HB4140, now pending in Springfield, would make it "unlawful for any coach, parent, teacher, or other person to knowingly allow the use of an aluminum bat during a recreational baseball or softball game in which a person under the age of 13 is a participant."
Why?
Sara Faiwell's story in the December 10, 2007 issue of the Daily Herald mentions HB4140, sponsored by Chicago Rep. Robert S. Molaro (D 21) -- and a couple of tragic stories involving aluminum bats.
And there have been some horrible, heartrending stories about serious injuries and even deaths at youth baseball games, from balls screaming off aluminum bats.
But baseball can be a dangerous game, no matter what bat is used. Skip Rozin's story for the July 31, 2007 Wall Street Journal starts with the tragedy of Tulsa Driller Coach Mike Coolbaugh -- killed by a screaming line drive -- off a wooden bat -- on July 3, 2007 while standing in the first base coach's box during a AA game. (Because of the Coolbaugh tragedy all Major League Baseball base coaches will be required to wear batting helmets this season.)
Rozin's article contended that there was scant research about the safety of metal bats vis a vis wood bats. He wrote, "The only fatality figures comparing metal to wood bats come from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. In 2002, it reported 17 deaths due to impact with a batted ball between 1991 and 2001. Of those, eight were known to involve nonwood bats and two to involve wood ones, but in the remaining seven cases the type of bat was unknown. That overall group, however, was dominated by players using metal bats--at least 90%, according to bat manufacturers."I venture into statistics with great trepidation, but it seems to me that if aluminum bats were exactly as dangerous as wood ones, no more dangerous and no less, and if 90% of young players used metal bats, there would still be nine times as many incidents with aluminum bats as with wood. To demonstrate, by this method, the inherent danger of aluminum bats, one would have to find far more than nine times as many incidents.
It turns out that a physics professor at the University of Illinois, Dr. Alan M. Nathan, has looked into the perils of aluminum vs. wood bats -- a number of other 'physics of baseball' issues.
Yes, that's a link to Dr. Nathan's compilation of baseball-related physics research; here is a link to Dr. Nathan's paper evaluating the "procedure used by the NCAA to control the performance of non-wood bats." He concludes that "aluminum bats outperform wood bats in the field." (Dr. Nathan offers this collection of academic papers and other materials for persons wishing to really compare the merits of wood vs. aluminum bats.)
Anyone who's ever played the game, or watched their kids play, is likely to conclude that players hit better and farther with aluminum bats. But it may because aluminum bats are easier to use. This explanation comes from the Ask A Scientist Physics Archive: "Because the aluminum bat is lighter, the batter has more control. It is easier to make 'last-minute adjustments' to his swing. Once a wooden bat is swinging, adjustments are difficult. Also, less time is needed to get the aluminum bat moving. The batter can wait just a little bit longer before deciding how to swing with an aluminum bat. * * * A wooden bat moving at the same speed as an aluminum bat will hit harder. A batter who can get a wooden bat moving fast will hit the ball further, provided he makes contact at all. * * * Overall, the wooden bat has more potential power, but the aluminum bat is easier to use."
Rozin's 2007 WSJ article notes that the "sweet spot" on an aluminum bat is bigger than on a wood bat. That's why major league scouts prefer to evaluate potential players in wood bat summer leagues. Kozin quotes Red Sox director of amateur scoting Jason McLeod,"Some of these kids are in very good leagues--SEC, Pac 10--and they're hitting .400, and they come to the Cape Cod League and they struggle to hit .200." And pitchers can come inside on a player armed with only a wood bat; the same player, wielding an aluminum bat, might fight that same pitch off for a hit. And, Rozin concludes, "It isn't a safety factor for Mr. McLeod and his colleagues. These scouts are just convinced that baseball is a different game with any bat but a wood one."
Aluminum bats cost more than wood bats, as any parent who's given in to a child's plaintive entreaties can tell you. But they tend to last longer and, for park districts and other youth baseball leagues looking to buy equipment that can be used by everyone on the team, aluminum is more cost effective.
I don't much care for the "ping" noise that aluminum bats make -- but I don't know that the case has been persuasively made for banning them.
It seems easier to ban something so that some politican can say that they've made the world safer. I almost think that's kind of sad.
ReplyDeleteIt's good to hear Dr. Nathan's results about wood bats having more power potential, because I seem to always hear the opposite argument. The increased danger can be attributed to the number of balls in play versus kids striking out with wooden bats, because aluminum bats allow kids to put more balls in play. Little league baseball is boring enough. I'm not in favor of making baseball safer by diminishing the sport of hitting and fielding.
ReplyDeleteThis is the aforementioned Dr. Nathan. For the record, the statement that wood bats have more power potential than aluminum is not my statement. Actually all bats that are subjected to NCAA regulalations provide about the same amount of power *when swung identically*. The real advantage of aluminum over wood vis-a-vis power is that aluminum bats can be swung faster. So, batters can hit the ball harder with aluminum and with more control (leading to more balls put in play).
ReplyDelete