Posted by: Jack Mankin (mrbatspeed@aol.com) on Fri May 7 23:35:21 2004

Hi all

Doug and Brian’s baseball discussion has run off the page. Therefore, it will be continued as a new thread.

Jack Mankin
##

grc, In what way is Gwynn a so called linear hitter? Why would you call him or Carew linear? Please explain. As far as homework, I have a lot of film on both Gwynn and Carew and would like to hear your reasons for calling them linear. Please explain your thoughts on what a linear hitter does.

Doug
##

Hi Doug:

Based on your question (what is the difference between linear and rotational), I assume that you do not have either of the BatSpeed.com instructional videos, and thus you are trying to learn all of these terms by what has been written, which can be very difficult. Our first instuctional tape really explained the differences between the rotational hitter and the linear hitters because, at that time, our objective was to demonstrate that the best professional hitters were not using linear mechanics even though most coaches were teaching it. By the time that we filmed the second tape, rotational mechanics had become widely known, so the second video was orientated toward teaching rotational mechanics. Perhaps we should not assume that most people understand the difference and/or buy the videos. We may consider adding a new page to the website.

In any event, the difference is very simple, and it has to do with the path of the hands. A linear (or in a line) swing means that the hitters drives the hands from the launch position in a fairly straight line directly toward the ball. The classic cues and drills are "chop wood," fence drill, hands to the ball, throw your hands at the ball, A to B, keep your shoulder in there, and so on. The whole goal is to direct the hands back toward the pitcher in a straight line without "casting" or creating a "long swing." Imagine a right handed boxer attempting to throw a quick right jab to his opponents mid section. The linear hitter has the same basic approach in that he wants to direct the hands right back at the ball. I was watching a high school practice recently and a coach was teaching his right handed hitters to swing a bat in their right only in a straight line to the ball, much like the boxer throwing a punch. This type of teaching is absolutely detrimental, but many coaches believe that this produces a quicker swing because they would say that the most direct route to the ball is a straight line. These coaches are misguided.

One point to note is that when most people such as yourself ask for names of linear hitters, we throw around names like Gwynn, Boggs, Ichiro, and other good, high average hitters. I would also classify Gwynn as primarily a linear hitter, although he initiated the bat very well and then basically kept his lead shoulder somewhat closed and directed the hands to the ball. His bat was on a very straight and consistent line, but he just didn't quite have the bat speed to drive the ball. (Suggestions that a linear swing produces more bat speed or is quicker is meritless.) However, unlike these select linear hitters, most linear hitters dominate the bottom of the batting charts and/or will be found batting in the number 1 and 6-9 slots. There are far less linear hitters today because you simply cannot make it to the pros with a weak linear swing that generates about a .260 average and 6 homeruns. In the 80s and 90s, linear hitters were able to survive with these stats in the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 7th or 8th position in the lineup, as long as they could play defense. Those days are gone and linear hitters just can't make it in the pros much anymore unless they have blazing speed, great defense or play catcher. But you will still find coaches teaching linear mechanics on nearly every high school and college softball team, probably one-half to two-thirds of the high school baseball teams, and a high number of college teams. The hitters who make it are usually the ones who do not conform to their coaches' teachings or finds the coach who understands the rotational swing.

On the other hand, rotational (or in a arc/circle) swing mechanics means that the first movement of the hands is NOT toward the pitcher. Rather, the rotational hitters direct their hands and the bat into a circular arc to start the swing. The first movement of the hands is not toward the pitcher, but perpendicular to the ball or slightly in a backwards arc toward the catcher before arcing around toward the ball. Imagine the golf swing for a moment. When Tiger Woods has completed his back swing and the club is about parallel to the ground, his hands then go in a circular arc toward the contact position. They do not drive directly toward the ball. The great hitters do the same thing in the baseball swing.

There is a lot of physics behind why the A to B swing is slower than the rotational swing, but this post is running long and we'll save it for another day.

Brian
BatSpeed.com
##

Hi Brian, Well! you came up with an answer of what you feel is linear and what linear coaches teach. Why the word linear? Why not just say....lousy coach.? As far as the rotational swing, since I am not trying to sell a product or a theory, I look at a rotational hitter as one who rotates his hips and shoulders and does not let his body slide forward after his lead foot comes down.The tapes I have of Gwynn and Carew put them in the rotational class of hitters. All the other talk about bht, tht is for the professors out there. Hitters don't want to hear about that stuff. It just clutters up their mind and keeps them from getting their job done.If you are talking about teaching nonsense and what I think a so called linear hitting coach teaches, it is what Lau Sr. and Hriniak taught at the big league level.I appreciate your time, but are you grc's big brother? I asked him the question, but he never came back with an answer.Brian, the guys who make it have talent and the coaches in high school don't mess with the talented kids. The guys without talent can have a house full of gurus teaching them and they will never play pro ball.The guys today hit more home runs because they are bigger and much stronger. The balls are juiced, the maple bats add distance. The bodies have changed and it is now a power game. There are no Belangers, Laniers, Oylers, Brinkmans, Maxvills, Kessingers, S. Jacksons, Alleys, Harrelsons or Torres playing short stop in the big leagues anymore. The Owners want power, because it sells more tickets and that is the main reason. If you wanted the game to be back in the pitchers hands, all they would have to do is raise the mound back to where it was in the mid sixties and the hitters stats would take a dive.

Doug
##

Hi Doug,

Good post, but you are so wrong in so many respects that I do not know where to begin. Because you bring a good perspective to the table along with many age-old adages that are interesting to debate, I'll start from the top with your erroneous statements and go from there. Your quotes are in “<<< >>>” for reference.

<<>>

You are wrong. Jack Mankin - not me - defined the term "linear" swing mechanics because it was an accurate description of the movement of the hands hitters who shoved their hands directly back to the pitcher. It was also a term that he used to described coaches who taught linear mechanics.

<<>>

Hip and shoulder rotation is one aspect of the rotational swing - the easily observable aspect. In addition, a good rotational swing incorporates many more factors, including proper grip, linkage, initiation of the bat, placing the bat into the swing plane, circular hand path and torque. For instance, if a batter has poor linkage (lead arm is not tight to the body) it does not matter how well you rotate the hips and shoulders. Likewise, if a hitter starts with good shoulder rotation, but the first movement of his hands is toward the pitcher, then the batter is not rotational, but linear. In response to your comment about selling products, and solely based on my observations of your posts, I would not encourage you to try to sell a product because your analysis of the swing is very shallow and your simplistic ideals will not serve your customers very, many of whom will have poor swings and are trying to improve.

<<>>

Fine, you have your own definition of linear and rotational, or you clearly do not understand what I just wrote in the post above, or you do not understand what you are seeing on the films. I can describe it to you, but I can't help you see what you do not understand in their swings.

<<>>

This should be obvious, but for the sake of clarity, I'll explain it. Of course hitters don't want to hear about linear, rotational, bht, tht, chp, scap load, etc. These are terms for the coaches so that they can begin to understand the swing and then teach it to the hitters. Jack Mankin rarely if ever uses the terms tht or bht when teaching a player. Rather, he teaches the players in simple terms, examples and demonstrations how to execute proper mechanics.

BTW, speaking of Lau Sr., his son Charley had an interesting exchange with Jack about what Lau Sr. “taught at the major league level,” as follows:

Charley said: "Why don’t you simplify it by saying your front leg should firm up at contact which keeps you from being to linear and too rotational? My father said that 20 yrs ago."

Jack said: "Your dad did not say the front leg should 'firm up at contact.' He gave no indication he believed the lead leg had any role in driving hip rotation. His writings maintained the front leg should be 'rigid and firm' before hip rotation begins. Here is what Lau Sr. stated on page 73 of his book,“THE WINNING HITTER”:

“Your stride begins by stepping and placing your lead foot on the ball of the foot. You bring the bat to the launching position as you plant your front leg firmly and shift your weight forward from your back leg to your front leg. The internal movement you had in the stance makes this weight shift easier and more effective. In fact, it’s so effective it makes your rear foot start to leave the ground. Your hips remain closed, which means you avoid pulling this powerful trigger until just the right moment. The entire motion is positive and aggressive. With your front leg rigid and firm and most of your weight now on top of this 'platform,' your hips start to open as you bring the bat through.”

Charley, I sincerely believe your dad was a great man. But if what I read above is what you mean by “simplify it,” I will continue teaching principles that may require more thought. "

So Doug, you must agree that the major league coaches are teaching that the front leg should be "rigid and firm" before hip rotation begins, as maintained by Lau Sr. Is that what you are saying? I'm only asking because the great hitters are totally ignoring Lau's advice, including A-Rod - his so-called protégé.

<<>>

You finally hit the nail on the head. The owners want power because power scores run, wins games, and brings fans to the park. However, let me expand on what you did not say. The players of today are using rotational mechanics (chp, tht, bht, etc) in order to have the power that the fans and owners want. Notably, very few pro hitters actually execute good rotational mechanics. Nevertheless, a decent rotational swing is much more productive than a linear swing.

<<>>

I agree that raising the mound would lower the stats a little, but not take a dive. The hitters are too good today because the game is much different today. Hitters in the 60s and 70s were not faced with 3-5 pitchers a game throwing the wicked pitches that they do today. Hitters in the 60s and 70s used much weaker mechanics than the do today, which you acknowledged. If hitters of the 60s or 70s were playing today with the current mound height, they would struggle to hit .250 and 10 homeruns a year on average. The reason the stats would be so low is because the swing mechanics were not as good back then.

Out of curiosity, how successful were you with the front leg being "rigid and firm" before hip rotation begins, which I’m assuming that you learned from Lau, Sr.?

Brian
BatSpeed.com
##

Brian, Actually, you are way off base and wrong in your post.You seem to think that I am a fan of Lau and Hriniak, which is wrong. I am a fan of Ted Williams.You are right that I have my own ideas on rotational hitting.As far as Jack being the first person to use the word linear, I will take your word for it.Linear is a useless word when helping a hitter, so why even use it? As far as what major league coaches teach, I don't think that you have any idea. The great hitters in the big leagues did not learn their swings from you or your dad, and since it takes the average kid about 4-5 years in the minor leagues before getting to the big leagues, maybe you should give some credit to the hitting coaches in the minor leagues.As far as raising the mound......unless you hit in the 60's at the major league level, you are not qualified to make the statement that you made. If the guys of the 60's were playing today, they would be lifting weights and taking creatine just like the guys do today. Since your dad really likes George Brett and you don't care for Lau Sr. as a coach, how do you figure that Brett ended up being a Hall of Fame hitter when Lau Sr. was his hitting coach? Your last question puzzles me as I have never been a fan of Lau Sr. but you seem to think so. As far as saying what the guys of the 60's and 70's would hit today, that is a very arrogant statement......how the heck do you know what anyone would hit.

Doug
##

Doug, I’m not going to use the term broken record yet, but I have not heard anything relating to your understanding of swing mechanics or how to teach the swing, and the only thing that I’ve heard is your repetitive statement that only major league players are qualified to teach the baseball swing. Notwithstanding such a pretentious statement, it is untrue. I may not know what every major league coach teaches, but I know what Reggie Smith of the Dodgers taught because Jack had a meeting with them discussing swing mechanics, and if I recall correctly it occurred in our living room. I know what Merv Retman (sp?) of the Padres taught because Jack had several meetings with him. I know what Dusty Baker taught because we had many discussions with him also. Unfortunately, all of these coaches had no clue what type of batting mechanics their players actually used. In fact, they had admittedly not even used frame-by-frame analysis to review their players swings, and Merv and Reggie thought it was interesting to see a swing in frame-by-frame for the first time. They merely relied on what they thought they were seeing in the batting cages, which is not an effective way to understand swing mechanics.

This is much like the feeling that I am getting from you. You don't understand the difference between linear and rotational as it has been defined for you, and you simply fly by the seat of your pants on the notion that you allegedly played at a high level and, therefore, only you and other pros are qualified to teach batting. Such a belief is naive and fails to understand that most coaches at all levels were misinformed as to the mechanics used by the great hitters until very recently. Now, recently, some pro coaches understand the swing as a result of using frame-by-frame analysis (and probably learning material from the internet). Some coaches are now able to make changes in a batter’s mechanics from game to game when a flaw develops. However, I can clearly see that most coaches do not understand the swing because at least a couple of players on every pro team have major flaws and these coaches are unable to identify and/or correct it.

To be frank, even if you made it to pro ball, I think its fair to say that you did not properly execute the swing unless you hit around .300 and 30 homeruns. Minor league players and those who make it to the pros but don't last very long are usually victims of poor swing mechanics. If you want to send us some videos, we'll quickly tell you if your swing mechanics prevented you from excelling to the top.

If you don't see the differences in batting mechanics and statistics during the 60s - 80s verses the mid 90s - present, then you need to first understand the difference in linear and rotational swing mechanics and then start reviewing some videos from the past and present. There has been a major transformation in swing mechanics over the last 10-15 years, along with a dramatic corresponding rise in statistics.

Your belief that it all relates to the pitching mound, weights and drugs is unfounded. Regardless of how strong a player is or how many steroids he pops, you cannot hit the ball if your mechanics are not good. Many very strong players have gone into bad slumps and/or retirement when their swing mechanics deteriorated, such as Canseco, Ron Gant, McGwire, and many others. On the other hand, when a player starts using proper rotational swing mechanics, he will be able to hit regardless of his size, such as Bret Boone who went from a 10-15 hr/year hitter to 30+ and he is only about 5'10" 190 lbs. Thus, the excuse of small stature is not very compelling either.

Do you seriously believe that George Brett used the mechanics taught by Lau Sr.?

Brian
BatSpeed.com
##

Brian, George Brett Talked about Lau and the help he recieved all the time. Maybe, you should ask George what he was taught by Mr. Lau. Brett Boone has not weighed 190 Lbs. for about 5 years.....he came into camp 3 years ago at 218 lbs on his 5'10" frame. Your approach is to put words in peoples mouths. I never said anything about steroids.....I brough up weight work and creatine, which most of the hitters today use. You say that there has been a major change in swing mechanics over the years......I agree. Since you say that the pros, college coaches and high school coaches all teach the wrong way, how is it that the major leaguers of today are now using rotational mechanics? I would bet a steak dinner that there are hardly any of them that even know of this site, Epstein's site or Nyman's site. Someone must be teaching them an improved way of hitting. As far as pro ball goes, you and your followers don't see any value in it, because you never played pro ball. As far as understanding hitting, you have no idea what I know or don't know. I get the feeling that you have been spoon fed by your dad on hitting and have just played follow the leader without thinking for yourself.......much like Lau Jr. When you use Gant, McGwire and Canseco as having bad swing mechanics, you are pounding on guys who had great careers. I am sure that you would love to have had the careers that they had. Mantle hit .237 in his last year and Mays hit .211 in his last year. Are you going to say it was due to bad mechanics? Ruth hit .181 his last year. On this site I see a constant picjing on pro ball and pro coaches. The only people that I hear say such things are people that never played. I think it is a jealousy thing that you have, because you did not swing the bat well enough or throw the ball well enough to play the game at an advanced level. I guess that to qualify as a hitting coach, you have to have been a crappy player!!!

Doug
##

Doug, I’m not surprised. Your post is simply more of the same. You allegedly played at a high level, but cannot engage in an intelligent discussion about swing mechanics. Regardless of the merits of your story, this is exactly what we observed when we met with two professional batting coaches: Merv Retman and Reggie Smith, who had never analyzed a swing in slow motion or frame-by-frame prior to meeting with Jack.

Since you discount everything taught by BatSpeed.com since Jack did not play pro ball, then describe exactly where the batting mechanics taught on this site differ from the batting mechanics used by Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa.

You have 50 pages of writings on this site to demonstrate where BatSpeed.com is wrong. You should be forewarned that Jack Mankin repeatedly states that he has not discovered something new in the swing, but is only defining the mechanics used by the great hitters. For once, you'll have to focus on analysis of mechanics instead of regurgitating your weak spiel. Until you can identify specific areas where BatSpeed.com is wrong, there is no point in continuing a discussion with you, as it will be evident that you are merely espousing contrived beliefs.

Notably, I could identify exactly where Brett does not follow Lau's teaching in about two seconds. And who cares what Brett says, look at his videos and analyze his swing. His words are gray, but his frame-by-frame movements are black and white.

Again, describe exactly where the batting mechanics taught on this site differ from the batting mechanics used by Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa.

Brian
BatSpeed.com