[ About ]
[ Batspeed Research ]
[ Swing Mechanics ]
[ Truisms and Fallacies ]
[ Discussion Board ]
[ Video ]
[ Other Resources ]
[ Contact Us ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: squashing the bug again


Posted by: grc () on Sun Apr 22 17:33:13 2001


>>> jack....tim olson made an interesting comment..."squasing the bug is merely a rotational action while driving the rear kneee forward initiates rotation and weight shift"....i think he's right...extreme squashing of the bug is merely a rotational action OF THE BACK FOOT ONLY, and not contributing much if any to rotation of the hips........and tim made another statement: "driving forward off the rear foot and leg tends to launch the entire body into the swing"......again, i think tim has it right.....EVIDENCE: many of the video clips i see reveal the pros sort of first transferring the weight that was on their back foot to the inside part of their foot (bug squashers will try to keep thae weight on the ball of the back foot)...and as the hips rotate the back foot seems to sort of graze the dirtand perhaps the back foot eventually slides forward somewhat.....what do you thin, jack, tom, rql???? respectfully, grc.....<<<
> > >
> > > Hi grc
> > >
> > > I know from reading a number of posts by you and Tim that you are of the opinion that linear mechanics contributes significantly to bat speed generation. The statement; “driving forward off the rear foot and leg tends to launch the entire body into the swing” personifies a longer stride, forward axis drift and greater weight shift. – I am more than happy to discuss this with you. But it would help me to have a better understanding of your position if you would answer a couple of questions first.
> > >
> > > (1) Do you think a batter with very limited or no linear movements can generate great bat speed? Can a batter who just picks up the front foot and places it back down in the same spot (no stride or forward weight shift), rotates around a stationary axis and has a light amount of weight on the back toe (no toe drag), hit a ball 450+ feet?
> > > (2) How much farther do you think Tiger Woods could hit a golf-ball if he were to add those linear components to his swing? Forgetting accuracy for a minute, how much more club-head speed could he develop by striding forward a foot or so (adjusting the tee position), shifting his axis forward 5 or 6 inches, and dragging the back-toe a good distance?
> > >
> > > Jack Mankin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >hi jack...thanks for the response.....in answer to your two questions....(1) this is the stride vs. no stride question....i think you would agree that nomar epitomizes the no-stride school of thought and until i revisited a clip of him i was leaning toward the you-need -to-stride school of thought....it was based on my hunch only...i could never get a scientific explanation from anyone as to why forward momentum is needed or not needed and my hunch told me that probably a stride is better than no stride..........but after your post i revisited a nomar clip downloaded from setpro...it is a side view and it is no-stride...he never picked up the front foot in the clip....but jack, i noticed something else i had never noticed in the clip.....with fans in the background as a reference point, nomar's axis of rotation actually shifts forward about 6 or 8 inches!!!!...i couldn't begin to describe this happens ...it seems like he did it with a combination of slight backward body lean and the body sort of gliding forward and leaving the back foot behind...........so.....back to my original question regarding bug squashing, even with no stride there is no bug squashing, but rather a transfer of weight from the back foot to the instep of the back foot, and finally as the body shifts forward slightly the back foot reacts by the back heel coming up and little or no weight on the back toe......now maybe or maybe not this process "launches the entire body into the swing", but jack, i am sure of one thing: almost all clips i have seen show a slight linear movement of the body....i agree with you that rotational mechanics are better than linear mechanics if (1) you are pulling a pitch and (2) if we restrict the use of the term "linear mechanics" to the hands and arms.....i really think you might consider rethinking your position that linear precludes rotation....i think that the fact that the body and axis of rotation shifts forward slightly does not at all contradict many of your other theories......your second question: we can't forget about accuracy ....i'm not a golfer, but i have a hunch that if on the tee a golfer could have an unlimited number of attempts to take his best drive from each tee i think maybe there would be some golfers who would incorporate a stride in their swing....but thats wild speculation on my part....respectfully, grc.....
>
> If I may chime in here, I would like you all to consider the following: stride or no-stride, the hips travel forward ( a linear movement) that shifts the weight onto the front foot. This action happens BEFORE rotation. It accomplishes things including establishing the backward tilt of the axis of rotation AND generates linear momentum that the body can convert to rotational/angular momentum. The back heal may rise during this shift or the back foot may start to push and turn over or squish the bug or whatever you call these movements. As long as the hips shift forward you will not create back foot spinners.
> When the front heal drops and the front knee turns out the conversion to rotational movement has begun. The body redirects linear momentum into rotational/angular momentum as the front leg pushes back and the back leg drives the back hip forward, torquing the hips. For lack of a better term, the 'bracing' of the front leg, is how the body converts linear to angular momentum. I think 'bracing' is not a descriptive term, however. The front leg is not just used to bounce off of, but to catch the body weight and redirect it. The flexing of the quads of the front leg near contact is significant. Hitnut referred to his studies showing 110% of body weight on the front foot at contact. This would accomodate such things as back foot toe dragging after turnover, etc.
>
> I don't see anything incompatable with a weight shift before a rotational swing. The churning motion of the hips (slide forward, then torque) is the core motion of the swing. You can accomplish it with or without a stride.
> I believe that most good hitters have this motion as part of their swing. Jack has shown me clearly that the more significant distinction between hitters at the top levels is in upper body rotation, circular hand path, shoulder turn during contact, keeping the hands in/back during the turn, etc.
> >
>
>
>major dan...as usual you have made a very thoughtful analysis and i'll take some time to digest it....also perhaps jack could comment on your excellent post as well as my most recent comments...in the meantime i wanted to advise as to where one can find the nomar clip i was referring to...it's a fascinating clip (to me, anyway) because it seems to show exactly many of the things you just pointed out...and as a good reference point it shows fans in the background appearing and disappearing from sight as nomar shifts forward (and without a stride!!!)....the clip is from setpro.com, posted by the distinguished LEEBALL on 3-26-2k @ 12:14 pm...the topic is "hands back and hip rotation" and the specific location is www.setpro.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000327.html..........respectfully, grc....


Followups:

Post a followup:
Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Text:

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

   
[   SiteMap   ]