Posted by: Shawn () on Tue Feb 17 09:04:44 2004

Hi BHL
>
> I used to read the discussions on Mike’s Board. His principles of transfer mechanics were more linear than rotational. It became a “Support Forum” only when he started feeling heat in the kitchen.
>
> Jack Mankin
>

Hi Jack, BHL,

It's easy to take comments out of their context. In theory Mike's staying inside the ball, is an attempt to explain staying connected and allowing rotation to the deliver the bat/hand to the ball. The biggest difference is Mike wants the hands and arms to be reactive to the lower body (follow). Jack is trying to say that hand torque is important to stay connected or transfer the rotation momentum.

It doesn't mean a hitter is 'driving the hands forward' to hit inside the ball.

There has been so much debate over linear and rotational and the cues, we forget it's a force production problem. How the hitter is producing force or swinging a bat.

I don't think staying inside the ball means your not allowing rotation to deliver the bat, or keeping the hands back and allowing rotation to bring them forward.

Here's a clip, and perhaps we can start a new thread, of Barry Bonds hitting inside the ball. It's easier to stay inside the ball as a lefty facing a righty.

http://members.aol.com/bellshw2/bonds.mov

I have mixed feeling of going around the ball and staying inside the ball. Going around the ball can 'mean' to much early batspeed and spin out, it doesn't have to be only an extension problem or late batspeed.

Almost all ML hitters are exposed to staying inside the ball and the same cues we hear and use.

Shawn