Posted by: jcontrada (jcontrada@msn.com) on Tue Jan 14 04:30:57 2003

Look, maybe I'm just missing something here, but I'm just trying to understand where all this linear talk comes from, esp. in regards to Lau? Also, what's the big difference between Lau's book, and William's book, as far as stride and linear movement are concerned? Am I suppose to interpret "stride", "and linear", as being synonymous? If that's the case, then they're both linear thinkers, since they both advocate stride?And, maybe it's just me, but Lau seems to get scuffed around in here a little bit, but not Williams, hands off.Seems to me that no one wants to for one second, be the guy that says a 400 hitter didn't get it right regarding his theories.I've read both books many times, and to me,the main difference between the 2 books, is that, as everyone knows, Williams preached a slight arc in the swing, re. pitch trajectory. But,he himself, was the first to say it created a loop, you had to be quicker with the bat.As we all know re. Lau, he wanted to cover the plate more,"down and thru". Look for the ball away, and react inside.But, the bare bone mechanics of the theories re. stride, are very similar.

I think this site is a wonderful outlet for folks that love the game. I just feel that sometimes it sounds as though an attempt to re-invent the wheel is made often.I just wish sometimes that folks would recognize the positives of Laus book, as opposed to trying to dispell some of it.Is it for everyone? Of course not, but that's the case with anything in life.

Thanks for allowing me to be long winded, and keep up the good work.

John.