Posted by: Andy () on Fri Oct 1 18:12:32 2004

Hi Eril
>
> I have been following your thread with Teacherman regarding, “ Re: Instructo swing/the ultimate batting tee.” Below is your last September post.
>
> ##
> >>> HI,
> I would like to ask you a question. Do you think jr works on upper cutting the ball as a training drill? Also, do you think ken griffey sr promotes jr to swing up when he is training and working with him? I hope you know the answer to these questions. The ultimate batting tee is also endorsed by ken griffey sr. The ultimate batting tee helps promote a positive approach to the ball. Will ken griffey jr swing the same every time after using this device ? NO, this device just helps elimimate poor approaches that start when a hitter starts to approach the swing. All good hitters have to take the barrell down to the ball with their hands and rotational mechanics. How else can you get the barrell to the back side of the ball? The ultimate batting tee isn't going to cause you to swing the same way all the time. The ultimate batting tee is going to help hitters approaches with the start of the swing. Will a hitter be able to hit home runs after using this device? Why not, see jr is a better hitter when he isn't thinking long ball all the time that gets all hitters in trouble wouldn't you agree? The ultimate batting tee will help hitters .The angle adjustment improvement will help power hitters achieve their goals. The ultimate batting tee will help all instructors they just need to be aware of this devices purposes. I can be reached anytime to help explain the purposes. (513)616-3611 ERIL LASEKE <<<
>
> Eril, it would be helpful if you would clarify your position on the swing plane. You asked Teacherman, “Do you think jr works on upper cutting the ball as a training drill? Also, do you think ken griffey sr promotes jr to swing up when he is training and working with him? I hope you know the answer to these questions.” --- One could infer from your question that you feel the bat should not be on an upslope at contact. The first Ken Griffey model definitely produced a swing plane that had the bat angling downward at contact. Do you think a downward angle at contact represents the bat-path exhibited by most of the top hitters? Or, would your newer model promote an up-slope at contact?
>
> I would also appreciate your thoughts on the following article from the site.
>
> Jack Mankin
> ##
>
> Truism or Fallacy
> Rethinking Old Baseball Hitting Theories
>
> "Swing Down At the Ball"
>
> I am sure it is quite obvious to everyone that if the bat head starts above the batters head and makes contact at his knees, the bat must have been swung downward sometime during the swing. The problem is, to many coaches think "swing down at the ball" means the bat is still on a downward angle when it strikes the ball (as in the Two-Tee Drill). They would contend that hitting down on the top of the ball results in the ball leaving the bat with more backspin. Note: A ball with backspin will carry farther. --- But, when I recall my old pool shooting days, I seem to remember I more often hit the bottom half of the ball when I needed backspin.
>
> One of my main concerns with having the bat angling downward in the contact zone is the problem it would cause in making consistent contact. Most players have enough trouble making contact when the path of their bat is inline with the path of the ball. This way, if their swing is a little early, they will pull the ball. If they are a little late, they will hit it to the opposite field. The timing would need to be near perfect to make contact if the bat is just passing down through the path of the ball.
> Swing level
>
> I think most coaches would agree that the bat should pass through the contact zone in a "level" position. But some may offer different views if we were to ask; "level in reference to what?" --- An 85 MPH fastball is angling downward (in reference to the plate) at about 11 degrees as it passes through the contact zone. Therefore, should the batter swing level with the path of the ball, or level with the plate?
>
> During the swing a hitter's body will be slightly leaning away from the pitcher (front leg straight, back leg bent). This places the rotational plane of his hips and shoulders angling upward at about 10 to 15 degrees. Once again, should the swing be level with the rotational plane of the body - or the plate? --- Or, would you still think the bat should be angling downward in relation to the plate?
>
> Which of the following most closely describes Mark McGwire's swing at contact?
> 1. Bat angling downward 10 to 15 degrees
> 2. Level with the plate
> 3. Angling upward 10 to 15 degrees
>
>
"Will ken griffey jr swing the same every time after using this device ? NO, this device just helps elimimate poor approaches that start when a hitter starts to approach the swing. All good hitters have to take the barrell down to the ball with their hands and rotational mechanics. How else can you get the barrell to the back side of the ball? "

Why would someone want to train a swing that differs from their game swing? Ever see a pro golfer take a practice swing? Is it any different than his swing when addressing the ball? No. Why would anyone want to train more of a downward swing than used in a game? And if you're attempting to say that the old angle is appropriate in game situations, show me a clip where the barrel is way above contact, say, a foot behind contact. 12-18 inches from contact, the average mlb player is usually 1-4 inches below point of contact. At the old angle, only a swing 3-6 inches above the ball will get through. And, as stated before, the only way to hit a line drive was to hit the bottom of the ball.

All that being said, with the angle adjustment (set that think right at around 10 degrees up) I think it's an excellent training tool.