Posted by: Dave A (oxagin@hotmail.com) on Mon Oct 18 14:09:28 2004

>>> JACK, ARE YOU SAYING FLAIL IS THE SAME THING AS TOP HAND TORQUE? IF SO IM CONFUSED BECAUSE MANNY SAYS FLAIL IS LINEAR AND WE ALL ALREADY KNOW THAT FOR SURE TOP HAND TORQUE IS THE OPPOSITE OF LINEAR, THAT IS, THT IS ROTATIONAL.CLARIFICATION WOULD BE APPRECIATED. THANKS. <<<
> > > >
> > > > Hi James
> > > >
> > > > No, I am not saying, “flail is the same thing as top-hand-torque.” In fact, the addition of the steering-wheel knob eliminates torque (hands applying force from opposing directions at the handle) as a factor in generating angular displacement of the bat-head.
> > > >
> > > > There are two independent mechanical principles at work that induce the rate of angular displacement of the bat (bat speed).
> > > >
> > > > Principle (1) – An angular displacement rate of the hand-path (CHP) induces angular displacement of the bat-head. -- Some may refer to this as “flail.”
> > > >
> > > > Principle (2) – Hands applying force at the handle from opposing directions (Torque).
> > > >
> > > > We set up tests that would isolate the bat speed generated from each principle. In order to gather data on bat speed generated from the CHP alone, we needed to eliminate the torque factor. That is why we added a steering-wheel knob for this test. – We found that the straighter the hand-path (less angular displacement) the less the bat speed generated.
> > > >
> > > > In order to test for the amount of bat speed that could be generated from Torque alone (little to none generated from a CHP), we kept the hand-path as straight as possible. --- We found that with a 24 to 26 inch hand-path, both CHP alone and Torque alone produced 50 to 55 mph bat speed. Readings for applying both (CHP & Torque – John Elliot – 34/32) was around 81 to 84 mph.
> > > >
> > > > Jack Mankin
> > > >
> > >
> > > Certainly top hand torque/bottom hand torque have not only been proven to exist, but it has also been shown to be present in every majojor league power hitter (we can see for ourselves in Bonds, Piazza and all the rest). However, I think the flail and bow arch material is a figment of someone's imagination.I know that at leat among college players everyone talks about tht/bht, but no one talks about flail and bow arch.
> >
> > Can I ask which college players at what university? I am a believer in THT and BHT but I have never heard a college hitter mention it. If you noticed in the college world series, most of those kids did not have top quality rotational swings. I have visited a lot of schools and whenever they discuss hitting they do not use the terms THT or BHT.
>
> Dave, I can tell you where I go: Cal Poly Pomona. We are Division II. I don't know about D1 or for that matter other D2 leagues, but I can tell you that at my school and throughout the league everyone talks about top hand torque, circular hand path and rotation. No one talks about bow arch , flail and the other linear stuff. Maybe because Jack is right here in Southern California his views are more widely known, I don't know. But I can say that everyone is convinced that rotation, not linear increases the chances of getting drafted.

I am in the Northeast so maybe thats why. Even why I travel down South I rarely hear references to those terms so it could be because of where you are in SoCal. All the coaches around here are horribly linear and its disgusting.