Posted by: Bart () on Fri Sep 13 14:56:51 2002

To All,
> > > >
> > > > Hitting is a very standard activity. There are differences in the size of balls (softball and baseball), distances vary from game to game. Bats are different but within a very narrow rang. The material the bat is made of makes little difference in mechanics. We have a round ball and bats that are the same shape with insignificant differences in size when it comes to mechanics.
> > > >
> > > > So, we have a very standardized universe of equipment. Hitters are all basically the same shape. Everyone's arms are in the same place as are their head and legs. They all operate the same. There are differences in size but the fundamental structure is the same for all hitters.
> > > >
> > > > The idea is to use the bat to hit the ball as hard as possible. Because of the physical characteristics of the bat and ball, hitting it hard requires more then a hard/fast swing. Maximum force comes from a balance between control and power. Hitting the ball in the middle is just as or all most important has the power from the bat speed.
> > > >
> > > > The act of hitting a ball is a physical act which is governed by the laws of physics. There are almost no situations is natural law where there are two equally best ways to do something. Because all the factors (equipment and the body) are almost identical, there is only one method for apply maximum force to a sphere with a bat. The differences that do exist are of no relevance to the basic mechanics of hitting the ball. The size of the batter or the bat the speed and size of the ball, etc, etc, etc, will have an impact on the results. But there is only one method of swinging that will give the control to hit the ball in the best place with a bat speed that will produce maximum force to the ball.
> > > >
> > > > I make this statement not because I intend to say what the best method is. But this issue is fundamental to the entire discussion. If you cannot agreee that there is a "one best method" then anything goes and all ideas are equal. This is unscientific and illogical.
> > > >
> > > > S. Procito
> > >
> > > S. Procito,
> > >
> > > Your statement "There are almost no situations in natural law where there are two equally best ways to do something" is false.
> > >
> > > Consider projectiles in free-fall physics: "What is the optimal angle to launch an object (of mass m and initial velocity vi) such that the final velocity vf (at time of ground impact) is maximized.
> > >
> > > This:
> > > 1. Is a natural situation.
> > > 2. Equates to EVERY angle yields maximum results. Why? Because energy of the system is FIXED. Regardless of launch angle, the system must conserve energy until the object impacts the ground. When the ball impacts ground all energy is kinetic, as it was when the object was launched, so initial and final speeds are equal.
> > >
> > > You conclude that since mass of bat, ball, and person are simple variables, they only affect result, not the optimal method. This is not necessarily the case. Basically, any equation model (polynomial incorporating all of the variables you introduce) can have multiple maxima, depending on behaviour. In fact, if you take the derivative of your model, and set it to zero, ignoring minima, you will see exactly how many equally optimal possibilities exist.
> > >
> > > Since, in baseball, you are looking at a transform of fixed energy into optimal batspeed, it is not necessarily clear that one and only one mechanic exists to optimize this result. Humans can move many body parts in different angles and sequences such that net batspeed is no different after time t.
> > >
> > > The fact that this is the case would not discourage me from learning a variety of hitting tactics of reasonable logic.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Mike.
> > >
> > >Hey when I was on my sabatikal I lerned a lot of new things.You guys were right on some stuff and wrong on a lot of stuff.I can say unakwivikably theres a right way to hit and a wrong way and maybe just me and a few others really know the master plan.
>
> I think Sal makes a good point in that there is one best way to hit a baseball, even though they are many different ways that people have success doing it. I think what he is saying is that by striking the ball in the proper spot with the optimal mechanics and the greatest batspeed = maximum distance and therefore "best". The other part of this equation is skill in hitting the ball square and natural abilities.
>
> This is where all the back and forth discussion comes from because all types of hitting mechanics have great results with great athletes, that's where all the "my way is best" theories come from. But, there is probably one set of mechanics that allow you to hit the ball the farthest and the Batspeed website is one place you'll find them.
>
> Notice I didn't say the only place, because like Sal I too believe hitting is a very simple activity and many people use these same mechanics. The reason batspeed.com mechanics are the "best" is because Jack didn't start with the "know-it-all" attitude, instead he observed what wast best and how it was being done.
> Alan

I think that there care certain mechanics that most good hitters have in common. Therefore it is worthwhile studying and in most cases teaching these mechanics.Of course, there have been many notable exceptions. For example, I have previously noted flaws in the swing of Ted Williams. I would not want to use him as a model. Some people might think that the end of Macgwire's or Griffey's swing is too "linear" and therefore not want to teach their mechanics. I personally do not care for the swings of Stan Musial or Mel Ott, to name o couple more hall-of-famers. But since perhaps 80 or 90 percent of the great hitters did have in common certain mechanics, I think the "safe" thing would be to teach those mechanics. In other words, although what worked better for some may not have worked for others, play it safe and teach what seemed to work for the vast majority of hitters.