Posted by: rql () on Wed Dec 4 11:32:06 2002

I would like to get an idea of what folks think is the correlation of loading to power.I watch griffey with a large load or stretch position to me ,and I see mcgwire with not so much separation yet I think they are both fully loaded with different body styles .Griffey gets to apply force over a longer distance and mac,applies more force over a shorter distance.Both hit the ball very hard and far,Yet when I watch carew I see a very small cock that does not look fully loaded at all though all the other parts of his swing looked rotational.Having saw 1 clip of rose from overhead looking very rotational I wonder if he had a small load that did not allow for power.
>
> rql-
>
> I think the key to power is what Nyman calls "synchronization" or what Shawn Bell refers to as "lightning striking".To me,it is a given that the muscles have to be put on stretch,but how much they are stretched is less important than having them all "unstretch" optimally.Jack has pointed out the importance of rotation around a stationary axis and how transfer mechanics work in the unwinding.Others have described how the body rotates,and Nyman has especially pointed out the importance of scapula loading to create and efficient link between the torso and more distal(smaller) parts.
>
> You have described the importance of the direction of the hands in loading them.I think the key to loading is to use the big muscles in the sequence 1-cock the hip as back arm is internally rotated,2-cocking the hands by scapula loading while avoiding an excessive "backswing",muscles stretch as stride foot goes out, and back arches3-beginning unloading by uncocking the hip(don't lose hip cock before this).Details in the lengthy post below.Good winding and unwinding mechanics are far more important than how much stretch there is.

Tom,what do you think is the difference why carew and rose hit for so little power yet appear to be quite rotational as say a palmeiro and gonzo who are of similar size.