[ About ]
[ Batspeed Research ]
[ Swing Mechanics ]
[ Truisms and Fallacies ]
[ Discussion Board ]
[ Video ]
[ Other Resources ]
[ Contact Us ]
Scientific Hitting

Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Thu Mar 11 14:33:01 2004

'tis ... the "Bible" (no religious offense meant to anyone). :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In a few years, I look forward to passing my copy onto my son, and replacing mine.
> > > > >
> > > > > his overall theme is that hips lead the way.....that's ok but he does not get into the "how-to-do-it" details like we do at this site or the other site....
> > > >
> > > > grc, He knew how to do it and passed along the information that a young hitter needs. The "how to do it" details that I read are of very little value in the batters box. That happens when people who were not hitters try to teach hitting.......they start explaining things about the swing that they think the hitter feels, except the hitter does not feel them. To brush off Williams, shows that you did not spend much time in the batters box learning how to hit.
> > > >
> > > > Doug
> > >
> > > Ditto.
> >
> > Anyone who thinks Williams and his ghost writer knew how to write a book does not have an understanding of the game. Try reading Schmidt's book if you want detail. Of course if you don't want detail try consulting with a coach of a 7 year old girls softball team.
> Fred and Art, If you feel that you need to be an author to teach hitting, then you should dig up Steinbeck. Williams had more knowledge about hitting in his little finger than schmidt does in his whole body. Schmidt has pics in his book of how he thinks you should swing and demonstrates one way and then has pics of himself in a game doing it the opposite way. Williams taught everything that a hitter needs and described it very well. He also produced results, and results are the bottom line, not chapters on what a physics professor thinks is happening.Details are only good if they are correct. Anyone that feels they can't learn hitting from Williams book will never hit much anyway IMO.
> Doug

Hi Doug,

Why John Steinbeck? Why not Emily Dickinson? Obviously, Jack Mankin has become lucid in the expository information that he presents on hitter; hence, authorship is essential. In order to articulate ideas to the population, and influence that they have right idea, they need information, as well as the proper vehicle for transmitting their concepts. That vehicle is writing.

Also, some individuals can develop terrific counterarguments against certain hitting techniques, but cannot defend their opinions becaus they are deficient in inscribing their ideas on a piece of paper. This allows the individuals who have a weaker model--but more writing expertise--to quash their opponent's ideas. This sound frustrating, but it happens every day.

On the other hand, Mankin, Epstein, and Nyman are all lucid in their opinions and literature. Whenever they clash, they seem to be able to defend their research. Thus, one must conclude that authorship is just as important as coaching.


P.S. Earlier on this site I accused Nyman of stealing "scap loading" from others. From what I read on his site, that is not true at all, since it occurs even before the shrug, or X-factor. I owe it to him to offer a public apology for making blind accusations against him before I had all the facts.


Post a followup:

Anti-Spambot Question:
Who hit a record 70 home runs in one season?
   Kobe Bryant
   Wayne Gretzky
   Walter Payton
   Barry Bonds

[   SiteMap   ]