Posted by: Major Dan (markj89@charter.net) on Tue Nov 26 06:01:44 2002

> There seems more agreement than disagreement to me here.Maybe that's just my overly optimistic nature.Paul Nyman has said that max batspeed is with "extension" at contact, with no disconnection or deceleration before contact.Griffey(and Big Mac) have been given as examples of hitters who get extended at contact.Nyman also states that Griffey gets a lot of separation,but that this is NOT the swing he would teach because it's harder to master,and he prefers a swing that is "quicker to the ball." That doesn't mean he doesn't admire Junior's swing.
> >
> > Paul's main disagreement with Jack has mainly to do with whether or not/to what degree "hand torque" is a cue verus real underlying principle.I am not qualified and do not intuitively understand this area well enough to weigh in. I would love to see the two of them set up some trials/evidence to elucidate this if their exact differences can be defined.
> >
> > Jack has described a more extended swing for the outside pitch.Whether he believes this relates to higher batspeed potential I don't know.
> >
> > I think Lau Jr's "cues" (not really anything like a "law") are descriptions/instructions that produce this more extended Griffey like further off the plate swing.You can't belly up with mechanics like this or you get a serious hole in the zone up and in or just in.You also get more vulnerable(slump prone) to the outside stuff because the timing has to be really exquisite to get consistent contact so near full extension,and with relatively little torso turn.
>
>
> Tom,
>
> I tend to disagree with the statement that Griffey is fully extended at contact. I have photos showing that at contact his rear arm is not
> fully extended at contact as many people seem to think. From what I saw from most hitters, griffey included, is that the front arm can be almost fully extended but that is based on pitch location. On pitches in the fron arm will be more flexed and on pitches away the front arm with straighten out more. The rear is almost never fully extended unless the hitter is completely fooled on the pitch.
>
> Having the arms fully extended at contact might be the most optimal position in terms of batspeed. I won't argue that. I am not sure though do think it probably is when the greatest bat speed is genrated. I will argue that the elite hitters in MLB don't really do it. I would think there must be a reason then why they don't do it whether it be a biomechanical, to make more contact, or physics. I don't know for sure.
>
> One theory that seems to come mind, although is just conjecture on my part, is that although batspeed is maximum when arms become fully extended at contact the bat is actually decelerating at this point which may not for the greatest amount of energy and momentum transfer to the ball (i.e not as much power). When there is some flexion the bat is still actually accelerating through the ball.

Coach -
batspeed cannot be at its maximum at the same time the bat is decelerating. If the bat were decelerating at contact, its velocity would be less at contact than before contact, hence not maximum. Momentum is mass x velocity. Since the bat doesn't change mass, max batspeed at contact is max momentum, so theoretically thats when you get greatest impact/collision with the ball, ie, how the ball is hit the hardest.
If the bat is acclerating at contact, max batspeed will be reached after contact, when the ball is already gone, not the most efficient use of batspeed.
The ball is on the bat for 1/1000 or 1/2000 of a second - essentially one moment of time, not an extended period, so there is no significant change of batspeed during contact.