Posted by: thom blinn (freeneasy7@yahoo.com) on Thu May 19 08:49:32 2005

> >>> Thanks for the forum
> I think that a sensible image for having strong hands and arms is that they'd be strong enough to be soft and allow a seamless fluid transfer of energy while having maximum stabilty. Stability is the factor that accounts in part for the disparity between some batters having high bat speeds at contact but less distance resulting. I believe it's prudent to think in terms of accumulation of mass as well as accumualtion of speed. I believe the more dynamic a batter, the more their speed is manifest later in the forward swing. An athletic release is a delayed release, and softer hands are more able to behave themselves as they approach the ball. <<<
>
> Hi Thom
>
> When you state, “I believe it's prudent to think in terms of accumulation of mass as well as accumualtion of speed,” I assume you are referring to how much body mass is transferred to the bat at contact. Some would say that strong hands allow more of the body’s mass to drive through the ball. However, many tests ran by bat companies show that force applied at the handle through contact has no bearing on the ball exit speed. In other words, a 35 ounce bat swung at 75-mph as a free object (like swung with a piece of rope), will hit a ball just as hard as the same bat welded to a 200 pound flywheel.
>
> Forces applied at the handle accelerate the bat to contact, but it is the bat’s mass and speed at contact (mvv) that determines the force impacted to the ball. To understand why forces applied by the hands through contact have no bearing on ball exit speed, go to - http://www.kettering.edu/~drussell/bats-new/grip.html
>
> Thom, would you explain what you mean by, “An athletic release is a delayed release.” Is this referring to when in the swing the batter should apply forces to accelerate the bat-head?
>
> Jack Mankin
Hello Jack
With respect to accumulation of mass, my conviction is that we need a way to account for why for a given swing speed some balls are hit further...I start by contending that it was hit more solidly(I'm not convinced it was just a mismanagement of speed). I start from a goal then to get as much ball speed with as little bat speed as possible. That would indicate an effective collision. Any additional speed added to the system would really exponentially add commensurate ball speed in all probalility. Martial artists have an interesting image of what happens when a whip snaps: rather than imagining an accumulation of speed , it's imagined as the entirety of the mass from the grip to the tip as being manifest AT THE TIP AT THE MOMENT OF CONTACT. So then the body moves in a fluid smooth sequence but is manifest simultaneously. This image resonates with my artistic sensibilities. It's like the Italians say..."if it's not true, it should be". I feel a sense of wonder knowing that when I hit a golf ball, there's 2000 pounds of force manifest,so actually this image isn't literally true...it's far too impotent to explaing the multiplying nature of the well trained system. I begin my probative queries from the standpoint of magic. You can explain to me how a loudspeaker works, but I prefer to think of a piece of paper moving back and forth in space causing the rhapsody in blue to come out as MAGIC. I like to preserve the mystery. I really admire guys like you who follow your insticts to give the rest of us knuckleheads some sensible ways to interpret the magic.
With respect to delayed action, I believe first you bring the swing, then you swing the swing. That the better the hitter, the more they preserve the integrity of the upper right side hence they delay the hitting implement to the max. It's as you say, half of the bat speed happens is that millisecond just before contact. A better player then stays inside the line of flight longer and leaves the line of flight (to the inside)faster than less expertly executed motions. Early speed is counter to my sensibilities. I believe early movement of the bat is moving backward relative to the forward swing. The muscles of the arm then are loaded up to brace the contact point as well as release the preceeding momentum. That's how I interpret the right arm's behavior, it's one of restraint right up to contact. My belief in simple terms is that the front part of the body is about rotation, and the back part is about extension. It starts at the ground. It's true for the feet relative to the ground, the legs relative to their respective foot, the hip relative to its repective leg, and the arm relative to the body. So rather than thinking of the hips rotating, I see the left hip as rotating, and the right hip being brought forward. Again though, my experienc is limited to tennis and golf.
To sum up my bias for teaching is to DRAMATIZE the motion with leverage and a feeling of width being the ruling images.(IN DRAMATIZING, YOU SUSPEND REALITY TEMPORARILY TO CONSIDER SOME ASPECT OF REALITY) Only then is a player able to program his psyche in real time so he can respond ballistically to the state of emergency which is the millisecond episode of swinging at a ball. I believe when a person has a sensible image in mind, that half way to the ball, they should feel as if they can close their eyes KNOW they're going to hit a good shot and feel captive of their motion which would include terrific speed. Golf and tennis players seem to underscore a preoccupation with speed, and in releasing their energy too soon, they ironicall have diminished results when they need it ...at contact.Sorry to blather, I'm just trying to air out my bias!
Respectfully yours sir,
Thom Blin