Posted by: rahkling7 () on Fri Aug 24 06:14:38 2001

one addition: I did not say in my post after reviewing the system that I found the system "fundamentally flawed". What I did say was that I would be forced to conclude that it was indeed flawed ABSENT an answer to my questions in the 2nd post. I hope to receive those answers. Thank you



First let me say that my post was and will continue to be civil despite what Melvin did and I ask you, Jack, to delete it on the basis of it adding nothing to the honest exchange of ideas on this board. I am open minded, possess above average intelligence and am willing to devote the time to a full and comprehensive understanding of your system. However:
>
> I KNEW that I would be questioned after so short a time that I really understood your system. It is as you said in the video "difficult to convey these concepts in words". The video, however, is well laid out and I say unashamedly that I understand the concept fully. I credit you and the way you laid it out as much as my ability to comprehend it.
>
> You talk in your post of "converting" to rotational mechanics. My son was NOT coming from a totally linear system. He has NEVER been taught to thrust the knob of the bat at the ball. He has NEVER been taught to move his torso weight forward over the front foot in a linear move. I offer this to you as proof of my understanding of your system and that fact that he is NOT fighting muscle memory as he applies your system.
>
> I am willing to invest WHATEVER IT TAKES to ensure that my son has the best swing he his physical body allows. HOWEVER, along the way I must have reasonable answers to my questions. The answer to question number 1 was: "I haven't spent enough time". I hope I have answered that but perhaps I cannot satisfy any doubters absent sitting down with Jack for an hour or so. Question 2 and 3 in my orginal post remain and I ask in the interest of open and honest discussion and for the purposes of gaining confidence in the system that they be answered.
>
> Regarding confidence I will close by paraphrasing George Sisler who said in his book SISLER ON BASEBALL: that confidence was the single most important factor in a hitter's ability to hit the baseball. The same holds true for adopting any system on batting.
>
>
>
> “Wed Aug 22 08:38:32 2001”
> >
> > I have just ordered the video and have been pouring over the web site the last few days. If someone could please answer a couple of questions for me so that I can understand this concept more clearly:
> > >
> > > 1) Is the VERY first move to begin to turn the hips open to the pitcher?
> > >
> > > 2) Are the hands and bat simply "dragging" through the hitting zone as a result of the hip turn? The bat dropping below the forearms is the reason I ask about the dragging concept. I realize at the point of impact that the bat will be parallel with the right hip.
> > >
> > > 3) I understand the principle of torque at the point of impact once the hips are fully open and the bottom hand has begun its move back to the catcher and the top hand is still pushing.... as a result of the hip action. However, should the batter attempt to "add" to this torque by consciously exerting the pull/push action with his hands? In this same vein is there any "pushing" of the bat back towards the catcher by the top hand at the very beginning of the swing..... thus starting the torque early?
> >
> > “Thu Aug 23 16:38:08 200”
> >
> > well I got the tape and it answered the aboce questions. HOWEVER:
> >
> > 1) I have a GOOD understanding of the system, ie I am sure he was executing the syatem properly, and when I took my son out to hit on the tee with these mechanics he was popping EVERYTHING up... weakly! Comments? fyi.... we went back to his "old" system and he was immediately hitting line drives again.
> >
> > 2) while "dragging" the bat in the above post may have not been the appropriate term in essence it does transmit the concept because we are told to apply no pressure to speak of with the hands on the bat. How then are we to hit a baseball while exerting no real direction and control over the bat. It is indeed much like having a ball on the end of a string and trying to make contact with an incoming pitch with that same ball... an extremely difficult task anyone would admit. I simply do NOT see how you can make the barrel of the bat strike the incoming pitch with any consistancy without linear motion, ie directing the barrel TOWARDS the incoming pitch with the arms/hands. Perhaps if this system is indeed a reasonable explanation of of the mechanics of Big Mac, Sosa, Gonzales, Griffey Jr. et al then I submit that their HORRENDOUS strike out numbers are a vindication of what I just said.
> >
> > 3) I consider myself a pretty fair student of the history of the game. Jimmie Foxx once said that he held the bat so tightly with his grip that he expected sawdust to come out of the knob at any moment. Foxx was one of the greatest, he hit balls OUT of old Tiger stadium. Indeed, prior to Big Mac nobody hit LONG HR's as consistantly as Double X. Can anyone reconcile this success with the fundamental "no tension" tenant of this system?
> >
> > I am an open minded individual with a good mind. I look forward to hearing this board's explanations. Absent these however, I will be forced to conclude that this system is fundamanentally flawed.. with all due respect to Jack who has obviously put a tremendous amount of time and effort into his analysis and should be applauded for it.
> >
> > Hi Rahkling7
> >
> > I find myself at a loss for words. Are you saying that you received, studied and understood the batting principles presented in the video well enough to convey the concepts to your son and after a few swings found the system to be “fundamanentally flawed” – All in one day? Successfully converting to rotational mechanics would be a great benefit to your son and I would be willing to work with you, but how many months do you feel you would be able to devote to the project without becoming discouraged?
> >
> > Jack Mankin
> >