Posted by: Hector () on Sun Apr 25 19:14:20 2004

You have said the path of the bathead is not a circle.This being the only objection you had to BHL's theory, could you please tell us what the path is if is not a circle? From launch to followthrough, I see the path as about 30 degrees short of a 360 degree circle. I have looked at side angles, behind the plate, in front and over the top. For the life of me, I can't imagine what it could be other than a circle.Your enlightenmight would be greatly appreciated. P.S. I am referring to the path of the bat of major league hitters.
> > >
> > > Read the board. It's already been answered.
> >
> > Thanks for your polite response, Teacherman. Actually I have read the board, and it seems as though you think the bat travels in a straight line. I guess I was wondering how you reconcile this with all the video that shows a circular path. It would seem to me that if you advocate a straight line, that would also meam a "hands to the ball" technique rather than a circular hand path. And since Jack has demonstrated time and again that this linear method you advocate produces less bat speed than rotation, I was just wondering what your basis was for your theory, because it seems like your reasoning is out of the mainstream. Thanks
>
> Thanks for your lazy response. I'll do the research for you. Under the Geometry thread Apr 22 20:25:55 2004, you'll see why the path is not circular to the degree that BHL's nonsense makes sense.
>
> And, rather than fall in line with the other lemmings why don't you really read the board. No where have I advocated a linear hand path, except as necessary to make adjustments to unexpected pitch locations and speed. Which, by the way, is done every day by every mlb player. I have often disagreed with the details of Jacks's description but I have never advocated linear as your base swing.. I don't believe THT exists. I don't believe max batspeed is at the "L". I don't believe Arod is rotational (he's a combination). He clearly takes his hands to the ball in a much different fashion than most all mlb players, yet Jack always defies what is right in front of us all in video. But, I have never advocated linear.
>
> Maybe it's the posts that are posted by an imposter (which Batspeed has been informed of, they have the ability to stop, yet don't) that is confusing you.

I'm sorry to upset you Teacherman but let's move on to the issues at hand.
1. I had read BHL's post and it DOES make a lot of sense. You are the only one who thinks it does not make sense, and other than resort to name calling (nonsense, lemmings etc) you STILL have not said why it doesn't make sense to you.That's ok, maybe you just don't understand geometry, and there are a lot of people who don't, so don't feel bad.
2.You have failed to explain why you feel THT does not exist. Again, I guess basic physics is also overhead. Don't feel bad, there are a lot of people including major leaguers who don't understand physics. But just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it therefore does not exist. I don't understand the theory of relativity but I can not therefore say it does not exist. You are not being logical!
3.You said you don't advocate a "linear hand path, except as necessary to make adjustments to unexpected pitch locations and speed". But you have never said WHICH pitch locations calls for linear and WHICH pitch locations call for rotation. And you seem to be saying that somehow, when the ball is .2 seconds from the plate the hitter is going to somehow decide to go linear or rotation, depending on pitch location? You must not have viewed Jack's tape and dvd, or you would know that the beauty of Jack's philosophy is that you do not have to think linear or rotation, depending on pitch location. It is rotation EVERY SWING, EVERY PITCH. Even in golf, with all the time in the world the golfer strives to take the same swing, EVERY TIME. So you are telling us that a mlb hitter, with .4 seconds to pick up pitch & make decision, he will have time to make such a decision? And if he has time to make such a decision, why would he decide to go linear, resulting in reduced batspeed? This is not logical!!
4. I can't believe this one: "I don't believe max batspeed is at the "L" ". Therefore you believe maximum batspeed is at full extension. You are very misguided to believe in this fallacy, but then why do you get upset when someone suggests you believe in linearism?
5. "I don't believe Arod is rotational (he's a combination)." a combination of WHAT? Lower body, linear, top rotation? Or vice versa? Or sometimes rotation, sometimes linear, depending on pitch location? i could be wrong, but I KNOW Jack has covered this issue before, whether it was with you or someone else, I don't know. But I can tell you this, you would be well advised to go to ESPN, Baseball Tonight and make some video clips. Then come back and tell us AROD is not rotational!