Posted by: Shawn Bell (bellshw@aol.com) on Sun Dec 3 20:47:35 2000

Hi All,

Recently Dave took some shots at the material presented on this website and it's originator.

The "combination system" that Dave preaches creates just as many differences of opinions as does "weight shift". "Rotation" can be abused just as well.

He went on to write a article about how some hitters will have more weight shift and some will have more rotation.

He started off with some "experts" teaching a purely rotational swing and labeled it "circular" or a linear swing.

I have always felt Dave leans more toward weight shift and his ideas on a short swing is based on the aluminum bat swing, bottom hand torque and extension.

The best hitters are "circular" with their hands and swing. The more rotational from start to finish the better the hitter is using the torso/trunk during the actual swing. The "circular hand path" is a indication of how well you are using your entire body to power the swing. The "circular" hand path identifies the transfer mechanics.

I would be the first to say the swing is a combination. The problem is like the linear style they make the weight shift part as a "mystical" element in the swing. He even mentions the swing as 50/50, 50% rotational and 50% weight transfer!
Wow! What's in that 50% weight shift?

He does say that the hands start out linear and finish circular. I can buy that if it means the hands stay back until torque brings them forward, shoulder rotation.

I think Dave has good information on hitting, although he is "foggy" on the core elements of the swing. Keeping it simple means staying close to the core elements of the swing. He puts down rotation (purely rotational) and even makes claims of it's downfalls to support his "combination version", which is mixing "style" and "technique" together to mis-lead parents and coaches on the core elements of the swing.

The best hitters are "rotational" from the start to finish in every mannerism. You want to maximize plane of motion with plane motion, rotation equals circular hand path. The stride is an extension of the swing, weight shift is part of preparing to swing. The torso moves back as the lower body moves forward. You should have a separation between the lower/upper body as the stride is being completed. You should end up in a "balanced hitting position", weight centered or slightly back.

This is the torque position, where the "actual" swing takes place. Until you reach this point there is no shoulder rotation forward, no driving the hands forward forcefully.

Making a statement that the swing is 50% weight shift and 50% rotation is just as poor information as saying you shift all weight against the front leg only.

I think Dave made some very poor character assassinations on his web site. This was mainly due to one individual questioning his low elbow (NO NAMES please). Then he turned on Jack's material.

Does Jack take rotation to far?? Maybe a little. If there was one flaw in his material it's assuming coaches are teaching proper lower body mechanics (Jack this isn't true). Whatever the lower does effects the upper body and transfer mechanics he explains so well.

Although this is an area that Jack was sick of hearing about "theories" on how power is transferred during the "actual" swing. So he focused on what gives the hitter that blazing and quick batspeed that sends ball 500 ft.! While making it look "easy". Effortless power.

"Torque" is the "main" component of batspeed and power. Nomar uses torque almost "solely" for his bat quickness. I will not say he uses only torque, although it's the major factor (element) in ever hitters power and quickness.

Making weight shift into something it's not "the main element" or 50 % of your swing. Weight shift doesn't have to be a mystery. I no longer mention weight shift directly, and I would never say weight shift makes up 50% of the swing.

What is in that 50%? 50% of a chance to make mistakes in your transfer mechanics, 50% chance of swinging and shifting your weight together? 50% chance of rotating and swinging together (shoulders start to soon, hands)? 50% chance of not getting into the launch position, not locking into shoulder rotation? 50% chance of a poor swing plane?

I posted this because I believe Dave is mis-guiding parents and coaches on the "core" elements of the swing. I like his material, although it's far from being perfect or simple. The newsletter article was solely hitting "theory" did nothing to describe the ML swing or the "core" elements in the swing.

Is Jack 100 % correct, well he leaves much less to guessing about what makes the ML swing, the ML swing, than Dave Hudgens gives him credit for.

Perhaps Dave needs to do a reality check and describe that 50% weight shift in an easy and simple way. He used poor average hitters as a description of the purely rotational hitter. There's a reason they have poor averages, rotation has nothing to do with their average. Although torque does have something to do with their power.

Claimed Ted William's gets to "centered" position because he came up on his toe and didn't stay on the ball of his back foot. Therefor Ted is weight shift and rotation. If that's the argument that makes a hitter weight shift and rotation, than guess what all great hitter came up on the toe/ball. it's a detail involving the lower body mechanics. Although this is a "major" point in the swing, which he didn't mention anything to support the "weight shift" part, only Ted reached the centered position. Lets hope he consistently reached a balanced centered position.

Shawn