Curious Aardvark wrote on Jun 8
th, 2009 at 9:25am:
heavier is not better - it's that simple. Don't know where you got that idea from, it has no evidential basis that I can think of.
Aerodynamic is better. Density and aerodynamic is even better.
Quote:To sling like Larry Bray you not only have to be good, you have to be strong
Nyahh, not really. It's 90% technique and 10% conditioning.
As evidenced by the fact that 26 years after throwing his world record he was still capable of putting a golf ball around the 400 yard mark. Don't get me wrong he's still a trim fit bloke, but he'd be the first to admit he was in better shape as a youngster.
I'm probably at least 50% stronger than larry in brute strength terms - but I just don't throw as hard.
Totally different techniques.
His conditioning came as a result of being a baseball pitcher.
Again technique is more important than brute strength.
So yes physical conditioning is a factor - but not as large a one as you might think.
Missile density and aerodynamism and the sling length and technique used are far more important.
CA,
I wish you would avoid the snappy little one liners like, "heavier is not better". The trouble is they are so ambiguous that I am not sure whether I agree or not because it depends so much on what you mean.
If you are contradicting my assertion that
for any given release velocity, with similar sized and shaped objects the heavier ones will go further then all I can say is, "cobblers". I often inject water into tennis balls to make them heavier. Same size, same surface conditions and shape, same release velocity etc. only difference is an extra 20 grams of weight. They go further. There goes your assertion that there is no evidence. Course there is. (have a play with Matthias' simulator and vary only weight - observe the effect.)
Even with stones of the same type, ie. same density, the bigger ones go better up to a point. Trouble is once they get too heavy it's hard to throw them as fast. So despite being theoretically better ammunition, the limitation is my strength. Same slinging technique but my dicky shoulder stops me taking advantage of the better stone. Sure technique is the dominant factor but I have reached the point where I just can't throw them. Strong blokes like you would merely laugh and put me to shame.
When one of our members asserted he was throwing 5 oz stones at 250 mph I pointed out that the tension in the cords would be in the order of 150 lbs. Of course it's possible that he is super strong and can actually hold and spin such a sling, probability is low though.
Larry's technique is unquestionably good. I did not say or intend to imply that technique was unimportant. But it's also an unquestionable fact of physics that the tenion in his sling cords with a 2 oz stone is well over 50 lbs. He has to be, and obviously is, good enough and strong enough to hang on to those cords with his fingers all at the blinding speed necessary to achieve the distances he does. Sure if his technique was crap he could be Hercules himself to no avail. But if he was the stereotypical 98 lb weakling he wouldn't be throwing records either.
So if you're going to contradict something I've said because I've made a genuine mistake, fine! I'd sooner suffer the indignity than perpetuate an error. But don't just shoot from the lip, make your criticisms specific and accurate.
Aussie