|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 16, 2018 16:34:49 GMT
the question came up of whether a curling stone could be tampered with to affect the outcome. from there it went to whether other olympic sports could be rigged, with the idea of having an olympic sports episode.
so: with the curling stone, since it is a literal stone, would have a limited opportunity for tampering. the only possibilities I came up with were to hollow it out, and either fill it with lighter material or heavier material to change the weight; or to change the texture on the contact surface.
so any ideas for curling, or any other events; summor OR winter?
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Feb 16, 2018 16:39:18 GMT
Baseball -
A few years ago, I posted a revisit idea for the "knocking the cover off of a baseball" myth.
Adam & Jaime were using brand-new or like-new balls in their testing. While it's true that any baseball field or team with the budget to do so is going to maintain as many brand-new balls as possible, it's ignoring the kids who play sandlot ball; these kids will likely just play with a ball until it's no longer in condition to be used, and so may well end up playing with a ball that's old, damaged, or defective in some fashion. In this case, they're basically just seeing if a ball that's already on its way to being junked can be hit hard enough that something finally gives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Feb 16, 2018 19:04:29 GMT
I'm thinking it might be more interesting to test ball tampering done in Cricket, and I think also baseball. Specifically things bowlers do involving picking at the stitching and polishing the ball on one side to make it curve more sharply, along with rubbing dirt on another side to roughen it; Which is banned in cricket.
That kind of thing strikes me as being more 'Mythbustery' as its not a revisit and the testing could be done with a guest, the hosts and then a rig to see how much these kinds of tricks really affect the ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 17, 2018 0:08:21 GMT
I'm thinking it might be more interesting to test ball tampering done in Cricket, and I think also baseball. Specifically things bowlers do involving picking at the stitching and polishing the ball on one side to make it curve more sharply, along with rubbing dirt on another side to roughen it; Which is banned in cricket. That kind of thing strikes me as being more 'Mythbustery' as its not a revisit and the testing could be done with a guest, the hosts and then a rig to see how much these kinds of tricks really affect the ball. baseball pitchers also like to try to rough up the ball to make it curve more sharply. the preferred method of combatting this is to retire a lot of balls per inning. that said, what sort of empirical testing would be done to confirm whether this makes a difference? I think a baseball pitching machine can be gotten that throws curve balls, so one could start by establishing a grouping and then tamper with the ball. do they have a bowling machine that can throw a googly? I think somewhere buried in the archives we have a question of whether the velocity the ball approaches the batter has a significant effect on how far he can hit the ball. that might be a bit challenging - trying to make a batting machine that can hit off a pitching machine, so you can have a consistent swing AND control the speed of the pitch. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 17, 2018 8:50:41 GMT
Olympic sized swimming pool, one I heard, hard to imagine, "More water than one person will drink in their whole life"....
Yeah, really?. I intend to be REALLY old when I die, as in a lot older than I am now.
That and the one time I went swimming and tried to drink my way out... Near death experience that involves some twerp landing on me whilst not looking and jumping at the same time. Stupid Kid.
No seriously, anyone got figures into how much water an average human drinks in a year?. Dies it alter on where you live?. Of course those in hot climates may need more than your average Inuit...?.. or do they?.
Drinks and consumes is two different figures dependant on other uses...
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 17, 2018 9:00:38 GMT
Curling stones, messing with the contact patch is difficult.
They are hollowed out to create a bubble of air between the outer "O" that is in contact and slides on the ice and the rest of the stone, this helps them glide, if it were a solid contact patch, they wouldnt go that far.
So I suppose you could alter how much air it traps if any at all, and "Hobble" your opponents stones?..
Otherwise, its a highly polished surface, no chemicals just elbow grease in that polishing, and of course the rougher band around the middle of the stone to ensure a solid grip when in contact with another stone.
Extra weight, I cant see how that would be of any help.
It would make it harder to throw, and if you watch one that is sent with a little hurry up anyway, it could knock over a small building if thrown down the ice with a little extra push?.
It may help a thrown stone resist being pushed out by another one, in that a body at rest is usually a lazy sod, likes to stay at rest, but I cant see someone not noticing a heavy one when they kick them out of the way as they change ends.
Or when it collides with a stray ankle.
So how much would an altered stone be of any benefit?.
"Polishing" the ice.
I know that they polish the ice in front of the stone because it actually does alter how far/fast it glides and in what direction as well... the slight twist on the handle put on by the pusher gives basic directional control, but the sweepers can alter that "a bit", but by how much?.
Maybe the lads could do a section to show exactly what that does for other people?.
I will pop back with some more ideas I have when I get a fact check on some of them...
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 18, 2018 1:49:04 GMT
I learned while watching the US Vs. Canadia women's curling round, that the stones are not necessarily perfectly uniform in weight. according to wikipedia, a stone weighs between 38 and 44 pounds. thus, one of the skills required is being able to feel how each stone is gliding and adjust for that.
which might mean a perfectly uniform stone set might give an advantage.
they also mentioned that in the olympics, the handle has electronics in it which measure whether the thrower hogs out.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 18, 2018 9:03:21 GMT
I learned while watching the US Vs. Canadia women's curling round, that the stones are not necessarily perfectly uniform in weight. according to wikipedia, a stone weighs between 38 and 44 pounds. thus, one of the skills required is being able to feel how each stone is gliding and adjust for that. which might mean a perfectly uniform stone set might give an advantage. they also mentioned that in the olympics, the handle has electronics in it which measure whether the thrower hogs out. For those that dont know, I think TLW is referring to the line by which you must fully let go of the stone, sometimes known as a Hog line.?. Yes the stones may vary in weight, they cant vary in size, and as mentioned previous, differing stone is used, Green or Blue Hone, one is denser than the other in pure form, so, as stones are cut, you may have varying degrees of Green and Blue. The size limitation is that the stone must displace "so many" pints of water, must be so wide, so high, etc, and with a varying density of stone in that dimension restriction, getting an "Exact" 44lbs of an unknown [yet] density stone, almost impossible. To work out how heavy it is, the person throwing it, lifts it into place prior to chucking it down the ice. Indeed, on watching the sport, you can see certain members "choosing" the stone prior to the shot, I presume reserving a heavier stone for a needed power shot later in the match?.. and a lighter stone for a guard, that may be unpredictable when hit, as the opposing team do not know the weight of that guard stone. On consideration, how much "fettling" would you need to do to alter the weight of a stone to give an unfair advantage to get either way over 44lbs or way under the 38lbs?. The stone is quite dense, thats an awful loot of lead you would have to pack in there. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 18, 2018 11:24:39 GMT
I learned while watching the US Vs. Canadia women's curling round, that the stones are not necessarily perfectly uniform in weight. according to wikipedia, a stone weighs between 38 and 44 pounds. thus, one of the skills required is being able to feel how each stone is gliding and adjust for that. which might mean a perfectly uniform stone set might give an advantage. they also mentioned that in the olympics, the handle has electronics in it which measure whether the thrower hogs out. For those that dont know, I think TLW is referring to the line by which you must fully let go of the stone, sometimes known as a Hog line.?. Yes the stones may vary in weight, they cant vary in size, and as mentioned previous, differing stone is used, Green or Blue Hone, one is denser than the other in pure form, so, as stones are cut, you may have varying degrees of Green and Blue. The size limitation is that the stone must displace "so many" pints of water, must be so wide, so high, etc, and with a varying density of stone in that dimension restriction, getting an "Exact" 44lbs of an unknown [yet] density stone, almost impossible. To work out how heavy it is, the person throwing it, lifts it into place prior to chucking it down the ice. Indeed, on watching the sport, you can see certain members "choosing" the stone prior to the shot, I presume reserving a heavier stone for a needed power shot later in the match?.. and a lighter stone for a guard, that may be unpredictable when hit, as the opposing team do not know the weight of that guard stone. On consideration, how much "fettling" would you need to do to alter the weight of a stone to give an unfair advantage to get either way over 44lbs or way under the 38lbs?. The stone is quite dense, thats an awful loot of lead you would have to pack in there. I looked it up when I first posted, and I think high grade Galena is close to twice as dense as granite. still, it may take a significant sized chunk to make a significant difference, and the top of it would have to be hidden under the handle. I believe the way stones are made, the handle could be exchanged relatively easily, so a person could theoretically still bring their own stone if special handles are to be used. the other factor is if the cut and hone on the bottom of the stone could be altered to make a difference in the way it glides on the ice. in saying all this, I am aware of the possibility that the only reason they use stones provided is because there really isn't any significant advantage to using your own stones, and that saves shipping 400 pounds of rocks to the competition. addendum: the stones are traditionally natural in color. would it be possible to dye the stone to make it more difficult for the other team to assess its characteristics when struck? make a blue hone one look like a green hone one, and would it make a difference in play? |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 19, 2018 5:23:21 GMT
addendum: the stones are traditionally natural in color. would it be possible to dye the stone to make it more difficult for the other team to assess its characteristics when struck? make a blue hone one look like a green hone one, and would it make a difference in play? Such are the vagaries of the stones, I believe what they do is assess by watching the stone in play. They can by experience see what force is implied to the stone by different players, and then by experience and watching the stone's decay in speed, asses each stone in play.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 19, 2018 5:38:38 GMT
On to other olympic myths...
The UK's sliders, on "Skeleton" bob-sleigh.
There has been a lot of interwebs chatter about the new "Skin-suit", and allegations that it gives "Unfair" advantage...
The suits were assessed by the olympic committee and passed as "Within regulation"...
We already know that the type of clothing you wear can alter the coefficient of drag on an open cockpit vehicle of any type, which is why the lycra clad joy-boy one piece romper suited motorbikeist use that type of racing suit.
Us that know how much road rash HURTS, and how quick it can rip into a one-piece romper suit, ignore that lightweight stuff, and go for leather, or the waxed cotton weatherproof stuff, "Belstaff", I have done 40mph on my back down a road after a minor spill, got some good war wound type grazing on it, which washed off the first splash of rain we had later that day...
But just how MUCH can a "Skin suit" change your results?.
We all know they are fighting for 100th of a second advantage in these olympic things, but can it help that much?.
I propose a sled down a track with a buster on it, on rails, same sledge, once with a jumper and jeans "I want to be warm" clothing, once with a skin suit, maybe even that Lycra one piece that pedalcylists prefer, and one with just a pair of boxer shorts, au natural, see if there is any advantage to a free-wheel 100to300 yard track, and then, by how much.
Also, the skeleton basic sledge, they go head first, whilst we are at it, turn him around and put him on his back, is head first or feet first faster?.
BTW, it has been noted, the skeleton sledge, thousands of dollars euros or £-quids in development, held together by Duck-Tape.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 19, 2018 9:41:54 GMT
On to other olympic myths... The UK's sliders, on "Skeleton" bob-sleigh. There has been a lot of interwebs chatter about the new "Skin-suit", and allegations that it gives "Unfair" advantage... The suits were assessed by the olympic committee and passed as "Within regulation"... We already know that the type of clothing you wear can alter the coefficient of drag on an open cockpit vehicle of any type, which is why the lycra clad joy-boy one piece romper suited motorbikeist use that type of racing suit. Us that know how much road rash HURTS, and how quick it can rip into a one-piece romper suit, ignore that lightweight stuff, and go for leather, or the waxed cotton weatherproof stuff, "Belstaff", I have done 40mph on my back down a road after a minor spill, got some good war wound type grazing on it, which washed off the first splash of rain we had later that day... But just how MUCH can a "Skin suit" change your results?. We all know they are fighting for 100th of a second advantage in these olympic things, but can it help that much?. I propose a sled down a track with a buster on it, on rails, same sledge, once with a jumper and jeans "I want to be warm" clothing, once with a skin suit, maybe even that Lycra one piece that pedalcylists prefer, and one with just a pair of boxer shorts, au natural, see if there is any advantage to a free-wheel 100to300 yard track, and then, by how much. Also, the skeleton basic sledge, they go head first, whilst we are at it, turn him around and put him on his back, is head first or feet first faster?. BTW, it has been noted, the skeleton sledge, thousands of dollars euros or £-quids in development, held together by Duck-Tape. is that skeleton or bob sleigh? it can't be both. and I forget just where toboggan fits in the list of sleds. skeleton: belly down, head first on an ironing board. luge: two butter knives on your bum. bobsled: inside a refrigerator box on skates. so what did they do different on the british suit that the competitors didn't? I recall the US did a better swimming suit, that the olympic committee said, "that's a good idea, give one to everybody." whereupon michael phelps cut his in half, and proceeded to still speed away from everybody. good show on your female skeleton pilot, BTW. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Feb 19, 2018 16:13:55 GMT
Bob sleigh's require someone to steer them and apply braking to avoid taking corners too quickly and flying off the track or overturning. You simply couldn't duplicate this with Buster or any kind of rig. Meaning that you'd have to bring in guest stars to do the testing, and since you'd get natural variation in their runs you'd have to do multiple runs on the same track over several days; Which would be very costly.
There is also the question as to if they would be allowed to explain how the suits work and if this would qualify as product placement/advertisement. The creators of the suits may consider the details to be trade secrets.
There is however a myth that MB could tackle that deals with something similar; Does shaving your body hair really make much difference to swimming speed?
This is a myth where there is no concerns about costs, all the testing could be done by Brian and Jon - and also give us some humor if they show them getting their legs waxed on camera*. They could bring in a guest swimmer, maybe giving the guys some pointers on techniques as well as a way to compare the guys times against a pros. But this isn't a requirement for testing, allowing them to either do all filming and testing in a couple of days if they are short on time or spacing things out if time is less of a factor. They might also be able to test out a couple of other things if they have access to a swimming pool for a few days.
(*The Bothan has described their jobs as 'finding excuses to torture two grown men for entertainment'. This would certainly qualify)
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 19, 2018 17:26:19 GMT
Bob sleigh's require someone to steer them and apply braking to avoid taking corners too quickly and flying off the track or overturning. You simply couldn't duplicate this with Buster or any kind of rig. Meaning that you'd have to bring in guest stars to do the testing, and since you'd get natural variation in their runs you'd have to do multiple runs on the same track over several days; Which would be very costly. There is also the question as to if they would be allowed to explain how the suits work and if this would qualify as product placement/advertisement. The creators of the suits may consider the details to be trade secrets. There is however a myth that MB could tackle that deals with something similar; Does shaving your body hair really make much difference to swimming speed? This is a myth where there is no concerns about costs, all the testing could be done by Brian and Jon - and also give us some humor if they show them getting their legs waxed on camera*. They could bring in a guest swimmer, maybe giving the guys some pointers on techniques as well as a way to compare the guys times against a pros. But this isn't a requirement for testing, allowing them to either do all filming and testing in a couple of days if they are short on time or spacing things out if time is less of a factor. They might also be able to test out a couple of other things if they have access to a swimming pool for a few days. (*The Bothan has described their jobs as 'finding excuses to torture two grown men for entertainment'. This would certainly qualify) I think part of the idea was building a track that would not require braking or steering. perhaps they could even reuse the material for the giant waterslide, and do the testing sans ice. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Feb 20, 2018 6:24:59 GMT
Bob sleigh's require someone to steer them and apply braking to avoid taking corners too quickly and flying off the track or overturning. You simply couldn't duplicate this with Buster or any kind of rig. Which is why I am suggesting a rig on rails, maybe with wheels, thats not even ice related, that can be set on a slope to run down a hill in a regular time, with or without a Buster, so that the only vaguries will be the air resistance of the Buster?.. Again, this is why I am suggesting a rail and wagon on a downhil slope thats going to post the same time every time, to take away the human input, it doesnt have to turn unless the slope cant be straight, if its a straight slope and on rails needing no steering input, only the load will change how fast it runs. Also, three runs at that should be enough to prove its a regular unchanging time?. Maybe wind resistance on a blustery day may alter the results... so anyone know an "Inside" railway they could use?. Failing that, can they get access to a wind tunnel?. Or, and this is a slightly technical ask, can they build their own and have a force meter measure the resistance?. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Feb 20, 2018 14:30:47 GMT
one factor is that they either need a launcher or a long run in order to get up to the right velocity.
note, further research has shown that skeleton is what used to be toboggan.
|
|
