Posted by: ray porco () on Sat Nov 26 16:21:36 2005

Jim,

Your quote:

***In Bagwell’s case there is obviously no momentum generated from hip slide/weight transfer.***

Certainly, what is obvious to you is not to me. I do see a weight transfer (actually, I’d like to refer to it as a transfer of center of pressure).

The reason for me directing you to the clip of Bagwell was to demonstrate that you can have weight transfer without sliding the hips.
Do you think that Bagwell hits without momentum?
Or do you think that Bagwell hits with momentum not generated by hip slide or weight transfer?
And, if your answer to the second question is yes, then what generates the momentum?




Your quote:

*** You said, “For the sake of argument, let’s say that there is no difference between “weight shift” and “hip slide”. You disagree that a batter who strides while hitting, may or may not weight shift. I take it that you don’t believe that there is an option. But, there is. I can physically transfer my center of mass over my rear leg, and keep it there while striding (stepping out) with my front leg. . .”***

What you didn’t do, is read the entire paragraph and quote it in its entirety.

Quote me:

***For the sake of argument, let’s say that there is no difference between “weight shift” and “hip slide”. You disagree that a batter who strides while hitting, may or may not weight shift. I take it that you don’t believe that there is an option. But, there is. I can physically transfer my center of mass over my rear leg, and keep it there while striding (stepping out) with my front leg. So can you. I can also stride as far forward as I can possibly stretch while trying to keep my center of mass as much back as possible. I can also stride as far forward while trying to transfer as much of my center of mass over the stride leg as I possibly can. A similar case can be made for no-striders. The point is to refute Jack’s silly assumption, “If forward weight shift develops linear momentum that is transferred to rotational momentum, you would think the best hitters would be taking longer strides and shifting more weight”, with one as silly.***

The reason that I think that you did not read the entire paragraph is because of your reference to my quote:

Quote you:

*** Your point is well taken.***

No, it is not. Because you go on to say…

Quote you:

*** However, in such an example any rotation will be entirely on the back foot. Correct rotation occurs off the front foot (at ground level), usually around the heel. For this to occur, the back foot must be un-weighted. If it is being un-weighted, there must be some weight being shifted. In other words, no weight shift yields rotation on the back foot; while weight shift forward yields rotation off the front foot.***

Telling me something that I already know, while ignoring the point I had wished to make.

The point that I had wished to make is not only clearly stated in the section of paragraph that you left out, but even stated as such:

Quote me:

*** The point is to refute Jack’s silly assumption,…, with one as silly.***




.