How far do Home Runs REALLY go?

[stevethesoxfan]

I started this thread in reaction to seeing Manny Ramirez hit two absolute bombs in the last two days. On Monday, he hit a ball 430 ft. over the Green Monster in Boston. I was there in person and saw it go ridiculously high over the Monster seats. It is the longest HR I think I've ever seen in person.

And then yesterday, he hit one 440 ft. I saw it on TV, and it seemed to be hit even harder and higher than the one on Monday. It went high over the Monster, bounced just in front of the last row of cars on the garage roof across Landsdowne St., and bounced down to within 15 ft. of the Mass. Turnpike.

The measurements were according to ESPN. What I find hard to believe is that so many HRs in recent years have supposedly gone a lot further than that. We've all read of a lot of shots that went 480 ft., 500 ft. etc. , and I sometimes wonder if those measurements are simply hyped up by their teams propaganda. I'm sure that such balls were hit really well, but take into consideration that several of the players, coaches, and others at yesterday's game thought Ramirez' s HR Tuesday was the longest they had ever seen.

I'm not saying this to boost Manny's reputation and denigrate others -- it's just that it's hard to believe that a lot of balls recently have gone so much more than the ones crushed by him in the past two days. What do you think -- are some of these measurements exaggerated????

There is video of these two HRs on mlb.com. Go to Red Sox>multimedia>4/18 vs. Toronto>Top Plays>Ramirez goes deep. Then go to the same spot, but then 4/19 vs. Toronto>Top Plays>Manny's Monster shot.

Credit to Mr. Guido on SOSH posting this spotting of a 440 ft. HR at Fenway, about where Manny's shot went yesterday.

[Bleacherbee]

By no means scientific, but taking known distances in that photo, it would appear that if it is correct that the green dot is where ManRam's shot landed, its between 480-485 feet.

[scootermojo]

by stuff that i have read reported by physics professors and their studies of baseball is that it's practically impossible for a human being to hit a baseball over 500 hundred ft. by their estimations most of these titanic shots that where reported to have been over 500 to even 600 ft in some instances were in the high 400's and at best just a shade over 500. i would tend to believe their reporting since the laws of physics are irrefutable.

it's so hard to tell just exactly how far a hit baseball has traveled in most stadiums since they almost never land on flat ground level from where the ball was originally hit. i'm quite sure that most teams, stadiums and the league in general inflate these distances for sheer media hype. i think this is true with most of the longest homers reported from the past by the likes of ruth, mantle, etc., since there was really no movie footage and only eye witness speculation which is, after all, the worst account that one can have since people tend to exaggerate things, especially if it is their hero. one can only look to many negro league "statistics" and accounts such as josh gibson supposedly 650 ft. or even 700 ft. homer and 70 to 90 homer season he had.

in my opinion, if all of these "500 foot" hr's are greatly inflated, which i'm sure they are, it still doesn't diminish the fact to me because a 400 to 450 foot shot is a BLAST that still blows my mind.

[therealnod]

By knowing the trajectory and velocity of a batted ball a physicist can measure precisely the distance a ball will travel. Now whether or not MLB does this I'm not completely sure, but I think they do.

[ElHalo]

It certainly is possible to hit a baseball over 500 feet. I actually remember seeing Manny Ramirez last year hit a ball at Yankee Stadium that hit the second wall in monument park. Now, that second wall in Monument Park was the original outfield wall in YS 1, and that was 490 feet from home plate. Now, there certainly were home runs hit over that 490 foot wall during the lifetime of YS1, and those, by definition, had to be close to or over 500 feet. There's videotape of Mickey Mantle hitting the upper deck facade at YS1, which must by definition have been a home run that would have traveled 530 or more feet on flat ground.

[Yankees]

There was a shot (may have been Mantle) which hit the upper deck facade in Yankee Stadium while still going up, and bouced all the way back into the infield.

[stevethesoxfan]

There was a shot (may have been Mantle) which hit the upper deck facade in Yankee Stadium while still going up, and bouced all the way back into the infield.

I'm not doubting that someone, Mantle or otherwise, hit a 500 ft HR in past decades. It's just that there seems to be a lot MORE claims for them in the last few years.

For instance, to my recollection on Red Sox HRs, there was a gigantic blast by Jim Rice over the circa-1975 CF outer wall of Fenway, supposedly over the flagpole. Never really measured, but it was unbelievable. Manny also hit one out in the same area in 2001, and it went 501 ft., which is suspicious as hell because Ted Williams infamous "red seat" shot (the Fenway "record") went 12 inches further, hmmm...Then Manny hit one in Skydome that supposedly went about 490 ft. (?) in 2001. And I recall Canseco during his brief Sox stay hitting a monster in Skydome too. And in the Tokyo Dome during the All-Star tour this year, Ortiz supposedly hit one 514 ft. (I have the video clip) First of all, I wonder if these numbers are legit, but secondly, those are the ONLY 450+ ft. HRs I can recall Red Sox hitting in the last 30 years. (EDIT: And NO ONE in 93 years at Fenway has ever hit one on the RF roof, which is high, granted, but "only" 430 ft away. Think about the lefties: Williams, Yaz, Vaughn, Ortiz, and others -- none of them did that. So how can all these other people be hitting 500 ft. HRs?)

Yet doesn't it seem now like every couple of weeks someone is supposedly cranking one 460, 480, 500 ft? They all ARE titanic HRs, but are they all REALLY going THAT far, or are the teams' pumping up the numbers for PR purposes?

[scootermojo]

I'm not doubting that someone, Mantle or otherwise, hit a 500 ft HR in past decades. It's just that there seems to be a lot MORE claims for them in the last few years.

For instance, to my recollection on Red Sox HRs, there was a gigantic blast by Jim Rice over the circa-1975 CF outer wall of Fenway, supposedly over the flagpole. Never really measured, but it was unbelievable. Manny also hit one out in the same area in 2001, and it went 501 ft., which is suspicious as hell because Ted Williams infamous "red seat" shot (the Fenway "record") went 12 inches further, hmmm...Then Manny hit one in Skydome that supposedly went about 490 ft. (?) in 2001. And I recall Canseco during his brief Sox stay hitting a monster in Skydome too. And in the Tokyo Dome during the All-Star tour this year, Ortiz supposedly hit one 514 ft. (I have the video clip) First of all, I wonder if these numbers are legit, but secondly, those are the ONLY 450+ ft. HRs I can recall Red Sox hitting in the last 30 years. (EDIT: And NO ONE in 93 years at Fenway has ever hit one on the RF roof, which is high, granted, but "only" 430 ft away. Think about the lefties: Williams, Yaz, Vaughn, Ortiz, and others -- none of them did that. So how can all these other people be hitting 500 ft. HRs?)

Yet doesn't it seem now like every couple of weeks someone is supposedly cranking one 460, 480, 500 ft? They all ARE titanic HRs, but are they all REALLY going THAT far, or are the teams' pumping up the numbers for PR purposes?

my point EXACTLY...thank you

[scootermojo]

There was a shot (may have been Mantle) which hit the upper deck facade in Yankee Stadium while still going up, and bouced all the way back into the infield.

dude, first of all think about it. there is no video of the home run at all so the only account is eye witness and it should go without saying how unreliable that is. i'm sure elhalo, being a lawyer, would agree with me on that.

do you honestly believe that mantle's homer was STILL going up when it hit the facade? impossible!

do you honestly believe that the ball bounced ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE INFIELD? come on.

it was a mammoth shot, no doubt, but greatly exaggerated just like most accounts from the past for they are full of personal bias.

[scootermojo]

By knowing the trajectory and velocity of a batted ball a physicist can measure precisely the distance a ball will travel. Now whether or not MLB does this I'm not completely sure, but I think they do.

i read and saw two different reports on the methods that mlb uses and it varies from park to park and they don't go by the formula you desribed above which would more than likely by accurate.

[scootermojo]

It certainly is possible to hit a baseball over 500 feet. I actually remember seeing Manny Ramirez last year hit a ball at Yankee Stadium that hit the second wall in monument park. Now, that second wall in Monument Park was the original outfield wall in YS 1, and that was 490 feet from home plate. Now, there certainly were home runs hit over that 490 foot wall during the lifetime of YS1, and those, by definition, had to be close to or over 500 feet. There's videotape of Mickey Mantle hitting the upper deck facade at YS1, which must by definition have been a home run that would have traveled 530 or more feet on flat ground.

i agree that some homers could be around 500 to 510 or even 520 at the best but most that are claimed to be 500ft are in the 480 to 490 range. just as in everything else they are greatly inflated for pr purposes and/or by personal bias.

[Metal Ed]

It certainly is possible to hit a baseball over 500 feet. I actually remember seeing Manny Ramirez last year hit a ball at Yankee Stadium that hit the second wall in monument park. Now, that second wall in Monument Park was the original outfield wall in YS 1, and that was 490 feet from home plate. Now, there certainly were home runs hit over that 490 foot wall during the lifetime of YS1, and those, by definition, had to be close to or over 500 feet. There's videotape of Mickey Mantle hitting the upper deck facade at YS1, which must by definition have been a home run that would have traveled 530 or more feet on flat ground.



Where can one find this videotape?

[Bob Hannah]

Batting lefthanded, Mantle smashed a ball to left center, clearing the grandstand beyond the 391 foot mark. The ball caromed off the edge of the scoreboard at the back of the grandstand, landing in a yard behind the left field wall and across the street. The ball traveled well over 500 feet, estimated at 565 feet.

[Bleacherbee]

Whatever they use to measure homeruns is certainly not, in any way, scientific.

Case in point, I was at a game two weeks ago at Comerica park where Rondell White hit a bomb to left center that clanged off Hal Newhouser's statue behind all the seats. I've had season tickets to every game at Comerica since it opened and made it to nearly 75% of the games personally... it was easily the longest homerun in the park's history, bar-none.

When the distance came up, it was 440 feet - some 20 feet shorter than Eric Munson's record-holder, which went further down the line in left, but only about 15-20 rows into the crowd.

I figured that they knew that the base of the statue was 440 feet from home plate, but had no tools to take into account that it hit far up the statue, and even less to realize that if it were a foot right or left, it would not have touched the ground in the park, likely clearing the back fence and landing on Adams street.

If you take into account that Comerica park's field level is something like 50 feet below street level, Rondell White's homer would have gone 500 feet or more on a level field with no obstructions.

[Imapotato]

Some 'scientifically' measured HR Shots

Buck Ewing hit a ball 483 feet, measured by the building he hit

Harry Heilmann hit a shot 515 feet, 4 feet above a barn door that was past Detroit's RF

Babe Ruth blasted over the barn and was actually measured to be 600 feet

This is according to Spalding Baseball's Guide 1922

[rockin500]

i know at miller park, that the surveying class for UW-Milwaukee took hundreds of measurements in the outfield area and are thus used for measurement of homers. It certainly isnt impossible to hit a baseball 500 feet. Theres nothing in physics that precludes that possibility.

Sammy hit one in 2003 that went 520 feet, and it was partway down the street. when it left, you knew it was going to be a long long drive.

[RuthMayBond]

Some 'scientifically' measured HR Shots

Harry Heilmann hit a shot 515 feet, 4 feet above a barn door that was past Detroit's RF

Babe Ruth blasted over the barn and was actually measured to be 600 feet

This is according to Spalding Baseball's Guide 1922I wish I had the dates for these taters

[Imapotato]

look it up RMB, I gave you the documentation

[RuthMayBond]

look it up RMB, I gave you the documentationAll righty, I'll just go to the corner store and get my 1922 Spalding Guide

[Bleacherbee]

All righty, I'll just go to the corner store and get my 1922 Spalding Guide

HAHAHAHA :clapping

[Bob Hannah]

On April 8 of this year during the Washington/Florida game at Dolphins Stadium in Miami, Miguel Cabrera hit home runs in the 1st and 8th innings. When the distances were announced shortly after the blasts, each I think 430 to 440 some feet, the Nationals' announcers, Mel Proctor and Ron Darling, decided to find out how quickly the distances were determined. They reported the Marlins have the stadium sections/rows/areas plotted on a grid. Each grid square has the distance from home plate measured. After determining what section/row/area the ball landed in, it seems it would be fairly easy (at least in Miami) to get an accurate measurement of how far a ball traveled from the time it left the bat to the point where it contacted beyond the fence. Instant replay could pretty much pinpoint the spot where the ball came down.

[Imapotato]

All righty, I'll just go to the corner store and get my 1922 Spalding Guide

It's online for 1
and 2 smart guy...if it's the 1922 guide, then Heilmann and Ruth's HRS must have happened in?????

And for that you can go to retrosheet

[Bleacherbee]

It's online for 1
and 2 smart guy...if it's the 1922 guide, then Heilmann and Ruth's HRS must have happened in?????

... a year prior to 1922?

[cubbieinexile]

SPALDING'S OFFICIAL BASS BALL GUIDE.

Home Run Standard No timt seems to be better than the present to establish a standard fot home run measurements. Through the kindness of Mr. Harry Bullion of the Detroit Free Press, there is information at hand which is sufficiently accurate to determine Ruth's home run hit at Detroit as that by which home runs are to be measured in the future in comparing their length of distance. When Heilmann of the Detroit club batted his longest home run in the month of July, 1921, on the Detroit ground, it was such a prodigious hit that Mr. Bullion in company with others had it measured exactly. From home plate to the barn door which the ball hit across the street from the park, its flight was 515 feet. It struck' the door about four feet from the surface of the ground, so that it would have gone many feet further if the building had not been in the way. That hit is a fixed statistical and historical fact. It is much longer than the recorded hit of "Buck" Ewing made in Cleveland in 1889, which was measured a distance of 478 feet from home plate to fence. Where the ball went after that never was ascertained, although it was a standing joke in Cleveland that it brought up in the reception room of a Euclid Avenue mansion, which would not have been wholly impossible if it rolled to the corner of what was once Case Avenue. Mr. Bullion has not definitely located the spot where the ball struck the ground when Ruth hit it at Detroit, but from his personal observation and effort to ascertain the facts it is certain that it went at least 75 feet further than the ball hit by Heilmann. That would give the total distance for Ruth's hit as 590 feet, which is well enough attested to be authentic. In speaking of Ruth's hit Mr. Bullion writes: "The ball selected a course at the deepest part of the playing field and scaled the wall with plenty to spare. I am inclined to believe that it struck the earth at the corner of Trumbull Avenue and Cherry Street. I was one of the biggest shouters for measurements when Heilmann hit his home run, because I believed that it beat both of the home runs which were made by Ruth in New York into the center field bleachers. That is all over now, as Ruth batted the ball here so much further than it was batted by Heilmann that you may truthfully say that Ruth's hit surpassed Heilmann's by at least 75 feet and very likely is the long distance home run hit of the world in a regular league game." It seems as if Mr. Bullion has given the information which was necessary to establish a distance standard for home runs, and we can definitely set Ruth's home run drive at Detroit at 590 feet. Until that is exceeded by another which is better it will be considered that Ewing's home run in Cleveland is officially set aside in favor of one by the greatest long distance hitter in the history of the game. Ruth has made hits which were more than 600 feet long in exhibition games, as claimed by local authorities. His performance in Detroit was made in a regular game. Detroit and Cleveland divide between them the records for old and modern long distance hitting.



Ruth's is at the very least dubious considering it is all just a guess on Ruth's home run.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

We will for sure never know who hit the longest, impossible to ever be sure. I doubt there would be much of a difference between the longest hit and the second or third longest hit.

I did do some research on some of Babe Ruth's home runs. The following are from the most accurate source there can be, the news archives, mainly the N.Y.Times archives at the public library. These accounts were written in the game recap the day after the game. Not subject to distortion, faulty memories or exaggeration over the years.

Its a bit easier to judge some of the following in particular those to CF because parks were so much bigger then. What I mean is a home run hit to dead center way back then in most parks had ro be hit at least 450 to 480 since that was the distance marked off at the wall or fence.

Here are a small number of Ruth's long ones.

July 21, 1915, Sportsmans Park.. cleared bleachers and on the fly across Grand Avenue landing on far side of side walk.

August 10, 1917 Fenway, homers into dead center field bleachers. This one came in the 9th inning and gave Ruth the victory 5-4.

Both these long drives were before the live ball came into the game.

All of these were from his 1927 season.

July 10 at Detroit home runs number 28 and 29 both to CF. The distance to the CF wall was 455 feet.

August 17 at Comiskey, home run number 37. Ruth hits one over the roof out of the park. In those days some sports writers would sit in a perch on the roof to view the game. At least a dozen writers said Ruth's drive cleared the 52 foot wide roof, landed on Wentworth avenue. The roof was 75 feet high.

September 7, at Fenway, number 47 to dead center, described in the Times as being hit in the middle of the bleachers. The distance marked off at the fence 488 feet.

September 8, at Fenway, number 48 to center field.

It would appear that if the fence distance is 488 these drives had to be around 500+ feet.

I think most of us are familiar with number 714, Ruth's last home run, over the roof at Forbes Field.


Again we will never know who hit the longest of just how far it was hit but I thought it would be interesting to go back and check on some that were hit before our time. No place like the news archives to get the real story.

[Bleacherbee]

July 10 at Detroit home runs number 28 and 29 both to CF. The distance to the CF wall was 455 feet..

Centerfield at Navin in 1927 was 467 feet

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Centerfield at Navin in 1927 was 467 feet

That it was, my mistake.

[scootermojo]

Measuring Home Run Distance
On May 22, 1963, Mickey Mantle, the great New York Yankee slugger, hit a prodigious home run; some say the longest ball ever hit in the major leagues. Although it struck the stadium roof only 370 feet from home plate, some news reports credited Mantle with a 620-foot blast. Why was there this vast discrepancy? By tradition, when a batter hits a home run and it lands somewhere within the ball park, the distance this home run is said to have traveled is not the distance to the point of impact, but the estimated distance the ball would have traveled had its flight been unobstructed. As we shall see, in Mantle's case, this distance may have been considerably exaggerated.


Four parameters come in to play in estimating home run distance:
1. The ball’s height above the field at the point of impact with the stadium ( h in the diagram).
2. The horizontal distance that the ball has traveled when it impacts the stadium ( s in the diagram).
3. The angle of impact — the angle that the tangent line to the flight path makes with the horizontal
( A in the diagram).
4. The height at which the bat struck the ball (k in the diagram).

To calculate the distance, we view the parameters h, s, A, and k as given and assume that the path of the batted ball is a parabola, at least from the point of impact with the stadium to the “virtual impact point” with the ground — the spot at which the ball would have hit the ground had its path been unobstructed. Traditionally, these parameters have been estimated with the aid of a tape measure and careful observation of the ball’s flight path. Today, sophisticated technology (see, for example, reference [4]) can provide much more accurate figures for these variables.
We then introduce a Cartesian coordinate system in the plane of the ball’s path, in which the origin is at home plate and the positive x-axis runs along the field in the direction of flight (see the diagram above). In this coordinate system, we assign the coordinates (d, 0) to the virtual impact point, which makes d the “home run distance.” To determine the equation of the desired parabola, y = ax2 + bx + c , from the known parameters h, k, s, and A, we make use of the following conditions:
Note: Both trajectories have
the same "baseline" distance.


The Calculation
(1) When x = 0, y = k.

(2) When x = s, y = h.
(3) When x = s, dy/dx = tanA.


Condition (1) yields c = k. Conditions (2) and (3) result in the linear system (with unknowns a and b):
h = as2 + bs + k
tan(A) = 2 as + b

Solving this system, we see that

a = [ s(tanA) - h + k] / s2 and b = [2h - s(tanA) - 2 k] / s .

Once a and b have been calculated, the home run distance, d , is determined by finding the positive solution of the quadratic equation ax2 + bx + k = 0..

As an example, suppose a batter hits a home run into the seats. A chart supplied by the home club tells us that the ball landed 50 feet above the playing field and 400 feet from home plate. Thus, h = 50and s = 400.We estimate that the bat met the ball 3 feet (k) above home plate and that the angle of impact with the stadium was 135 E ( A). Then, using the formulas given above, we see that the path of the ball has the equation y = ax2 + bx + c, where a = -0.00279, b = 1.235, and c = 3. So, the home run distance, d, is the positive solution of the equation

(-0.00279)x2 + (1.235)x + 3 = 0.

Using the quadratic formula, we see that d is approximately 445 feet. (Note that the actual (straight line) distance that the ball traveled to the point of impact, obtained from s and h by using the Pythagorean Theorem, is approximately 403 feet.)

Note: Please see references [2] and [5], p. 594, for other approaches to this problem.


Let’s now return to the Mantle home run that was mentioned at the top of this page. Its point of impact with the stadium was approximately 115 feet above field level (h in the formula) and 370 feet from home plate (s ). The 620-foot estimate for this blast was based on the belief that the ball was near the peak of its travel at the point of impact with the stadium, which has since been deemed to be highly unlikely (see references [1], pp. 104 - 105 and [3]). Suppose we take the more conservative view that the path of the ball made an angle of 150 E ( A in the formula) with the horizontal when it struck the stadium. We will also assume, for the sake of simplicity, that Mantle “golfed” the pitch off the ground, so that k can be taken to be 0. (This simplification alters the computed home run distance by less than a foot.) From this data, we compute the parabolic path of the ball to be y = ax 2 + bx,where a = -0.00239and b = 1.199.So, the home run distance, d, is the positive solution of the equation
(-0.00239)x2 + (1.199) x = 0,
which is approximately 502 feet.

[scootermojo]

hey, wait a minute The conventional wisdom debunked.


The Myth of the 500-Foot Home Run
Do men always exaggerate the length of their long balls?
By John Pastier
Posted Saturday, Oct. 4, 1997, at 12:30 AM PT



On June 24, fans at Seattle's Kingdome witnessed one of the most dramatic pitcher-hitter confrontations since Walter Johnson faced Babe Ruth. On the mound, the Mariner's Big Unit, 6'-10" Randy Johnson, the tallest man ever to play in the majors, and the most proficient strikeout pitcher in history. At the plate, Oakland's Mark McGwire, the best and strongest home-run hitter since Ruth.

Although Johnson whiffed McGwire twice on the way to a record-breaking total of 19 strikeouts, McGwire hit what was estimated as the longest home run in at least a decade. He got all of a 97-mph fastball, and launched it at 105 mph in the general direction of Canada.
On the radio, Mariner announcer Dave Niehaus marveled, "A high fly ball, belted, and I mean belted, deep to left field, into the upper deck! My, oh my, what a shot by Mark McGwire! That is probably the longest home run ever hit here. ... It will be interesting to see how far that ball will be guesstimated. ... We have often wondered if McGwire got ahold of a Randy Johnson fastball how far he could hit it, and I think we just saw it."

Shortly after, Niehaus gave the estimated distance: "538 feet--unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable. The longest home run ever hit here in Seattle ... the longest home run I think I have ever seen hit." Not only that, it seems to be the longest ball hit since 1988, when the distance of major-league home runs was first estimated on a wide scale. Sports pages and broadcasters across the country are still heralding McGwire's homer as one of the great feats in slugging history.

But there's a catch: The 538-feet figure, announced by the Mariners about 40 seconds after the ball landed, was an overstatement worthy of P.T. Barnum. According to three physicists who have worked independently and have written extensively on the science of baseball, the human limit for hitting a baseball at sea level, under normal temperatures and with no wind, is somewhere between 450 feet and 470 feet.

Curious that anyone could hit a ball 538 feet in an indoor park near sea level, I called the Mariners to see how they devised such a spectacular number. The team repeatedly refused to explain how they arrived at the figure or to allow me to speak to whoever made the estimate. Mariners PR Director Dave Aust stresses that the figure is "a guesstimate." "We don't really believe in the process," Aust says, distancing the team from the McGwire number.

That "process" has evolved over time. In 1988, IBM established the "Tale of the Tape" program, devising a system by which home-run distances could be estimated. Sponsorship of the Major League Baseball-licensed program was assumed by telecom giant MCI in 1992 and redubbed the "MCI Home Run Program." The program's Web site lists the 10 longest home runs of the year and provides a searchable database of the home runs of the previous two years.

"We do not measure the home runs," says MCI spokesman Cal Jackson. The distances are estimated by the individual clubs and then provided to MCI. "We act as a warehouse for the numbers that Major League Baseball sends us."

Unsatisfied
with the 538-feet number, I did my own figuring. I consulted the 1976 Kingdome blueprints, a more recent laser-survey diagram of the stadium, and the Seattle Times game story, and visited the park twice. Here are the facts: McGwire's homer landed in the eighth row of the left side of section 240 in the second deck--439 feet (measured horizontally) from home plate and 59 feet above the playing field.

How much further could the ball have gone? Based on a review of the trajectory charts in The Physics of Baseball and Keep Your Eye on the Ball: The Science and Folklore of Baseball, conversations with University of Puget Sound physicist Andrew Rex, and correspondence with aerospace engineer and baseball researcher Roger Hawks, I determined that the McGwire home run would have traveled about 474 feet. A mighty home run, yes, but still 64 feet short of the length claimed.

Rex and Hawks agree that any home run hit that far must approximate the "maximum-distance trajectory"--that is it can only be a high fly or a normal fly, not a line drive. McGwire's homer was a high fly, as Niehaus attested, and as was confirmed by his broadcast partner Rick Rizzs, who marveled at the ball's hang time. According to the Major League Baseball system, a high fly will descend at an angle whose cotangent is 0.6. In trigonometry-for-dummies terms, what that means is that for every foot the ball would have continued to drop vertically, it would have traveled another 0.6 feet horizontally. Here's the math: 439 feet + (59 feet x 0.6) = 474 feet.

McGwire's "538-footer" isn't the only questionable long ball of the season. The MCI Web site claims six 500-footers in 1997, five by McGwire and one by Colorado Rockies star Andres Galarraga, hit in Miami. Galarraga's home run, originally announced as 573 feet, then revised at the park to 529 feet, is listed at 529 feet by MCI. By my calculations, it probably went about 479 feet. And yet another reason to doubt the 1997 numbers: Apparently, the IBM/MCI program recorded no 500-footers from 1988 to 1996.

Don't
get me wrong--all the homers listed on the MCI top-ten list were remarkable shots. And I'm not arguing that 500-footers are impossible. A few have been hit, but all were aided by altitude, the elements, or both. The best-known of these, Mickey Mantle's mythical 565-foot blast on a windy day at Washington's Griffith Stadium, probably traveled about 506 feet, according to The Physics of Baseball author Robert K. Adair.

The MCI Web site spells out the intended method of measuring these home runs. "Distances are measured using a grid system matched to each ballpark's unique parameters and configuration. Each home run is estimated based on how far it would have traveled from home plate on a horizontal line had it not been obstructed by something (seats, fence, roof, foul pole, other stadium parts, etc.)."

If every team worked according to the MCI plan, each stadium would be accurately diagramed with a fine-grained grid related to its seating sections, level by level. This would tell the estimator how far the ball was from home plate when it landed in the seats, bullpen, or other stadium area, and how high it was above field level when it landed. (In today's stadiums, very few home runs touch the ground before hitting something higher first.)

Working with the distance and height, the estimator would assess the ball's trajectory--was it a liner? a normal fly? a high fly?--and use a formula to determine the ultimate distance the ball would have traveled. Click here for the formula.

In theory this is not a bad system, but in practice it's not always fully observed. Some teams work from arcs rather than grids, making the estimators' jobs more difficult. Some teams measure only to the point of impact, rather than to the likely field-level landing point. The Rockies don't have height data, and must estimate that dimension. The Red Sox can't see where balls, hit beyond "The Monster" into the street, land. If McGwire had hit his home run in Baltimore, for example, it would have been measured at about 448 feet under the Orioles' point-of-impact house rules. Such departures make the various major-league home-run distances inconsistent, and usually make them less accurate as well.

Major League spokesman Patrick Courtney acknowledges that there have been questions about the MCI program, and says that the measurement issue will be discussed at league PR meetings next month "so everyone will be on the same page for next year."

Let's hope so. Baseball, a game of inches and meticulous record-keeping, deserves accurate and consistent data, and these awful numbers have already tainted one set of record books. Click here for the story. The pity is that the home-run-measurement program, as conceived by IBM in 1988, was never uniformly implemented. Now is the time for scientists to review and refine the system and for Major League Baseball to ensure compliance and train the estimators.

After a period of adjustment, during which many long home runs will seem puny, we'll slowly reacclimate ourselves to reality. Weaned off the inflated estimates, numbers that add 60 feet to big home runs, we'll finally appreciate the majesty of a 440-footer.

[Bob Hannah]

In the photo showing RFK Stadium below, begin counting the yellow seating sections, starting with the first full section on the left. If you look closely at the fourth , seventh, and eleventh sections you can make out one white seat in each of those sections. The white seats mark the impact point of home run balls hit by Frank Howard during his tenure with the Senators. Orignally there were 25 such seats. These are three that remain.

The seat in the eleventh section is just about dead on center field, a 410 foot distance as measured at the fence. The fence can be seen at field level, a white structure with the sections of fence further to the left of the picture a darker color. The fence at RFK is currently eight feet in height.The green wall is about 20 feet beyond the fence, the top of which partially forms the walkway between the burgundy and yellow seats and is seven to eight feet wide. Howards shot in the center field section is 3 to four rows up, another 10 to twelve feet back.

I know this is REAL unscientific guesswork, but I think it is safe to assume the point of the ball's impact for that centerfield shot is maybe 450 feet. Howard was a line drive hitter. Using the info in the article posted above, it can't be line drive, has to be a high fly or normal fly. I can only assume the height of the ball's impact from the height of the fence at eight feet. It might be 45 to fifty feet above the level of the ground. Don't know the trajectory of the ball.

I do think its a safe bet Howard regularly blasted balls 450 feet and beyond.

[west coast orange and black]

easier on the eyes, bob.

[west coast orange and black]

readin' about the frank howard seats made me recall the high an deep drive in denver that bonds hit a few years back in bp, the seat is in the 20th row (the purple row up there) of the upper deck.
the 20th row coors field seats designate one mile above sea level.
now, it was bp, true, but it was a blast, to be sure.

then there's that window that bonds broke.
the window across the street from oriole park.
hoo-boy.

[Blackout]

what do most people measure, the spot where the ball lands or where the ball stops rolling? (most of the time it stops rolling because it runs into something)

[meatface]

I'm not in any way downing Fenway Park, but it is a VERY small ballpark to left field. I remember when the All-Star game was in Boston a few years back there was a show on ESPN that examined the ballpark in great detail. They measured from homeplate to the green monster and I don't remember exactly what they came up with but I do remember that is was WAY more than the number posted on the wall. So it is possible , I think ,that the measurements on that home run are correct.

[csh19792001]

i agree that some homers could be around 500 to 510 or even 520 at the best but most that are claimed to be 500ft are in the 480 to 490 range. just as in everything else they are greatly inflated for pr purposes and/or by personal bias.

Who does Guiness list as hitting the longest homerun in history (recorded and verified)?

[vlady fan 15]

It is entirely possible in my opinion to hit a 500 plus shot. Reggie Jackson had that homerun in the all-star game that hit the stadium ligh in right field. That could have been a 600 foot blast or better. And just last year, Adum Dunn hit a 507 ft. (approximately) homerun at Great American. So I guess you have to take a real nice hack a quarter inch below the center of a 98mph fastball on a windy day heading towards center.

[The Splendid Splinter]

Guinness Book Of World Record

Longest Home Run Hit
The longest measured home run in a major league game is 193 m (634 ft) by Mickey Mantle (USA) for the New York Yankees against the Detroit Tigers at Briggs Stadium, Detroit, Michigan, USA, on September 10, 1960.

[flash143817]

The longest looking HR I ever saw on TV had to be Adam Dunn's last year off of Jose Lima at Great American Ballpark. That thing went all the way out of the stadium to dead center and landed near the river behind the stadium.

Considering that Dunn is 6-6 275 lbs and has a huge swing. I find it hard to believe that many humans could possibly hit it farther than him.

Has anybody done an official measurement on how far it was when that ball landed outside of the ballpark?

[hereforaday]

i got this from this site:
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/feats/art_hr.shtml

"It should be noted that those regular references over the years to 500- and 600-foot home runs were born out of scientific ignorance, misinformation, or even deliberate exaggeration. The most common cause for overstatement has been the basic misconception about the flight of a batted ball once it has reached its apex. Seeing great drives land atop distant upper-deck roof, sportswriters observing the occurrence from a press box would resort to their limited skills in mathematics without any regard for the laws of physics. Perhaps the ball had already flown over 400 feet, whereupon it was interrupted in midflight at a height of 70 feet above field level. Awed by such a demonstration of power, the writers would then describe the event for posterity as a 500-and-some-foot home run. With the guidance of our scientific brethren, we know that once a batted ball has reached its highest point and lost most of its velocity, it falls in a rapidly declining trajectory. The aforementioned fictional home run could have been reported at 550 feet in a prominent newspaper, and re-created at that length by historians for years thereafter, when in fact it traveled about 100 feet less. Hyperbole has always been part of the phenomenon of long-distance home runs, and this factor must also be considered."

hope it helps

[The Splendid Splinter]

Bobby Abreu hit a 517 foot homer tonight at the all star home run derby. Now, that was a shot. Sosa has the longest in the derby with 524 or 526 ft. I remember seeing that shot. And I don't think that was Sosa's farthest HR ever either. So I can see someone getting a 550 ft. bomb, and even a 600 ft. BOMB. After watching, Reggie's bomb that hit the lights on the rooftop of Tiger Stadium. I think it's possible to hit 600 ft. But I think it would be one of those "once in a lifetime" type of moonshot.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Bobby Abreu hit a 517 foot homer tonight at the all star home run derby. Now, that was a shot. Sosa has the longest in the derby with 524 or 526 ft. I remember seeing that shot. And I don't think that was Sosa's farthest HR ever either. So I can see someone getting a 550 ft. bomb, and even a 600 ft. BOMB. After watching, Reggie's bomb that hit the lights on the rooftop of Tiger Stadium. I think it's possible to hit 600 ft. But I think it would be one of those "once in a lifetime" type of moonshot.

I don't accept any of those numbers. None iof those balls actually traveled the distance listed. Some sort of a formula is used to estimate where the ball would have landed. I believe the field and the playing area is devided into grids. The point where the ball hits is then used to estimate where the ball would have landed on the fly if not for striking a wall or the seated area.

Now the method may have changed or maybe more than one method is in use, any one out there know, any more info on this.

No matter what the method, the bottom line in most cases is that the ball never traveled the distance given (hitting a wall or seated area) it's an estimate.

[flash143817]

I am certainly skeptical on most of the distances, especially the older HR's. Notice that since science and technology has improved, we haven't seen nearly as many 500+ and 600+ ft. HR's. But I do believe that it should be possible in today's age to get a fairly accurate measurement or estimation.

I don't know if it went the reported 535 ft., but Adam Dunn's HR was easily the farthest I have ever seen. It went at least 100 ft. past the CF wall and CF there has to be over 400 ft.

I think a lot of the HR's look farther than they really are because they go out to left or right, where the fences are shorter. The fact that Dunn's HR was to center was very significant to me for the distance.

One question: Does anybody have a clip of Glenallen Hill's supposed mammoth shot at Wrigley a few years ago?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

One question: Does anybody have a clip of Glenallen Hill's supposed mammoth shot at Wrigley a few years ago?
I don't have a clip, did see that one, only in my memory, what a shot. Not only that it was hit so far but so high even on impact, struck a building near the top of that building.

[gator92]

Dredging up an old thread here, I know, but thought I'd attach the link for the Glenallen Hill home run (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSajsyhypNs), and maybe reignite the discussion by pointing to my website, which has complete trajectory analysis for all 2006 home runs (and a few from 2005):

http://www.hittrackeronline.com

[misterdirt]

What a cool web site! Seems like getting the exact time of flight would be very important for accuracy. How much different in feet does + or - 1/100 of a second make on a typical home run?

[redbuck]

Distance = initial velocity + 1/2 (acceleration x (time ^ 2))
Acceleration due to gravity= -9.8 m/s^2

They don't do it this way but it's a simple physics equation that, with a little knowledge of angles and sines and cosines can tell the distance of the ball using bat speed and time.

[SABR Matt]

well...bat speed, average recoil force for the bat in question (remember...the ball doesn't just hit the bat and leave it going the same speed the bat was going...the ball has its' own initial velocity prior to impact, imparted by the pitcher...and there is enough give in the inner core of a ball that the combined forces of ball and bat as they collide are at least partially damped out through the ball giving way a little bit.

Plus the friction of the air the ball is flying through acting to slow its' momentum.

And of course the angle the ball path takes relative to the ground (which you already included).

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Here's a pretty interesting website.

http://www.stevetheump.com/HR_physics.htm

-Furthest a batted ball can go in normal conditions is 545 feet.

-To hit the ball at maximum possible distance, the trajectory of the bat should have a 35 degree angle.

-The "muzzle velocity" of a pitched baseball slows down about 1mph for every 7 feet after it leaves the pitchers hand. A loss of roughly 8mph by the time it reaches home plate. Fast gun, slow gun anyone?

[SABR Matt]

545 feet...what did they use as the hardness of a player's bat...the hardness of the ball (and thus the damping coefficient for the collision)...and the player's batspeed?

For that matter...what humidity and density coefficients did they call "normal" for the air (thus...how much frictional drag)

[Sultan_1895-1948]

545 feet...what did they use as the hardness of a player's bat...the hardness of the ball (and thus the damping coefficient for the collision)...and the player's batspeed?

For that matter...what humidity and density coefficients did they call "normal" for the air (thus...how much frictional drag)

All excellent questions. I have no idea what standards they used to determine what are "normal conditions." A grain of salt is in order for sure.

Matt, on a side note, quick question. I've often though the Brewers should be hitting Carlos Lee third, and Jenkins fourth. Would you be able to take a formula, switch them around, and see if the teams wins or runs created goes up? Just wonderin'.

[SABR Matt]

I don't currently have the capability (I'm working on it)...but Tango Tiger would.

and yes...i think hitting Lee third would improve the Brewers' chances of winning.

In fact if it's true that Lee is a free agent after this season, I'm hoping the Mariners will pursue him because right now, althugh they have some nice pieces of an offense, they don't have a #3 hitter...and Lee would fit perfectly.

[gator92]

What a cool web site! Seems like getting the exact time of flight would be very important for accuracy. How much different in feet does + or - 1/100 of a second make on a typical home run?

Depends - if the observation point is close to the ground (ball landing in the first deck, for example), makes very little difference, or often no difference at all. For example, I just analyzed Adam Dunn's homer tonight (5/10/06) with 5.35 seconds time of flight (my observation) and with 5.30 seconds and 5.20 seconds. The 5.35 and 5.30 second measurements were identical at 1 decimal place to the right (i.e. 436 feet, 118.8 mph SOB). For the 5.20 second analysis, the distance went to 437, and the SOB to 118.7 mph. That's pretty bulletproof - in fact, I'm wondering if I'm being too careful timing these things (no, I'm not, have to get it exactly right :) Dunn's homer landed at a height above the field of 40 feet, in the RF stands...

However, for the homers where the ball slams into a light tower or something else very high up, the timing difference can yield more of a difference. I just did a hypothetical homer, flight time 4.0 seconds, clears the Monster at Fenway at height of 95 feet, true distance of 408 feet. If I change the time to 4.1, I get 404 feet, a pretty significant difference. I combat this by always doing mutiple timings, and on the high observation points, I do even more, and average the results, so I can be confident I have it right.

[gator92]

By the way, I've added a section to my site called "Historic Homers", I'm going to try to analyze some of the most well-known tape measure shots. So, if anyone can send me some info on homers you want to see analyzed, I'll give it my best shot. What I need most is where the ball landed: distance from home plate horizontally, and height above field level. If you have video, all the better, if you have the boxscore with wind & temp, God bless you!

The first two homers analyzed are Glenallen Hill's Wrigley Field top-of-the-building shot, and Ted Williams' Red Seat homer.

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/historic.php

[misterdirt]

Again, great stuff! I was surprised that the time to impact didn't make a bigger difference but I guess I shouldn't have been given the other factors involved. Hope you figure out a way to make some money for all the hard work you have put in.

[redbuck]

well...bat speed, average recoil force for the bat in question (remember...the ball doesn't just hit the bat and leave it going the same speed the bat was going...the ball has its' own initial velocity prior to impact, imparted by the pitcher...and there is enough give in the inner core of a ball that the combined forces of ball and bat as they collide are at least partially damped out through the ball giving way a little bit.

Plus the friction of the air the ball is flying through acting to slow its' momentum.

And of course the angle the ball path takes relative to the ground (which you already included).

Instantaneous velocity. Yes it does.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I don't take the distances list seriously, some I do. The one's I doubt the most, the ones that strike seats in the upper decks in parks. The methods they use have no certain way to know where the ball may have landed had it landed on ground level, where it first came from in the batters box, impossible. They may get it close but who can say, thay could be of 20 to 40 feet off.

When I see a home run in the area of center field and in particular almost dead center, with no seating behind, just open field the distance given I consider more accurate than those than come down in seated areas, especially when landing in upper decks.

It's obvious that a ball clearing a wall at say 410 feet in dead center and landing 40 or 50 feet behind that 410 marker has to be around 440 to 460. It's much easier to judge a ball clearing a wall or fence marked off with no seats behind it than a ball hit into the stands, seated area.

I'm sure I'll hear all the math about angles and velocity and I say thats still no proof. I don't say they are never close, it's just to hard to determine distances when we can't say for sure where the ball would have landed, on the ground.

[SABR Matt]

Instantaneous velocity. Yes it does.

Yes what does?

If you're referring to the impact speed of the ball being fairly represented by simply a non-elastic collision model where the bat meets the ball and those combined forces are perfectly conserved by the bat's continuing momentum and the ball's momentum in its' new direction...you are mistaken. If you think a baseball is a perfect non-elastic particle, you need to do some research.

[redbuck]

Yes what does?

If you're referring to the impact speed of the ball being fairly represented by simply a non-elastic collision model where the bat meets the ball and those combined forces are perfectly conserved by the bat's continuing momentum and the ball's momentum in its' new direction...you are mistaken. If you think a baseball is a perfect non-elastic particle, you need to do some research.

No, absolutely not. There are theoretically two phases when the ball hits the bat. The ball makes impact with the bat, causing the ball to take a shape about 3/4 its normal shape. At this point, the ball is losing its negative x-direction velocity. Once that velocity reaches 0, the bat still carries the ball for a couple hundredths of a second. At one instantaneous point, the two are traveling at the same speed. At this split second, you can measure the bat speed, which equals the ball's initial speed before it accelerates slightly due to the bat and then leaves the bat and carries in the x and y direction.

[SABR Matt]

At the moment where the ball and bat reach an equivalent velocity, that velocity does not equal the velocity of the ball when it is free of the bat and beginning its' projectile motion. That velocity is often as much as 5-10% higher than the velocity of the bat.

Use of instantaneous velocity as you describe it would therefore not be an accurate starting point for force calculations unless you had an equation that explained the ball's acceleration post-speed-matching.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Lots of math here, equations, theories but in the end, the bottom line, no way can it be proven where some of these balls would have come down on the ground, no one knows. How much error is there, how far off are some of these distances given, who knows.

[gator92]

Lots of math here, equations, theories but in the end, the bottom line, no way can it be proven where some of these balls would have come down on the ground, no one knows. How much error is there, how far off are some of these distances given, who knows.

Not disagreeing with you that a direct measurement of a ball hitting the ground is always the best, but I think you're selling short the concept of analyzing the trajectory. If you can pin down the xyz position of where the ball strikes the seats (eyeballs and accurate scale diagram of stadium), and you know the time it took to get there (stopwatch), and you know the atmospherics (thermometer, anemometer and altimeter), then you can nail the trajectory of the ball very well, and then just project it all the way back down to the ground. Example diagram:

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/historic/Williams_RedSeat.jpg

The wind, temperature and time in flight for the trajectory shown are best guesses, but I'm just making the point, if you know those things, you can trace the trajectory down to field level and be very accurate... and if you understand how much error is in those inputs, you can describe the error in the outputs.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Not disagreeing with you that a direct measurement of a ball hitting the ground is always the best, but I think you're selling short the concept of analyzing the trajectory. If you can pin down the xyz position of where the ball strikes the seats (eyeballs and accurate scale diagram of stadium), and you know the time it took to get there (stopwatch), and you know the atmospherics (thermometer, anemometer and altimeter), then you can nail the trajectory of the ball very well, and then just project it all the way back down to the ground. Example diagram:

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/historic/Williams_RedSeat.jpg

The wind, temperature and time in flight for the trajectory shown are best guesses, but I'm just making the point, if you know those things, you can trace the trajectory down to field level and be very accurate... and if you understand how much error is in those inputs, you can describe the error in the outputs.

I am not completely dismissing the method used. But what about swirling winds. Winds that are different directions in different parts of the park. How do they know with certainty how the winds may have effected the ball near the end of it's flight had there been no seats there but an open field.

Sounds like I'm splitting hais here, maybe I am but I would be more pleased if they gave a figure but included a margin of "possible error like maybe 3 or 5 percent.

[gator92]

I am not completely dismissing the method used. But what about swirling winds. Winds that are different directions in different parts of the park. How do they know with certainty how the winds may have effected the ball near the end of it's flight had there been no seats there but an open field.

Sounds like I'm splitting hais here, maybe I am but I would be more pleased if they gave a figure but included a margin of "possible error like maybe 3 or 5 percent.


You have a very good point, the consistency of the wind is an assumption that is probably not completely valid, but let me try to explain why the effect of that is (often) minimal. If it were a question of starting from home plate, with a given speed off the bat and a given direction, then the swirling winds could indeed blow the ball off of the computed trajectory quite far. However, the way I solve these trajectories involves TWO fixed points in space, the beginning point (3 feet above home plate), and the end point (say a seat in the bleachers 390 feet away, 30 feet above field level). Whatever the wind is doing, constant or changing as the ball flies, the trajectory path of the ball is constrained to pass through the final point, so the only "play" in the trajectory is what happens after it passes through the landing point. I have done some tinkering with my analysis engine to see what the typical effect of late changes in wind might be, and the initial read is that it would only cause a change of perhaps 5 feet maximum, and then only when the wind change is quite dramatic (say a delta of 20 mph). But, I will try to take a closer look at this to provide some more solid data, as I say, this was just a quick check.

Hope I'm making sense here, not sure I've done a good job of explaining how the knowledge of the second point makes the difference...

[SHOELESSJOE3]

You have a very good point, the consistency of the wind is an assumption that is probably not completely valid, but let me try to explain why the effect of that is (often) minimal. If it were a question of starting from home plate, with a given speed off the bat and a given direction, then the swirling winds could indeed blow the ball off of the computed trajectory quite far. However, the way I solve these trajectories involves TWO fixed points in space, the beginning point (3 feet above home plate), and the end point (say a seat in the bleachers 390 feet away, 30 feet above field level). Whatever the wind is doing, constant or changing as the ball flies, the trajectory path of the ball is constrained to pass through the final point, so the only "play" in the trajectory is what happens after it passes through the landing point. I have done some tinkering with my analysis engine to see what the typical effect of late changes in wind might be, and the initial read is that it would only cause a change of perhaps 5 feet maximum, and then only when the wind change is quite dramatic (say a delta of 20 mph). But, I will try to take a closer look at this to provide some more solid data, as I say, this was just a quick check.

Hope I'm making sense here, not sure I've done a good job of explaining how the knowledge of the second point makes the difference...

Your making sense and you did do a good job, looks like lots of work. I'll accept that.

[gator92]

Your making sense and you did do a good job, looks like lots of work. I'll accept that.

One thing that has always concerned me is getting a good read on the wind speed & direction. As a defualt or fallback, I capture the box score numbers, but they quote those for the first pitch, and 3 hours later it could be very different. So, I try to check the flags and how they are flying during the home run (if they are visible - some stadiums are great, like Yankee Stadium, the whole place is ringed with flags, some are terrible, I don't know if there is a flag in the entire Great American BP that you can see during a hit). Failing that, I go forward or back in the video until they do a wide shot, and then I try to gauge the wind from that. Most times I can come up with a number I think is pretty close to representative, but there is certainly an element of uncertainty introduced there. But, for the reasons I explained below, the distance estimates are fairly robust to that most of the time.

So, I think the numbers are about as good as I can get them, and definitely better than what the stadiums are announcing in the park - hopefully I can convince them to make a change...

[TheSandman]

Listen to this:

Ok, I dont' remember who they were playing, but it was a home game at Yankee Stadium (I'll try and find the date but it was quite a while ago, when Joe Dimaggio was in his prime) and the Yanks were losing 4-3. Joe Dimaggio was up, with a man on 2nd and 3rd. Bottom of the 9th, 2 outs.Down by only one run. The first pitch: Called strike. The second pitch: Outside, ball. Third pitch: Fastball up and in, if Joe hadn't moved it would've hit him in the head. And when he moved to get out of the way, he spun around, and the ball hit the bat and blooped into shallow right scoring 2 runs and winning the game. Unbelievable, I know. But the next day, The headline is: Joe Dimaggio comes up with unbelievable clutch hit into deep right to win the ballgame!


This just shows exactly how much media can hype things up. And I don't doubt they do the same with home runs too.

I'll try and get you the exact details too, like the date, newspaper article, and who they played.

[gator92]

Listen to this:

Ok, I dont' remember who they were playing, but it was a home game at Yankee Stadium (I'll try and find the date but it was quite a while ago, when Joe Dimaggio was in his prime) and the Yanks were losing 4-3. Joe Dimaggio was up, with a man on 2nd and 3rd. Bottom of the 9th, 2 outs.Down by only one run. The first pitch: Called strike. The second pitch: Outside, ball. Third pitch: Fastball up and in, if Joe hadn't moved it would've hit him in the head. And when he moved to get out of the way, he spun around, and the ball hit the bat and blooped into shallow right scoring 2 runs and winning the game. Unbelievable, I know. But the next day, The headline is: Joe Dimaggio comes up with unbelievable clutch hit into deep right to win the ballgame!


This just shows exactly how much media can hype things up. And I don't doubt they do the same with home runs too.

I'll try and get you the exact details too, like the date, newspaper article, and who they played.
For this reason, when I put up "Historic Homers" on my site, I'm going to stick to homers where the landing spot can really be pinned down with confidence, i.e. the Mantle Facade shot, the Reggie Jackson homer off the transformer on the RF roof at Tiger Stadium, Ted Williams' Red Seat homer. I'm not going to try to say anything intelligent about the one's that end with "...and a neighborhood youth picked the ball up out of the gutter half a mile away", or words to that effect. For those sort of homers, there's no hope of ever knowing how far they went, but for some, we can make a good estimate.

Just yesterday, a guy sent me some copies of pages from the New York Times with the weather conditions for the day Mantle hit the "Facade" homer - so I'll be able to make a pretty good esitmate now, the only variable I'll have to show a range of values on is the time of flight, because I have the end location, and the weather now.

[Calif_Eagle]

Perusing old threads today and found this one to be fascinating. No one mentioned a Dave Kingman HR at Wrigley Field in about 1976 (late 70's anyway) that struck a house on the fly several buildings down from those structures that front onto the outfield bleachers at Wrigley. I recall newspaper write-ups at the time calling this possibly the longest home run ever hit. (Of course, its equally possible that those papers hyped it up also.) Nonetheless, it was a very long drive & I'm wondering if any one recalls it, and how far it went, or at least was estimated to have gone.

[pizzacutter]

If you like, I actually live in Wrigleyville. If you can give me an address, I can bring my tape measure!

[RuthMayBond]

Perusing old threads today and found this one to be fascinating. No one mentioned a Dave Kingman HR at Wrigley Field in about 1976 (late 70's anyway) that struck a house on the fly several buildings down from those structures that front onto the outfield bleachers at Wrigley. I recall newspaper write-ups at the time calling this possibly the longest home run ever hit. (Of course, its equally possible that those papers hyped it up also.) Nonetheless, it was a very long drive & I'm wondering if any one recalls it, and how far it went, or at least was estimated to have gone.April 14, 1976 off Tom Dettore in 6th. Supposedly 630 feet :eek:

[Williamsburg2599]

If you like, I actually live in Wrigleyville. If you can give me an address, I can bring my tape measure!
Or you could just use Google Earth. :laugh

[RuthMayBond]

If you like, I actually live in Wrigleyville. We all hate you :mad: :evil Ok, we're just EXTREMELY jealous ;) :laugh

[brett]

i read and saw two different reports on the methods that mlb uses and it varies from park to park and they don't go by the formula you desribed above which would more than likely by accurate.


The problem with the scientific studies I've read are that they assume that the ball is a non-dynamic object. A 100 mile per hour pitch, struck with a 100 mile per hour swing would probably not go over about 480 feet based on linear mechanics only, but the lift given to a ball by the its spin could extend the flight time considerably. In fact, a fastball with a lot of backspin will have that backspin reflected back off the bat. Baseballs simply do not follow the rules of simple projectile motion.

In fact, the lift is due to the air, and the thinner air of Colorado, while providing less resistance to a ball in simple projectile terms, would also not allow for as much lift/hang time in rotational terms.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Anyone interested in long distance home runs needs to pick up Bill Jenkinson's new book, which includes information on several long homers from various players, not just Ruth. And they can look forward to his next project as well.

http://www.amazon.com/Year-Babe-Ruth-Home-Runs/dp/0786719060/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-9837302-3112101?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174267134&sr=1-1

[RuthMayBond]

Anyone interested in long distance home runs needs to pick up Bill Jenkinson's new book, which includes information on several long homers from various players, not just Ruth. And they can look forward to his next project as well.

http://www.amazon.com/Year-Babe-Ruth-Home-Runs/dp/0786719060/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-9837302-3112101?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174267134&sr=1-1Woo hoo, it's at my public library, should have it in a week :clapping

[gator92]

The problem with the scientific studies I've read are that they assume that the ball is a non-dynamic object. A 100 mile per hour pitch, struck with a 100 mile per hour swing would probably not go over about 480 feet based on linear mechanics only, but the lift given to a ball by the its spin could extend the flight time considerably. In fact, a fastball with a lot of backspin will have that backspin reflected back off the bat. Baseballs simply do not follow the rules of simple projectile motion.

In fact, the lift is due to the air, and the thinner air of Colorado, while providing less resistance to a ball in simple projectile terms, would also not allow for as much lift/hang time in rotational terms.
Hit Tracker incorporates all of these factors - in fact, more so than many other analyses because it also incorporates the sidespin you get when the ball is not hit directly to CF (i.e. the hook or slice effect). So, the Magnus Force from the back and side spin is in there, as are the atmospheric conditions (temp., wind, altitude) that affect the density of the air and the relative velocity of the ball through the air, which affects the drag coefficient, which affects the drag force, etc..

[gator92]

Anyone interested in long distance home runs needs to pick up Bill Jenkinson's new book, which includes information on several long homers from various players, not just Ruth. And they can look forward to his next project as well.

http://www.amazon.com/Year-Babe-Ruth-Home-Runs/dp/0786719060/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-9837302-3112101?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174267134&sr=1-1
It is a great book, almost numbing at times in its descriptions of how many long homers Ruth hit at a time when baseball was very different... it must have been nice for the poor fans sitting in the bleachers at the Polo Grounds 500 feet from home plate to have Ruth get them into the game with a deep blast!

By the way, what is Jenkinson's new project that you refer to?

[Calif_Eagle]

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=59046 <--- this link to a post on the minor league baseball forum here at the Fever references a "730 foot home run" Anyone care to comment, or otherwise have any info or light to shed on this HR? I had (have) never heard of it before this and while I have little doubt it was quite a poke, could it REALLY have travelled so far without a Force Five Hurricane wind behind it?

[brett]

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=59046 <--- this link to a post on the minor league baseball forum here at the Fever references a "730 foot home run" Anyone care to comment, or otherwise have any info or light to shed on this HR? I had (have) never heard of it before this and while I have little doubt it was quite a poke, could it REALLY have travelled so far without a Force Five Hurricane wind behind it?


Using computer simulations, air resistance, and magnus force I estimated that a ball hit 120 miles per hour at an optimal angle would go about 500 without any spin, and 600 feet with about 45 rps backspin. Now the NCAA has set limits on ball "exit speed" at 94 miles per hour, and the actual exit speed would be the major factor. At 94 mph, NO! The values drop to about 440 and 490 feet.

That's with no tail wind, but the tail wind would cut into the magnus (spin) lift.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

It is a great book, almost numbing at times in its descriptions of how many long homers Ruth hit at a time when baseball was very different... it must have been nice for the poor fans sitting in the bleachers at the Polo Grounds 500 feet from home plate to have Ruth get them into the game with a deep blast!

By the way, what is Jenkinson's new project that you refer to?

How do you like the picture on page 215?

From what I undertand, it has to do with the slugging of the 50 greatest slugger in history. Should be a good one.

[Biofury]

How do you like the picture on page 215?

From what I undertand, it has to do with the slugging of the 50 greatest slugger in history. Should be a good one.

I would've prefered attending a game on July 18, 1921 at Navin Field.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I would've prefered attending a game on July 18, 1921 at Navin Field.

Better in the stadium than driving through that intersection :D

And better driving through that intersection that being a tree trimmer on 9/9/21 in Philadelphia ;)

[elmer]

http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=59046 <--- this link to a post on the minor league baseball forum here at the Fever references a "730 foot home run" Anyone care to comment, or otherwise have any info or light to shed on this HR? I had (have) never heard of it before this and while I have little doubt it was quite a poke, could it REALLY have travelled so far without a Force Five Hurricane wind behind it?

references to long 3 long home runs

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/keepingscore_article/catching_up_with_a_big_hitter/
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1230253&type=news
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070203&content_id=169805&vkey=news_milb&fext=.jsp

[Calif_Eagle]

references to long 3 long home runs

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/keepingscore_article/catching_up_with_a_big_hitter/
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1230253&type=news
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070203&content_id=169805&vkey=news_milb&fext=.jsp

Thanx much for posting those Elmer! All were very interesting and entertaining to read.

[tommybaseball]

[QUOTE=scootermojo;286438]by stuff that i have read reported by physics professors and their studies of baseball is that it's practically impossible for a human being to hit a baseball over 500 hundred ft.


From what I've heard, Mantle did not hit the baseball like a human being. He hit the ball like an animal!

[RuthMayBond]

[QUOTE=scootermojo;286438]by stuff that i have read reported by physics professors and their studies of baseball is that it's practically impossible for a human being to hit a baseball over 500 hundred ft.


From what I've heard, Mantle did not hit the baseball like a human being. He hit the ball like an animal!I would think Foxx would hit more like an animal (they did say he wasn't scouted ,he was trapped)

[elmer]

Thanx much for posting those Elmer! All were very interesting and entertaining to read.
one more referencing Gil Carter home run

http://www.efqreview.com/NewFiles/v18n1/numbersgame.html

[elmer]

Thanx much for posting those Elmer! All were very interesting and entertaining to read.
Ruth homers:
Oct 23, 1926 - In South Bend‚ Indiana‚ the Babe Ruth All Stars‚ including Johnny Mostil‚ Marty McManus and Urban Shocker‚ beat the local South Bend Indians 7-3 in a game called after 6 innings because of a late start. The all stars were delayed 2 hours when their vehicle broke down‚ as researched by historian Kevin Paczkowski. The Babe is 3-for-4 and hits a HR estimated at 600 feet. In preparation for the Babe's visit‚ the local team stocked up on baseballs at a cost of $1.23 each: in Montreal on October 17‚ the Babe hit 36 into a nearby river‚ according to the South Bend Tribune‚ and the ensuing game had to be stopped for lack of balls. Babe's squad will tie tomorrow when the Indians pitch the Giants Fred Fitzsimmons‚ who lives nearby. Joining Freddie is Fred Lindstrom.
few others:
http://www.humbersport.org/essays/ruth.html
http://www.retroweb.com/lynchburg/attractions/main.html
http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/R/Ruth_Babe.stm
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=spalding&fileName=00165/spalding00165.db&recNum=34&itemLink=S%3Fammem%2Fspaldingbib%3A%40field%28TITL E%2B%40od1%28Spalding%27s%2Bofficial%2Bbase%2Bball %2Bguide%2C%2B1922%29%29
http://www.espn.go.com/columns/wojnarowski_adrian/36695.html
http://www.retroweb.com/lynchburg/attractions/main.html

[ander2001]

vlady hit some bombs in the derby today. One was over 500 feet i believe.

[Williamsburg2599]

vlady hit some bombs in the derby today. One was over 500 feet i believe.

496, according to www.hittrackeronline.com

[SHOELESSJOE3]

June 8, 1926. Navin Field Detroit. One of Babe Ruth's longest to RF at this park.

[gator92]

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/Ruth_Navin_1926.jpg

Looks like about 475 feet. I think Ruth must have done better than that in Detroit at some point...

[SHOELESSJOE3]

http://www.hittrackeronline.com/Ruth_Navin_1926.jpg

Looks like about 475 feet. I think Ruth must have done better than that in Detroit at some point...

Possible but I did say to right field. I will do some searching on right field home runs at Detroit but it's probably difficult to know with certainty if this or another was the longest right field.
I believe there were some hit to center and and closer to centerfield that were longer.

Do you think you could come up with some distances on some of his longest at Yankee Stadium that he hit in the direction of the scoreboard. I know he hit some of his longest at home to centerfield. We know that because we know they left the playing field around that 487 foot mark.

I think some that he hit near the scoreboard are overlooked because they were hit over the fence at a shorter distance to right centerfield and did not appear as impressive as those hit to center.

Searching the news archives I read of a number that he hit close to that scoereboard, one of them a half dozen seats away from the scoreboard. Can you come up with any numbers on that drive.

[hellborn]

Looks like about 475 feet. I think Ruth must have done better than that in Detroit at some point...

Looks like that ball would have barely gone out to CF!

Google Earth is amazing...I was zooming in to my backyard and thought I saw my wife sunbathing. As I zoomed in more, I realized it was a guy's back, but with my wife's legs sticking out from underneath it...kind of weird!!

[Ubiquitous]

Jenkinson puts the blasts landing spot further down plum street then Joe's clipping does and has it at about 520 feet. The longest blast at Tiger Stadium was said to be the straight away CF blast on July 18, 1921. Jenkinson has it down as 575 feet but that is a guess, nobody really knows how far it went. If it went 575 feet then it falls short of the black arrows in Jenkinson's book. The arrows have it going out to the street which is well into the 600 foot range.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Can anyone come up with anything on this one. This of course is in Jenkinson's book. Remarkable that the ball traveled so far with the height it reached.

From what I have gathered at Comiskey the roof was 75 foot high and the roof was 50-52 feet wide, the ball cleared the roof.

[elmer]

Jenkinson puts the blasts landing spot further down plum street then Joe's clipping does and has it at about 520 feet. The longest blast at Tiger Stadium was said to be the straight away CF blast on July 18, 1921. Jenkinson has it down as 575 feet but that is a guess, nobody really knows how far it went. If it went 575 feet then it falls short of the black arrows in Jenkinson's book. The arrows have it going out to the street which is well into the 600 foot range.

That home run was reported in several papers at 560'. Mr. Jenkinson's research later uncovered the 601' reference which lacked some specificity.
Cherry Street was moved Northward when they attached bleachers in left field which were later double decked. Tiger Stadium configuration is significantly different structurally. Home plate is probably in the same spot as in Ruth's day. His line drive homer was described as clearing the fence at dead center by 10 feet. It landed in the intersection to the right of the buildings on the far side of Cherry St. The home run was mentioned in the Spalding Guide and compared to Harry Heilmann's 515' foot homer hit less than two weeks before. Heilmann's homer left the park several fence panels to the left field side of dead center.
It struck a garage door across the street from the park 4 feet off the ground. It was measured. Ruth's was stated by A.G. Spalding to be "at least" 75 feet farther than Heilmann's.
p>SPALDING&apos;S OFFICIAL BASS BALL GUIDE. </p>
<p>Home Run Standard No timt seems to be better than the present to establish a standard fot home run measurements. Through the kindness of Mr. Harry Bullion of the Detroit Free Press, there is information at hand which is sufficiently accurate to determine Ruth&apos;s home run hit at Detroit as that by which home runs are to be measured in the future in comparing their length of distance. When Heilmann of the Detroit club batted his longest home run in the month of July, 1921, on the Detroit ground, it was such a prodigious hit that Mr. Bullion in company with others had it measured exactly. From home plate to the barn door which the ball hit across the street from the park, its flight was 515 feet. It struck&apos; the door about four feet from the surface of the ground, so that it would have gone many feet further if the building had not been in the way. That hit is a fixed statistical and historical fact. It is much longer than the recorded hit of &quot;Buck&quot; Ewing made in Cleveland in 1889, which was measured a distance of 478 feet from home plate to fence. Where the ball went after that never was ascertained, although it was a standing joke in Cleveland that it brought up in the reception room of a Euclid Avenue mansion, which would not have been wholly impossible if it rolled to the corner of what was once Case Avenue. Mr. Bullion has not definitely located the spot where the ball struck the ground when Ruth hit it at Detroit, but from his personal observation and effort to ascertain the facts it is certain that it went at least 75 feet further than the ball hit by Heilmann. That would give the total distance for Ruth&apos;s hit as 590 feet, which is well enough attested to be authentic. In speaking of Ruth&apos;s hit Mr. Bullion writes: &quot;The ball selected a course at the deepest part of the playing field and scaled the wall with plenty to spare. I am inclined to believe that it struck the earth at the corner of Trumbull Avenue and Cherry Street. I was one of the biggest shouters for measurements when Heilmann hit his home run, because I believed that it beat both of the home runs which were made by Ruth in New York into the center field bleachers. That is all over now, as Ruth batted the ball here so much further than it was batted by Heilmann that you may truthfully say that Ruth&apos;s hit surpassed Heilmann&apos;s by at least 75 feet and very likely is the long distance home run hit of the world in a regular league game.&quot; It seems as if Mr. Bullion has given the information which was necessary to establish a distance standard for home runs, and we can definitely set Ruth&apos;s home run drive at Detroit at 590 feet. Until that is exceeded by another which is better it will be considered that Ewing&apos;s home run in Cleveland is officially set aside in favor of one by the greatest long distance hitter in the history of the game. Ruth has made hits which were more than 600 feet long in exhibition games, as claimed by local authorities. His performance in Detroit was made in a regular game. Detroit and Cleveland divide between them the records for old and modern long distance hitting. </p>
<pageinfo>

[derm81]

http:// http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/i1265274_mantle643.JPG (http://www.imagehosting.com)

I used Google Earth to measure Mantle's Guinness World record homerun almost to the spot and it was well over 600 feet in the air at level ground. Living in Detroit, I actually spent a great deal of time around the Stadium near Trumbull Avenue the other day. The outside facade is HUGE plus Trumbull itself is somewhat wide at about 65 or 66 feet. It has been widened a few feet since the 1920s, but not by much. Trumbull was a main thoroughfare and several notable mansions were built on it. Matle's homerun could not have hit the lights but it was within several feet of the tower nearest center field.

[derm81]

In games, four players have hit Tiger Stadium’s left field roof…Frank Howard, Harmon Killebrew, Cecil Fielder and Mark McGwire. Canseco hit the roof at batting practice a number of times as did Mickey Mantle. Dick Allen smashed the siding of the roof at left center in a game which does count as a roof homerun in my book.

No one has ever “cleared” Tiger Stadium’s left field roof in the air. Had there been no roof, ever one of those homeruns would have landed into the last rows of the upper deck. To completely clear the stadium in left is roughly 465 or so. …600 feet and you are on the expressway.

I still think the blast Jimmie Foxx hit was one of the hardest at the stadium. It landed in the last row of the upper-deck left center bleachers. Had the ball been able to complete its flight it would have carried between 520 and 540. Ted Williams called it one of the hardest homeruns he’d ever seen.

[White Knight]

I'm not doubting that someone, Mantle or otherwise, hit a 500 ft HR in past decades. It's just that there seems to be a lot MORE claims for them in the last few years.

That's because people are stronger today than they were in the 20's to 70's. I'm not only talking steroids either. We have much better workout routines and weight sets/person trainers than years ago. Yeah, Mickey Mantle in his prime (or even Lou Gerig) would be stronger than most today. But the average phsique in the 30's, 50's, etc just doesn't match to the average player today. Look at even Derek Jeter. You can tell he never took steroids, and he's rather small compared to most of his teammates. But he'd be a monster if he were playing in 1929.

[scorekeeper]

Check out the comaprison of Mantle to McGwire.


http://www.themick.com/10homers.html#Home%20Run%20#9

[Ubiquitous]

You have the wrong link for a comparison of Mick to Mac.

Secondly I'll add two bits to the discussion. First the author is giving Mickey an exhibition blast and secondly almost all of his calculations look to be horribly over exaggerated.

[scorekeeper]

You have the wrong link for a comparison of Mick to Mac.

????

Check out Mark McGwire vs. The Mick! See their stats side by side and comparison graphs of their ten longest home runs. CLICK HERE!

When the click takes you to http://www.themick.com/macvsmick.htm it may not be the best comparison, but how do you figure its not A comparison?

Secondly I'll add two bits to the discussion. First the author is giving Mickey an exhibition blast and secondly almost all of his calculations look to be horribly over exaggerated.

You may well be correct. I didn’t post the link as proof of anything. I posted it in case anyone wanted to see a link to some interesting data that lots of folks were talking about.

All I know is, I remember sitting in Cleveland’s Municipal Stadium in the early 50’s, about 15 seats to the right of the old 470’ sign, and about 10 rows back, and I saw a ball go over my head and hit the seats at least 5 rows behind me that was the longest HR I ever saw in any game. If they had the signs mis-marked, I didn’t have anything to do with it. I only know what I saw. ;)

[Ubiquitous]

If they had the signs mis-marked, I didn’t have anything to do with it. I only know what I saw. ;)

It has little to do with the signs and a lot do with the bad math used to ascertain the distances.

[White Knight]

Check out the comaprison of Mantle to McGwire.


http://www.themick.com/10homers.html#Home%20Run%20#9

I think a good many people here are just bitter that Mark McGuire probably used steroids, and was a modern player. People need to get over it. Steroids or not, the reality check is McGuire was a better HR hitter. A lot better in fact.

Also, old timers love to say how incredibly strong Mantle was in his prime. Do they honestly believe he was stronger than McGwire? I'm willing to bet the ranch and first born that McGwire was far stronger, and could bench a hell of a lot more weight too.

PS I do not believe that site's "facts' on bit. A 734 foot Mantle homer? Come on now...

[scorekeeper]

I'm willing to bet the ranch and first born that McGwire was far stronger, and could bench a hell of a lot more weight too.


Well, since one guy is dead and the other is now known as a cheater, even if it were possible to prove one way or the other, would it make any difference?

But when all is said and done, would you bet the ranch and the first born that McGwire generated more bat speed? IOW, does stronger guarantee bat speed, which translates into distance? If it does, why don’t we see record setting weightlifters playing ball?

[scorekeeper]

It has little to do with the signs and a lot do with the bad math used to ascertain the distances.

Little to do with the signs? If I go to a ball park and I’m standing behind a sign that says 400’ and a ball goes over my head, why shouldn’t I believe the ball went at least 400’? If the people who put that sign up know it was only 375’, how could I be blamed for being in error? I don’t normally carry a laser distance finder with me to baseball games.

So, if based on the signage at a park, if I say I saw a ball go what I believed to be in excess of 500’, does that make me a liar?

[RuthMayBond]

IOW, does stronger guarantee bat speed, which translates into distance? If it does, why don’t we see record setting weightlifters playing ball?They'd actually have to contact the ball, at the right angle, at the right time

[Ubiquitous]

Little to do with the signs? If I go to a ball park and I’m standing behind a sign that says 400’ and a ball goes over my head, why shouldn’t I believe the ball went at least 400’? If the people who put that sign up know it was only 375’, how could I be blamed for being in error? I don’t normally carry a laser distance finder with me to baseball games.

So, if based on the signage at a park, if I say I saw a ball go what I believed to be in excess of 500’, does that make me a liar?

Because that isn't what is being done here. When someone says that a ball traveled 735 feet or that it would have traveled 600 some odd feet do they know that because there was a sign stating the distance right next to where the ball landed?

[Tango Tiger]

Of course arm strength doesn't guarantee bat speed, nor does arm strength guarantee fastball speed. Nor does leg strength guarantee foot speed nor kicking length. Acceleration is what matters.

[elmer]

All I know is, I remember sitting in Cleveland’s Municipal Stadium in the early 50’s, about 15 seats to the right of the old 470’ sign, and about 10 rows back, and I saw a ball go over my head and hit the seats at least 5 rows behind me that was the longest HR I ever saw in any game. If they had the signs mis-marked, I didn’t have anything to do with it. I only know what I saw. ;)

Who hit this ball, If you are saying Mantle, he is not known
to have hit an IN GAME home run into those bleachers. If Mantle, could
it have been a BP homer? If not Mantle, who?

Elmer

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Here is a drive off the bat of the Babe at Artillery Park, Kingston Pa.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

I think a good many people here are just bitter that Mark McGuire probably used steroids, and was a modern player. People need to get over it. Steroids or not, the reality check is McGuire was a better HR hitter. A lot better in fact.
Also, old timers love to say how incredibly strong Mantle was in his prime. Do they honestly believe he was stronger than McGwire? I'm willing to bet the ranch and first born that McGwire was far stronger, and could bench a hell of a lot more weight too.PS I do not believe that site's "facts' on bit. A 734 foot Mantle homer? Come on now...


First place lets get of the nonsense about the bench pressing, Has little or nothing to do with comparing long ball hitting.

Are you considering that in Mantle's time the upper part of strike zone was at times the shoulders and no lower than the letters. Compared to the 1990s when the zone was a bit above the belt. I think any who follow this game knows what a few inches in the verticle of the strike zone mean to the hitter.

I had to laugh one time when a strike was called on Mark, he didn't like it and made a hand gesture to the ump. He put his hand a few inches above the belt to show where the pitch was, he thought it was high. Just above the belt... too high, come on.

We have another miracle in Mark, kind of like Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds who some how displayed power after being in the league 10 or more years, power they never had before.

Sammy first 10 seasons 1989-1998-----AB/ HR ratio---17.08
------------------------1999-2006-------------------10

OK Sammy changed teams and parks but does not explain the hugh drop in that ratio.


Mark first 10 seasons---1986-1995------AB/HR ratio-----13.20
-----------------------1996-2001-----------------------8.26 WOW


Mark's career AB/HR Ratio 10.61 and Mantle 15.11 but you can see that Mark really opened up that gap in the last 6 seasons with that off the chart 8.26.

The strike zone though no longer the hot topic it was before steroids pushed it off the front page, hugh advantantage to the 1990s hitters.

In front of that committee Mark didn't want to talk about the past, Sammy who spoke some very good English before and after his appearence before the committee suddenly forgot the language, talk to my lawyer.

Sammy in 2006 questioned McGwire's choice of answers.
When questioned why he chose not to speak before the committee.
"The reason I have an interpreter is because I am not from the United states." Wow big word there for Sammy, but in front of the committee "No hablo inglis."

Are you surprised of the fact that many question their numbers at that point in their career's.

Getting back to the main topic here you make the claim that Mac was a better home run hitter than Mantle, a lot better, I don't see it that way. They were close before Mac turned in to the Hindenburg and really took off, the strike zone. How about looking at the whole picture, not just numbers.

[west coast orange and black]

shoelessjoe3: Here is a drive off the bat of the Babe at Artillery Park, Kingston PA

is 650' the flight of the ball, or where the ball came to rest?

[Ubiquitous]

Supposedly that is where it landed. I believe the aerial photo is a bit off due to the fact that they moved some stuff around since Babe hit the shot but according to Jenkinson even we adjust for all that the shot by Babe would be the longest home run ever hit.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

shoelessjoe3: Here is a drive off the bat of the Babe at Artillery Park, Kingston PA

is 650' the flight of the ball, or where the ball came to rest?

Not sure if it landed there or came to rest there. In question the actual distance. When we get around to 550+, 600+ footers thats difficult to accept with accuracy.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Today this one would be a highlight on ESPN a monster shot. Imagine a ball hit that far and that high and the outfielder thinks he may have a play on it. Mantle's tape measure jobs were almost routine, no big deal.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

We could debate for all time who was the more powerful hitter Mantle or Mac and never prove who was the more powerful. I may be dating myself with the following but I was here when Mick was playing and he was hitting tape measure jobs with regularity. We didn't have nightly ESPN highlights to to show them. Flip a coin, both belong in that class, two of the best at hitting long home runs.

Another indication of Mantle's power, consistent long ball hitting. 1960 World Series game two. Mantle's homer at Forbes Field, batting right handed he hits one just to the right of center field and the ball clears the 435-436 foot marker. Pirate center fielder Bill Virdon later remarks " the ball went at least 50 feet above the fence and was still going when I last saw it."

No one can recall a right handed hitter hitting one out at that point.
Now thats a long drive for a right handed hitter to that section of the park. More remarkable the pitch was described as low and outside You can tell by looking at his swing that he was either fooled or just chose to swing at a pitch on the outside and still managed to drive it a long way.

[elmer]

references to long 3 long home runs

http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/keepingscore_article/catching_up_with_a_big_hitter/
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1230253&type=news
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070203&content_id=169805&vkey=news_milb&fext=.jsp
http://www.desertexposure.com/200504...l_history.html
http://www.efqreview.com/NewFiles/v1...mbersgame.html
http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=47077
http://citizensvoice.com/site/news.c...d=595727&rfi=6
http://ch22.majestic-choices.com/bas...crownhigh.html

Sporting News of July 22, 1953, page 23 reports:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. ___"After
beating a prize Arabian horse in a between-games race at Edmonds, Field here, July 8, Outfielder Neill Sheridan was restored to the Sacramento lineup for the second game and not only defeated the Seals. 5 to 4, with a pair of homers, but walloped possibly the longest four-bagger of all-time.
Pat Kelly, a spectator at the contest, discovered the rear window of his automobile smashed and the ball on the back seat when he returned to his car after the game. Solon Prexy Eddie Mulligan used a tape measure the following evening and found the spot where Kelly's automobile had parked was 620 feet from home plate. Later a surveying firm measured the distance as an official 613.8 feet.
"It sounds incredible," said Mulligan, "but nevertheless Sheridan's ball must have traveled farther than Babe Ruth's famous 600-footer years ago in Tampa, Fla." Mickey Mantle's prodigious blast in Washington early this season was measured at 565'.
Ted Shandor was on the mound for San Francisco when Sheridan hit his long drove over the left field wall. Earlier in the game Sheridan had cleared the right field barrier, making him the first player to belt homers over both fences in the same game at Sacramento."

In Ed Hughes' Column of the New York Telegram and Evening Mail of Dec. 12, 1924 Ed prints a long report from Christie Walsh Babe Ruth's agent.

"He established distance records at five ball parks. He was the first left-hander to drive a ball over the left field fence at San Francisco. He was the first player that ever drove a ball over the wall at Kansas City. He drove a ball to the top of a fir tree at Dunsmuir (Cal.) a distance of 604 feet and 6 inches. (Measured by surveyor.)"

Excerpt from May 19, 1948, page 20 The Sporting News.

Sacramento:
the following is an excerpt:
"The home run Ernie Lombardi hit in the series opener with Oakland is believed to be the longest ever walloped at Edmonds Field. The ball cleared a 60-foot light tower in left field and, according to measurements, landed approximately 578 feet
from the plate on an adjacent parking lot. . . ."

Excerpt from June 20, 1956, page 25 The Sporting News.

Jerry Casale home run:

"While Casale is no hitter-for-an-average as a pitcher, he occasionally gets hold of a ball and all but knocks the cover
off it. A 551-foot homer over the center field wall at Seals Stadium recently was the fifth-longest clout on
record in the 24-year history of the park."

[csh19792001]

From SABR-L:

This isn't exactly what Steve Ferenchick was looking for, but I thought it
was historically relevant to recall Mike Schmidt's hit off the Astrodome
speaker in 1974. At the time, The Sporting News reported in its 6/29/1974
issue (with the help of a Dr. Martin Wright, head of the Houston Univ.
mathematics dept.) that "The ball probably reached its maximum height 50
feet before it hit the speaker, or 250 feet from home plate. That would make
it travel about 500 feet." Baseballlibrary.com reports that the ball was
actually 329 feet from home plate and 117 feet in the air. Either way, the
hit wound up as a very, very long single for Schmidt since it bounced back
onto the field in play, courtesy of the Astrodome ground rules.

Schmidt was known to hit some of the highest popups known to man, so I
wouldn't be surprised he didn't come close to reaching 200 feet.

John Cappello


I have been reading on and off (i.e., there's a bathroom involved) the
enjoyable 2004 book "Why Is the Foul Pole Fair?" by Vince Staten, and there
is a statement in there that pop-ups have hit the ceiling of the Metrodome,
which is 195 feet from the field at its peak, but none have hit the ceiling
of the Astrodome, which is 208 feet from the field at its peak. With 35
years of play in the Astrodome, and 27 years of play in the Metrodome, it
would seem we have a pretty big sample size. Is it possible that the
highest a pop-up _can_ be hit is somewhere between 195 and 208 feet?

I seem to recall that Robert Adair determined the furthest a baseball can
be hit is 545 feet. Has anyone ever done the physics on how high a ball
can be hit?

If the limit is under 208 feet, then the only other place besides an
elevator shaft that a pop-up could have been a home run would have been
the L.A. Coliseum for the exhibition game played there this past spring,
where the left field foul pole was just 201 feet away!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/sports/baseball/26coliseum.html

-Steve Ferenchick

[gator92]

Take a look at this animation of Mantle's home run, set in Rick Kaplan's amazing 3D model of 1960's Yankee Stadium. Go to this link, then check the video marked "Mantle..."

http://www.digitalcentrality.com/Yankee_Stadium/

Gives a pretty good idea of how far he hit them, and how far he would have had to hit one to get it up and over the roof in RF at Yankee Stadium...

[Ubiquitous]

Pretty cool, I just wish in one of the sequences he would have used a line to show the trajectory.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Take a look at this animation of Mantle's home run, set in Rick Kaplan's amazing 3D model of 1960's Yankee Stadium. Go to this link, then check the video marked "Mantle..."

http://www.digitalcentrality.com/Yankee_Stadium/

Gives a pretty good idea of how far he hit them, and how far he would have had to hit one to get it up and over the roof in RF at Yankee Stadium...


Some great work Rick with an assist from Bruce Orser. Bruce knows as much as anyone when the subject is The Mick. Put on my 3D glasses and took a look at the monuments..............Great.

[leewileyfan]

The physics, reduced to elementary arithmetic [where I'm more comfortable] is take from Dr. Adair's The Physics of Baseball and other notes from various articles that provide a pretty strong consensus.

1. Two principle elements are:

a. pitch speed and bat speed, with pitch speed contribution dissipating to a .25 contribution, while bat speed contributes @ a 1.2 factor.

Example: pitch speed @ 80 mph = 80 * .25 = 20 mph contact speed off bat
.............bat speed @ 70 mph = 70 * 1.2 = 84 mph contact speed off bat. Contact speed off bat = 20 + 84 = 104 mph [an instant].

b. arc of batted ball will determine the following:

.............travel time of ball flight, with a high rainmaker hanging longer with greatly reduced forward flight speed ..... and a wicked line drive screeching at high speed that dissipates quickly and has low altitude and sudden drop.

c. keeping it ultra simple [and not addressing ball spin and aerodynamics] we can determine average forward flight speed by forward speed at last instant of decline:

Example: the rainmaker above will decline at a forward motion probably not more than 5 mph, maybe 10. The sizzling line drive might drop to the ground with a forward speed of 40 mph.

d. finally there is flight time, which can be counted off in seconds

Average speed = average of impact and terminal speed:

line drive = average 104 mph and 40 mph = 72 mph.
rainmaker = average 104 mph and 10 mph = 57 mph
long- high drive = average 104 mph and 30 mph = 67 mph.

So, if math is right so far, here are the three distances:

rainmaker; 57*5280=300,960'/60=5,016' in one minute. With a flight time of 4.3 seconds, we get 4.3/60=.0717*5,016 = 359.5'.

line drive; 72*5280=380,160'/60=6,336' in one minute. With a flight time of 2.8 seconds, we get 2.8/60=.0467*6,336' = 295.9'.

long, high drive; 67*5280=353,760'/60=5,896' in one minute. With a flight time of 4.1 seconds, we get 4.1/60=.0683*5,896'=402.9'.

Working out and pumping iron have virtually nothing to do with generating bat speed. Coordination of weight shift and lower body forward whip to accereate the bat to the ball is what matters. The instant after impact, that factor drops to 0.

I used 70 mph as bat speed for a competent MLB batter with no special gifts for power generation. 80 mph probably enters elite territory.

Therefore, if we combine the best of both worlds, bat speed [80] and pitch speed [95], and select a 37 degree upward batting arc and contact right in the sweet spot, we get:

80*1.2 = 96 mph + 95*.25 = 23.75 = 118.75 mph for a high arcing liner with a terminal speed of 40 mph and a flight time of 5.0 seconds. Average speed = 71.25 mph:

71.25*5280=376,200' per minute/60=6,270'. With a flight time of seconds, we get 5.0/60 = .0833*6,270 = 522.5'.

That would be a blast[B] by any standard. A trailing wind might add a smidgen to flight time and average forward speed, but not all that much.

Math says @ 525' looks like a pretty idealized model. Add what, 5%-10% for wind, spin, relative humidity, height above sea level and 575' looks like an extreme limitation. Anything over that starts to look apocryphal.

One specific example for reality is [B]the red seat at Fenway Park, whic marks the longest measurable HR ever hit in that old parks venerable history. It marks a 502' shot hit by Ted Williams.

What is the meaning of that seat painted red in the bleachers?

The seat in the right field bleachers is painted red to mark the spot where the longest measurable home run ever hit inside Fenway Park landed. Ted Williams hit the home run on June 9, 1946 off Fred Hutchinson of the Detroit Tigers. The blast was measured at 502 feet. Legend says that the ball crashed through the straw hat of the man sitting in the seat — Section 42, Row 37, Seat 21.

[west coast orange and black]

very interesting reading, leewileyfan.
many thanx.

one thing that has long puzzled me is the distance attributed to a ball that hits an object before hitting the ground.

so, williams' home run: is 502' the distance from home plate to where the ball struck - section 42, row 37; or is the distance icluding where the ball would have landed?

[leewileyfan]

very interesting reading, leewileyfan.
many thanx.

one thing that has long puzzled me is the distance attributed to a ball that hits an object before hitting the ground.

so, williams' home run: is 502' the distance from home plate to where the ball struck - section 42, row 37; or is the distance icluding where the ball would have landed?

I am fairly certain that's where the ball hit or landed on the fly. It was on its descent, so we can conjecture how much further it might have gone had that part of Fenway Park been an open pasture. Guess? 25'-45'.

The marker is the spot where forward flight was stopped. So, Ted's shot might have gone between 527-547' unimpeded. The 502' is a given.

As a matter of opinion, I'd say the fairest measure for a HR in the point where the ball lands on the fly, without any distance added for bounces and rolls.

[mikefast]

Is it possible that the
highest a pop-up _can_ be hit is somewhere between 195 and 208 feet?

I seem to recall that Robert Adair determined the furthest a baseball can
be hit is 545 feet. Has anyone ever done the physics on how high a ball
can be hit?

For a level swing, the maximum is somewhere around 250 feet high, but that's quite unlikely to happen, for at least two reasons. One, it requires hitting the ball with the perfect offset to deflect it straight up, just a hair over two inches off center between bat and ball. While unlikely, that's bound to happen occasionally. The second reason is that most swings are below the horizontal plane since most of the strike zone is below the batter's hands. As the bat dips down in angle below horizontal, the maximum possible height decreases, such that at a 30-degree angle on a typical swing, the maximum height is around 200 feet.