[ About ]
[ Batspeed Research ]
[ Swing Mechanics ]
[ Truisms and Fallacies ]
[ Discussion Board ]
[ Video ]
[ Other Resources ]
[ Contact Us ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Weight Shift and Balance Before Lower Body Rotation

Posted by: Gillyspy (gillyspy@gmail.com) on Thu May 5 20:48:07 2005

okay, so i'm 4 years behind anyway...
> > >
> > > Coach Tom -
> > > You misunderstand one very important point. I am referring to forward movement of the hips BEFORE hip rotation, not during.

I think what Major Dan is saying is essentially true, but what Jack is "not buying" is there is no evidence to support this being significant (or significant enough to consider).

Let me explain.

I think it is true that if a batter could do some kind of "happy gilmore" rush to the batter's box and co-ordinate his body movements to remain a perfect rotational swing while doing so that his swing would produce further hits because there is more power available to load into the body parts that will transfer into the rest of swing. I think this could be proved mathematically if all the components were accurately expressed and calculated.

To a lesser extent than happy-gilmore a 5inch forward motion (before the swing, etc, etc what-you-said) would add SOME extra energy that is coming from nowhere else.

I believe the reason for Jack's doubt is that this is hard to prove in practice. There is no way that a happy gilmore type rush could produce a consistent result in order to measure it. You'd fall asleep waiting for the hitter to get lucky enough to have good contact. You could get better success with a tee but then we've lessened reality and increased the theory and that doesn't help your #4 hitter when the bases are juiced down by 3 does it?

Barry-and-the-great-ones face major league pitching. If they used a forward momentum they would be sacrificing good contact with the ball -- talking probabilities here. We've established that the speed of the ball coming at the bat has something to do with it SO that IS important in practice, so ability to contact the ball squarely, more frequently is desirable. It's harder to hit the ball the more your head moves.

So Dan, I think you're right but your theory breaks down in the usefulness of it. Proof by real-life seems to suggest that this forward slide is not worth the sacrifice of being able to contact the ball.

Jack, you're right in that your swing technique is awesome but you need to consider this extra energy source could be credible.

Two more quick points related to this
i) While running for a high-jump generates extra energy there is a point where you are running too far/ wasting energy and therefore have less energy to apply to the jump. Perhaps it could be argued that the forward momentum here is a waste because it detracts from the ability to supply as much energy in the rotational aspect? I doubt it, but willing to consider it.

ii) Could this necessity for the practicality of a swing be why the linear method has been so successful? That is because it seems to give better opportunities for good contact. The bat seems to be easier to get into the zone and / or be in the zone longer. I think of linear as the way to get more consistent hits and rotation as the way to be as powerful as possible.



Post a followup:

Anti-Spambot Question:
This pitcher had over 5000 strikeouts in his career?
   Nolan Ryan
   Hank Aaron
   Shaquille O'Neal
   Mike Tyson

[   SiteMap   ]