Posted by: Mike Stringer () on Sat Feb 12 12:00:03 2005

> Hi Mike
>
> Welcome to the site. I appreciate your appraisal of our batting principles. However, a very detailed analysis of thousands of major league swings does not support your contention that some great hitters have poor mechanics while some players with great mechanics perform poorly.
>
> Although I do not have clips of Beltre for analysis, I can say that I have never charted a great hitter who did not have great mechanics. And, I found very, very few players with good mechanics that preformed poorly. I have seen many batters who appeared to have good mechanics with the naked eye. But a frame-by-frame breakdown of their swing revealed flaws in their mechanics and distortions in the swing plane that limited their production.
>
> Mike, below is part of an article regarding my study of the swing on this issue. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
>
> Jack Mankin
> ##
>
> It may sound cynical, but I no longer believe in Santa, the Tooth Fairy, or that old Truism that you have to be a Born Hitter to have "pop" in your bat. But something in a few players batting mechanics allowed them to swing a bat with much greater speed than other good athletes. I spent the last 12 years finding out what that "something" was. I was determined to give coaches the proven facts to teach the mechanics that generate power and bat-speed (and not simply someone's pet theory regarding it).
> The study covered nine years and literally thousands of hours. The first two years I spent charting the swings of 185 professional players. I would video tape games shown on television and replay the swings back in frame by frame action. By placing a piece of clear plastic over the screen I was able to trace the movement of each part of the body and the bats reaction for each video frame of the swing. From the time the swing was initiated to contact required from 4 to 6 frames depending on the mechanics of the batter.
>
> When I started the study, I made a sign and hung it over my desk. It read " Have no preconceived theory, report only what you observe." To make sure I correctly identified a players swing mechanics, I charted 15 swings (at good pitches to hit) of each player over a two year period. I then devised a system whereby I could identify players according to the characteristics of their mechanics. I used 39 different mechanical characteristics and developed 12 swing classifications that players fit into. It was truly amazing how close the performance stats were for players with the same classification. There was other very interesting findings I made during the charting phase of the research and I will discuss them with you when those subjects arise.
>
> In the next part of the study I undertook the task of defining the forces acting on the bat that would cause the various reactions I had recorded. These reactions involve a great deal of rather complex physics. My only formal study of physics was those required for my engineering major in college. Not having a strong physics background, I spent a considerable amount of time discussing my finding with college physics departments. I cannot thank them enough for their help and patience.
>
> To me, one of the most important findings to come from the research was that a player's swing mechanics was far more important in determining batting potential than the player's athletic abilities. Even a 6 foot, 4 inch, 230 pound Mark McGwire performed just as poorly as other players with the same swing classification in 1991 when he hit .201 with 22 homeruns. I discovered that whenever a hitter went into a batting slump, there would be a notable change in his mechanics and he was just performing according to his new swing classification.
>
> The last couple of years I have spent a lot of my time developing methods to overcoming old muscle memories (long stride, weight shift and extension) and how to teach the rotational mechanics, a circular hand path and torque, which is used by the great hitter in the game today. >>>

Thank you for the reply. Again, I am absolutely positive that the mechanics you teach are the key to great hitting. But I cannot help but notice the exceptions to this rule, or at least, the apparent exceptions. I have video-taped

Perhaps briefly analyzing the swing of these players will clarify the situation. If you would please take a second to view the 9/03/04 video called, "Adrian Beltre's homer," you can clearly see that in the 32nd second, in the nice slow-motion replay they give, Beltre's back arm is nearly straight at contact (you can see the bat on the ball, and it flying off). Having the back arm nearly straight is one of the major flaws in any person's swing.

Now that I look at Mike Cameron's swing again, he often has the same flaw in his swing, but it still looks very good.

Or maybe I don't have a strong idea of what a great swing looks like, but an explanation would be appreciated.

Thanks, Jack.