Posted by: Mister X () on Tue Apr 29 18:15:10 2003

ray,

First, sorry I took so long to post. I've been busy over the weekend, and wanted to think this through a little. I did notice what you just corrected when I first read your post and figured that's what you meant. I guess the best way to go about this is to respond to your post paragraph by paragraph so here goes.

I agree that you don't want to drive the top hand past the bottom hand on an outside pitch. But I don't think you want to do it on an inside pitch either. Rather, I would pull my bottom hand (using rotation to pull the arm which in turn pulls the hand) to get my hands through the zone quickly so the barrell can get to the ball. This also allows you to hit the inside of the ball which is how Bonds can pull everything for HRs, yet keep it fair. When I heard "drive the top hand", I think of a long, extension swing that hits the outside of the ball. A long swing that hits the outside of the ball is not what you want on any pitch, yet alone an inside pitch. That will cause you to pull it foul, if you can even get the barrell to the ball.

I still contend that you cannot tell definitely that there is ulnar flexation in the Bonds pic. It is just not clear enough to be certain either way. I understand what ulnar flexation is, I was just trying to use more simple terms. I also agree that there is no "wrist roll (over)". But those are just still pictures. If they were clips, and you went a few frames farther, there might be "wrist roll (over)". And that is the problem. Because if your timing is not right, you will hit the ball as you roll over. To really look at this, it would be better to look at actual clips and not still pics.

On to the pics (in the order you posted them).
The first two pics of Bonds are after contact (at least to me, which is another reason why clips would be better). You have to agree that after contact the top hand will eventually be "past the bottom hand". No matter what you're trying to do, if you rotate your top hand will end up closer to the pitcher. In the first pic, again, you just can't tell for sure if he has ulnar flex. In the second pic he does, but that might be because he's after contact.

I can't tell if A-Rod is before or after contact, but I'm not convinced he has unlar flex. Again that pic is just not clear enough. In the second A-Rod pic, it appears he might have unlar flex, but I'm not 100% for sure. Another note on A-Rod. He may well indeed have ulnar flex in most all of his swings. But he is one of the most linear hitters in the Majors. I don't know what his mechanics are in his mind, but from viewing his clips, I know that in my rotational swing, I don't do many of the things he does with his arms.

In the first Big Mac pic, I would say there is ulnar flex. He most likely has it in the second pic as well. But in that pic, and especially the third clip, you can't tell 100% for sure.

Berkman has it, but he is very far in his swing and looks out in front.

I really can't tell in Matt William's pic. Maybe, but I'm not 100%. He also looks like he is hitting the ball out in front.

Griffey has it. I guess Chris Gomez has it. And Cliff Floyd looks like he has it.

Again the problem with the pics, and the reason that I can't say 100% for sure one way or another on them is because of the angle. The only way to really tell is from a directly overhead or underneath view where the camera is perpendicular to the movement we're looking for.

As far as the three points you wanted me to look for. There top hand palms all better be facing up, or they would never be able to hit. That should be a given no matter what. In a good rotational swing, your top hand position vs. bottom hand position with respect to the pitcher is determined by where in your swing you are. As you begin rotation, bottom hand is in front. At contact they should be close to even, and after contact, as you continue to rotate, the top hand will at some point be closer to the pither. The angle the bat has with the forearm doesn't automatically mean ulnar flex. If your grip is loose, you can flex your wrist and still keep the bat perpendicular to the forearm. Yes it's a good indicator, but it's not universal.

When you say "Mr. X, I never ask anyone to consciously think once the ball has been released from the pitcher’s hand." I assume you mean that once they get to the plate, their mind is cleared of mechanics and they just do what comes natural or through practice. I agree, but then I don't think Bonds EVER thinks to drive the top hand whether in practice or games. In fact, the last I heard he was quite the opposite. On ESPN, he said he often takes BP with a glove on his top hand and just rotates down to catch the ball.

Paul Nyman was the person who told me that contact should be made even with the front knee. That assumes a perfect situation. Correct timing on a pitch right down the middle. Inside pitches are hit a little more out front, and outside ones a little farther back. It's really just common sense. You have to hit the ball somewhere within your body frame. Without lunging, it's darn near impossible to hit a pitch in front of you stride foot and keep it fair. And it's darn near impossible to hit a pitch behind your crotch and keep it fair. I never asked if there were any real mechanical reasons why, but he showed me several clips where contact was made near the front knee. In most of those clips you can't see contact. It is a little before or after. But I would be willing to bet that most of those pitches were inside to. I never said hitting the ball a little in front or behind the front knee was bad, its just the ideal contact point.

What does "hands still" mean to you? To me, that means they don't independently go to the ball. It's to refute the old "take the hands to the ball" cue. The hands only move forward due to rotation of the body. The hands keep the same relationship with the body until after contact. That's also what I mean when I say "inactive hands". In my swing, I don't think to do anything with my wrists. I don't think to "lock" them, I just let them do whatever. To be honest, I've never really thought about them at all. I don't believe they are real important unless you are fooled and need the "whip effect" to hit the ball hard.

If you don't use "drive the top hand past the bottom hand" as a cue, what do you use it as? Are you playing devil's advocate and don't really use it at all? I'm just confused by how you seem to be using this statement, but then say you don't really use it. Also, my post that you refer to is taking about the "whip effect". The wrists come into play when you are fooled. Otherwise, I don't think they add anything.

I believe we are getting somewhere here. You and I think two different things when we hear "drive the top hand past the bottom hand". You think of wrist (ulnar) flex. I think of "punching" the ball with the top hand which results in a linear, disconnected swing. Your way can be used in the correct rotational swing, but I believe it could easily cause problems such as being out in front and hitting around the ball.

The only pic I have to support my views is the Big Mac one you posted and then agree with me. His wrist is not bent at all, and look where his bat is. Directly even with his front knee. He hasn't hit the ball yet, but in a few hundredths of a second he will, and he will make contact somewhere between his knee and foot. To me, that just looks/feels like a powerful position. If he were trying to make contact anywhere else, he would lose some power. You can also look at the links below, but even though I think there is no unlar flex, you can't tell 100% for sure. The pics do clearly illustrate the contact point at the front knee as does the Mac pic.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/features/2001/bonds/popups/hr_67.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/features/2001/bonds/popups/hr_71.html

I would also like to know what is the difference (in your mind) between the terms "wrist roll" and "wrist roll over"? Can you have one without the other? I would say no. If your wrists "roll over", the before that they had to just "roll". If you wrists "roll", then as the swing continues, they will "roll over". And either way, the results are bad, and effect your chances of hitting the ball well. If you can't have one without the other, and the end results are the same, what is the difference between them? All we're really talking about is the degree of roll, which to me doesn't matter for the reasons above.

Again, I think this discussion is one of the best the site has ever had. We are actually discussing the swing, AND getting things answered without attacking each other. At least I am starting to see where are differences are and how we see the same cue as meaning two different thing. You already suggested you are, too. Good job, ray. And thanks. Hopefully we'll also understand the wrists' roll (no pun intended) in the swing.