Posted by: The Hitting Guru (hitman3527@aol.com) on Mon May 15 13:30:05 2006

> Kevin, you'll find that this thread won't be worth your time...I've seen the issue raised by BHL before...its interesting in a laughable way. Its clear that he never actually played the game seriously. jima


Not to demean anyone intelligence, but it is clear that both ways have merit. I agree that in a perfect world or with almost as perfect a hitter as possible like a Ted Williams pulling the ball could be done on most every pitch. But as we know Ted Williams was the only Ted Williams. And since most hitters do not have the ability to time most every pitch and hit it hard conventional wisdom would have us use the opposite field at minimum in the case of a right hand hitter. And as someone mentioned the ground ball would be most effective and should be the easiest way to advance the runner which is how to play winning baseball. Of course if we have a player who has not practiced enough to execute a ground hit to the off field, it would not make good sense to have him attempt it at such time. But BHL in using more of a station to station theory might be used in an Earl Weaver 3 run homer mindset if the team is structured on power and the hitters would more likely have to bunt in an emergency rather than hit the other way. The late Charlie Lau believed the most important part of winning baseball was moving the runners. As to which way is better depends a lot on what tools the team is working with. Even so, a major league hitter and or any professional hitter should be able to hit to the opposite field when necessary as even the great Ted Williams found out while hitting against the Boudreau shift.