Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Mon Mar 7 23:25:49 2005

> Reading your post made me thank God for Jack Mankin. Your improvement to Jacks terminology is a kludge of meaningless terms that don't make any sense.
>
> Clear terminology? - Combined Hand Reactive Exertion
> Back Hand Reactive Exertion (Back hand exertion? ..... tennis maybe, I don't know)
> Bottom Hand Reactive Exertion
> front arm squeeze
> Back Arm Squeeze
> Increasing Distance through the Contact Zone
>
> I have a scary vision of me standing with a group of 12 year olds(or even 14,16, 18 ...) relating terms like - back hand reactive exertion and front arm squeeze and seeing how they interpret that into there swing. Its not a pretty picture.
>
> >>When a person posts weight on the front side, and uses it as a >>pivot point to rotate around, this will turn only the back side >>of the torso, causing only back shoulder gyration.
>
> How can a person turn only one side of there torso? I know when I turn one side the other side also turns.
>
> >>CHRE (use in lieu of BHT and THT): This acronym stands for >>Combined Hand Reactive Exertion—that is, using rotation around a >>stationary axis to cause both hands to rotate around each other.
>
> Now I have visions of Yogi Kudu.
>
> >>MC (use in lieu of Casting): This acronym stands for Modified >>Casting. In order to achieve a wider hand path, obviously the >>batter must cast. However, the batter approaches the problem by >>keeping the upper arms against the upper body, but allowing >>the >>forearms to go the ball.
>
> Tried that and I think I broke my elbow.
>
> I have found Jack Mankin to be one of the very few people anywhere that can explain the hitting process from beginning to end without contradicting himself. Anyone that has ever gone through the things like - "your flying out", "hands to the ball",
> "your all arms, use your body" knows what I'm talking about. Something that I once thought was a complete mystery that only few people could understand is now easily understandable. Lets not make it a mystery again OK?
>
>
> Sorry if I am a little harsh but you did put it out there for all to see.
>
> just my two cents

HI RadSD,

Perhaps Jack should divide his research into "cues," and "actual biomechanics of the swing." He can then place the confusing scientific material in an appendix than can be easily referenced.

Whether or not you agree with my suggestion is up to you.

Apparently, sometimes "cues" (Nyman) trump "reality."

If the feedback leads to confused minds, then perhaps it is better to leave the misnomers in tact.

Sincerely,
BHL
Knight1285@aol.com

P.S. What isn't confusing, though, is my theory on pulling all pitches (see Mar. 2003 or Mar. 2004, and look for BHL's Pull Field Orientation for details).