Posted by: Marcus (shawnhbk716@aol.com) on Sat Sep 29 18:58:16 2007

> Hi all,
>
> In Melvin’s latest post, he suggests that Mike and I like to photocopy ideas indigenous to others, and present them as our own. He implies that, since both of the named culprits possess no original ideas, they must steal theories. I will end this accusation right now, and prove contrariwise, by showing how Jack, Mike, and I have all embarked upon ideas that will allow hitters to ameliorate.
>
> The most obvious crusader of rotational mechanics is Jack, who exposes the banality of linear propulsion during the swing. Once a person realizes why Jack’s argument is de facto to generating optimum bat-speed, that individual can compare his or her swing to the Mechanics Page on Batspeed.com. More than likely, the person will make the necessary adjustments to improve.
>
> Mike, another staunch supporter of circular movements, makes his contribution to hitting by reducing the amount of time required to acquire such a swing to about a week. His vehicles for ingraining the proper muscle memory necessary for completing the task are the Torque and Number Drills. As a result, the learner will improve over a shorter time using Mike’s ideas.
>
> Finally, my philosophy encourages everybody, irrespective of size, to understand what he or she did right on a specific swing to allow it to clear the fence. I believe that if a batter only hits nine home runs in a season in 500 AB (we are assuming all pitches are videotaped a side-view)—but on pitches in every part of the strike zone—there is no reason why that person should not watch those swings on the VCR, and practice until he or she can hit pitches in different strike zone locations out of the park on a consistent basis. Eventually, this individual will develop into a home run treat, capable of knocking out 1 home run, every 14 turns AB.
>
> In the end, Batspeed.com posters should note that Jack, Mike, and I all embrace rotational mechanics. Nevertheless, each postulates a way of improving hitting unimagined by the other theoreticians. Hence, Mike and I are not thought thieves, but people with theories that complement the philosophies of others rather nicely.
>
> Sincerely,
> BHL
> Knight12885@aol.com