Posted by: Jack Mankin (MrBatspeed@aol.com) on Sun Mar 6 10:59:43 2005

I have thumbed through a number of your posts, checking for semiotic accuracy. In many places, I found your descriptions of the swing to be accurate--that is, if I substitute what you intended to write for what you actually wrote.

Put succinctly, I find flaws not with the concepts, but the labels used to signify the concepts (see Ferdinand De Saussare). For instance, many times you note that, if there is a better way way of explaining the "reactionary" effect of torquing hands--such as making Nyman's / your idea of allowing body rotation to turn the hands on the bat--more lucid, you would. Since simplifying some terms leads to reducing them to "cues," I believe that you should designate an operational definition to every complex scientific physic principle that you simplify.

Another error I see in your text is termiology contradicting each other. This is apparent in passages where your research about the lower body turning the upper body is refuted by message board responses suggesting that the upper body powers the lower body. Aporias (i.e., places in the text that deconstruct themselves), as Jauss suggested, are capable of ripping a thread apart.

Finally, sometimes the site tends to affix "cues" to a ubiquitous understanding; hence, those who learn the same concept through other "cues" are wrong. In view of the lower of body mechanics presented in this site, I see few variations between your way of teaching good lower body mechanics, and Epstein's method of teaching good lower body mechanics. Thus, you should attempt to make "cue" all-encompassing.

On the other hand, although the site could benefit from verbal revision, I find little fault with the underlying principles of the swing that you are trying to convey. I just believe that the terminology should not obscure one from its bedrock meaning.

You have done a fine job with this site, and deserve accolades for your attempts to comprehend the biomechanics of the swing. With some revision--not necessarily dictating a flux in principle, but a more precise choice of words--your site can back its "scientific claims" more rigorously. E-mail me if you need any help, and I will be more than happy to assist.


Hi BHL

I appreciate your critique of my work and your offer to assist in revising and correcting it with a more precise choice of words. I have always maintained that if one does not learn from a discussion, it is because they are to fond of their own voice. Therefore any clarification of my batting principles you could offer would be helpful.

I have found from reading posts to the site that some coaches have trouble with making a distinction between the mechanics involved in “pre-launch torque” to those that supply “top-hand torque.” I will place my post on this topic below and I am sure we can all benefit from your verbal revision.

BHL, I am not requesting your appraisal of these batting principles. Nor am I requesting a line by line breakdown of why you feel one choice of words is preferable to others. I am requesting your completed Revised Version of the post as you feel it should have been presented to the board to make those batting principle better understood. I look forward to your revision.

Jack Mankin
##

Re: THT

Posted by: Jack Mankin (mrbatspeed@aol.com) on Mon Sep 8 15:14:35 2003

Question/Comment:

>>> Following is a link to a file with some frames showing my interpretation of THT. Please let us know if this is correct. How do you teach it? Is the que flatten the hands useful? (The file is best viewed in frame by frame mode)

(http://webpages.charter.net/nickkio/THT.mpg

Thanks, Nick >>>

Jack Mankin's reply:

Hi Nick:

In order to generate maximum bat speed at contact, the better hitters first accelerate the bat-head back toward the catcher before rotating and directing their energies at the ball. The purpose of Top-Hand-Torque is to apply forces to the bat that will accelerate the bat-head in an arc back toward the catcher. With many hitters, Bonds and Sosa to name a couple, the bat-head is accelerated back in two phases.

The first phase occurs prior to shoulder rotation and we refer to it as “Pre-launch” Torque. During this phase, the batter starts with the bat cocked forward toward the pitcher and has his hands some distance from the back-shoulder. Bonds, for example, starts with his hands low and forward from the back-shoulder. As he prepares the launch position, his hands (as a unit) are brought up and pulled to the back-shoulder.

The bat-head is being accelerated into the normal launch position by the top-hand being pulled back at a faster rate than the bottom hand (THT). Therefore, the hands as a unit are being pulled to the back-shoulder but the top-hand is moving faster, or, arcing around the bottom-hand. During the pre-launch phase, one can clearly see the top-hand being pulled up and back (or toward the catcher).

The second phase of THT occurs during initiation as shoulder rotation begins. The direction of force applied by the top-hand at initiation continues to be rearward, but shoulder rotation accelerates the hands (as a unit) around and forward. Therefore, once shoulder rotates begins, the hands (as a unit) are viewed moving forward, but the rearward directional force of the top-hand causes it (and the bat-head) to arc around the bottom-hand.

Many good hitters do not use pre-launch torque in their swings. They apply THT at initiation as described for the second phase. Since they are applying THT as the shoulder start turning, the hands (as a unit) will always be viewed moving forward. --- Nike, the clips you are showing has the batters starting with the bat at (or past) the normal launch position.

Note: With linear mechanics, at initiation, the direction of force of the top-hand and the hands (as a unit) are both forward. This results in a straighter hand-path. --- With THT, the rearward directional force of the top-hand results in the hand-path being directed more parallel with the catcher’s shoulders into a more circular hand-path (CHC).

Jack Mankin