N/S calling all smart people (1 Viewer)

[phil413th]

I like how you think about math and football in the offseason. I feel like you and me may have a lot in common sir

It's the off-season!!! What are you gonna do?

 

[duhonmark551]

You got me thinking

How does a cheetah catch a gazelle?
They never heard about Pythagorus and his hippopotamuse triangles.

Maybe its instinct.

 

[HailStateSaintsFan]

if the tackler and the runner started at the same yard line, the tackler would never catch him. This question just been buggin me for a while.

Unless of course, his name is Malcolm Jenkins.

 

[Alan12]

if the tackler and the runner started at the same yard line, the tackler would never catch him.

Unless of course, his name is Malcolm Jenkins.

Also if the runner's name is Roman Harper, and the tackler's name is Sam Bradford...

 

[nolaspe]

Up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, B, A, start....

 

[Watertaco]

Ok so I had a question creep into my head the other day after consuming a few beers. Everyone knows that a potential tackler has a better shot at tackling a runner by taking an angle at the runner. But according to the Pythagorean Theorem that we all learned in fifth grade, the angle, C,(that the tackler is taking) is a longer distance than what the runner, B, would be taking. My question is how does it give the tackler a better chance at catching up if the distance he has to travel is greater than what the runner's is? I can't come up with an answer.

The Pythagorean Theorem applies to right triangles.

Why are you only addressing B, the opposite of C (which is the hypotenuse), but you fail to mention the adjacent side A?

To answer your question, it's simple. Perhaps C has greater speed than B?

 

[bornnraisedwhodat]

Ask Malcolm Jenkins

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

 

[qweasdzxcxz]

Everyone here is wrong.

Geometry does enter into it. The key is that the defenders only take these angles when they are farther up the field than then runner. This is why it's not the pythagorean theorem.When the defender then turns downfield to run at the ballcarrier at an angle, he is not on the hypotenuse. The runner and the defender are both running at the same point downfield. In otherwords. they're both running on the "b" sides of this triangle: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/eps-gif/IsoscelesTriangle_800.gif



So, you have to take the "a" dashed line in that and turn it in your head so that it isn't pointing downfield. It's pointing slightly to the sideline.

So, they're now running the same distance before their paths meet.

Furthermore, if the defender is even farther up field, he can take a larger angle, and make it so that the runner is on the hypotenuse.

If the defender was on the same yardline as the runner, and then took an angle, then he is on the hypotenuse. Sometimes they have to do this - a safety should never be in this position - but it only works if the defender is faster than the runner. So, for instance, this will never work on AP. But sometimes they have no choice - it's still a better option than running straight at the defender.

 

[MrEMann83]

The real answer is that in a Triangle, all points are sitting still. In football, point B and C is constant movement to a new point. The points are not established until the tackle is made.

 

[daMixter]

Tacoes. The hypotenuse conflicts with the integral vortex and therefore eliminates any inconsequential conclusions due to the unknown parameters.

PS-hangin' out on 48 hours straight travel from India and a tall glass of diet pepsi laced with Old Monk rum........

 

[reason2believe]

The Pythagorean Theorem applies to right triangles.

Why are you only addressing B, the opposite of C (which is the hypotenuse), but you fail to mention the adjacent side A?

To answer your question, it's simple. Perhaps C has greater speed than B?

Bingo. Some good answers ... but speed was left out alot of the explanations. Without a difference in speed, you are not catching anyone.

 

[AmerVet]

Try posting with the same thread title on a Falcons, Cowboys or Niners board and see what you get.

I'd bet you'd get a good laugh.

 

[qweasdzxcxz]

Bingo. Some good answers ... but speed was left out alot of the explanations. Without a difference in speed, you are not catching anyone.

This isn't true. See my post.

 

[Sardonios]

Ok so I had a question creep into my head the other day after consuming a few beers. Everyone knows that a potential tackler has a better shot at tackling a runner by taking an angle at the runner. But according to the Pythagorean Theorem that we all learned in fifth grade, the angle, C,(that the tackler is taking) is a longer distance than what the runner, B, would be taking. My question is how does it give the tackler a better chance at catching up if the distance he has to travel is greater than what the runner's is? I can't come up with an answer.

The answer is simple, it's just difficult to conceptualize. The short answer is that the defender has to travel the distance of both sides if he takes the direct route, and, while each side is shorter than the hypotenuse, the sum of the sides is always longer. This results from the fact that the runner is moving while the defender approaches. Let's say the defender is substantially faster than the runner (if the defender is slower, the second side of the triangle will be infinitely long). To catch the runner by traveling along the side, first he covers Side A. Now he's directly behind the runner and has to turn 90 degrees and cover Side B to catch the runner. Alternatively, he can travel along the hypotenuse and reach the end of Side B directly. This latter route, the hypotenuse, is longer than either side, but is always shorter than the sum of the two sides.

Take a hypothetical example. The players are standing at the 20 yard line and are 4 yards apart. Player A (defender) can cover 2 yards in the time Player B (runner) covers 1. A runs directly at B while B runs upfield. A covers the 4 yard gap and winds up where B started. Meanwhile, B has run 2 yards upfield and is on the 22. A chases. A catches B at the 24. All told, A covered 8 yards (4 yards along each side). How long would the defender have traveled if he took the hypotenuse? Square root of 4^2+4^2 = 5.65 yards. So he increased the distance required by over 2 yards by traveling along a side (not accounting for the fact that he'll actually be traveling along an even shorter path since he'll get there earlier; in reality, he'd have to cover less than 5 yards if he took the perfect angle).

There's another possible interpretation of your question, though: how would a defender traveling along the hypotenuse catch a runner traveling only along a side. Unless the defender is faster than the runner, the answer is that he wouldn't. Taking an angle serves only to decrease his travel distance versus alternative routes.

 

[ETWhoDat]

Everyone here is wrong.

Geometry does enter into it. The key is that the defenders only take these angles when they are farther up the field than then runner. This is why it's not the pythagorean theorem.When the defender then turns downfield to run at the ballcarrier at an angle, he is not on the hypotenuse. The runner and the defender are both running at the same point downfield. In otherwords. they're both running on the "b" sides of this triangle: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/images/eps-gif/IsoscelesTriangle_800.gif



So, you have to take the "a" dashed line in that and turn it in your head so that it isn't pointing downfield. It's pointing slightly to the sideline.

So, they're now running the same distance before their paths meet.

Furthermore, if the defender is even farther up field, he can take a larger angle, and make it so that the runner is on the hypotenuse.

If the defender was on the same yardline as the runner, and then took an angle, then he is on the hypotenuse. Sometimes they have to do this - a safety should never be in this position - but it only works if the defender is faster than the runner. So, for instance, this will never work on AP. But sometimes they have no choice - it's still a better option than running straight at the defender.

You sure everyone's wrong? I guess you missed my post.