Posted by: tom.guerry (tom.guerry@kp.org) on Mon Jan 2 10:17:19 2006

I think there is a lot of complexity which prevents anything except talking in circles unless assumptions are identified and agreed on. If assumptions are not agreed on, then different hypotheses could be constructed base on the incompatible assumptions and then tested.

Beyond agreeing on things like when/where/what is "launch" and how is path of bathead tracked to contact, there has to be agreement on how actual measurements are done.

For me the teacherman idea seems to be that some players can only sustain acceleration for a certain period of time,so the bathead path has to be shortened by running a 20 yd dash,not a 60,hence a shorter "quicker" swing.

I would say that this is not how bathead path and speed are related during the "high level" swing.

Also,how they vary/relate in one swing pattern vs another (beginner vs "high level" swing) will differ, if you believe that discrete patterns are progressed through (after Dixon,for example), which I do.

On the other hand,you might believe there is more of a continuum, in which case, a different dependence might be expected. perhaps requiring a different experimental approach.

The way I would speculate things should be organized/tested might involve confirming and building on data such as Jack's and from skilltechnologies motionanalysis, for example which puts refelectors on key points of the body and measures accelerations of hips,upper torso/lead shoulder,lead hand/bathandle and bathead/sweetspot or tip.

What is actually found with the NON highlevel swing in the motionanalysis data is that most hitters (most hitters are NOT high level) decelerate and then attempt to or actually do reaccelerate before contact. This is obviously a suboptimal swing because quickness is horrible and timing is prone to high error. While batspeed at contact CAN be high it is "late".

Jack has described this as a swing that is excessively torque dependent where the rotational component is prematurely disconnected,bathead decelerates and then is re- accelerated by involving dependence on "hand torque".

What teacherman is proposing appears to put a premium on maintaining connection to the rotational/flail component of the swing without worrying or even acknowledging any torque component. The goal would be to get to contact without decelerating, which I think we all think is a good idea. The problem with this idea is that if this "quickness"/prevention of deceleration involves too much lowering of batspeed, then quickness and more importantly timing error are degraded. IF you stay connected (but do not synchronize the torque component well with good transfer mechanics) this will tend to be a "spinning" swing pushed from the back.Batspeed and quickness is then limited by a "power leak" where power is wasted OVERturning the hips as measured by motionanalysis. This can be actually worsened by then trying to "hook the handpath" to prolong
connection. As Jack notes, good "transfer mechanics" are necessary to improve this situation/get rid of the power leak/prevent the transmission from slipping,etc.

Jack's observations instead show that a quick swing is achieved by high batspeed AND a short bathead path that is produced by good synchronizing of the torque and rotational components of the swing. This is the preferred way to progress to the "high level swing" ,
and jack's approach encourages a quick swing with a short batpath and excellent batspeed. Emphasis is on good "transfer mechanics" to promote learning the high level swing pattern.

The preceding describes the typical/usual situation dicussed here in which concerns how to go from a non high level to a high level swing pattern.

This should not be confused with batspeed differences in different high level players/diferent types of high level swings. In this case of players in the same overall/"high level" pattern (in absence of flaws that creep in when slumping), all swings are ideally not
decelerating before contact and have adequate batpseed and timing error management. Within this high level group when the swing is going well, highest maximum batspeed swings would tend to be a little Longer (time and/or path). The result is still limited by
quickness necessary to deal with the allotted reaction time

The intriguing thing for me in Jack's work is that perhaps high batspeed and maximum acceptable shortening of bathead path and timing optimization may all go together which may be exemplified by Bonds, for example. The exact timing error tradeoffs of max batspeed and length of batpath are not completely clear,but the belly-up type pattern seems best to me as opposed to the off the plate type.

In any case, i think the lesson is that your basic mechanics will create a certain bathead path/swing shape and way of adjusting it, and within this,the higher the batspeed the better. The way to a good pattern is not by consciously backing off on batspeed. The way
that Jack emphasizes involves good transfer mechanics.

As Ted Williams said, hips at 80-85%, hands at 100%. Don't give up on the 100%.