Posted by: The Hitting Guru (hitman3527@aol.com) on Tue Feb 28 15:41:54 2006

> > > > > > >>> Jack. This is a continuation of my previous post regarding "Trying to hit a homerun every at bat cancels consitency".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I almost forgot to mention Lau also believe that (like you have mentioned to a different degree) all successful hitters do certain things which he believed could be taught to anyone with above average athletic ability and repetition. One of his key observances was that the hitter has to be in the launch position once his lead foot hit the ground (see art of .300 video and or book). It is noted that the launch position for some was different from others, but never the less each hitter was at his own launch position for consistency. Ex. A Chuck Knoblack's launch position would be different from a George Brett, but both hitters batted in the high .300s on more than one occasion. <<<
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Guru
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here are a couple quotes that might interest you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When Ted Williams was asked what he thought of Lau's theory he said, "He's done more to ruin the art of hitting than anyone in the history of baseball."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When asked what he thought of Lau's book, he said, "They should burn every copy ever printed."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You state, “It is noted that the launch position for some was different from others, but never the less each hitter was at his own launch position for consistency.” – That would depend on your definition of ‘launch position.’ For this site, I have defined the launch position as: “When the bat has been brought to the swing plane and shoulder rotation is being initiated.”
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Therefore, when all great hitters are in the launch position, they will all have the bat, hands lead-forearm and elbow in the same plane. Guru, you may occasionally find a strong athlete (like Frank Thomas) who can produce with less efficient mechanics. However, by far, most great hitters exhibit the same transfer mechanics – the “10 Absolutes.”
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS This site has not recommended “Trying to hit a homerun every at bat.” We do recommend hitting the ball hard. If your swing is a little high, it’s a sizzling grounder – hit it square, it’s a frozen rope to the gaps – hit it a little under center, its bye – bye time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jack Mankin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > PS This site has not recommended “Trying to hit a homerun every at bat.” We do recommend hitting the ball hard.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > With regard to your comment above, my post was used to promote discussion though many feel its merits are true.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is also interesting to note that the Boston Red Sox organization of the middle 1980's players seemed to benefit from Lau's teachings, especially Dwight Evans and Dave Henderson. Also, in the past, the Red Sox Organization has allowed both Lau and Williams to offer advice one after the other. So the debate goes on.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Guru, The Red Sox of the middle 80's had a hitting coach named Walt Hriniak, not Charlie Lau. Mr. Lau passed away in 1984 I believe. Dwight Evans worked with Hriniak and not Lau. Would you suggest that hitters hit the ball softly? One more thing, why would you even bring up Chuck Knoblauch in the same sentence with George Brett?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Charlie Lau Sr. never worked for the Red Sox. He was the hitting coach at Baltimore, Oakland, KC, New York Yankees and then with the White Sox up until his passing in 1984. So there is no debate on the Red Sox having Lau work with their hitters, because he did not work for them.
> >
> >
> > Doug. Would you consider Don Mattingly more of a Lau Hitter (weight shift) or a William's hitter (rotational) and why?
>
>
> He did both. He had weight shift and rotation. Just like 99% of all major league hitters.


I guess your answer means that 99% of hitters are doing the same thing. And with that answer there is no need to debate further.