PDA

View Full Version : Ocular Enhancer Machine


Dadawg_77
01-18-2005, 11:55 AM
In the most unusual clause of the deal, the Mets agreed to lease for Beltran an ocular enhancer machine, a device that throws colored, numbered tennis balls to batters at 150 mph or faster.

This is one of the newer training methods. The machine throws the tennis balls marked with numbers and the players stands in the batters box reading the number. The exercise is meant to improve players recognition time of spin on balls and slow the ball down to the batter. 11 years olds have reportedly been able to hit 90 mph fastballs after doing this training.

While people believe improve offense is derived from artificial chemical means, I think training like this which wasn't available back in the day, is a bigger reason for spike in offense.

NonetheLoaiza
01-18-2005, 12:09 PM
I think youre right. Most of the unusual numbers put up these days, I think, are a testament to newly developed training methods such as this. When looking at the overall picture, I have no doubt that the training is better nowadays, thus a reason for some of the spike in the offensive numbers. I'm sure chemical enhancement has had its effect as well, but I think if that was taken out of the equation, the numbers would still be huge.

voodoochile
01-18-2005, 12:10 PM
This is the visual equivelent of running with weights so that when you run without them, your feet feel lighter.

Training techniques are improving by leaps and bounds.

Palehose13
01-18-2005, 12:14 PM
This is one of the newer training methods. The machine throws the tennis balls marked with numbers and the players stands in the batters box reading the number. The exercise is meant to improve players recognition time of spin on balls and slow the ball down to the batter. 11 years olds have reportedly been able to hit 90 mph fastballs after doing this training.

While people believe improve offense is derived from artificial chemical means, I think training like this which wasn't available back in the day, is a bigger reason for spike in offense.

Wow...hey. I'm ahead of the times. I used to paint numbers on softballs and have the batters call them out as they were hitting it...6 years ago. :wink:

gosox41
01-18-2005, 12:52 PM
This is one of the newer training methods. The machine throws the tennis balls marked with numbers and the players stands in the batters box reading the number. The exercise is meant to improve players recognition time of spin on balls and slow the ball down to the batter. 11 years olds have reportedly been able to hit 90 mph fastballs after doing this training.

While people believe improve offense is derived from artificial chemical means, I think training like this which wasn't available back in the day, is a bigger reason for spike in offense.

I thought this has been going on for the last 15 years or so.



Bob

SoxFan76
01-18-2005, 01:30 PM
I've known about this for awhile.

Dadawg_77
01-18-2005, 01:50 PM
I thought this has been going on for the last 15 years or so.



Bob

It has been around but baseball moves slowly into new ideas, the Mets just got one. The general idea behind the post is that new training techniques are always developing for athletics and we should see performance increase because of this. I was reading an article about Beltran's contract and saw the line which inspired this post.

idseer
01-18-2005, 02:17 PM
I think youre right. Most of the unusual numbers put up these days, I think, are a testament to newly developed training methods such as this. When looking at the overall picture, I have no doubt that the training is better nowadays, thus a reason for some of the spike in the offensive numbers. I'm sure chemical enhancement has had its effect as well, but I think if that was taken out of the equation, the numbers would still be huge.

i think chemicals had a larger effect than you seem to indicate. special training is always evolving, that's true, but when chemicals were removed (bodies shrunk, etc), suddenly no one can hit 50 homers anymore. coincidence?
i still don't see stolen base levels going up. i don't see averages going up, i don't see many changes at all without chemical help.
now you might say the pitchers are also evolving and so everything looks the same but is being played at some higher plane ... but who knows?
the one thing that training has caused, i feel, is endurance is better than ever before. players ARE playing longer on the average than players from bygone era's.

WhiteSoxFan84
01-18-2005, 02:51 PM
They need to change the name of the machine to the EDGAR MARTINEZ MACHINE. He's known for making it famous amongst MLB players. He's said to master the machine. Explains his career BA (.312) and OBP (.418).

Fungo
01-18-2005, 03:26 PM
I thought this has been going on for the last 15 years or so.



Bob

Tony Gwynn used this technique back in his day. Maybe not to the degree of having a pitching machine throw at that high of a rate of speed, but in normal batting practice he would have colored dots on the ball and have to yell out the color before swinging. Helps the eyes pick up the spin of the ball. Can't argue with his results.

Nick@Nite
01-18-2005, 03:36 PM
Can we somehow chain Crede to one of these machines?

Dadawg_77
01-18-2005, 05:54 PM
i think chemicals had a larger effect than you seem to indicate. special training is always evolving, that's true, but when chemicals were removed (bodies shrunk, etc), suddenly no one can hit 50 homers anymore. coincidence?
i still don't see stolen base levels going up. i don't see averages going up, i don't see many changes at all without chemical help.
now you might say the pitchers are also evolving and so everything looks the same but is being played at some higher plane ... but who knows?
the one thing that training has caused, i feel, is endurance is better than ever before. players ARE playing longer on the average than players from bygone era's.

The 50 home run argument is a really weak arguement. People can see it but don't look behind the numbers. There are only a handfull of active hitters who have hit over 50 HRs. Thome only played a 143 games last year for 508 ab for 42 home runs or one hr for every 12 ab. He has always been a high 40's home run hitter at about 10-12 Abs per hr. When he hit 52, he was at 9 Abs per hr. Bonds hit one HR for every 8 AB but only had about 370 ABs. ARod met the Yankee Stadium, the death of right handed power. Griffery and Gonzo have slipped since they hit 50. In the year of the home run 2001, MLB players in 2001 hit a home run every 30.4 at bats. In 2004 MLB players hit a home run every 30.7. Not a big difference thus lack of a player reaching 50 home runs is probally do to factors other then the lack of steroids well maybe not in Giambi or Sosa case. Then again Giambi was never hit more then 43 home runs.

Flight #24
01-18-2005, 05:57 PM
The 50 home run argument is a really weak arguement. People can see it but don't look behind the numbers. There are only a handfull of active hitters who have hit over 50 HRs. Thome only played a 143 games last year for 508 ab for 42 home runs or one hr for every 12 ab. He has always been a high 40's home run hitter at about 10-12 Abs per hr. When he hit 52, he was at 9 Abs per hr. Bonds hit one HR for every 8 AB but only had about 370 ABs. ARod met the Yankee Stadium, the death of right handed power. Griffery and Gonzo have slipped since they hit 50. In the year of the home run 2001, MLB players in 2001 hit a home run every 30.4 at bats. In 2004 MLB players hit a home run every 30.7. Not a big difference thus lack of a player reaching 50 home runs is probally do to factors other then the lack of steroids well maybe not in Giambi or Sosa case. Then again Giambi was never hit more then 43 home runs.

True, but isn't one benefit of 'roids faster recovery? So fewer drugs for major power hitters could manifest itself in more injuries/days off to recover.

batmanZoSo
01-18-2005, 06:26 PM
Can we somehow chain Crede to one of these machines?

Ha!

Pleeeeeeease!

santo=dorf
01-18-2005, 06:26 PM
There was a feature about this on SC last March talking about how the Royals were using it. They interviewed Beltran and Graffy in the piece. It sure worked out well for the Royals last year!

idseer
01-18-2005, 07:05 PM
The 50 home run argument is a really weak arguement. People can see it but don't look behind the numbers. There are only a handfull of active hitters who have hit over 50 HRs. Thome only played a 143 games last year for 508 ab for 42 home runs or one hr for every 12 ab. He has always been a high 40's home run hitter at about 10-12 Abs per hr. When he hit 52, he was at 9 Abs per hr. Bonds hit one HR for every 8 AB but only had about 370 ABs. ARod met the Yankee Stadium, the death of right handed power. Griffery and Gonzo have slipped since they hit 50. In the year of the home run 2001, MLB players in 2001 hit a home run every 30.4 at bats. In 2004 MLB players hit a home run every 30.7. Not a big difference thus lack of a player reaching 50 home runs is probally do to factors other then the lack of steroids well maybe not in Giambi or Sosa case. Then again Giambi was never hit more then 43 home runs.

i imagine there would be fluctuations of course but let's not forget the guys who hit 30 because of enhancers ... or 20 for that matter. there was a hugh spike in homeruns altogether and it's just too coincidental to ignore.

Dadawg_77
01-18-2005, 08:15 PM
i imagine there would be fluctuations of course but let's not forget the guys who hit 30 because of enhancers ... or 20 for that matter. there was a hugh spike in homeruns altogether and it's just too coincidental to ignore.

True but how about factors like pitching becoming more diluted and new parks that are very home run friendly. There are many variables that can explain increase in home runs. To just say it come from or mostly from enhancers I think is faulty logic since not all variables have been explained. This isn't to say enhancers have had an effect, just questioning has it been as big as some believe it has.

Dadawg_77
01-18-2005, 08:17 PM
True, but isn't one benefit of 'roids faster recovery? So fewer drugs for major power hitters could manifest itself in more injuries/days off to recover.

Could be but there are other explanations that could easy answer the question.

idseer
01-18-2005, 08:29 PM
True but how about factors like pitching becoming more diluted and new parks that are very home run friendly. There are many variables that can explain increase in home runs. To just say it come from or mostly from enhancers I think is faulty logic since not all variables have been explained. This isn't to say enhancers have had an effect, just questioning has it been as big as some believe it has.

i agree it isn't totally drugs. but i think it is more drugs than training. at least the power side of things and as flight#24 said, recovery time which greatly adds to an individuals numbers.
as i say endurance i'm sure is due mainly to training methods in today's game.

this is a litte off the topic ... but you raised the issue of dilution ...
i've always had a different opinion :o: about dilution in baseball. i don't think it is any more diluted than it's ever been. i believe the percentages show that for the population size there are roughly the same amount of players today as there have ever been. and sports in general (even tho some gravitate to other major sports) is so much more lucrative than it's ever been that i think there's no shortage of people trying to make it as major leaguers.
the only time i think dilution raises it's head is JUST after an expansion. but after a few years i think it blends back to the normal expected percentage.

FarWestChicago
01-19-2005, 12:21 AM
While people believe improve offense is derived from artificial chemical means, I think training like this which wasn't available back in the day, is a bigger reason for spike in offense.LMAO!! This is rich. I thinks it's crystals. That really helps them. Or it could be the meditation and chanting. You know, not every new idea is a breakthrough for the ages. http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

FarWestChicago
01-19-2005, 12:22 AM
i agree it isn't totally drugs. but i think it is more drugs than training.It's nice to see somebody isn't a New Age goofball. http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

Nellie_Fox
01-19-2005, 01:17 AM
i believe the percentages show that for the population size there are roughly the same amount of players today as there have ever been. and sports in general (even tho some gravitate to other major sports) is so much more lucrative than it's ever been that i think there's no shortage of people trying to make it as major leaguers.Two things. First, your dismissive reference to some gravitating toward other sports is a huge factor. In the thirties, forties, and fifties, baseball was the undisputed king. Kids only played other sports to fill the time until baseball came around again. The best athletes played baseball first. That is simply no longer the case.

Second, as far as pitching goes, just going from the four-man to the five-man rotation dilutes pitching.

Dadawg_77
01-19-2005, 10:11 AM
LMAO!! This is rich. I thinks it's crystals. That really helps them. Or it could be the meditation and chanting. You know, not every new idea is a breakthrough for the ages. http://www.flyingsock.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

The most important hitting skill in baseball is being able to pickup the pitch and generate a powerful swing in micro-seconds. This skill wasn't worked on at the level it is today back in the 80's let alone the deadball era. Increasing this skills, increases the time a hitter has to see the ball, thus less guesses. Ted Williams was born with this skill, now imagine how the game play improves when people can develop this skill. Motion capture systems allow pitchers and coaches to breakdown mechanics in ways that were never dreamed of before. Better mechanics allows pitcher to generate more power for long time period since injuries decrease. This is some new age crap but looking at the present and future effect science on the game. Or if you want to believe steroids helps your hand eye coordination and better pitching mechanics, keep believing that. I just ask which thought process is more kooky.

Flight #24
01-19-2005, 10:22 AM
i agree it isn't totally drugs. but i think it is more drugs than training. at least the power side of things and as flight#24 said, recovery time which greatly adds to an individuals numbers.
as i say endurance i'm sure is due mainly to training methods in today's game.



Let's also not forget the impact that 'roids can have during training. I believe the increased recovery time lets you train harder, with the expected results.

The most important hitting skill in baseball is being able to pickup the pitch and generate a powerful swing in micro-seconds.

I think steroids can have a major impact on the 2d part of that statement. Obviously the hand-eye isn't as much of a factor, but the increased power would manifest itself in a shorter reaction time required (so you don't have to pick the ball up as quickly), and in how for the ball goes when you do make contact.

It's not the only factor, but to say it's not a major one is incorrect, IMO.

idseer
01-19-2005, 10:28 AM
Two things. First, your dismissive reference to some gravitating toward other sports is a huge factor. In the thirties, forties, and fifties, baseball was the undisputed king. Kids only played other sports to fill the time until baseball came around again. The best athletes played baseball first. That is simply no longer the case.

Second, as far as pitching goes, just going from the four-man to the five-man rotation dilutes pitching.

you make an interesting point. altho there certainly was professional football, basketball and hockey in, say, the 50's which did draw athletes, those sports have become bigger and probably do siphon off potential players.
but, without yet checking on this information, i'd suggest that not only is the usa population much larger now but baseball is drawing players from all over the globe like it never did before. how many players are coming from outside the usa as compared to the 50's? and most of the rest of the sports 'world' is in to baseball like this country used to be.

as far as pitching goes, i believe the above makes up for going from 4 to 5 man rotations. throw in the fact that the whole idea behind 5 man rotations is to better preserve pitchers to make them more effective making it a stronger pitching situation for teams ... not weaker (diluted).

there may be no way for me to prove just how many more players are available now as compared to the 50's. i just believe it's the case. :smile:

Dadawg_77
01-19-2005, 10:45 AM
Let's also not forget the impact that 'roids can have during training. I believe the increased recovery time lets you train harder, with the expected results.



I think steroids can have a major impact on the 2d part of that statement. Obviously the hand-eye isn't as much of a factor, but the increased power would manifest itself in a shorter reaction time required (so you don't have to pick the ball up as quickly), and in how for the ball goes when you do make contact.

It's not the only factor, but to say it's not a major one is incorrect, IMO.

I don't in is the main reason for improvement preformace. The science isn't on either side as no one has study the effects of steroids on baseball play. All that has been done is speculation based on the effect steroids have on muscles. I think the media has blown this story up since it helps sells papers not because the validity of the claims made. Steroids aren't even the drug with the largest effect on the game, that is stimulants. Stimulants don't make the easy story since you can't say player Y is popping uppers since he is so awake thus aren't covered as much as steroids.

idseer
01-19-2005, 11:03 AM
I don't in is the main reason for improvement preformace. The science isn't on either side as no one has study the effects of steroids on baseball play. All that has been done is speculation based on the effect steroids have on muscles. I think the media has blown this story up since it helps sells papers not because the validity of the claims made. Steroids aren't even the drug with the largest effect on the game, that is stimulants. Stimulants don't make the easy story since you can't say player Y is popping uppers since he is so awake thus aren't covered as much as steroids.

so you think you need scientific proof to show steroids help?

the fact that for 30 years prior to 1995 the lofty total of 50 homeruns was reached 3 times .... and in the 9 years (not counting last year as everyone was jumping the steroids ship) since 1995 it has been reached 8 times and 5 times it was over 60 (all by KNOWN steroid users) is just a coincidence?

Dadawg_77
01-19-2005, 11:30 AM
so you think you need scientific proof to show steroids help?

the fact that for 30 years prior to 1995 the lofty total of 50 homeruns was reached 3 times .... and in the 9 years (not counting last year as everyone was jumping the steroids ship) since 1995 it has been reached 8 times and 5 times it was over 60 (all by KNOWN steroid users) is just a coincidence?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/HR_season.shtml

50 homers has been reach 36 times. So you numbers are off.
As for all known steroid users, I wouldn't say Griffey, ARod, Gonzo and Brady Anderson are steroid users?

Parks have become smaller since 1995 since newer parks have been built for the home run. As much as Ruth benefited from Right Field Porch in Yankees Stadium, players are now benefiting from that concept in most every park.

daveeym
01-19-2005, 11:31 AM
This is one of the newer training methods. The machine throws the tennis balls marked with numbers and the players stands in the batters box reading the number. The exercise is meant to improve players recognition time of spin on balls and slow the ball down to the batter. 11 years olds have reportedly been able to hit 90 mph fastballs after doing this training.

While people believe improve offense is derived from artificial chemical means, I think training like this which wasn't available back in the day, is a bigger reason for spike in offense. Ha this is rich. While true modern training methods will make better players the major explosion of homeruns are from chemicals. But on the non-chemical enhancement I believe Lasix and similar corrective eye surgeries have a bigger effect.

What 11 year olds are they using, latin americans (or anyone for that matter) with doctored birth certificates? Most high schoolers can't even hit an 80-85 mph fast ball let alone a 90 mph one. I find there claims EXTREMELY dubious (aka BS) that 11 year olds are teeing off on 90 mph fast balls. This is improving sight not strength or speed.

idseer
01-19-2005, 11:37 AM
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/HR_season.shtml

50 homers has been reach 36 times. So you numbers are off.
As for all known steroid users, I wouldn't say Griffey, ARod, Gonzo and Brady Anderson are steroid users?

Parks have become smaller since 1995 since newer parks have been built for the home run. As much as Ruth benefited from Right Field Porch in Yankees Stadium, players are now benefiting from that concept in most every park.

you are incorrect.

i clearly stated for 30 years prior to 1995

you just put the total up there. INCLUDING the very questionable ones i was talking about.

in fact the number i was off about was there have been EIGHTEEN 50 hr seasons since 1995 not the 8 i stated!
which further proves my point!

so for all time, exactly HALF of all the 50 homeruns season have been hit in the last 10 years!

Dadawg_77
01-19-2005, 11:47 AM
you are incorrect.

i clearly stated for 30 years prior to 1995

you just put the total up there. INCLUDING the very questionable ones i was talking about.

I included everything, because I dislike arbitrary ending points. Why did you pick 30 years prior to 1995? You end points include an era of baseball where pitcher dominated the game more then hitting, why? To make any accurate assessment you need look at everything.

idseer
01-19-2005, 11:49 AM
I included everything, because I dislike arbitrary ending points. Why did you pick 30 years prior to 1995? You end points include an era of baseball where pitcher dominated the game more then hitting, why? To make any accurate assessment you need look at everything.

see my edited version of that same post.

HALF of ALL 50 homerun seasons have occured in the past 10 years!

The Critic
01-21-2005, 08:54 AM
I tried this machine once and it went like this:
"THREE!"...................."THREE!"......................"uhhhhhh.....THREE!"
Turns out they just put Penn #3 tennis balls in the machine....:D:

( This is all meant to be in teal, but I fear the Teal Police! )