Re: Re: Re: Major Dan/ Lau
Rotational Hitting (Jack Mankin from earlier in this thread)
> > > “It's easy to identify hitters that use rotational mechanics because most of them do. I'm still waiting to hear about one that doesn't.” --- I would agree with you that there are many similarities of how linear and rotational hitters develop energy for the swing. Either may or may not take a stride, or shift weight, and both rotate around some axis.
> > >
> > > But there is a vast difference in the mechanics they use to transfer that energy into bat speed. The batter using linear
> mechanics initiates the swing with forces that will have the back-hand driving past the lead-hand at contact. So, how he strides, rotates and the forces he applies to the bat at initiation is timed and geared to achieve back-arm extension through contact.
> > >
> > Major Dan, I'm very impressed with your explicit scientific descriptions of the swing but how would you communicate that to a hitter without scaring him to death? It seems to me that they're many different attempts at trying to explain the swing properly and the goal is for a universal understanding and to simplify things.
> > Keep up the good work.
> > Charley Lau Jr.
> > > A good rotational hitter has no thought of extending the back-arm through contact. The mindset for his mechanics is to initiate the swing with forces that will cause the lead-hand to arc around a more stationary back-hand coming into contact. So the forces he applies to the bat at initiation will be far different than those of the linear hitter. He will have expended all rotational an torque energies by contact. The power for the follow-through will come from the bat’s momentum – not his arms.
> > >
> > > So, to sum it up: The linear hitter sets up to drive (or extend) the back-hand past the lead-hand. --- The rotational hitter sets up to have the lead shoulder and arm pull the lead-hand around a more stationary back-hand. --- The mechanics may look similar, but there is a vast difference in what they produce.
> > >
> > > Charlie Lau Jr. response:
> > > Jack, Don't make linear and rotational hitting so confusing.
> > > The vast majority of good hitters display the same axis to produce not only hip rotation but also weight transfer that depends on the location of the pitch. Mark McGwire, Jeff Bagwell,Dante Bichette and a few others are bigger and stronger than the vast majority of todays' sluggers and can get away without displaying full hip rotation and weight transfer. Instead of perpetuating the problem, why dont you simplify it by saying your front leg should firm up at contact which keeps you from being to linear and too rotational? My father said that 20 yrs ago.
> > > > Respectfully,
> > > > Charley Lau Jr.
> > >
> > > 1- Jack, your description above is brilliant, concise and to the point. I have given it to all my AAU players. It is a very clear statement of what we are trying to teach them and in many cases fixing in their swings.
> > >
> > > 2- Charley Lau Jr. poster/im-poster?? takes issue with Jack's statement. "Don't make linear and rotational hitting so confusing." I for one am not in the least confused by Jack's statement. Jr. what is confusing about it?
> > > Wat does Jr. offer? "your front leg should firm up at contact which keeps you from being too linear and too rotational". Now that does confuse me. Is the goal to be partly linear and partly rotational? Why? Which part of linear is the part to keep, which part of rotational is the part to keep? Please answer these questions so they can be discussed. The statement is at best too ambibuous as stated to be discussed.
> > > 3- "your front leg should firm up at contact which keeps you from being too linear and too rotational". I have challenged this hitting tip before but with no material response.
> > > If the front leg firms up at contact, that implies to me that hip rotation, caused by the front leg pushing the front hip back and the back leg pushing the back hip forward, is occurring as the bat approaches contact.
> > > If this were true, how can hip rotation be linked to shoulder rotation through the torso in a kinetic chain, then turned into batspeed with the hands turning with the shoulders in a circular hand path?
> > > The legs power hip rotation. That energy must be transferred to shoulder rotation through the torso. As the hips turn open and transfer energy, they slow down (equal and opposite reaction) and form a base against which the torso can turn in order to turn the shoulders (another equal and opposite reaction). This implies a delay between hips open (front leg firm) and bat coming into contact with the ball. Without the delay, there is no kinetic chain. So how can you firm up the front leg AT contact? Isn't it BEFORE contact?
> > > or
> > > Jr. - are you saying that the proper swing is to shift the weight, then turn the body as a unit - hips, torso, shoulders, arms - into the ball? If so, then you can firm up the front leg at contact. Do you advocate a unit turn swing? If not, how do you reconcile these conflicts?
> > > Major Dan
> > > Major Dan-I would apreciate a little more respect when you address me please do it with respect, until you become an author yourself.... I am here to offer my opinion which to most, is very apreciated and well paid for. Let us discuss the pure rotational hitter and please share this with Jack Mankin: The p- Rotational hitter has difficulty covering the entire strike zone because the hips and shoulders tend to open up too quick and causes the path of the swing to leave the hitting area a bit too soon. I or my late father never said to lunge to the ball. Many of you guys see things the way you want and have decided to interpret it that way for some reason. Let's simplify it as I did in my new book Lau's Laws on Hitting". Once the stride is complete the head should stabilize and serve as an axis for rotation. It's only $21.95 at your favorite bookstore and I believe strongly that it explains the true dynamics of hitting. No more arguments or grey areas.
> Charley Lau Jr.
> > >
Charley Lau Jr. -
I did not intend address you disrespectfully. I apologize for any unintended slights. However, I do not consider disagreeing with you or challenging your ideas to be disrespectful if that is what you take offense at. This discussion board is an open forum. I am willing to take my lumps when I post. I hope you willing to openly discuss hitting issues as well.
(if I become an author, can I address you more disrepectfully? or is that not what you meant???)
"Once the stride is complete the head should stabilize and serve as an axis for rotation"
"your front leg should firm up at contact"
How do you reconcile these two statements? What constitutes completing the stride? Toe touch? heel down? What constitutes front leg firming up? knee straight? front hip rotated back? leg catching weightshift of stride? What else happens in between stride completed and front leg firms up? anything? is there a time difference?
I asked you in my last post
"are you saying that the proper swing is to shift the weight, then turn the body as a unit - hips, torso, shoulders, arms - into the ball? If so, then you can firm up the front leg at contact. Do you advocate a unit turn swing? If not, how do you reconcile these conflicts?"
What is your response?
You did address what you consider a pure rotational hitter. It would benefit you to read more of Jack Mankin's website and previous threads. He deals with the issue of the outside pitch and the ability to use to torque to drive balls hard to the opposite field. Your criticism of rotational hitting is similar to criticisms of Ted Williams' theories going back 30 years or more - antiquated, more of a straw man than an in-depth response.
As far as your book is concerned:
1- you promised me a copy in a private email some time ago. I still haven't received it, but am eagerly awaiting it.
2- is your agenda here to participate or to sell books?
3- "it explains the true dynamics of hitting. No more arguments or grey areas." is a bit ambitious of a statement.
Do you really believe you know it all, have all the answers, have nothing left to learn? There is a difference between confidence and hubris, expertise and arrogance. I hope you do not wish to portray yourself the wrong way.
Awaiting more education....
Post a followup: