Posted by: Jeff (kidd@islc.net) on Fri Dec 24 13:02:15 1999

Hey BHL,

No offense taken.

I really couldn't come close to quantifying the value of w/s in the generation of bat speed. I'm not sure you could even truly test for it because tethering the body to prevent w/s would necessarily involve tethering rotational movement as well. In my mind, it's a very difficult factor to control for.

However, it seems to me that if virtually every hitter shifts his weight (and that those who don't can't hit), it must have some importance, even if its contribution to bat speed is indirect, for example helping the hitter overcome initial inertia, as you posit. But even here I have a question, for of what value is overcoming inertia if the resultant motion cannot be converted to all-important rotational movement? Inertia of the swiveling parts would still need to be overcome. How is that accomplished if not through some conversion of power from weight shift?

I think it should also be pointed out two different things seem to be happening in regard to w/s and stationary axis model hitters. The latter seem to be far more efficient in terms of creating bat speed, but clearly something allows hitters who tend toward the w/s model (I'm thinking of Hank Aaron, Frank Thomas, Harold Baines, George Brett) to generate considerable bat speed, too. Even if the conversion of linear to rotational energy in such hitters is not nearly as great some would lead us to believe, the w/s does not seem to hinder these guys greatly. Yeah, yeah, you can say they would be even better if they used better mechanics, and you might be right. But, at least in the case of Aaron and Brett, you're talking about former MVPs who put up Hall of Fame numbers. Even if they weren't perfect, they weren't shabby, either.

Regards and happy holidays,
Jeff