Posted by: Teacherman () on Thu Nov 21 19:17:41 2002

If you look at major league hitters, most of them do not get to full
> > > extension until after contact. You will find that the back elbow is tucked and L is made between the upper and lower arm. The lead arm is
> > > is somewhat extended but this is a function of pitch location. The further outside the pitch is the more the lead arm is extended, and the further inside the pitch the more the lead arm is bent. You will also notice the the hands are in the palm up and palm down position. I will admit full extension does occur with all the great hitters but not until after contact.
> > >
> > > If you look at still photos of Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Luis Gonzalez, Moises Alou, Vladimir Guerrero, and others, you will see at contact they are not at full extension.
> > >
> > > I wish I could post some picutres to show you proof. If you look at Jack's analysis of Sammy you will see he is pretty much dead on in describing what happens at contact.
> >
> > Coach, you are right, but to Tom, RQL & others who have visited Setpro in the past, why would Paul Nyman make such an argument?
>
> I haven't found the quote you are referring to but if I remember correctly what Paul said, he was making the point that you can get maximum batspeed that way but at the sacrifice of swing quickness (quick start from decision time), ie, a long swing.
> This shouldn't be surprising. Top MLB hitters have batspeeds in the mid to high 90's according to ESPN Sunday Night baseball. Yet on a batspeed measurer, unspectacular MLB level hitters can generate easily over 100 mph swings when not timing a pitch. I knew a 13 yr old who topped 90 mph on a dry swing.
>
> This does bring up an interesting question: if there is some sacrifice of batspeed for swing quickness by MLB players, which makes sense due to the time constraints between decision time and contact (not too much...) then wouldn't slow pitch softball players want a long swing for max batspeed since they have no reaction time problems to contend with?
> So maybe the two swings really aren't the same in some respects. What do you think?

Dan,

The quote comes from the Griffey v Bonds thread (presently dated 11/14. You're pretty much right about the trade off of batspeed to accomplish bat quickness. Paul's point also seems to address the difference between theory and application, in that he says his knowledge of biomechanics tells him that batspeed would be the greatest at full extension at contact but then goes on to say that this extension must be achieved properly, that being without disconnect. You can't let the hands go to the ball. And the application of the swing, under the stress of timing, and the need for bat quickness may not make it possible for maximum batspeed to be achieved. He said that Bonds swing is a trade-off swing. Very short, very quick at the expense of some batspeed. (Obviously not enought to hurt him).

Bart,

Please read the thread completely. He is not recommending Griffey's swing as a model. In fact, he says he would not use it as a model to teach hitting with.


>