Posted by: Major Dan (markj89@charter.net) on Tue Oct 23 07:34:06 2001

The Dusty Baker thread is very instructive reading on what some people think about athletics.
> > > >
> > > > People want to cling to artificial descriptions such as linear and rotational. They are meaningless because they are so broad.
> > > >
> > > > People want to believe that great hitters can be relied upon to accurately describe the reasons for their success. They cannot, as is amply demonstrated in books, newspapers, and most convincingly, upon video analysis.
> > > >
> > > > People want to believe that good hitters have mastered the proper shorthand, or `cues.' It doesn't matter, because good athletes play, they don't think.
> > > >
> > > > People want to believe in magic, that some divine grace allows some to swing in ways that others can't. This despite overwhelming evidence that strength, reflexes, eyesight, muscle-fiber type,
> > > > training regimen and body proportions have nothing to do with skill attainment. Their argument becomes circular, self-defining and collapses.
> > > >
> > > > I hope perhaps to concentrate more on what great athletes do -- not what their coaches do, not what they say, not what others say about them. What they do. That is what is important and interesting.
> > > >
> > > > Melvin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey, that's what I been saying along the whole time, just because the pros do it doesn't mean you can copy that style. There are errors in some of the things you jest said but I agree about the part of copying pros.3
> >
> > Hey Melvin if you think there's nothing to learn why do you come here?
> >
> > Huh? huh? You think athletes just play and don't think? You are totally clueless, my friend if you think athletes just do it. And aren't you the dude that thought Bonds didn't know what he was talking about when he (Bonds) says he "throws the bat at the ball"?
> >
> > I think until such time you have better manners as well as have something constructive to say, you should retreat to your cyberspace shell
>
> To All,
>
> This is the orginal Joe A. I didn't make the post above with my name on it, though I agree with it.
>
> Conisder this, I think it tends to support Melvin's post. Many of our great players were great players from the time they started playing-- some at 6 or 7 years old. Some were coached at an early age but they demonstrated great natural ability. But many, I think most, were great on their own. They just "do it."
>
> Some of it has to do with natural mental ability of seeing and tracking moving objects. Others, and this is where I disagree with Melvin, have the physical ability (strength and quickness) to react to what they see. Without the great physical abilities the ability mental abilities cannot be transfered into the game.
>
> But the point is that most of them "just do it." They don't know what they do. If you ask them they will give you anaswer because they don't want to seem stupid.
>
> Point to Melvin.
>
> Joe A.
>
>
>
sorry about the last post - it went through without my added content - error somewhere along the network

Joe
Not sure where you are coming from. Melvin suggested we look at what the pros 'do'. You are suggesting we don't listen to what they 'say they do'.
I agree with both.
But you have said in the past that pros are lousy models because they are different/special/extra talented/etc.
My position-
Learn from the pros (the best) by watching and analyzing.
Have a good laugh at 90% of what they say, try to extract the gems from the junk. They can 'do' it, but they want to simplify 'their thinking' (what they say) as much as possible, not analyze to death.
As Yogi said, "you can't think and hit at the same time".
Joe, do you still say that the pros are bad models to copy? or just bad teachers to listen to?