Posted by: Scott W. (stwinton@netzero.net) on Sat May 27 10:11:46 2006

> > > > > > > > > Hi Sam R,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Perhaps if you spent more time researching on what I said in my March 2004, and less time belitting us with your infantile comprehension of semantics, my theory would make sense to you. First and foremost, unlike you, who do not give an email address when posting, I offer critics this option so that I can receive feedback on PFO, positive and negative. Last time I checked, at least in its initial stages, my PFO theory had more supporters than detractors. Perhaps people have also heard enough of your insults; if you want to deride others for merely the sake of doing so, pay to post on Nyman's site, www.hitting-mechanics.org. Now, I will get right to the point.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My model, if you followed it closely, was never intended to impose on anyone's approach. If Albert Pujols likes to go the other way, let him go--after all, his stats prove he is confortable with that approach. The main reason I designed my PFO theory was to show smaller players who rarely hit home runs--and only over the pull field sense--that they did not necessarily have to concede to contact hitting. Instead of being table setters for home run heroes, they could achieve the same acclaim by using Batspeed.com mechanics to pull all pitches. As a result, they would gain the advantage of a 340 foot fence, and not lose any power by trying to hit 400 feet to centerfield, or even 340 feet when they are late on the ball, and hitting the ball the other way. The result is more home runs. (And these players do not have be concerned every time they are tested.)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My theory is model, one that people can either employ, or disregard. I encourage all others to use, but if they find success another way, so be it. Please reread my March material--or go through my entire collection of posts from 2004 forward--before levying accusations. I am treating your insulting post as intelligently as I can.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > > BHL
> > > > > > > > > Knight1285@aol.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > P.S. This is my answer; should you need clarification, please point out specifics, and I will gladly clarify them for you.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > couple questions how do u loose power hitting the ball to center field?next if some one is 5'9 170 pounds why would u wantin him pulling the ball and swinging for the fences. This type of hitter would have alot more success hitting doubles and triples in the gap using right and left center field.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Josh,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is precisely because of this Social Darwinist thinking (i.e., hit according to your body type) that I designed my PFO theory. I abhor the fact that a coach should tell an individual that he should be a table setter, or even a line drive hitter, when he can acclaim heroism by pulling the every pitch. The three steps to PFO are 1) learning effecient swing mechanics, such as the one presented on Batspeed.com; 2) learning to develop consistent batspeed to any pitch home run distances; 3) the desire to pull every pitch so that long hits to centerfield, or shorter ones to right, which are not hit with enough batspeed to carry the fence, will cost the hitter an out (i.e., they will be 340+ foot flies over the left field fence), rather than 380+ foot flies that fall twenty feet short of a 400 foot centerfield fence, and into the centerfielder's glove, or 335+ foot warning track ugly balls that allow the right fielder to make a play).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Altthough Ted Williams did not recommend pulling all pitches, stats indicate this is what he did, and how he became successful.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > BHL
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "I abhor the fact that a coach should tell an individual that he should be a table setter, or even a line drive hitter, when he can acclaim heroism by pulling the every pitch."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I abhor the fact that a player will go up to the plate with a alternate motive (individual acclaim/heroism as you put it) as oppose to the TEAMS success...team success is based on having guys get on base, hit behind runners, drag bunt, push bunt, sac bunt, hit and run, run and hit, slash, slash hit and run, squeeze...A coach is after TEAM success, sometimes that means instead of letting you 105 pound leadoff hitter swing for the fence (with a 20 mph wind blowing in) you ask him to flatten the bat out and hit behind the runner in the bottm of the 9th and no outs...? But what do I know I’m a part of the baseball establishment that you ABHOR.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is a part of your argument that ALL HITTERS #1-9 in the line up should adopt this philosophy? Or just a select few in select situations?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Last night my team played at a field that was 335 down the line, 395 dead center with a 25 MPH wind blowing in…our 4 hitter who is 6-4, 215 CRUSHED a ball to dead left field…one of the hardest balls hit all year…warning track, LF camped. What does a night like that do for your theory…do you abandon your offensive approach based on field conditions?
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Scott W.,
> > > > >
> > > > > My answer--look at Carlos Delgado. He pulled a home runs, the wind knocked it down, and it still traveled the fence!
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > BHL
> > > > > Knight1285@aol.com
> > > >
> > > > Are you kidding me? Carlos Delgado...one of the strongest men in baseball, my buck-0-5 leadoff rake with spikes on should model his approach after Delgato? And what exactly does a fly ball to the wall for the teams success? It certainly won't win many games.
> > > >
> > > > Come on now, please give me more then a Carlos D fly ball to the wall...that or give in, the approach is flawed on multiple levels
> > >
> > > I will give you some other examples...Mac's record-breaking home home run, Mac's pulling of a Billy Wagner 98 mph fastball into the left field upper deck, Mac's pulling of Randy Johnson's 97 mph outside fastball into left field, Matt William's ability to hit pop flies over the shortest part of Candlestick Park (when it existed) by pulling every pitch, Bonds multiple 30+ home run seasons (when he was not on steroids) by pulling every pitch...this approach is all but flawed. Going to the opposite field, on the other hand, requires pure strength, and steroids would certainly be a benefit.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > BHL
> >
> > You have not responded to my questions?
> >
> > "Is a part of your argument that ALL HITTERS #1-9 in the line up should adopt this philosophy? Or just a select few in select situations? How does wind effect your approach?"
> >
> > I'll leave you with the idea that going up to the plate attempting to hit a home run is the hardest thing to do in all sports.
>
> Hi Scott W.,
>
> As I said before, I am not forcing my views on anyone. This is a simply a geometric tool that single hitters can use to inflate thair stats, and turn in home run numbers, thereby transforming them into home run hitters. Consider this as a tactic involving common sense, rather than natural ability.
>
> Best,
> BHL

A singles hitter is a singles hitter for a reason...a singles hitter that attempts to pull all pitches an be a homerun hitter will turn into a defensive replacement or a pinch runner (granted he can play defense and run).

If you were a coach, would you coach this philosophy or can you see the need for table setters in a lineup? How does your geometry stand up to a 20 MPH wind blowing in?

"Consider this as a tactic involving common sense, rather than natural ability” Common sense says that a 100 lb leadoff hitter is not going to go 320 feet down the line into a 20 mph wind...their ain't a geometric proof around that can prove that FACT different.

Who’s the martian and who’s the fungo in this conversation were having…LOL!