Bat Speed -- Baseball Hitting Forum

Posted by: JLB (oz2009@verizon.net) on Fri Aug 29 12:40:34 2008

"So, I ask all of you that subscribe to all the new age jargin and, buzz words; who was teaching and instructing these hall of famers and, by what method?
I mean ,how were they able to excell at such a high level,without all of todays plethora of scientific experimentation?"

John, John, John, (manny sucks) John, John, John John:

Your argument reminds me of a historical debate that raged back in 1877, whether all four of a horse's hooves left the ground at the same time during a gallop. Guess what they used to settle the debate SCIENTIFICALLY: a series of 12 stereoscopic cameras, 21 inches apart to cover the 20 feet taken by one horse stride, taking pictures at one thousandth of a second. The photographer was Edward James Muggeridge and his work “Horse in Motion” is deemed a seminal work in high speed photography.

Flash forward, John, to the 21st Century, and you will find the same method todays hitters use to learn to hit is surprisingly the same method hitters used 50 years ago. EMULATION. The difference is today we can accelerate the learning process through, what must be weird science to you, HIGH SPEED PHOTOGRAPHY. So rather than tediously studying hitters through first hand observation, DAY BY DAY, like they did 50 years ago, we can break down virtually every hitter’s mechanics frame by frame every night of the week. The interpretation of those observations remains in the eye of the beholder, no different today than 85 years ago when a certain Red Sox pitcher decided to emulate the swing of Joe Jackson instead of Ty Cobb.

So to answer your question, hitting is really not taught that different than it was fifty years ago, except today we can actually see whether all four of a horses’ hooves leave the ground or whether there is a circular hand path to the baseball swing. Your boy Ted Williams endorsed Epsteins’ method of “Do we teach what we really see” and the use of high speed videography, so why then do you so stubbornly refuse to accept the body of work displayed by Jack on this site? I for one sincerely enjoy the arguments on this site when there is at least some offer of evidence in support of contrary theories. Do me a favor and tell us all how the mechanics put forward on this site contradict ANYTHING Ted Williams said.

Followups:

Post a followup:

Name:

E-mail:

Subject:

Text:

> "So, I ask all of you that subscribe to all the new age jargin and, buzz words; who was teaching and instructing these hall of famers and, by what method?
> I mean ,how were they able to excell at such a high level,without all of todays plethora of scientific experimentation?"
> 
> John, John, John, (manny sucks) John, John, John John:
> 
> Your argument reminds me of a historical debate that raged back in 1877, whether all four of a horse's hooves left the ground at the same time during a gallop.  Guess what they used to settle the debate SCIENTIFICALLY:  a series of 12 stereoscopic cameras, 21 inches apart to cover the 20 feet taken by one horse stride, taking pictures at one thousandth of a second.  The photographer was Edward James Muggeridge and his work “Horse in Motion” is deemed a seminal work in high speed photography.   
> 
> Flash forward, John, to the 21st Century, and you will find the same method todays hitters use to learn to hit is surprisingly the same method hitters used 50 years ago.  EMULATION.  The difference is today we can accelerate the learning process through, what must be weird science to you, HIGH SPEED PHOTOGRAPHY.  So rather than tediously studying hitters through first hand observation, DAY BY DAY, like they did 50 years ago, we can break down virtually every hitter’s mechanics frame by frame every night of the week.  The interpretation of those observations remains in the eye of the beholder, no different today than 85 years ago when a certain Red Sox pitcher decided to emulate the swing of Joe Jackson instead of Ty Cobb. 
> 
>  So to answer your question, hitting is really not taught that different than it was fifty years ago, except today we can actually see whether all four of a horses’ hooves leave the ground or whether there is a circular hand path to the baseball swing.  Your boy Ted Williams endorsed Epsteins’ method of “Do we teach what we really see” and the use of high speed videography, so why then do you so stubbornly refuse to accept the body of work displayed by Jack on this site?  I for one sincerely enjoy the arguments on this site when there is at least some offer of evidence in support of contrary theories.  Do me a favor and tell us all how the mechanics put forward on this site contradict ANYTHING Ted Williams said.

Anti-Spambot Question:

This slugger ended his MLB career with 714 homeruns?
   Tony Gwynn
   Babe Ruth
   Sammy Sosa
   Roger Clemens