Posted by: Lamber () on Mon Dec 22 11:07:41 2003

Hi Gentlemen
> >
> > We are having a very interesting, and I must say, challenging discussion on what classifies a batter as being either a “linear” or “rotational” hitter. The more I analyze the differences we have with each other’s viewpoint, the more I am convinced it is a matter of how we interpret the two terms.
> >
> > For us to communicate our ideas to each other, and avoid much confusion regarding a batter’s mechanics, we must be on the same page as to what the terms we are using actually mean. This is especially true in the linear vs rotational controversy.
> >
> > At first I though it would helpful if we pooled our thoughts to see if we come together and agree on a common definition. This still may be a good idea. But, keep in mind, that the basis for definitions of swing mechanics at Batspeed.com is derived from the forces a batters transfer mechanics applies to the bat (CHP, THT and BHT).
> >
> > Therefore, at this site, linear mechanics is viewed as applying linear (straight or inline) forces to the bat. Pure linear mechanics would generate a straight (A to B) hand-path and the force from each hand would be inline driving the bat linearly knob first at the ball. – I might add, that prior to this site coming online with findings from my study, those linear principles, "hands extending A to B" and "knob to ball" were taught by the vast majority of coaches.
> >
> > Rotational mechanics applies rotational (chp and torque) forces to the bat. Rotational mechanics supply these forces by generating the optimum angular displacement in the hand-path while the hands apply force to the bat from opposing directions (torque). Therefore, I think you can see the problem I would have with a post that refers to Arod as having linear mechanics. But the poster may be right with his definition of linear mechanics.
> >
> > What is your input on for defining linear or rotational mechanics?
> >
> > A Joyous Merry Christmas to You All,
> >
> > Jack Mankin
> >
>
> jack...i think the key distinction is happening immediately after toe touch & before heel plant.....
>
> ROTATION:if,at toe touch the shoulder immediately turns aprox 15 degrees or so as the heel lands, the chp will also start...then, with elbow going into slot, hips, shoulders rotating in UNISON, contact will be made without full xt of top arm.....
>
> LINEAR: if, at toe touch the front shoulder is kept in (and therefore front shoulder remains in at toe touch),the start of chp, rotation of hips, shoulders, everything will be slightly delayed...this will create a time issue, resulting in hitter neeeding to draw in hands/excessively bent front elbow and need to get full xt of front arm in order for the bat to create the new,modified arc required by this approach....results = issues of proper bat angle at contact and MAYBE power issues....
>
> rotation means chp, rotation, etc earlier in the swing....of course this also means an earlier comitment to the swing than for linear...linear does =slightly more time to evaluate the pitch, but then when decision is made to swing, swing has to be rushed (the A to B thing)....
>
> i think one major key to difference in R & L is the UNISION thing you have spoken about....
>

I totally disagree with linear equals more time to review the pitch. In fact, it is completely opposite. Linear (moving hands to the ball)moves the contact point forward therefore shortening the distance the ball travels, therefore speeding up the pitch. A rotational hitter hits the ball deeper in the zone. Maybe up to 2-3' difference in contact point.

When considering a hitter only has .4 seconds to see the ball and get the barrel to contact, whatever increase in time the extra 2-3' of distance allows is HUGE.