94 mph fastball. Hit a single.
  
• Ask the batter where the pine tar smudge will be on the ball when it's retrieved.
  

[FoulkeLore]

Originally posted by incarnadine


I thought that Ted Williams himself debunked the notion that he could see the bat hit the ball.

I will have no links to back this up and I'm not sure I believe it myself but I rememebr seeing/hearing/reading (one of those) that Ted Williams could count either the rotations of the ball or the seems spinning in rotation. If someone could confirm it, I'd be stunned as it seems you would need Superman's vision to do that.

[stevethesoxfan]

Originally posted by incarnadine
Here would be a test:

• Cover a bat in pine tar.
  
• Get a ball which is divided into sectors, each of which has a different bright color painted on it.
  
• Have an Iron Mike groove a 94 mph fastball. Hit a single.
  
• Ask the batter where the pine tar smudge will be on the ball when it's retrieved.
  

i like your idea, but wouldn't the ball be going so fast that the four colors would blur together? If we work on the assumption that a batter may be able to see the ball hit the bat, he still would be unlikely to do what you propose.

Personally, I think it's impossible to clearly see a baseball hit the bat. I think an MLB hitter can track the ball to the general vicinity of his bat, but little more. Heck, it's hard enough for me to do it playing slow-pitch softball.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by FoulkeLore


I will have no links to back this up and I'm not sure I believe it myself but I rememebr seeing/hearing/reading (one of those) that Ted Williams could count either the rotations of the ball or the seems spinning in rotation. If someone could confirm it, I'd be stunned as it seems you would need Superman's vision to do that.

Here's something from Ted:

http://www.tedwilliams.com/index.php...phtips&level=1

I had 20-10 vision. A lot of guys can see that well. I couldn’t “see” the bat hit the ball, but I knew by the feel of it. A good carpenter doesn’t have to see the head of the hammer strike the nail but he still hits it square every time.

So Ted said he did debunk this.

Here's another, where he basically says "No, but you can come close on a very slow pitch":

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/bas...ashbacks/1986/

GAMMONS: Does anyone ever see the ball off the bat?

WILLIAMS: Now if the ball's coming real slow and you swing early, you can come real close. I've seen what I thought was the ball going over my bat -- I think.

BOGGS: You can't see the bat hit the ball if you're generating any bat speed. If you're just laying the bat through the strike zone, sure, maybe. Ted, ask Don the question you asked me about the bat burning.

This is why I'm skeptical about any player saying they can see the bat hit the ball. If Ted Williams says it can't be done, I feel like it's a good bet it can't be done.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by incarnadine
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/bas...ashbacks/1986/

Hah. Read this all the way. Williams get's pretty feisty with Mattingly.

[cubswin]

Originally posted by incarnadine
Here would be a test:

• Cover a bat in pine tar.
  
• Get a ball which is divided into sectors, each of which has a different bright color painted on it.
  
• Have an Iron Mike groove a 94 mph fastball. Hit a single.
  
• Ask the batter where the pine tar smudge will be on the ball when it's retrieved.
  

If I had the ability to hit a 94 mph, there's a decent chance I wouldn;t be sitting here "chatting" with you (no offense)

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Originally posted by incarnadine


Here's something from Ted:

http://www.tedwilliams.com/index.php...phtips&level=1

So Ted said he did debunk this.

Here's another, where he basically says "No, but you can come close on a very slow pitch":

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/bas...ashbacks/1986/

This is why I'm skeptical about any player saying they can see the bat hit the ball. If Ted Williams says it can't be done, I feel like it's a good bet it can't be done.

On the other hand...

"Musselman's machine shoots tennis balls out of a long tube at speeds between 80 and 150 miles an hour. Each ball has five numbers written on it in red or black. The idea is for a player to watch the ball so closely that he can read the number on it.

This is a little problematic for somebody like catcher Corky Miller, who happens to be colorblind. On the other hand, it's too easy for a veteran such as Seattle's Edgar Martinez, whose eyes are so trained that he had to special-order a machine that throws 200 miles an hour."

From: http://www.cincypost.com/2002/may/14/lonnie051402.html

[Thor99]

Former MLB umpire Ron Luciano, in his book "The Umpire Strikes Back," recounted a tale of watching Ted take batting practice with his bat covered in Pine Tar. After each hit, Ted would say, "One seam" or "No seams." And Luciano says he was right every time.

Could be just a made up story to sell his book.

BTW, Ron committed suicide a couple of years back. Was truly a great character in the game of baseball. His arguments with Earl Weaver were legendary.

[incarnadine]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
On the other hand...

"Musselman's machine shoots tennis balls out of a long tube at speeds between 80 and 150 miles an hour. Each ball has five numbers written on it in red or black. The idea is for a player to watch the ball so closely that he can read the number on it.

This is a little problematic for somebody like catcher Corky Miller, who happens to be colorblind. On the other hand, it's too easy for a veteran such as Seattle's Edgar Martinez, whose eyes are so trained that he had to special-order a machine that throws 200 miles an hour."

From: http://www.cincypost.com/2002/may/14/lonnie051402.html

True, but you do get the whole path of the ball to attempt to read the numbers, rather than attempting to seeing the event of bat on ball.

It seems like we aren't going to get a consistent answer from players. (Especially if Luciano's story is right, then even guys like Ted Williams contradict themselves.) It's possible some can see the bat hit the ball, and some can't, and it's possible that none can but some think they can.

[stevethesoxfan]

Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan
On the other hand...

"Musselman's machine shoots tennis balls out of a long tube at speeds between 80 and 150 miles an hour. Each ball has five numbers written on it in red or black. The idea is for a player to watch the ball so closely that he can read the number on it.

This is a little problematic for somebody like catcher Corky Miller, who happens to be colorblind. On the other hand, it's too easy for a veteran such as Seattle's Edgar Martinez, whose eyes are so trained that he had to special-order a machine that throws 200 miles an hour."

From: http://www.cincypost.com/2002/may/14/lonnie051402.html

Great link! That is WILD!