Posted by: John D (John@Dresslar.com) on Thu Nov 10 22:11:42 2005

SJD:

I wasn't going to pursue this thread any further, because Scott isn't doing anything to advance the substance of the dialogue. But I found myself laughing out loud at your response. Thanks for adding a cherry to the sundae that is my evening. As you note, Scott doesn't want to look at the evidence we've pointed him to about all the hitters' techniques that defy his conclusion that rotational hitting is unproven, unaccepted mumbo jumbo. So why go further?

And then there are the self-contradictory phrases like:

> Scott, your statement, “going strait to the baseball (hand path) is physically impossible, the linier mental picture will get better results for far more hitters then a rotational mental picture to the baseball” is illuminating.

And, I was going to stay above the phrase at Scott's inappropriate use of spelling, grammar, and diction, like...

> ps – it’s “Occam’s razor”, BTW

But, at some point it does suggest a certain lack of precision in observation and logic that kind of permeates the rest of the analysis.

I will give Scott his props for one comment:

>>...getting to the heart of a problem takes a keen eye, and
>>patience to NOT say whatever comes to mind...one real good piece
>>of coaching said with the right words goes 10 times further the
>>ten pieces of marginal suggestions.

Agreed there. Too many coaches have their tried and true theories and try to apply them all at once to some poor kid. As a coach, you sometimes have to apply triage, tackling the most basic flaws first. And you have to know the kid to know if he's mentally ready to absorb any changes to his swing at all... Perhaps he just needs a confidence boosting hit, however feeble, before he feels comfortable enough to think of the mechanics of his swing.