Home plate 17" wide?

[JaxRolo]

According tou Kyle, It is impossible for Home plate to be 17" wide.

Here is his FB Post:

I don't know who or what to trust anymore! I just came to the realization that the official baseball rule book doesn't know math

The required dimensions for home plate are not physically possible!! WHY?!?!?!

 

Point of the plate is a 90 degree angle, and the foul line parts of the plate are 12" .... that means the hypotenuse (which ends up being the front edge of the plate) is supposed to be approx. 16.97 in ...

 

Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2 = c^2 ... or the basic rule for a 45-45-90 triangle ... hypotenuse is (square root of 2) times one of the sides.

 

 

I will have to adjust my zone accordingly.

[Rulekeep]

More excuses.

[blue23ll]

Que?

[th3]

its 17 with the black - everybody knows that

[SJA]

Kyle wasn't taking into consideration of the angle of a flat dangle nor the kanoute of the root x the horizontal whacker madoodle . . . some people just don't learn everyday stuff . . . GEEZ!!

;-)

[Replacematt]

its 17 with the black - everybody knows that

 

No, it's 17" without the black.

[spiritump]

the plate is really 57 inches---17" plate plus 10"(5"x2 ball) plus 30" (15"x2 catchers mitt)

[Replacematt]

the plate is really 57 inches---17" plate plus 10"(5"x2 ball) plus 30" (15"x2 catchers mitt)

 

You can't use the same logic here that you use with your wife.

[bam]

 

the plate is really 57 inches---17" plate plus 10"(5"x2 ball) plus 30" (15"x2 catchers mitt)

 

You can't use the same logic here that you use with your wife.

 

Which is, and I quote:

 

Yes dear.  Whatever you say, dear.  You're right dear.  You're always right, dear.

 

Repeat as necessary.  

[Jimurray]

According tou Kyle, It is impossible for Home plate to be 17" wide.

Here is his FB Post:

I don't know who or what to trust anymore! I just came to the realization that the official baseball rule book doesn't know math

The required dimensions for home plate are not physically possible!! WHY?!?!?!

Point of the plate is a 90 degree angle, and the foul line parts of the plate are 12" .... that means the hypotenuse (which ends up being the front edge of the plate) is supposed to be approx. 16.97 in ...

Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2 = c^2 ... or the basic rule for a 45-45-90 triangle ... hypotenuse is (square root of 2) times one of the sides.

I will have to adjust my zone accordingly.

Since you start with a 17" square I don't think the front would change. The 90 degree angle might be off.

But tell Kyle not to worry. The diamond is not a perfect square either.

[Rich Ives]

 

According tou Kyle, It is impossible for Home plate to be 17" wide.

Here is his FB Post:

I don't know who or what to trust anymore! I just came to the realization that the official baseball rule book doesn't know math

The required dimensions for home plate are not physically possible!! WHY?!?!?!

Point of the plate is a 90 degree angle, and the foul line parts of the plate are 12" .... that means the hypotenuse (which ends up being the front edge of the plate) is supposed to be approx. 16.97 in ...

Pythagorean Theorem: a^2 + b^2 = c^2 ... or the basic rule for a 45-45-90 triangle ... hypotenuse is (square root of 2) times one of the sides.

I will have to adjust my zone accordingly.

Since you start with a 17" square I don't think the front would change. The 90 degree angle might be off.

But tell Kyle not to worry. The diamond is not a perfect square either.

 

 

It is by definition. It isn't using the required 127' 3-3/8" measurement from HP to 2B.  They'd get a lot closer if they made it 127' 3-45/128" but I don't think you could read the marks on the tape well enough. 

[noumpere]

 

Since you start with a 17" square I don't think the front would change. The 90 degree angle might be off.

But tell Kyle not to worry. The diamond is not a perfect square either.

 

The diamond as measured by the base points is a perfect square.  As measured by the base bags, it isn't.

[Rich Ives]

 

 

Since you start with a 17" square I don't think the front would change. The 90 degree angle might be off.

But tell Kyle not to worry. The diamond is not a perfect square either.

 

The diamond as measured by the base points is a perfect square.  As measured by the base bags, it isn't.

 

 

No - because the 127' 3 3/8" is not the exact length of the hypotenuse of a 90' square.  If you follow the directions for the layout you;ll get a slight rhombus.

[Jimurray]

Since you start with a 17" square I don't think the front would change. The 90 degree angle might be off.

But tell Kyle not to worry. The diamond is not a perfect square either.

The diamond as measured by the base points is a perfect square.  As measured by the base bags, it isn't.

 

No - because the 127' 3 3/8" is not the exact length of the hypotenuse of a 90' square.  If you follow the directions for the layout you;ll get a slight rhombus.

And , if you don't follow the directions and instead use the diagram to construct a square with 127' 3 3/8" diagonals you will end up with a perfect square but with base points a little over 90' apart. I think about a 1/64th of an inch.

I wonder what they use to construct new stadiums. With CAD these differences are easily seen.

[BigUmpire]

Nerds!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BRUMP]

guys i come here to get away from my linear algebra class...not to practice it

[mjr_2013]

They told me there wouldn't be math involved!

 

Forget this, I quit!