Re: Re: Re: Barring arm
Posted by: Doug (
) on Thu Jul 31 19:43:03 2003
I saw where Epstein said barring lead arm is bad but Jack I thought you said it is good. What do you say?
> > Hi Sid
> > I have no problem with the lead-arm being straight in the launch position or during the swing. I prefer not to use the term “barred” because it infers a rigid and tense arm and on inside pitches it may be necessary for the lead-elbow to flex in order to generate a tighter hand-path. Therefore, I have no problem with the principle of “barring the arm” only with the connotations surrounding the term.
> > I will give everyone the benefits I find with having a straighter (“barred” - if you prefer the term) lead-arm. But first, I think it would lead to a good discussion if we heard from those that feel having the lead-arm barred is wrong. So those that think a straight or barred arm is bad, please give the reasons you feel barring the lead-arm has a negative effect on the swing. Or, if you can quote Epstein’s objections to it, I would like to hear them also.
> > Jack Mankin
> Jack. It seems that the elongation of the arm at toe touch must change the arc of the swing. The distance from the hands "barred" vs"not barred" in relationship to the stationary axis must cause some profound differences in the swing. My son seems slower to the ball if he barrs . It also seems to be harder for him to stay connected to the rotating midsection. I too want to hear the truth.
>>Jack, You say that you prefer not to use the term "barred" as it infers a rigid and tense arm. I feel that is exactly what it does.
Post a followup: