Posted by: Joe A. () on Sun Dec 3 19:36:51 2000

Jack,
> > >
> > > I have tried to make a point that I don't think that we should be using pros baseball players as models. I would like note something about some the specific models expand on this thought.
> > >
> > > It seems to me that the examples used are all homerun hitter. Mark M, Sammy S, etc, etc,etc. In a recent post you refered to Jose Canseco as a great athelete.
> > >
> > > This leads to me to ask, what are we trying to teach, "methods to hit the ball hard as often as possible" or "to hit the ball exceptionally hard once in a while?"
> > >
> > > It seems to be that we are concentrating on people who hit the ball hard once in a while. I never read about the swing of G. Brett, Pete Rose, etc, etc, or that guy for Minasoata who won all those batting crowns but I can't think of his name right now. Well, he got a lot of hits on bunts so maybe he dosen't count.
> > >
> > > Any way, there are many great hitters who make hard contact way more times then Jose Canseco or S. Sosa and M. McGuire even Hank Aron. Did you know that Babe Ruth had the same number of strikeouts as at-bats in five years.
> > >
> > > But the solid contact hitters don't seem to be the focus of the discussions for most posts.
> > >
> > > So, besides pros being poor models, I think people are using the worst pros as models, most of the time.
> > >
> > > Joe A.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > jOE,
> >
> > Which 5 years did Babe Ruth have as many strikeouts as At Bats?
> > I find that rwally hard to believe unless it was the years he was primarily a pitcher.
> >
> > Ed
> >
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I read through some of the posts on the first thread. There seemed to be a difference in opinions about what your message was about. You thought everyone mis-read your posts.
>
> I disagree, I think they did understand your posts. This site is for focusing on mechanics that make the ML swing and batspeed.
>
> Jack has mentioned many times that no matter how great the hitter when their mechanics are "off", they perform accordingly to their new mechanics.
>
> Discussing the actual mechanics of the ML hitter vs the thought process mainly driven by beliefs systems, is the only way to understand what makes the "core" mechanics of the great hitters.
>
> I totally disagree that pro's are bad models. The "core" mechanics that drives Sosa's swing is the same for Edgar, Brett, Mattingly, Molitor (?), Nomar. There's a good reason for looking at HR's and HR hitters. One is that many mechanics explained in books/videos are some variation to what a great hitter does to make adjustments. And some videos/books totally ignore or have no idea what makes the ML league swing.
>
> A dead give away is when someone says you can't use ML mechanics. The info then supports his/her ideas on mechanics. Something like, since I don't understand the ML swing, this is how it should be done?!!!!
>
> Usually everyone has something good and bad in their info, IMO. Although to make a claim that ML hitters do not know how to hit or they are there only because of their great athletic ability is totally false. Track any major league hitter and notice their slight variations in their mechanics and the results of such mechanics. Athleticism has something to do with their success, although I've seen many players that are far from great athletes.
>
> Now, if you were to say Sosa, Griffey, and the Babe went for "maximum" bat speed too often, I could agree with you on that (different goals, HR's). But, their "core" mechanics are no different than the best hitters from the past and present, or the future that most here focus on.
>
> One of the great things to look at is the past greats who were small by today's standard, and could hit the ball consistently hard (far).
>
> Shawn

Shawn,

I will try to clear this up. I did not say that only great athelets are good hitters. Pete Rose is a good example.

What I said is that being great athelets they are able to employ mechanics that are not the best. Some time they change the swing to accomodate a personal goal or mechanics quirk. They can do this because they are great atheletes. Therefore many have customizes swings so they are not good models for teaching.

Something that I didn't say before, but I will now, is that using pros as models is a problem because the people trying to learn from the pro swing can't tell the difference between a customized swing and a pure swing. This should be obvious. If they could tell a pure swing they wouldn't have to watch the pros, would they? So, being unable to tell the difference they look at pros and think they know what they are seeing. They don't.

You comment an the end of your post tells me you are confused. But this seems to be a common error on this site so don't feel too silly. You equate hard with far. I guess you don't consider 3rd base the "hot corner" since the ball only travels a short distance to get there. Funny everybody else in baseball does.

The hardest hit balls are when the center of the bat hits the center of the ball. The path of the hardest hit balls leaves the bat on a path that is an extension of the plane of the swing. This is not a path for distance. Its what is called in hitting circles as "driving" the ball. Perhaps you heard of it??? Probably not.

Any way, maybe this will help you understand my posts. I hope it helps.

Joe A.