Posted by: Doug () on Sat Nov 22 10:46:46 2003

>>> Jack....Pete Rose vs. Ken...Griffey who's swing is longer?
> Who generates more batspeed, who hits the ball farther. If you
> say less shoulder turn or shorter stride that works for me, but
> there is no denying somebody see's the ball longer....is there?
> You can make the same argument with Boggs, Carew and
> several others. Does less batspeed sometimes mean higher
> average? I talked to a guy that play's within the A's organization
> the other day...he stated that he become a .300 hitter (vice .220
> hitter)and increased his power when his swing went from 100%
> effort to 80% effort. This philosophy is rampid through the entire
> A's organization. He doesn't want max batspeed he wants
> smooth flowing body parts, that can only be destroyed with max
> batspeed on the brain. I think Max batspeed discourages
> smooth flowing parts, in fact the slower the batspeed the
> smoother the swing. This should be the baseline of all swings
> and work up from there. Not the other way around. I'm not being
> confrontational either, but Batspeed emphasis is why some
> people have trouble understanding your philosophy. I am not
> disputing how we obtain batspeed (you deserve a lot of credit for
> that), but striving for it soley is missing the point of great hitters.
> Ted Williams said every home run he hit surprised him. Most
> kids would not be surprised when they hit a home run, in fact the
> home run ball soon becomes there downfall, because they then
> try to hit harder the next time. This doesn't work in any sport
> when consistancy is the goal. Do big league oraganizations
> carry batspeed indicators in there clubhouses?
> >
> > I love what you say on this site, but until you've tried 80% effort
> at 90 plus MPH, you will never know the difference. I do not want
> more Batspeed when the ball is blowing by me....I WANT LESS!!
> <<<
> >
> > Hi Coach C
> >
> > I did face 90 mph pitching at the University of Missouri and I
> was taught basically the linear approach to batting you advocate
> with mediocre results. – Rose, Boggs and Carew were all good
> single hitters. But I will take the swings of Mantle, Brett, or Bonds
> against a 95 MPH fastball anytime. They not only led the league
> in batting average many times, their swings generated enough
> bat speed to clear the fences when they got lift on the ball. – If
> you feel their trying to hit the ball hard makes them inconsistent, I
> will take inconsistency every time.
> >
> > Coach C, below is an article I wrote that expresses our
> difference in coaching philosophy.
> >
> > "Swing For the Fence - Ruin Your Mechanics"
> >
> > Subject: Pushing the limits of flawed mechanics.
> >
> > I think all coaches would agree that "setting goals" is an
> important tool in the development of good athletes. The goals
> should challenge the athlete to be the best he can be. The
> setting of a goal that does not place the athlete far ahead of his
> past achievements is an insult to his courage. My dad used to
> say, "Son, it is far better to shoot for the moon and reach only the
> peak of a mountain; than to aim for the foothills an attain it."
> >
> > When setting goals for hitting the baseball, a strange
> inconsistency arises. By far, the number one prize of batting is
> that gratifying sensation a player experiences in hitting a long
> home run. The soothing vibes of power the bat resonates
> through the hitter's body is something a player will never forget.
> However, many batting coaches have discovered that the
> mechanics they are teaching will breakdown if the hitter attempts
> to swing with home run power. The player must be made to
> understand that home runs should not be sought after. They are
> something that just happens when the hitter least expects it.
> >
> > The coach must convince the players that to be successful
> they must "hit the ball on the ground back up the middle." His
> most worrisome time is right after a player hits a home run. How
> can he make sure that he and other players do not strive for
> another one? He has spent weeks convincing the players to
> forget about the fence and just "hit it up the middle." If the hitter
> should endeavor for something more than mediocrity it could
> ruin his mechanics forever.
> >
> > I can think of no other sport where striving to attain it's most
> prized goal is declared mechanically taboo. The paradox is so
> sad but true. With the mechanics coaches have been given to
> teach, the more power the hitter attempts to achieve the weaker
> the results. But the real sad part is, we have found it easier to
> lower the goals than to perfect the mechanics. When the seven-
> foot high-jump couldn't be attained with the mechanics being
> used, they didn't advise the athletes to settle for a lower mark or
> they might ruin their form. Records from the four minute mile to a
> twenty foot pole-vault would never have been achieved by
> teaching that adversity should lead to the lowering of
> expectations.
> >
> > I feel there is a touch of arrogance in claiming that since a
> coach can't teach an average player to hit with power, those that
> have power must have been born with "pop" in their bat. Is it
> possible the top hitters may not using the mechanics they
> teach? It may be time to acknowledge that teaching linear
> mechanics will not allow a hitter to attain the bat speed required
> to consistently hit the ball hard.
> >
> > By initiating the bat properly with torque and rotational energy,
> the average tension free swing of the hitter carries plenty of bat
> speed to clear the fence in most any direction. His main concern
> is timing and getting the plane of his swing in line with the ball. If
> he is a little high on the ball, it will be a sizzling grounder. Hit it
> square and you have a frozen-rope to the gaps -- a little low and
> bye, bye.
> >
> > Jack Mankin
>
> Thanks Jack !
>
> Tom's Thanksgiving RANT :
>
> Something seems to be creating an incompatibility between
> "visions" here.To my way of thiking,Jack's vision is that of the
> synergistic/whole is greater than the sum of parts approach to
> mechanics which he has distilled from watching the greats.Both/
> and/wholistic thinking.
>
> Others think there is ultimately a tradeoff that has to be faced-
> power vs average,batspeed vs quickness.Either/or/reductionist
> thinking.
>
> I vote for both/and.Either or is philosophically a leftover of
> materialistic phyiscal only/reductionist thinking.Both/and is the
> "belief" that there are emergent properties that result from the
> way things fit together that create novel adaptations.
>
> The human body is a miracle of adaptation.If you are aware of
> what your goal/challenge is you will encourage and not fight its
> wholistic adaptation.
>
> The hitting challenge is essentially a timing challenge.The
> solution of the geniuses of human adaptation to this particular
> challenge show great quickness AND great batspeed.They
> show great power AND great average.The human body does not
> survive and prosper when forced to choose either/or.When the
> hour is darkest,some creative soul will find a "third way" that
> transcends the dead end of either/or.We need to appreciate
> these solutions and use them as a guide to help others reach
> their potential,not limit the adaptation by the dead end of either/
> or.
>
> Jack has shown a way of understanding how to do this.
>
> Nyman has explained more about postmodern/chaos/systems
> theory/wholism/upward and downward causation.
>
> You CAN have the best of both worlds.You CAN find the solution
> via trial and error IF you don't limit yourself by setting your goals
> too low as the result of reductionist either/or thinking.
>
> Jack shows the key mechanics that need to be
> implemented.Nyman points out the importance of INTENT.
>
> You must hit the balll hard.That doesn't mean it won't feel
> effortless if everything goes well.
>
> Williams said BODY AT 80-85 %,HANDS AT 100%
>
> Palmeiro says HE GETS EVERY OUNCE OF ENERGY INTO
> EACH SWING.
>
> Gwynn says PULL WITH THE BOTTOM HAND,DON'T FORCE
> THINGS WITH THE LOWER BODY.
>
> Given Jack's model,all these things are clues to HOW to achieve
> your goals.
>
> Don't shortchange yourself.Don't sell yourself short by lowering
> your dreams and goals because of reductionist either/or
> thinking.
>
> Happy Thanksgiving to all !

Tom, Fine post IMO. "The hitting challenge is a essentially a timing challenge" You are hard for me to understand sometimes, but if I keep reading your posts, I find good sound mechanics and thinking in between the words that I don't understand. The preswing movements that the great hitters use are their own special ways of "timing" their swing to hit the ball at whatever speed. The basic mechanics of a rotational swing are not hard to learn......hips and shoulder rotation around a stationary axis. Elbow in the slot and good head position......then timing comes into play, and that is where true talent is. Timing and then the development of strength will lead a hitter to higher levels of play.

Doug