Posted by: ranthony (ranthony@ica.net) on Sun Mar 10 22:45:28 2002

>>> Tolson wrote:
> "I just don't feel the backside can really do a lot except allow the front side to pull accross a wider arc"
>
> Jack wrote:
> "Throwing inside or outside forces the batter to concentrate on either bottom or top-hand-torque"
>
> I wonder also about the concept of:
> Inside you drive the backside hip directly through the front hip,
> and outside, you drive the backside hip directly through the opposite field location that ball contact is anticipated ? Please, comments. <<<
>
> Hi Somebody
>
> It follows the linear theme that the front-side just clears out to allow the back-side to come through. It also points out that shoulder rotation is seldom mentioned by most coaches, at least not in a positive light. Yet, driving or popping the hips has no effect on accelerating the bat-head unless that hip action causes the shoulders to move or rotate. The hips are not linked to the bat – the shoulders are.
>
> So maybe your statement should read: “Inside you drive the backside ‘shoulder’ directly through the front ‘shoulder’, and outside, you drive the backside ‘shoulder’ directly through the opposite field location that ball contact is anticipated.” Driving the hips while the shoulder remains static accomplishes nothing.
>
> Jack Mankin
>
>Jack, please clarify: Are you saying "drive the backside ‘shoulder’ directly through the opposite field location that ball contact is anticipated.” .....without any hip recruitment?
I'm agreeing that the hands, back shoulder, head and any thing else I can muster to hammer the outside pitch out opposite way should be mustered. I hadn't mentioned those components. I was simply adding that I suggested considering the back hip action as a trigger mechanism to initiate empowering the reaction to outside.

I think your restating it as "drive the backside ‘shoulder’ directly through the opposite field location" implies the shoulders are not to be rotated. I don't think you advocate that....?

Also, you said, "Driving the hips while the shoulder remains static accomplishes nothing".
That response puzzles me. When it is stated that inside, the hips are fired, I don't interpret that to mean the shoulders are unrecruited. Why would you suspect me of lack of insight?
Perhaps we are even in not adding sufficient context to better dialogue?