Posted by: dougdinger () on Fri Sep 30 09:31:59 2005

> >>> No great hitter has a straight hand path?
>
> Your mistaken. No great power hitter has a straight hand path. But almost all the great high average hitters have a straight hand path.
> (I use Ichiro Suzuki of the Seattle Mariners as a prime example, as unothodox as his swing may be, he still takes a straight path to the ball.)
>
> That fact is this! As we all know the shortest path to a point is a straight line, not a curve, and not a circle.
> A short path to the ball allows a hitter to wait longer and see the ball better so therefore he will be more percise with his swing.
>
> A curved or circular path to the ball is longer, which causes the hitter to have to start his swing a bit earlier (cheating) although more momentum and angular displacement (faster bat) may be generated a long circular hand path to the ball makes for a less percise swing.
>
> This is why homer run hitters tend to bat for lower averages, and high average hitters tend to hit less home runs.
>
> It's a matter of preference, and I prefer the high average.
>
> Hi Chuck
>
> I agree with your assessment of Suzuki. There are also fastpitch players with great speed that use a similar swing. If the hitter has that kind of speed and feels that is their cup of tea – I say, why not go for it.
>
> You state “A curved or circular path to the ball is longer, which causes the hitter to have to start his swing a bit earlier (cheating) although more momentum and angular displacement (faster bat) may be generated a long circular hand path to the ball makes for a less percise swing.”
>
> I would say a hitter with 3000+ hits has a “percise” swing. Look at the following clip. http://www.youthbaseballcoaching.com/mpg/Rose.mpeg
> Does this overhead clip of Pete Rose show the “shortest path to a point is a straight line” path you prefer?
>
> Jack Mankin

In talking about the shortest handpath, one argument is brought up that a linear A to B handpath is the shortest, allowing you to wait longer on the pitch. A circular handpath is longer thus the batter has to cheat to get the hands to the contact position in time. My theory is that if you use a circular handpath to generate bat speed early in the swing, and since a handpath has been proven (by Jack) to generate much more bat speed than a linear path, wouldn't the hands be moving toward the contact position at least equally to a linear path? In other words the wouldn't the hands be making up for the lost time by generating the hand speed earlier during the path?