Posted by: BHL (Knight1285@aol.com) on Sun Aug 7 10:11:29 2005

> > Hi Jack:
> >
> > There seem to be certain theories floating around the importance of pushing off the back leg, and hitting with a straight back leg at contact. They believe that, by doing so, the ball will be hit farther. However, I have always held a diametrically opposed opinion--the back leg should be in an "L" shape at contact. Having this geometric position in the back leg, in my opinion, will allow the ball in the latter position, when struck properly, to travel further than when the leg is extended fully (i.e., in the former position). What are your opinions on this subject?
> >
> > BHL
> >
> > P.S. Note: Due to the complexity concerning the science of the swing, everyone will respond differently when asked this question.
>
> BLH
>
> I think i understand your position. I wish you would have included the facts or other information supports your opinion.
>
> Joe A.

Hi Joe A.,

Since you request that I augment my post with empiricism, I will do so.

I have noticed that hitters that make effective use of rotational energy have their back leg in an "L" position at contact. Some examples includes Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle, Ralph Kiner, Edguardo Alfonzo, Mickey Tettleton, ad infinitum. This contrasts those who use weight shift to create power, particularly Frank Thomas, Jim Rice, Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks, Gary Sheffield, ad inifintum.

I have also drawn a corollary between swing a bat and field goal kicking to illustrate why I believe that rotation is a more effective tool for smaller individuals to use than translation.

Field goal kicking, to cite an example, used to be dominated by individuals like Lou "The Toe" Groza--big, square-shouldered brawny individuals who would swing their muscular legs in a linear fashion to power the goal over the uprights.

Likewise, Frank Thomas is to baseball what Lou Groza is to football: he can use shift his massive body forwards to hit the ball over any
fence.

However, the Gogolac brothers changed the perception that size was a prequisite for having a powerful foot. Instead of swinging their foot in a linear fashion, their foot swept in a "semi-circular" fashion. (The descriptor I quote is borrowed from Joe Namath's "How to Play Your Best at Every Position.") As a result, these small individuals were able to kick 54 yard field goals.

In much the same manner, small individuals, such as Jimmy "The Toy Cannon" Wynn, proved that being 5'9," around 170 lbs. does not necessarily mean that you have to hit singles the rest of your life. By taking advantage of rotation, he was able to hit tape-measure shots in a park (i.e., the Astrodome) not conducive to hitting home runs.

Thus, although both forms of hitting are valid, the rotational method is clearly more conducive to power totals than than the weight shift method. (Here, I cite Mike Epstein.)

Also, the weight shift practitioners will hit with straight back legs; on the other hand, rotational enthusiasts will have their back leg in an "L" position.

I hope I was more lucid this time.

Best Wishes,
BHL