Posted by: Hank () on Mon Oct 18 07:41:21 2004

>>> JACK, ARE YOU SAYING FLAIL IS THE SAME THING AS TOP HAND TORQUE? IF SO IM CONFUSED BECAUSE MANNY SAYS FLAIL IS LINEAR AND WE ALL ALREADY KNOW THAT FOR SURE TOP HAND TORQUE IS THE OPPOSITE OF LINEAR, THAT IS, THT IS ROTATIONAL.CLARIFICATION WOULD BE APPRECIATED. THANKS. <<<
> > >
> > > Hi James
> > >
> > > No, I am not saying, “flail is the same thing as top-hand-torque.” In fact, the addition of the steering-wheel knob eliminates torque (hands applying force from opposing directions at the handle) as a factor in generating angular displacement of the bat-head.
> > >
> > > There are two independent mechanical principles at work that induce the rate of angular displacement of the bat (bat speed).
> > >
> > > Principle (1) – An angular displacement rate of the hand-path (CHP) induces angular displacement of the bat-head. -- Some may refer to this as “flail.”
> > >
> > > Principle (2) – Hands applying force at the handle from opposing directions (Torque).
> > >
> > > We set up tests that would isolate the bat speed generated from each principle. In order to gather data on bat speed generated from the CHP alone, we needed to eliminate the torque factor. That is why we added a steering-wheel knob for this test. – We found that the straighter the hand-path (less angular displacement) the less the bat speed generated.
> > >
> > > In order to test for the amount of bat speed that could be generated from Torque alone (little to none generated from a CHP), we kept the hand-path as straight as possible. --- We found that with a 24 to 26 inch hand-path, both CHP alone and Torque alone produced 50 to 55 mph bat speed. Readings for applying both (CHP & Torque – John Elliot – 34/32) was around 81 to 84 mph.
> > >
> > > Jack Mankin
> > >
> >
> > Certainly top hand torque/bottom hand torque have not only been proven to exist, but it has also been shown to be present in every majojor league power hitter (we can see for ourselves in Bonds, Piazza and all the rest). However, I think the flail and bow arch material is a figment of someone's imagination.I know that at leat among college players everyone talks about tht/bht, but no one talks about flail and bow arch.
>
> Can I ask which college players at what university? I am a believer in THT and BHT but I have never heard a college hitter mention it. If you noticed in the college world series, most of those kids did not have top quality rotational swings. I have visited a lot of schools and whenever they discuss hitting they do not use the terms THT or BHT.

From what I have read at another site, bow arch has something to do with "backward chaining".The concept originated from an article in "baseball Parent", a baseball newsletter geared toward youth players ages 8 to 14. The gist of bow arch aka backward chaining is lineariem. I personally think that linearism is incompatible with tht and rotationalism. I would suggest staying away from concepts that are out of the mainstream and stick with tht/bht.