Posted by: Jeff Atchley (jatchley@farmerstel.com) on Tue Sep 27 12:00:11 2005

IMO, the only reason the coefficient of friction of the hitting surface would make a difference is because you are thinking the way to generate rotation is to push with the rear leg and block with the front leg. I think this is a "way" to generate rotation, but certainly not the optimal way. One might even think that this is the way MLB players generate roation by watching their clips. Front leg does "appear" to firm up, etc. But what is actaully happening is a "result" of the body fully unloading and completing rotation. Optimal rotation should start in with the body's core muscles(pelvic, abdominal, upper thighs) and generate down through the feet and out through the shouldersarms. Body weight has little if anything to do with producing force in the rotational swing. It's all about loading/unloading those core muscles.

> Jack,
>
> People have problems adapting cage work to game situations for several reasons. Lack of live pitching experience is generally cited as the reason for poor transfer of mechanics between environments.
>
> How important is body weight, however? It occurs to me that even if one were perfectly able to hit live pitches in a cage (or by addressing a heavy bag, and graduating to soft-toss as you suggest), a huge difference from game situation is typically the ground co-efficient of friction (solid floor, to typical batter's box sand, for example).
>
> Have you found a weight "floor", such that if a batter weighs less than this, he can never drive the legs without significant foot slipping (regardless of body strength) and develop great power.
>
> Since frictional force is represented as a fraction of the normal force (fractional coefficient depending on surface type), it seems even a very strong batter will be ineffective if he cannot produce a large normal (i.e. body weight) force to drive rotation.
>
> Regards,
> Mike.