Posted by: BJ (bombinb@aol.com) on Sat Dec 18 00:47:03 1999

Steve and others,

Long time reader, first time poster ... and sense were in the feel goody mood, I'll add my few cents to get us back on track.

I'm glad to hear you admit the obvious mistake that you made, which therefore restores some of your credibility. To people who do not understand the apology: Griffey takes about 5-6 frames (30 frames per second) to go from swing initiation to contact (in frame for frame video, which is easier to understand that radians), not 15 frames as you previously alluded to (1/2 second is what you said). Now the point that I want to make regarding Griffey's swing is that after the timing step occurs - all forward moment stops and purely rotational energies take over. The effect of a timing step in creating bat speed is subjective to the person (may help prepare, gather thoughts, get the body ready, or it may do nothing), but objectively it does not result in a direct relation to bat speed, which is created and developed using rotational forces (ala Griffey). The timing step should be a non-debatable issue (use it if you want to, but understand that it is not necessary to develop world class bat speed), what really matters is how bat speed is created and initiated after the timing step.

Second, Steve, you previously said that a pitchers stride is proof that linear movement creates rotational speed; again either some sort of relevance proof is necessary (or an apology is) because the pitch of a ball is vastly different than the creation of bat speed. Need I point out activities where linear movement is not used to create rotational forces: golf is obvious, but then there is the tennis serve, the boxers punch, and Bagwell's backward timing step to name a few. The time has come to move past the so-called requirement of pre-swing linear movement (timing step) and start talking about the forces that actually develop bat speed (post timing step movements).

Lastly, Steve you said your bat speed is 97 mph with a stride and 80 without, this must be another ridiculous statement - no apology even necessary. I don't care if you personally lose bat speed without a stride (goes back to your subjective view as mentioned above), but stating that you swing a bat faster than many pro golfers swing a club is laughable or if its true, what pro team do you play for. Just as my statement here is uncalled for, so are such preposterous statements (97 mph to 80 mph) that you make, neither of which are needed to discuss bat speed development (this is not a chat room - I think Jack would agree). So lets all keep out personal feelings and use logic, video proof analysis and common sense to further our understanding of bat speed development.

Steve, I have nothing against you, and in effect, I am only replying to your previous statements (which allegedly were made while you were tired).

BJ