Posted by: () on Thu Dec 6 10:12:39 2001

JACK!!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Recently I made the following post: "Hi. I was wondering how I go about joining your club. I think I understand the rules but I want to be sure I understand them correctly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rule # 1 Only top hand torque and circular hand path may be discussed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rule # 2 Any discussion that challenges the sacred tenenants of top hand torque and circular hand path is prohibited.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rule # 3 If anyone points out an inconsistency in top hand torque or circular hand path, club members should do one of the following: (A) get defensive and attack the credibility of the challenger (B) ignore the facts and the poster and confine the discussion to believers only (C) arrange for the post to be deleted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do I understand the club rules correctly?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On second thought, I don't think I want to join your club after all."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, I know there might be just a trace of sarcasm in the post, but nevertheless there is truth to everything I said. I would like to know just one false statement I made.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you
> > > > >
> > > > > You wouldn't be closely related to Joe A. would you?
> > > > >
> > > > > Feeling the way you do, seems like the mature thing to do would just be to walk away? Why do you feel it necessary to communicate your hurt feelings to us?
> > > > >
> > > > > What I see happen here time after time (forgive me if this doesn't describe you) is that someone finds their sacred, long held swing mechanic beliefs challenged by those who have thought this through and have ready answers available for all their arguments. Sometimes this causes great emotional distress and they lash out. I would be delighted to have you convince me that my understanding of swing mechanics is wrong because that would mean I had learned something I needed to know. Right now, Mike and Jack make good sense to me along with Tom. Tell me where they are wrong. I look forward with an open mind to your response.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark H.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark H.
> > > >
> > > > My gripe has nothing to do with rotational mechanics. My gripe is exactly what I said and what you just did. As to Joe A, no, he's not a relative and in fact I never heard of him. Maybe you are confusing him with someone else.
> > >
> > > Sergio,
> > >
> > > I love to discuss mechanics with linear proponents or any kind of believer in whatever mechanics. Furthermore, Jack, from what I see on this board, is a complete gentleman of IMMENSE patience who suffers fools much longer than I would. I'm not saying you are in that group, but there have been some and Jack was patient to a fault. As far as aggressive arguers, this is an open discussion board. If you have thin skin, the internet is not the place for you. On this site though, facts and logic are respected. Stubborness and long held beliefs that the holder cannot logically defend are not.
> > >
> > > Mark H.
> >
> > Sergio,
> >
> > I am Joe A. All my posts are deleted thats why someone asked you if you are related to me.
> >
> > I have pointed out that Jack isn't really knowledgable about hitting. Plus he is a poor teacher because much of what is says needs clarification. Many people who buy his tapes posts questions about what is in the tape. Plus, There are many, many errors in the frame-by-frame. He never discusses 3 or 4 of the most important elements of hitting. When I refer to them he never even askes what I am talking about.
> >
> > Any way, you proably won't get to see this post but I thought I would give it a try.
> >
> >
> > Joe A.
> >
> > Joe, if you refer to your host by saying that "I have pointed out that Jack isn't really knowledgable about hitting" you shouldn't be surprised if your post is deleted.Just like if you are invited to dinner, if you refer to your host as a poor cook, you might not be invited again.
>
> Having said that,I agree with your position that many of Jack's ideas could use clarification. I assume that is what this site is for, is to provide that clarification. The problem , though, seems to be that some individuals take offense to anyone who questions the theories promoted on this site. People take constructive criticism personally and chase away anyone interested in a two-way or 3-way dialog.
>
> I used to visit hitting.com a lot before Dave shut it down to non-customers. I recall many interesting discussions on the pros & cons of fence drills, linear vs. rotational, etc. These discussions would go back and forth for days at a time and involve several different participants. However, at this site it seems that this type of discussion is discouraged. All it takes is for a handful of individuals to shoot down the non-believer and just like that the discussion is terminated. And do these individuals use logic and facts to shoot down the non-believer? No, they use personal insults.Sometimes I wonder if these 2 individuals (MD and MH)are perhaps still trying to convince themselves that they really believe what they thonk they believe.
>
> Just in the past few days I have noticed people who tried to point out some of the errors at this site and they were either shot down or ignored.

To the above poster,

The only time I get grumpy is when I see people being rude to Jack. It's a character fault of mine that when I see someone who is too much of a gentleman to respond in kind to insults, I tend to jump in with both feet. I have never ever, to my knowledge, shut down someone with insults just because they believed in different mechanics than myself or Jack or whoever. Shoot, I have small differences myself with Jack in terms of emphasis, but, I still count myself as learning. Nothing delights me better than to read someone with substantive differences in the area of hitting mechanics. Makes me think. And I can assure you I am open minded. When I first heard Jack and Mike's theories being discussed on another forum by TG I thought he was way off. I think if you study this objectively, you will see that the negative reactions on here are mostly due to people reacting to attitude and manners.

Tell you what, let's try an experiment. I'll throw out what I perceive to be the strength of linear mechanics and where they can be effective and we'll see if anyone insults me.

In fastpitch, where you are dealing with a smaller field and little punch hits tend to be probably more valuable than in bb, I am thinking that if a girl restricts herself to punching the ball the other way and doesn't try to hit for power, linear mechanics could result in a good BA. Now I wouldn't want 9 of them, but one or two could be a help. Especially if they were a base stealing threat so that my rotational hitters wouldn't be as likely to see any change ups when the speed bugs were on base. I also would want her to hit from the left side and have a very well developed short game. I have the recruiting video from such a hitter and she was VERY successful as a lead off hitter in Houston area gold ball during a period of time when Houston area pitching was as good or better than anywhere in the world. Whaddaya think?

Mark H.