Posted by: Bart () on Sat May 3 07:24:23 2003

I think someone previously made a distinction between the two (maybe Teacherman?). I think the distinction was in connection with full x-t vs. less-than-full x-t.
> >
> > I hope whoever it was might rearticulate their view, as I have reason to believe it might be a topic worth discussing. I say this knowing or thinking that at the time I myself was scoffing at the notion. But I would like to hear the idea once more.
>
> Bart
>
> You and I were doing battle last fall about this topic. I maintained maximum batspeed was at extension as Paul Nyman states. If you remember, you started the post with a quote from the SETPRO website that you disagreed with.
>
> Paul was saying that there is a tradeoff of batspeed for bat quickness by leaving the elbow in the slot, therefore not reaching extension on the swing. He also stated that there are a few major leaguers who do hit at extension with Griffey as an example. I later suggested McGwire did also.
>
> The whole point was that being quicker to the ball, even if it doesn't generate maximum batspeed. is desireable because it allows a little more time for decisions. And, that maximum batspeed isn't necessary for most big leaguers to hit the ball out of the park. Better decisions and better sweet spot contact resulted from this.
>
> I went on the explain that I had tested this theory with my 16 yr olds at fall practice and that everyone of them registered higher batspeeds at extension than at the "L". It was about this time that I posted a clip of Arod (the same on Ray Porco and I have been discussing) and the topic died a silent death.

This is the discussion I now recollect.I do remember challenging Paul's statement, although (and correct me if I'm wrong)it was YOUR interpretation of Paul's statement that "there is a tradeoff of batspeed for bat quickness by leaving the elbow in the slot, therefore not reaching extension on the swing." I don't think that's what paul said or meant, but that's ok, it's what you think and we are the ones having the discussion, not Paul.

What I would like to explore is how do you arrive at the conclusion that there is more batspeed at full XT ? As far as I know, there has never been any scientific studies using film, instruments, etc to make such a measurment.

On the other hand, for Jack and those who maintain that maximum batspeed is achieved when the top arm is in the "L" position, what, if any scientific studies are THEY referring to? Nevermind the rhetoric that can convince someone that this is fact....has there been or has there not been actual scientific studies done that can prove their case?

The closest to studies I have seen pertaining to batspeed are studies that indicate that in general, balls hit to the pull field are generally hit harder than balls hit to the opposite field. To be exact, the general range of difference in the distance is about 15 percent. But these studies pertain to distance, and of course I don't think batspeed is the sole determinent in measuring distance the ball is hit.

In the absence of scientific studies, I have concluded that hitting an inside pitch with the top arm in the "L" position is PROBABLY the most efficient, but my conclusion is not based on science. It is based on observation. That is, if 90 per cent of the major leaguers hit that way, it's probably the right way. however, I wouldn't go so far as to say that the 10 percent who hit with full XT are "elite".

And what exactly is bat "quickness"? How is it measured? There are some coaches who think that having a traditional fence drill swing (traditional, not the Bart fence drill swing)will yield "quickness". But i have a feeling their idea of "quickness" is much different from yours.

Respectfully, Bart