Choking up? (on the bat)

[The Wedge]

Don't some guys use those things that sort of choke for them? Kind of like donuts but they're down at the bottom.

[RShack]

Don't some guys use those things that sort of choke for them? Kind of like donuts but they're down at the bottom.

You mean these?

<img src="http://www.baseballjunk.com/images/knobcuff/eztaper.jpg">

[The Wedge]

Yeah, I guess so, but I seem to remember them being way more pronounced and noticeable. Making it impossible to slide down any further.

[wickedwitch]

It's pure physics. The force with which you hit the ball is proportional to the length of the bat. It's about finding the right balance between control and power.

Also, I guess that a lot of players who loke to choke up simply use a shorter bat.

[Migrant Redbird]

No one splits their hands, though.

I guess you can't include Moises Alou urinating on his bats?

[Moose Milligan]

Here is a site that has some Bonds pictures throughout his career. For the most part you never see him choked up a great deal. In the 3rd row and third pic when he was in SF in '93 it looks like he is up the bat a good 3 or 4 inches.

http://www.mywire.com/pubs/MyWirePE/2007/08/17/4263121?showAllImage=Y

Im trying to find my old SI which I know I got around my house from '93 or '94. It had Bonds on the cover with the words "I'm Barry Bonds and you're not". If I remember correctly it showed Bonds up on the bat a good bit but I could be wrong.

<img src = "http://i.cnn.net/si/si_online/covers/images/1993/0524_large.jpg">

I think the only SI cover I could find that has a shot of Bonds with his hands choked up that you can actually see is here:

<img src = "http://i.cnn.net/si/si_online/covers/images/2006/0515_large.jpg">

Side note, SI has all their covers archived online: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_online/covers/

[The Wedge]

Well, that's the single most unorthodox batting stance I've ever seen.

[scOtt]

I guess you can't include Moises Alou urinating on his bats?

I thought that was on his hands.

[DrungoHazewood]

What advantage is there to choking up that you couldn't get from a shorter, lighter bat? I can't think of any.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd bet choking up was an artifact of an era where big, heavy, often standard-sized bats were very common, and a 150-lb utility guy couldn't find tiny bat. So rather than swing some 40 oz piece of hickory from the knob they choked up. Once bat design emerged from the primordial ooze it became unnecessary, but like many things in baseball standard practice took decades to catch up to common sense.

The only real flaw in this theory is that Pete Browning was using custom bats in the 1880s. I find it hard to believe nobody would turn out a tiny bat for Willie Keeler and John McGraw. Maybe it was considered sissy to use a little bat.

[bobmc]

What advantage is there to choking up that you couldn't get from a shorter, lighter bat? I can't think of any.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd bet choking up was an artifact of an era where big, heavy, often standard-sized bats were very common, and a 150-lb utility guy couldn't find tiny bat. So rather than swing some 40 oz piece of hickory from the knob they choked up. Once bat design emerged from the primordial ooze it became unnecessary, but like many things in baseball standard practice took decades to catch up to common sense.

The only real flaw in this theory is that Pete Browning was using custom bats in the 1880s. I find it hard to believe nobody would turn out a tiny bat for Willie Keeler and John McGraw. Maybe it was considered sissy to use a little bat.

When I think of choking up, I think of HOF'er Nellie Fox. But in my memory, he used a bat with a larger barrel than the one pictured above. If the thinking was that the smaller guys wanted to have more pop and used a large barrel, it makes some sense. Perhaps now that techniques have evolved, bat speed means more than how large the bat is or weight behind the ball. Some left-handed slap hitters were also good drag bunters and having the hands in "choked" mode, it may have appeared easier to drop the hands down and drag the ball (but I'm not sure it makes any difference for deception). I think it enabled them to use a heavier bat and "get more wood on the ball" but that's just MHO.

As far as the "sissy factor", it seems to me that by choking up, it sissifies you anyway, but again that's MHO.

[The Wedge]

You want to know the advantage? Take a bat (or if not available, any bat shaped type object, of about equal size), and swing it.

Sounds stupid, doesn't it?

But try it. Swing it from the bottom, no choke. Get a sense of how much control you have over the "head" of the bat. Now choke up. I've always felt, and this was back in little league and travel leagues with aluminum bats, that when I choked up, I could control the head of the bat through the zone better. It also seems like I get the head of the bat towards the zone faster. I guess I have a really loopy swing without choking. Or maybe I don't. *shrug* But I know it helped me hit.

So basically, if you don't have a god gifted pretty swing, you might need to choke up just to feel like you have more control. Do you really have more control? Maybe, maybe not, but did Cal Ripken really need 150 batting stances? He thought he did, and therefore he did.

[DrungoHazewood]

You guys make some good points about bunting and about bat control. I guess it could be something of an advantage. When you choke up you change the moment of inertia of the bat - you're gripping the bat such that the weight distribution is slightly different and, well, that probably results in a different feel. (I'm sure some mechanical engineer is going to come give me a beat-down for mangling sophomore dynamics terminology here).

I have to think this is tied up with the death of the Texas League hitter. Used to be a whole class of hitters who'd hit .300 but with almost no power and they'd do it by blooping Texas Leaguers over the infield constantly. Luke Appling, maybe Nellie Fox, guys like that. Those hitters don't exist anymore, probably because of a lot of reasons, but mainly because outfields have shrunk and outfielders got better. I'd bet many guys who choked up were just trying to put bat to ball to bloop hits over the infield. Nowadays everyone has to hit the ball hard more often to get a hit, so choking up lost its appeal.

I still don't see an advantage to a split-grip like Keeler or Cobb, at least not if they're swinging away and not bunting or swing-bunting. Cobb used to lead the league in homers - I can't imagine him using a split grip and hitting the ball 250 feet. He couldn't have used that all the time, it must have been strategically employed.

[RShack]

You guys make some good points about bunting and about bat control. I guess it could be something of an advantage. When you choke up you change the moment of inertia of the bat - you're gripping the bat such that the weight distribution is slightly different and, well, that probably results in a different feel. (I'm sure some mechanical engineer is going to come give me a beat-down for mangling sophomore dynamics terminology here).

There's no question that it gives better control. If you pick up a 6' 2x4 and swing it around while holding it at the end, and then do the same thing with an 8' 2x4 holding it 2' from the end, you'll see a tremendous improvement in how well you can control it, despite the fact that the 8' one weighs a lot more and is otherwise much more unwieldy.

I have to think this is tied up with the death of the Texas League hitter. Used to be a whole class of hitters who'd hit .300 but with almost no power and they'd do it by blooping Texas Leaguers over the infield constantly. Luke Appling, maybe Nellie Fox, guys like that. Those hitters don't exist anymore, probably because of a lot of reasons, but mainly because outfields have shrunk and outfielders got better. I'd bet many guys who choked up were just trying to put bat to ball to bloop hits over the infield. Nowadays everyone has to hit the ball hard more often to get a hit, so choking up lost its appeal.

I'm not sure when it died, which is why I asked. But I bet aluminum bats were the last nail in the coffin. Everybody started concentrating on whipping light bats around to max bat-speed. I'm not as critical of an "empty" OBP as a lot of people seem to be. I bet a little guy who made the IF play in could still drop a lot of balls over the IF'ers if he worked at it. I think a lot of this has to do with the well-known phenomena of baseball fads. Of course, whether it's a good-fad vs. a bad-fad is completely different question ;-)

I still don't see an advantage to a split-grip like Keeler or Cobb, at least not if they're swinging away and not bunting or swing-bunting. Cobb used to lead the league in homers - I can't imagine him using a split grip and hitting the ball 250 feet. He couldn't have used that all the time, it must have been strategically employed.

Well, we know that there's a zillion different batting stances until it's time to actually hit the ball, then everybody suddenly gets much more alike. Maybe he thought it was easier to start with his hands there, and then slide the top hand down (or not) as he made his decision about what to do with a pitch. Seems to me that the bat is now a single-purpose instrument (bat speed) but for Cobb it was a multi-purpose instrument: by sliding his top hand down (or not) at decision time, he was changing what kind of instrument it was.

[Moose Milligan]

All I know is that the guys that do it/did it seem pretty successful. Can't argue with the results.

In watching the Ripken DVD from the 6-6 game, BJ Surhoff look like he choked up, too.