Posted by: Jack Mankin (MrBatspeed@aol.com) on Wed May 15 13:57:35 2002

>>> a lot of people assume that since the lower body muscles (e.g., hips)are the larger & stronger muscles, these muscles contribute the most towards the hitter's power.....i have heard some speculate that the ratio of contribution is as much as 90-10 (lower being the 90)......

but....

a hitter can, with no rotation, arms only , hit a ball perhaps 320-350 feet, & with the rotation hit the ball 400-430 feet....

this seems to suggest that it is the ARMS, not the lower body that is making an 80 percent plus contribution....

would you agree or disagree?

if you agree, than why is it there is so much emphasis on the lower body & so little on the upper body?

and if you disagree, what is faulty about my logic?....

respectfully, grc.... <<<

Hi grc

I would have to disagree with your assumption. – A batter may hit a ball a good distance without hip rotation, but even an arm hitter must rotate his shoulders. If a batter’s shoulders were glued to a wall (no rotation), I doubt if he could much more than clear the infield.

Professor Adair says it takes about 3 torque horsepower to hit a ball 400 feet. He calculates the arms can deliver about .6 horsepower.

Jack Mankin