Posted by: () on Sun Oct 14 08:28:41 2001

Would it be fair to say that, at least in our era, Bonds would be the greatest linear hitter in baseball?
> > > > > > > > > >>NO!!!
> > > > > > > > What makes you think Bonds is linear?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, until recently I had thought of Bonds as rotational. I have numerous clips from various angles showing that he has a circular hand path. Even when a few weeks ago Bonds was quoted as saying that when he his he "throws the bat at the ball", I didn't realize there was a relationship between "throwing the bat at the ball & the hand path."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But then, over the last day or two, Jeff and Melvin have been saying that ant hitter who "throws the bat at the ball" has a linear, not circular handpath.If this is true, then if Bonds throws the bat at the ball he has a linear hand path. So, either Bonds lied when he said he throws the bat at the ball, or Jeff and Melvin are wrong when they assert that "throwing the bat at the ball" results in a linear swing?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who should I believe, Bonds or Jeff & Melvin?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Who has more credibility, Bonds or Jeff & Melvin?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hitmaster,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would say that for you, you have the most credibility. What I mean by that is we have to do our own study and thinking and research on these questions. Don't just accept what anyone says. Sometimes great athletes don't really know how they do what they do. Sometimes "great" coaches have been lucky to have great athletes to work with. Study stop motion video and decide for yourself what Bonds is doing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mark H.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks, Mark . I'm glad there is at least one person at this site who thinks individual research is just as important as studying the research of others. I must say, though that with you being an exception, I found my reception at this site to be rather hostile and not at all conducive to learning. I welcome constructive discussion and criticism but what I saw was an attitude that one should simply accept at face value the findings of Jack's research , and any other research, individual or otherwise is not valid. It has left a poor taste in my mouth and this will be my last post.
> > > >
> > > > Bonds obviously doesn't know that he's rotational, same with Griffey. Ted Williams in his book says its a "push swing". I have a couple of video clips of him and he's nothing but rotational.
> > >
> > > Hey, Bonds knows beteer than you do if he is rotational or not. If he says hes not hes not, ok? You "experts" are always making errors.
> >
> > That's a very good argument. According to frame-by-frame he's rotational, according to Bonds he's linear. Who should we believe, a frame-by-frame which the eyes should be able to clearly see the rotational mechanics, or Barry Bonds-a professional baseball player who just hit 73 homers. I think if Bonds understand rotational mechanics like most of us on this site, he'd probably say he's rotational. Bonds might never have heard of "circular hand-path" or "stationary axis" in his life.
> Did Bonds say he was linear or did he say he thru the hands at the ball.




I remember he said he throws the bathead at the ball. It is Jeff and Melvin who are saying that this equates to "being linear" and therefore a poor swing.