[ About ]
[ Batspeed Research ]
[ Swing Mechanics ]
[ Truisms and Fallacies ]
[ Discussion Board ]
[ Video ]
[ Other Resources ]
[ Contact Us ]
Re: Re: Rotational


Posted by: Rick (rickmiller33@gmail.com) on Sun Mar 29 11:31:22 2009


Hi Jack,

Thank you for the reply. The repackaging I was referring to was Charlie Lau's theory, which is what his son continues to teach. Unlocking the hips, pulling with the arms (and for all that is holy, NOT THE SHOULDERS), hands inside the ball, snap the wrists through with flat hands, and finish with a high swing which facilitates a nice extension through the ball. ARod credits Charley Jr. openly with perfecting his swing -- a nice one indeed. Larussa, if you recall, insisted the White Sox bring Charlie Lau on board as their hitting instructor when he was hired as Manager ans subsequently went on to lead the league in hitting. Larussa, to this day refers to Charlie Lau as the greatest hitting instructor he has ever come across. The question shouldn't be posed to me as to why I think Pujols is not what he says he is... a Lau disciple, but why you disagree with Pujols own statement and suggest he is something else. George Brett credited Charlie Lau for getting him into the Hall of Fame. I don't doubt that you are trying to help hitters improve their game, but telling kids to pull with their shoulder is just bad, bad, bad on so many levels. You cite Bonds, Ruth, Williams, and Sosa as great hitters to model. First, three of them were left-handed, two played a LONG LONG LONG time ago, and all of them were dead pull hitters. Side-note: I am so sick of everyone pointing to Ted Williams as a hitting source; one shouldn't take exceptions to the game and apply their style to the masses. Then there is Sosa... are you kidding? Sosa in the same breath as the other three? My idea of rotational hitting would be Rose, and perhaps I am misunderstanding your interpretation of what rotational is to you.



> >>> I was reviewing the website. I don't know, this seems like a bit of hair-splitting and then repackaging. Pujols and ARod are Lau theory to a tee. Call it what you will, but knob to ball, head down, front-toe closed, and top hand release is, simply put, Charley Lau 101. What is the significant difference between what Lau taught and what you suggest? I think it is a fair question since you are posting Pujols as a rotational hitter when Pujols and Tony LaRussa -- themselves -- would tell you different. Thank you for your reply in advance. I just want to understand. All the best, Rick <<<
>
> Hi Rick
>
> I developed the rotational swing model presented on this site in 1988. After ten years of discussing the model's principles on the site's Discussion Board, those principles remain unchanged. I think you will find that Lau Jr.s' material was presented well after I presented my model. So I am not sure what (or whose) "repackaging" you are referring to. Also, since you appear to think, "Pujols and ARod are Lau theory to a tee" rather than the rotational principles I teach, I would be interested in how you classify the mechanics and principles Lau promotes?
>
> Rick, I am not up to date with what Lau teaches. But if you have a problem with any of the batting principles on the site, feel free to point them out.
>
> Jack Mankin


Followups:

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

Anti-Spambot Question:
This is known as hitting for the cycle in a game?
   Single, double, triple, homerun
   Four singles
   Three homeruns
   Three stikeouts

   
[   SiteMap   ]