Posted by: mikecan () on Tue Dec 17 13:33:26 2002

> > >>> Even the old "knob to the ball" works if the knob is turning while the hands are still staying back and connected.<<<
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you, the bat should undergo a good amount of angular displacement before the hand-path is accelerated. What forces would you say are acting on the bat that cause the knob to turn before shoulder rotation and the hands arc into their path?
> > > >
> > > > Jack Mankin
> >
> > Tony Gwynn offers his explanation while breaking down Bond's swing on the USA Today clip -- Gwynn says it is the force supplied is with the "bottom hand" pulling the bat through and in his analysis he says and sees and advocates pulling the bat through without "much arc" and he even says that Bond's bat moves in a parallel plane/flat plane vs. an arc.
> >
> > He also says "the top hand is going along for the ride".
> >
> > Gwynn has the credentials as one of the greatest hitters ever; now an analyst on ESPN and head college baseball coach.
> >
> > How is his explanation/analysis/experience refuted?
>
> Gwynn is describing the same thing as Jack and others,but less from and objective/video perspective and more from a feel perspective.
>
> For example,let's take his "pull with the bottom hand".If you listen to all his comments and watch the video,you can see that he is not refuting the idea of the "circular" or "arcing" handpath,but rather emphasizing keeping the hands in and swinging the bat in the power plane perpendicular to the rotation of the upper torso.This is the meaning of the "flat" description- the motion is staying in the power plane,but withinthat plane,there is an arc,a detail that is important,but not the way gwynn thinks.This is similar to what Jack details as the bat lining up with the front arm and maintaining connection,etc.

Tom,
I disagree. He talks about the "bottom hand" pulling the knob of the bat through the zone; he says the "more you can keep your hands inside the baseball, the better hitter you're going to be"; he even gloats that "people have said you cannot pull the bat through the zone on a FLAT PLANE and generate any pop... Well, I give you Barry Bonds (Gywnn says) because that is exactly what he does." Then he goes on to say "the top hand is going along for the ride". And then if you have read his book and listen to him on ESPN, he does not agree with your theory (tht). I'm not saying I agree with Gywnn, I just wanted to hear the other side of the story; someone refuting the facts or his analysis of Bonds video. But to say he is agreeing with your theory and he is just saying it a different way is WRONG IMO. Sounds like to me Gywnn maybe talking about this "HOOK effect" that people have said Nyman describes - where you in fact use the bottom hand pull. BUT when he says the TOP HAND is just riding along, that sounds very different than top hand torque creating forces on the bat head that dictate the swing radius/arc. He says "top hand riding along", "bottom hand pulling, the knob on a flat plane". Surely, Gywnn knows the difference and surely he knows the right language to describe what he is analyzing and surely he chose his words and his description intentionally, just like he did in his book and like he does on TV. That's his job by the way, to analyze and explain for the public what is going on. Gywnn says that Bonds is the "holy grail" for this type of hitting (sounds almost like he advocates the "linear, lag" -he calls it "reverse V", inside-out swing) and Bonds is his example for why it works so well. It's almost like he's telling the "people who have said you cannot pull the bat through the zone on a flat plane and generate any pop", all of you rotational, top hand dominant, pull the ball freaks --you're wrong, look at Barry Bonds, he does it my way (just like I told you so).