Posted by: SteveT () on Sat Dec 18 14:50:16 1999

I keep thinking of things I left out of my response to your statements- you wrote:

"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"

Really?

Can you please explain to me how your physics is somehow more advanced than Professor Adair's (and others), in that translational movement cannot be converted to rotational energy? Be prepared to provide solid, scientific evidence in support. I already know what Jack thinks, I'm interested in YOUR evidence.

"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."

Really?

Again, can you please explain how "the pitch of a ball is vastly different than the creation of batspeed?" Again, be prepared to give real data. I'm willing to listen. I know several very highly- respected kineticists/ biomechanists who would be quite interested....do tell!!!

Respectfully,

SteveT