Posted by: tom.guerry (tom.guerry@kp.org) on Thu Jan 9 09:04:04 2003

Who ever you are, you post is a good one and is correct in my opinion,
> > im the guy in the video and you're opinion is valid. The biggest problem of most young hitters is the restriction of the front leg. I do want to point out that the video shows us working with kids trying to get them to keep a bent front knee until contact. However, the problem with kids is usually patience and strength. They are not strong enough to maintain balance through rotation and don't wait and go linear before they rotate. This is one of the best post I have read on Jacks web site in a long time. If you are interested I have spent hours upon hours with Jack and I consider his input as good as anyones. I would with any problem not hesitate to ask him because of the amount of information he has to offer.
> >
> > John Elliott.
>
> I appreciate your kind words and enjoyed watching your swing. I truly do find many of Jack's teachings accurate, but we differ on one element. Not that Tony Gwynn and I agree on all facets of the swing, but he asked me to speak at a hitting seminar he did, where I presented my thought on lower body action and how it get's initiatiatd. My backround was a player in college, played golf for years and excelled in tennis. It wasn't till I started to ask questions like why do I hit the golf ball so far and a tennis ball so hard, but was a punch and judy hitter in college. Then one day I tried something at the plate. I said no hands, just arms and the stinking ball went 50 feet farther than I had ever hit one. This drove my curiousity to the point of obsession for two years....studying video, tinkering with my swing, going to games etc. It really hasn't been until the last 6 months that I have perfected my concept. I think it takes someone who did it wrong for so long to understand the difference between right. Now my phone rings constantly for instruction and many have asked me to do a video, but that sort of thing scares me, because I'm afraid to be wrong.......even though I believe I'm right. I want kids to get better.....way better and if the results aren't quick and noticable then the instruction has a missing link. I consider your opinion in high regard with many others who have been around the highest level, but my concept has never been articulated in a book, video or even from a hall famer like Tony Gwynn, so I remain guarded by not pushing my ideas in a critical world. I will say this, if you have an open mind and would like to hear my ideas I'll leave my E-mail and we can talk privately. Jack can be there too. Otherwise thank you for the kind words and keep up the good work. I live in San Diego.
> > >

Coach-

It's nice to hear from another obssessive type.

The closer your verbal descriptions are to reality and the better they communicate the necessary feel,the more likely instruction will be helpful as long as confusion is minimized.

Within the necessary mechanical/physical boundaries,there are still infinite ways for the brain and body to execute a good swing.

Jack has really hit the important physical principles well enough to usefully classify swings(long,short,rotational,not rotational).Using this I would classify the desirable hitting mechanics as rotational and short as opposed to golf which is rotational and long.The hitting task requires much more emphasis on timing precision,so different "transfer mechanics" are required for quicker acceleration over a shorter bat path.This requires getting the bat moving before the torso turns forward to drive the handpath as opposed to the "double pendulum" approach of the long golf swing where the torso starts first and the wrist cock is maintained until just before contact.Jack describes this early motion as top hand torque.

From your description,it sounds like you have observed the sequence in detail and can teach with better results reinterpreting this from your experience.The only thing I would advise is to not insist on the absolute nature of your descriptions/cues,moreso if they are not supported by careful observation.

The area of concern I have is your description of the "golden moment" in "linear" terms.Hitting and golf are somewhat different,and in the case of hitting,my observation shows that before this "linear appearing" action can happen,the lower/middle body is already rotating.The entire rotation body is going forward a little bit which is what appears "linear".This assists in loading the body,resembling the last bit of flex("separation") before the body arches/uncoils to transfer it's energy to the turning bat.The axis of rotation must be set when the torso then starts turning(approximately front heel down)and the axis must be leaning back slightly when it is set(so the head should not get forward as the entire body has moved forward before this.

The danger I see in describing the "golden moment" in partially linear terms is that it may prevent/inhibit the necessary sequence/beginning of body rotation.

Many of the cues the pros use make great sense once the underlying swing model is understood,and kids like the 'cues " of their heroes.

I personally like Gwynn's description of Bond's swing(USA Today)in terms of "pulling with the bottom hand" in a "flat plane" assuming you have made a good sequence of moves before this.I would agree with you it is the hips and arms that are sequentially useful cues,but historically,the best "cue" is hips and hands which is what the swing feels like once you learned("lucked into")the right mechanics between the two.

Seing this stuff reqires multiple angles and many frames per second across a number of successful hitters/sports.