Recent swings

[hiddengem]

Here are some Recent swings from the past few weeks. Thought I'd put them up here so Tom could tell us how bad they are.:D

Here are a couple of HR's from the same night.
Change Up
http://img10.picsplace.to/11/DMSacHR.gif (http://picsplace.to/)
Slider, Middle/down
http://img10.picsplace.to/11/DMsacHR1.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[hiddengem]

Here is a Home Run that traveled about 410 to left center. This guy is a great hitter with a ton of power to all fields.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/CustHR.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[Comm]

Here are some Recent swings from the past few weeks. Thought I'd put them up here so Tom could tell us how bad they are.:D

Here are a couple of HR's from the same night.
Change Up
http://img10.picsplace.to/11/DMSacHR.gif (http://picsplace.to/)
Slider, Middle/down
http://img9.picsplace.to/img9/15/DMsacHR1.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

I see good rotation, however, it breaks down...... It also seems that his arms are pushing at the ball into a V. It could just be that he was fooled by a pitch.

[Comm]

Here is a Home Run that traveled about 410 to left center. This guy is a great hitter with a ton of power to all fields.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/CustHR.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

Awesome rotation, keeping behind the ball and rotating around an axis.

[jbooth]

I see good rotation, however, it breaks down...... It also seems that his arms are pushing at the ball into a V. It could just be that he was fooled by a pitch.

Yeah right. He got fooled and hit it out of the park. Geez!

He's not pushing the bat. His front arm extended because the pitch was low. The extension was very late. The angular momentum was already generated by his excellent act of keeping the hands near his back shoulder and the 90 degree bat/forearm angle for a long time before he extended the forearm into the ball. Also, you may note that the weight is off of his back foot at contact, meaning he rotated all of his weight into the ball.

If he was fooled so much that he pushed the bat as you say, I guarantee the ball would not have gone out of the park.

I've seen him hit a 5o mph BP pitch 420 feet to left center. I doubt that he pushes the bat.

[jbooth]

Awesome rotation, keeping behind the ball and rotating around an axis.

Yep, and the force from his rotation moved all of his weight onto the front foot. Note that his back foot is unweighted at ball contact.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/CustHR.gif

[Ohfor]

You can't have it both ways Jim.

These two swings are vastly different.

One is very high level. The other has a flaw.

[Mark H]

Arms do look odd but I count a four frame swing.

[tominct]

Yep, and the force from his rotation moved all of his weight onto the front foot. Note that his back foot is unweighted at ball contact.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/CustHR.gif

PLease, some clarification...

Unweighted menas NOT weighted correct? That would mean 0% weighted, no weight whatsoever on the back foot....like this:

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro?z=9&c=4&n=1&m=24&w=4&x=0&p=17

I don't see anythign like this in Crust's clip.

Now, perhaps I am playing a semantics game here, but everyone is so very literal here, I might as well be too. From your post Jim I would assume that you belvie an UNweighted back foot is preferable to having any weight on it. Should we therefore teach our kids to hit in the manner of Roberto Clemente?

Tom

[tominct]

Well, I was meaning to copy the link to the Clemente clip. I guess I did something wrong.

Tom

[Ohfor]

Watch that rear foot really really closely.

[jbooth]

You can't have it both ways Jim.

These two swings are vastly different.

One is very high level. The other has a flaw.

They are different, and HG's is not "perfect", but he hit it out of the park, so what's the beef? And they are NOT, "VASTLY" different. They are more alike than you seem to understand.

You seem to think that there is only ONE way to apply enough forces to the ball, to get it out of the park. You are wrong.

[jbooth]

PLease, some clarification...

Unweighted menas NOT weighted correct? That would mean 0% weighted, no weight whatsoever on the back foot....like this:

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro?z=9&c=4&n=1&m=24&w=4&x=0&p=17

I don't see anythign like this in Crust's clip.

Now, perhaps I am playing a semantics game here, but everyone is so very literal here, I might as well be too. From your post Jim I would assume that you belvie an UNweighted back foot is preferable to having any weight on it. Should we therefore teach our kids to hit in the manner of Roberto Clemente?

Tom

You can try to understand the function or you can debate semantics. Sure his back foot has contact with the ground so it isn't 100% unweighted. I would venture that 99.99999% of the forces moving during rotation are being applied to his front foot. Should you teach to hit like Clemente? Why not, it worked for him.

There are a LOT of ways to hit the ball, you need to understand the underlying, important functions. There are several ways to swing, and there are many cues, and methods that can be used to accomplish any of the methods. Until you understand what the important things are, and that there are more than one way to execute them, you will not be the best teacher you can be.

[Ohfor]

They are different, and HG's is not "perfect", but he hit it out of the park, so what's the beef? And they are NOT, "VASTLY" different. They are more alike than you seem to understand.

You seem to think that there is only ONE way to apply enough forces to the ball, to get it out of the park. You are wrong.

Oh Boy....Here comes the cookie cutter argument. The "there is only one way" accusation...........even though their is no evidence of such.

Is this what they call a "straw man" arugment?

[hiddengem]

I see good rotation, however, it breaks down...... It also seems that his arms are pushing at the ball into a V. It could just be that he was fooled by a pitch.


What you guys need to realize is the only thing you are learning around here for the most part, is how to execute a swing that is perfect on a fastball perfectly timed. That is very evident by this comment and Richards. Jim(jbooth) is the one person around here that sees the big picture.

If I were to have just continued on with the rotation in these swings and not extended my hands and arms through these balls I would have simply hit a 17 hopper to 3rd base and or missed the ball completely. I find it funny that because of the good adjustment I made on these pitches, you say they are flaws.

Custs homerun was a fastball about 92 middle away. Go figure.

[hiddengem]

This was a 92mph fastball up and in a bit that I hit off the left center wall.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/DMMemphis.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[Jake83]

This was a 92mph fastball up and in a bit that I hit off the left center wall.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/DMMemphis.gif (http://picsplace.to/)


Keep your weight back and drive. Perfect example.

[Ohfor]

...If I were to have just continued on with the rotation in these swings and not extended my hands and arms through these balls I would have simply hit a 17 hopper to 3rd base and or missed the ball completely....

Unless of course, you tilted over and were able to rotate to those locations.

Keep up the good work.

[jbooth]

Keep your weight back and drive. Perfect example.

Please clarify "keep your weight back"

His back foot is dragging on his toe at contact. His upper body mass is "back" (centered between his feet), but the weight is and all the force from momentum of rotation is on his front foot.

[LClifton]

Jim(jbooth) is the one person around here that sees the big picture

I agreed with your hand strength comment.
In essence agreed with the "flat thru contact" argument.
And Jim is the "ONLY" one huh?
I personally think Jim is a student of the swing and a teacher of the swing,,,And I believe he does a good job at it.
But he is not the only one that sees the big picture.

LClifton

[Ohfor]

This was a 92mph fastball up and in a bit that I hit off the left center wall.

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/DMMemphis.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

Where is the tilt in any of these swings?

This swing is much better.

But, watch your shoulder rotation stop to allow the arms/hands to take over.

Compare your shoulder rotation to that of Cust..........or Bonds.........or Pujols.........or Manny.

The type of shoulder rotation you see from the other guys is quicker which allows another frame or two of read time. They hit the ball deeper than you do. Their shoulders go to contact ahead of the hands. Yours (shoulders) are behind them (hands). Their body is inside the swing arc. Yours is behind it. Their axis of rotation is like a merry go round's axis. Yours is like gear A turning gear B. Yours is like your hands pushing the merry go round.

Don't take my efforts in the wrong way. I'm thrilled to know you. I'm trilled to be able to talk hitting with you. I'm pulling for you.

I also recognize why you may not want to change things.

[Ohfor]

Check out Cust's hands and how they are almost "at his rear hip" at launch and they move to the ball with the rear hip. This is the ultimate connection.

This is also a key to both timing and hitting the ball deep.

Have you ever stood next to a catcher catching a pitcher in the bullpen? I imagine the answer is yes. Time your rear hip to ball arrival. Whether he throws a fastball, a changeup or any other pitch, it's easy to time with your rear hip.

Learn to fasten your hands there like Cust, and let the hip bring them around and you'll feel a tremendous ability to adjust to all the pitches.

[jbooth]

I agreed with your hand strength comment.
In essence agreed with the "flat thru contact" argument.
And Jim is the "ONLY" one huh?
I personally think Jim is a student of the swing and a teacher of the swing,,,And I believe he does a good job at it.
But he is not the only one that sees the big picture.

LClifton

I don't mean to speak for him, but I don't think he meant LITERALLY that I am the ONLY one. I think he was frustrated by the ignorance of some people who frequent this board, and that he meant; of the people he has spoken to and/or interacted with personally and/or privately from this board, I am high on the list of those that he thinks see the whole picture.

Yes, I am a student and teacher and I believe I have now gotten an understanding of the swing, that is beyond that of many here who seem to think they know it all.

[Ohfor]

...And they are NOT, "VASTLY" different...

If they aren't vastly different then HG should be able to do what Cust does and Cust should be able to do what HG does.

I say the over/under on each being able to swing like the other is 5 years.

These swings are vastly different.

Before you crown yourself "king of the hill" I suggest you still can't determine rotation from the center when you see it. And, that doesn't surprise me.

When one rotates from the center properly and the other does not, that is VASTLY different.

[jbooth]

Unless of course, you tilted over and were able to rotate to those locations.

Keep up the good work.

Why does he have to tilt, when his way got the job done? He didn't hit a 17 hopper, he hit a HR. He may also have hit a HR by doing what you say, but who cares when it scores a run?

Ted Williams never tilted the way you say hitters must and he did alright. There's more than one way to achieve the same result.

There are certain things that if done, and not changed, guarantee failure, but there are more than one way to achieve success.

[Ohfor]

Why does he have to tilt, when his way got the job done?...

Keep making ridiculous statements like this and I will officially dethrone you.

[Jake83]

Please clarify "keep your weight back"

His back foot is dragging on his toe at contact. His upper body mass is "back" (centered between his feet), but the weight is and all the force from momentum of rotation is on his front foot.


It is a saying that he let the ball enter the hitting zone and didn't lunge after it which causes pop ups or with good contact line drives foul.

[jbooth]

It is a saying that he let the ball enter the hitting zone and didn't lunge after it which causes pop ups or with good contact line drives foul.

OK, I agree with that.

"Stay back" is a saying that has been around for a long time and it is accurate, but it doesn't really mean what it says. It means keep the upper body mass centered between your feet, don't let it move over your front foot. It doesn't really mean "back" if you think of "back" as over your back foot.

[jbooth]

You can't have it both ways Jim.

These two swings are vastly different.

One is very high level. The other has a flaw.

Bonds' 661st HR seems to have a flaw, maybe you should tell him
http://firstpickclub.com/images/bonds661.jpg
http://firstpickclub.com/images/dmsachr1.jpg
Number 715 has a similar flaw, guess he's nearing the end his swing is so bad.
http://firstpickclub.com/images/bonds715.jpg

[fpdad]

It looks like Bonds upper spine is tilted more over the plate and the bat is perpendicular to the spine.
David looks more upright and his swing plane looks lower than his shoulder plane.

Bonds front arm looks like it's in the shoulder plane compared to Dave.
David's back arm is extended more also , but he is also hitting further out front.
When he initiates his swing the back elbow drops early, he stays upright, and his hands go to the ball.
I'd like to see other swings to see if this an adjustment for this pitch or a overall pattern.

[jbooth]

It looks like Bonds upper spine is tilted more over the plate and the bat is perpendicular to the spine.
David looks more upright and his swing plane looks lower than his shoulder plane.

Bonds front arm looks like it's in the shoulder plane compared to Dave.
David's back arm is extended more also , but he is also hitting further out front.
When he initiates his swing the back elbow drops early, he stays upright, and his hands go to the ball.
I'd like to see other swings to see if this an adjustment for this pitch or a overall pattern.

In 661 Bonds is tilted more because the pitch is low AND away, he is still extending his arms in addition to that, to get to the ball. Dave didn't need to tilt that much. Also, Dave has already made contact, Bonds hasn't reached the ball yet, his extension a frame later will look like Dave's.

In 715 Bonds' arms are fully extended even with his tilt. The point I was trying to make with these pics was to respond to a post about his arms being straight and that he pushed the bat. That isn't true, and extending the front forearm LATE in the swing, doesn't hurt you much.

Dropping the back elbow early isn't a big deal either, provided that the 90 degree, forearm to bat angle, is kept intact and the hands stay near the shoulder. He does that. There are flaws that will keep you from being succesful and their are flaws that are pretty insignificant.

Dave's swing might not be as good as Bonds' or Pujols', but whose is? How many players can do what those 2 can do? You don't need perfection to be successful. And even the MLB all-stars don't swing to perfection on every swing of every at-bat. Bonds and Pujols aren't hitting 1.000 or even .500. They make bad swings. The pitcher has a lot to do with most that.

It's one thing to point out flaws in a swing where the hitter is 0 for 6 with 6 K's and the flaw is causing the K's. It's kind of silly to point out flaws in a swing that produced 3 HR's two of them back-to-back. The flaws must not be THAT bad.

[Mark H]

I don't mean to speak for him, but I don't think he meant LITERALLY that I am the ONLY one. I think he was frustrated by the ignorance of some people who frequent this board, and that he meant; of the people he has spoken to and/or interacted with personally and/or privately from this board, I am high on the list of those that he thinks see the whole picture.

Yes, I am a student and teacher and I believe I have now gotten an understanding of the swing, that is beyond that of many here who seem to think they know it all.

You have come far and fast since the first day I read your stuff on eteamz. Being willling to question your own beliefs and dig is part of that. Actually teaching a lot of kids to hit is a huge advantage in accelerating your learning process as well. An advantage I can't claim in terms of total numbers. I would recommend your learning method to Tom. I couldn't be happier about the journey you have made. You're still a crusty bristly old buzzard, but you ARE a pretty darn smart buzzard.

[Mark H]

Why does he have to tilt, when his way got the job done? He didn't hit a 17 hopper, he hit a HR. He may also have hit a HR by doing what you say, but who cares when it scores a run?

Ted Williams never tilted the way you say hitters must and he did alright. There's more than one way to achieve the same result.

There are certain things that if done, and not changed, guarantee failure, but there are more than one way to achieve success.

I don't think HG was saying this was an ideal swing. I think he is saying it was an ideal adjustment when he got something different from what he was expecting.

I'll go look at some TW clips but if you are suggesting there is another ideal way to find swing plane beside posture, I would suspect you are letting your irritation with Ohfor override your knowledge base.

[Mark H]

OK, I agree with that.

"Stay back" is a saying that has been around for a long time and it is accurate, but it doesn't really mean what it says. .

I know what you are saying but you have to admit this sentence is hilarious.

[fpdad]

Then Dave is successful at his level in spite of any flaws? Or as you say thery're not that important.
He seems to very athletic, in that he drops his back elbow a lot without this torso turning, even through toe touch, heel plant and after and then he rotates very quickly.
Will this cost him at a higher level of pitching or is already able to play at the highest level? Is he in the majors?
My kids couldn't get away with what he does.

[Mark H]

Keep in mind the difference between the ideal swing and ideal adjustment when fooled and keep in mind it's a four frame swing.

[fpdad]

So his quickness saves him?
And quickness is the goal, rather than what we may think is flawed?
Wouldn't his back arm dropping add into his frame count?
Or do you count from first torso movement?

[jbooth]

Then Dave is successful at his level in spite of any flaws? Or as you say thery're not that important.
He seems to very athletic, in that he drops his back elbow a lot without this torso turning, even through toe touch, heel plant and after and then he rotates very quickly.
Will this cost him at a higher level of pitching or is already able to play at the highest level? Is he in the majors?
My kids couldn't get away with what he does.

He is currently with Triple-A Portland (Padres affiliate), but he spent a little time in MLB with the Astros, and a bit of time with the Angels, and was in spring training this year with the Padres. The Angels organization practically forced him to get his back elbow down early. They said, "Do it that way or else." He is trying to fix that, but as I said, that move alone and not done in a "bat drag" manner is not a big deal.

[jojab]

Where is the tilt in any of these swings?

This swing is much better.

But, watch your shoulder rotation stop to allow the arms/hands to take over.

Compare your shoulder rotation to that of Cust..........or Bonds.........or Pujols.........or Manny.

The type of shoulder rotation you see from the other guys is quicker which allows another frame or two of read time. They hit the ball deeper than you do. Their shoulders go to contact ahead of the hands. Yours (shoulders) are behind them (hands). Their body is inside the swing arc. Yours is behind it. Their axis of rotation is like a merry go round's axis. Yours is like gear A turning gear B. Yours is like your hands pushing the merry go round.


Well done, Richard. I think you are exactly right in what you are seeing. You have an unique ability to break down a swing.

Jim - As Ohfor notes, HG is not just doing this on the pitch he was fooled on but also on the fastball. There is a difference in what he's doing and what Cust, Bonds, Pujols and Manny are doing.

Your comment that Dave's swing might not be as good as Bonds and Pujols but "so what" seems to miss the point of Ohfor's comments. If there is something they are doing differently than Dave, then he, perhaps in the offseason, may want to experiment with it in an effort to improve himself.

[chesspirate]

The Angels organization practically forced him to get his back elbow down early. They said, "Do it that way or else." .

Hey Jim (or better yet HG) i'd like some elaboration here, does the organization as a whole have an opinion on the back elbow?

[jbooth]

Where is the tilt in any of these swings?

This swing is much better.

But, watch your shoulder rotation stop to allow the arms/hands to take over.

Compare your shoulder rotation to that of Cust..........or Bonds.........or Pujols.........or Manny.

The type of shoulder rotation you see from the other guys is quicker which allows another frame or two of read time. They hit the ball deeper than you do. Their shoulders go to contact ahead of the hands. Yours (shoulders) are behind them (hands). Their body is inside the swing arc. Yours is behind it. Their axis of rotation is like a merry go round's axis. Yours is like gear A turning gear B. Yours is like your hands pushing the merry go round.

Don't take my efforts in the wrong way. I'm thrilled to know you. I'm trilled to be able to talk hitting with you. I'm pulling for you.

I also recognize why you may not want to change things.

Your comparisons are valid, but I think you're missing the point. HG is showing you a swing that had a good result that may not be his best swing. The swings that many of us post and analyze here, of Bonds and Pujols etc, are usually swings we got from the pro media of HR swings they made on mistake fastballs.

Do you have any swings of the "big boy" stars that are NOT perfect swings? Do you have any that are HR swings that don't fit the "perfect swing" category?

Let's compare apples to apples. Let's look at those swings and compare them to HG's, and hopefully HG will get a clip of himself making what he considers his best swing at a mistake fastball and we can compare that to the big stars' best swings.

The point HG and I are trying to make is; nobody gets off a "perfect" swing all that often in a game situation, and it is possible to get very good results, even on a less than perfect swing.

Sure, one needs to know what a perfect swing looks like, and how it works, and hopefully be able to execute one, but the main goal is to get on base.

I have recorded many episodes of Baseball Tonight's "Touch 'em all" segment, and analyze each swing. There are many HR's hit with swings that are not textbook perfect and from looking at more than one of a particular player's HR's, you can see that his swing is not always exactly the same, or perfect on each swing that resulted in a HR.

The VERY elite hitters who are the all-stars of the all-stars, such as Bonds, Pujols and Manny Rameriz make near perfect swings consistently, but the rest of the guys don't and there are a lot of players who are having and have had; long MLB careers who didn't hit for a super high average and/or hit a lot of HR's.

You can analyze a posted swing and critique it against a perfect swing, or you can critique it against criteria that can be successful.

Paul Nyman once asked seriously for an answer to the question; "How is it that a player can make a less than optimum swing and still hit a HR?"

I believe I know, and Paul was stumped because he is too hung up on believing that the body must move according to his analysis of the physics of it, or it won't work. He's wrong.

You have a very good understanding of what a good swing looks like, and you can recognize the differences between that and someone's swing that doesn't match what you know is best, but I don't think you REALLY understand how the parts work and which ones are important versus those that are insignificant. I get the impression that it is "all or nothing" with you. You think a player can't be successful unless their swing looks like the one you know to be perfect.

[Ohfor]

The following has little to do with HG and a lot to do with jbooth.

Jim

Your series of posts tonight, including the stills of Bonds, shows you aren't anywhere near the top of the hitting ladder. You're foot is reaching for the first rung.

Not that I'm that far ahead of you. But....

My comments have everything to do with two things. HG still doesn't rotate from his center as well as Cust and the other mlb players mentioned. And, he doesn't have the proper tilt which would help him handle the strike zone and it would provide more of a "load" to quicken the swing. A result of all of this is his shoulder rotation is inadequate and he swings with his arms. It also offers insight into his "strong hands" belief.

In response to my comments about tilt and rotation from the center, you post clips showing Bonds arms extended to reach pitches and then say "see, nana nana boo boo". "Barry extended his arms".

I made no mention of HG's arm extension.

On every clip shown, he has incomplete shoulder rotation and his arms take over. That is a result of poor rotation from the center. Compare him to Cust and see what rotation from the center looks like.

I enjoy HG's company. I acknowledge I've never played at his level. Neither have you. I think he helps all of us learn. The difference between me and you is you're in awe of his "position" as a professional player. I am also. But my "awe struckness" doesn't override my ability to analyze and remain honest.

If all of these swings are "adjustments", fine. Show me the good swing to compare them to. I suspect every clip will show the lack of rotation from the center because when you rotate from the center and make adjustments, they look different than these swings.

HG is old enough, smart enough and has played enough to separate what he can use and what he can't. He can, probably will, and probably should ignore all that is said at this time. Changing mid season is not recommended. But, as a professional player, I doubt he is looking for what he's doing right. I bet he's looking for things that can help him. If he's smart he'll analyze what everyone has to say and use what he can when he can. The last thing he should want is gushing dishonesty from awestruck fans.

Mark

I'll bet a milk shake there is at least one frame missing.....in the area from lag to contact.

[hiddengem]

I don't mean to speak for him, but I don't think he meant LITERALLY that I am the ONLY one. I think he was frustrated by the ignorance of some people who frequent this board, and that he meant; of the people he has spoken to and/or interacted with personally and/or privately from this board, I am high on the list of those that he thinks see the whole picture.

Yes, I am a student and teacher and I believe I have now gotten an understanding of the swing, that is beyond that of many here who seem to think they know it all.


This is what I meant. Sorry if I offended you Clif.

[hiddengem]

Does anybody have clips of Rob Quinlan. he's got a right down "ugly" swing yet he hit .300+ every year in the minors and had a 25+ game hitting streak in the majors. I was there when the Angels tried to help him with his swing. He crapped the bed trying.

Any clips of Garrett Anderson or Cal Ripken? Lets look at some different hitters other than the standard Pujols, Bonds or Manny. Not everybody is gifted enough to do certain things that the "superstars" do.

[jbooth]

Jim

Your series of posts tonight, including the stills of Bonds, shows you aren't anywhere near the top of the hitting ladder. You're foot is reaching for the first rung.

That's your opinion. I have a current pro and and former MLB player who think differently. Your opinion has no value to me, but their's does. The former MLB player brings his 11 year-old son to me. He's managing the league's 11yo All-star team and he asked me to help him. Got anybody like that asking you for help?

Not that I'm that far ahead of you.

You're probably NOT ahead of me. But that's MY opinion and I don't care what you think of it. I have no respect for you as a person or a teacher, and my only regret is that I broke my vow to myself to never respond to any of your posts.

In response to my comments about tilt and rotation from the center, you post clips showing Bonds arms extended to reach pitches and then say "see, nana nana boo boo". "Barry extended his arms".

Yeah, because it isn't just about tilt. It's tilt and sometimes arm adjustment in addition.

The difference between me and you is you're in awe of his "position" as a professional player.

You don't know anything about me, if you did, you'd know that I'm not awestruck by anybody, and my first communications with HG on this board were to tell him he didn't know what he was talking about on the hands topic. He is a cool enough guy to have forgiven me for not being awestruck, and we now talk often.

But, as a professional player, I doubt he is looking for what he's doing right. I bet he's looking for things that can help him. If he's smart he'll analyze what everyone has to say and use what he can when he can.

That's exactly what he's doing. Just so happens he agrees with a lot of what I have to say. Are you jealous, you jerk?

[hiddengem]

I see good rotation, however, it breaks down...... It also seems that his arms are pushing at the ball into a V. It could just be that he was fooled by a pitch.


Why does it have to be that I'm "pushing" at the ball? Why can't it be that I'm "letting" my arms extend to the ball rather than holding them in. If these were fastballs and I wasn't out in front, I'd hold my hands and arms in closer rather than letting them extend to contact.

[hiddengem]

Hey Jim (or better yet HG) i'd like some elaboration here, does the organization as a whole have an opinion on the back elbow?


Yes, they want the back elbow coming down early and getting into their side. There are quite a few great hitters in the organization that have alot of success doing it.

[Jake83]

Yes, they want the back elbow coming down early and getting into their side. There are quite a few great hitters in the organization that have alot of success doing it.


Is that because they want players to drive the ball into the gaps at Petco instead of swinging for the fences

[hiddengem]

Is that because they want players to drive the ball into the gaps at Petco instead of swinging for the fences

This is Anaheim we're talking about.

[hiddengem]

...........

[Jake83]

This is Anaheim we're talking about.


Mickey Hatcher is a joke of a hitting coach and if any information comes from him I would turn away.

[hiddengem]

Mickey Hatcher is a joke of a hitting coach and if any information comes from him I would turn away.

Excuse me? Have you ever worked with Mickey Hatcher? Do you have some sort of first hand knowledge you could share with us?

[Jake83]

Excuse me? Have you ever worked with Mickey Hatcher? Do you have some sort of first hand knowledge you could share with us?


I have heard him speak numerous times on his theroies of hitting and he is someone who thinks practice is more important than changing a hitter's approach. Which is fact compounds certain Angel hitters problems at the plate alas....Dallas McPherson someone who should and could become a 300 hitter and Lead the league in homers instad of looking like another Rob Deer.

[hiddengem]

Dallas McPherson someone who should and could become a 300 hitter and Lead the league in homers instad of looking like another Rob Deer.

Thats all I needed to hear...thanks.

[Jake83]

Thats all I needed to hear...thanks.


You played with him at SLC last year you have an idea of his upside. He looks like a young Jim Thome a Player who almost strikes out, walks or homers every time at the plate

[hiddengem]

You played with him at SLC last year you have an idea of his upside. He looks like a young Jim Thome a Player who almost strikes out, walks or homers every time at the plate

no comment.

[GuitarMan]

I'm an idiot. I'm in Portland on business, and I've been just sitting around tonight not doing much and I just realized that I could have gone to the Beavers game. D'oh!

[Jake83]

I'm an idiot. I'm in Portland on business, and I've been just sitting around tonight not doing much and I just realized that I could have gone to the Beavers game. D'oh!


Just about the only option in Portland

[Ohfor]

...my only regret is that I broke my vow to myself to never respond to any of your posts.

Maybe I can help you........It's the facts that bothered you.

You made ridiculous statements, you were called on them, the facts were against you, and you had to try to save face.

Just like you're trying to do here. After all, "I'm Jim Booth" (as in Denny Crane).

[Ohfor]

...

Any clips of Garrett Anderson or Cal Ripken? Lets look at some different hitters other than the standard Pujols, Bonds or Manny. Not everybody is gifted enough to do certain things that the "superstars" do.

http://www.teachersbilliards.com/andersonside1alr.gif

http://www.teachersbilliards.com/anderson_garret_opt.gif

Garret Anderson (http://www.teachersbilliards.com/anderson_garret.mpg)

I don't have any clips of Ripkin.

I see the Cardinals on a regular basis. From David Eckstein, to So Taguchi, to Aaron Miles and John Rodriquez (none superstars) ALL of them rotate from their center.

Juan Encarnacion is pitiful this year. I'd like to know who he's been listening to or if he simply forgot how to swing. They ought to be comparing his swings from his days with the Reds to now. It is completely different.

As for a major leaguer with a bad swing I think Scott Spezio has to be near the top of the list. Another "athlete" who can get it done with less than optimal mechanics.

[jbooth]

Maybe I can help you........It's the facts that bothered you.

You made ridiculous statements, you were called on them, the facts were against you, and you had to try to save face.

Just like you're trying to do here. After all, "I'm Jim Booth" (as in Denny Crane).

Facts as you see them, and you still don't get the point, and I don't have enough respect for you to bother debating it with you. Nor, do I want to debate with a guy who responds more with personal insults than well presented justification for his beliefs and has tunnel vision, unopen to any ideas contrary to his. The statements weren't ridiculous, you just can't see the point of them.

I'm not trying to save face. I see no reason why I have to. You don't intimidate me, you jerk, you just aggravate me. I can fix that by doing what I was doing before yesterday, just ignore you.

[GFK]

I see good rotation, however, it breaks down...... It also seems that his arms are pushing at the ball into a V. It could just be that he was fooled by a pitch.

Within the early Setpro forums, there was a discussion of the swing starting as a flail and ending in a whip by extending into contact. The swing was still powered by rotation because the hitter would rotate into extension. The method of flail-whip was not presented as an absolute but as a form used by some high level hitters. Sosa and Mac were given as examples.

It seems to me both hiddengem and #29's swing go from flail to whip and not pushing at the ball into a V. As I remember it, Fungo22 started the thread. He may have more input and knowledge regarding the idea of flail transitioning to whip.

(No I don't think I am dead on. I reserve the right to be wrong and get smarter.)

Ohfor, thanks for the Anderson clips!

[fungo22]

What you guys need to realize is the only thing you are learning around here for the most part, is how to execute a swing that is perfect on a fastball perfectly timed. This is correct for the most part. But we are also learning a swing that is quick enough to "wait longer" so that something other than a fastball might be picked up ... but still get around on a fastball.

Jim(jbooth) is the one person around here that sees the big picture. I'm not so sure about that. It may be that he talks about it more when that is what you want to talk about. We are not so focused on the "big picture." For the most part, the little picture of teaching good PCR is all we can handle. It is enough for now, I think. Hitting coaches with more experience at the higher levels are more qualified than us to help out with the big picture.

If I were to have just continued on with the rotation in these swings and not extended my hands and arms through these balls I would have simply hit a 17 hopper to 3rd base and or missed the ball completely. I find it funny that because of the good adjustment I made on these pitches, you say they are flaws. I must admit that this is true. I think all three swings start out pretty good (in the "efficient" and "optimal" sense) - which I believe is what enabled you to generate the momentum necessary to hit the ball as well as you did even though you had to extend your arms and "give up" your rotation toward the end (i.e, make adjustments).

A couple more words on issues related to the "big picture." Another reason we don't talk about adjustments off the "optimal swing" is that some things just can't be taught - at least by most of us. Hitters at the higher levels have efficient swings which, for the most part, exhibit PCR. We can teach PCR, but some things that hitters at that level do are beyong our ability to teach. Some things depend on strength, some things depend on experience and good instincts, and some things depend on talent and athleticism. If we fail to sufficiently discuss these adjustments, it is because they are beyond our control. We tend to focus on only those things that we can have an influence on. PCR is within that sphere of influence. The other things in addition to PCR are not. It doesn't mean we don't appreciate the "big picture," including adjustments and compensations made by strong and gifted hitters with good instincts. It just means it is beyond our sphere of influence.

Concerning the "little picture," however, I think there are several on this forum who have a better understanding of what constitutes an efficent or "optimal" swing and how to develop one than most with high-level coaching and playing experience. I'm not sure whether Jim Booth is among them, but he does seem to have a better understanding than when he first blustered into h-m.org.

I've used an editorial "we" a lot in this post. Perhaps I'm just talking about myself. Keep up the good work HG.

[Ursa Major]

Gee, Ohfor, JBooth keeps his head low for several month, and once he pops back in you feel you need to shoot it off, rather than sticking with the purpose of the thread and look and learn regarding HG's swings. Is there some leftover baggage from Hitting-mechanics.org or something?

Jim did not try to anoint himself "king of the hill"; if anything, he tried to modestly deflect HG's accolade. And Jim is one of the few people on the boards I've seen who both exhibits high level knowledge and a fierce desire to challenge old prejudices to advance his knowledge. I don't talk to him but every few months, but -- when I do -- he's never more excited than when he's picked up a new way to understand or teach a facet of hitting or correct a hitting flaw. And, he tests it out with students.

I do give some credence to HG's assessment of Jim's knowledge -- apart from what he says in the forums -- because HG has actually sat down with Jim and talked hitting with him in person. So have I. Have you?

Anyway, you're so fired up to disagree with Jim that I think your judgment has been a little clouded. For example:
Where is the tilt in any of these swings?I think the tilt is just fine. It's hard to see from the side angle, but he does a little last minute fall, then straightens up just after contact. Compare his tilt on the low slider to that on the higher pitches. He certainly has more tilt than Anderson does in the game clip posted above. Part of the intriguing thing about HG's swing and how it has changed over the past six months is how little his swing seems to change from pitch to pitch and location to location, but he's still perpendicular to his spine.But, watch your shoulder rotation stop to allow the arms/hands to take over.I don't think it stops. He stays inside the ball a little more than Cust, giving up a little in pop to make sure he makes better contact. I think also we're seeing what HG has been trying to explain over and over; when you're facing high level pitching coming at you with motion and three or four different speeds, the hands are going to have to play a more prominent role in adjusting to speed and location than they would for a high school hitter. And the hands can, because his hands and arms are stronger than a high school kid.If they aren't vastly different then HG should be able to do what Cust does and Cust should be able to do what HG does.Well, that's about the dumbest thing you've said in a long time. To start with, I agree with Jim that the key differences between Cust and HG aren't so pronounced; they finish much differently, but that's after-contact style. But go ahead and take us through them, if you think it's important.

I'm not sure what you mean by your comment that Cust and HG should be able to do what each other does. If I can perfectly mimic Pujols' swing, should I be able to hit major league pitching? If Cust and HG do have differences, Cust outweighs HG by 60 pounds and HG hits in a different spot in the lineup, with a different role in the team's offense. Even so, Cust has homered every fifteen at-bats and HG every eighteen. I'd say it's pretty close on that score notwithstanding their size difference... So, what's your point?

[dannyboy]

fungo,

while adjustments and compensations made by strong and gifted hitters with good instincts can't be taught, I don't think it is beyond the ability of a coach to influence.

[MSandman]

I don't think it stops. He stays inside the ball a little more than Cust, giving up a little in pop to make sure he makes better contact.

http://members.cox.net/sandmanbaseball/HG%20vs.%20Cust%20-%20shoulder%20rotation%20near%20contact.gif

http://members.cox.net/sandmanbaseball/HG%20vs.%20Cust%20-%20shoulder%20rotation%20near%20contact.jpg

[Ohfor]

...I think the tilt is just fine...

Now I have to question your intellectual honesty and "star stuckness" or your ability to analyze swings.

HG has no tilt. Because he has no tilt his swing plane does not match his shoulder turn plane. Because his swing plane isn't perp to the spine, he can not adjust to pitches with his posture. He has to swing with his arms. Yes, he plays at a high level. Apparently very athletic. Good for him. Great for him. I'm pulling for him.

I'm also pulling for Jim to learn swing analysis. Now, I'm pulling for you.

Both you and Jim have "spoken the truth" before but now you ignore the truth. Why? Because he's your friend? Star struckness? Afraid to hurt feelings? Go ahead an enable him. I won't be a party to that.

You both have stepped on the wrong side of quality instruction. You have to offer honest evaluation or you're hurting HG, and every reader of this site.

As far as carry over from H-M site. In the last few weeks I've agreed with Jim many times. In fact, I don't remember the hitter but the swing was very similar to HG's. Jim was saying the same things I'm saying. I posted agreement. But, now that it's HG, now that a couple of balls were well hit, he can't see straight.

HG's results, although improved, will be inconsistent because his swing doesn't offer HG enough decision time. Every ball shown is hit out front. Check out the difference between where Cust hits the ball and where HG hits the ball. Probably a 2-3 foot difference. The time that takes is the difference between adjusting for pitch speed and location and not.

As I said before, maybe these are adjustment swings. Fine. Show me fastball down central. If I'm wrong I'll tell you I'm wrong. But the way these swings start lead me to believe they all start that way.

[fungo22]

Richard, I think the test of your posture (torso tilt) concerns would be to see how HG sets up for a fastball down in the zone or a downward moving pitch that he reads early enough to tilt (swoop) to hit. But in comparing the two hitters, it seems to me that there are two cases of adjustments made with the arms on the part of both hitters.

We've already discussed those made by HG, and his lack of tilt may be more a case of the pitch ending up at a location lower than that originally projected when his tilt/swing path was set. Consequently, he had to use his hands to adjust. We know this happens even with good hitters, :) meaning even the best hitters at the MLB level. We've seen clips of Arod and most recently Sweeney hitting the ball pretty will with hand/arm adjustments at the end (intead of with opitmal PCR). I'm not sure we've seen enough of HG's swings to identify his late disconnection as a swing flaw in these swings.

On the other hand, I believe that Cust's swing shows similar adjustments with the hands. The difference is that his adjustment is for a pitch that is higher than his original swing plane. Mark observed that he was doing something strange with his hands/arms. It looks like to me that his tilt and originaly swing path is for a pitch lower than the one he actually got and that he is compensating/making adjustments with this hands/arms.

Or so it seems to me.

[jojab]

Now I have to question your intellectual honesty and "star stuckness" or your ability to analyze swings.


I had the same thoughts when reading Ursa’s post. Since when is sitting down and talking with someone in person a precursor to analyzing a video clip of their swing? Since when do we ask where a hitter bats in the line-up or how much they weigh before offering up an opinion?

Ursa, you may not like Richard’s over the top approach but I’d challenge you to go back and find where his analysis of a swing has been off. He is often the first one to offer up an opinion when someone posts a clip. I can recall on another site where someone posted Upton’s swing clip with no identification of who it was and asked for an analysis. Richard stepped right up and said it was outstanding. He calls them like he sees them regardless of who is holding the bat.

[jbooth]

I had the same thoughts when reading Ursa’s post. Since when is sitting down and talking with someone in person a precursor to analyzing a video clip of their swing? Since when do we ask where a hitter bats in the line-up or how much they weigh before offering up an opinion?

Ursa, you may not like Richard’s over the top approach but I’d challenge you to go back and find where his analysis of a swing has been off. He is often the first one to offer up an opinion when someone posts a clip. I can recall on another site where someone posted Upton’s swing clip with no identification of who it was and asked for an analysis. Richard stepped right up and said it was outstanding. He calls them like he sees them regardless of who is holding the bat.

You're not getting the point any better than Ohfor and fungo22.

I agree that HG's swing at the ball was not the picture perfect, swing at a ball on a tee, swing. If you strictly want to analyze the swing by comparing what it looks like, to what a perfect swing looks like, then yes, it is not perfect.

There is more to HITTING, than just the SWING. One can make a perfect swing and not hit the ball, and also make a crummy swing and hit a HR.

Guys like Bonds, Pujols and Manny Ramirez have a gift and talent to make near perfect swings in games. MOST players even at the MLB level cannot do that.

I have a couple of students who have beautiful, near perfect swings from a mechanics point of view, and they can't hit for beans in a game. I have a couple of other students who have knocked it out of the park more than once and their swings are not as good as the other two.

HG's swing at the change up was flawed because he had to adjust to the pitch and in so doing his mechanics broke down a little bit, but the POINT is, the mechanics were still good enough to hit the ball out of the park. Now, if the catcher had told him a change up was coming, he probably wouldn't have had a breakdown in mechanics.

On the fastball he hit, the swing may not be perfect, but again, it was good enough, and maybe on a similar pitch later, he would hit it with a perfect swing.

The goal is to hit the ball, and every MLB player from Bonds on down, will sometimes make the adjustment to hit the ball, by tilting only, sometimes with arm adjustment only, and sometimes they will tilt more AND use an arm adjustment. The goal is to hit the ball! The reason they (including HG) can often get a good result even when they had to tilt more than they wanted and change their arm angles more than they wanted, is; they all START the swing correctly, and the adjustments are LATE in the swing. Tremendous forces have been applied and momentum generated, well before they have to adjust. The adjustment mostly just changes the direction of the momentum, it doesn't decrease it much if the adjustment is small.

Once a player has reached a high level of swing mechanic, whether he has success or not, depends on his ability to time the swing correctly and to make adjustments to get the bat on the ball. If those adjustments are minor because of good timing and a good start to the swing, the hitter will be a successful hitter. If he makes beautiful mechanical swings that are mistimed, and/or don't make the bat hit the ball, he's useless.

Obviously, the more beautiful your swing is (fundamentally sound), the better your chances for success are. And, you won't be successful at a high-level if you don't have a solid foundation of a swing.

Ohfor knows what a perfect swing looks like, and he IS good at finding the flaws and pointing out the differences between what is perfect and what the person in the clip is doing, but that doesn't make a hitter. I don't think he or most of the former H-M.org people really understand what's important and what's not, and how the mechanics actually relate to what happens to the bat, and how to be a successful hitter. All they know is what Nyman defined as a high-level swing and they don't really know how to make it happen. JMO.

If your goal is to make a swing that will hit the ball as far as you can make it go, then there are a lot of things that need to be done correctly. But, even in a HR derby contest, you don't get extra points for hitting it farther than your opponents, you just have to get more balls over the fence. In a game, the goal is to get a hit, and a HR would be nice, and to hit a HR sometimes you only need to hit it 330 feet. You can get a hit, and you can get a 330 foot HR without the swing having the components necessary to hit it 420 feet.

Again, I'm not saying that you ignore flaws and don't try to make your swing perfect, I'm just saying that some flaws will make you fail, and some flaws just mean you won't hit it 425 feet.

I think HG's frustration is from the fact that he forgot that the focus of this forum is on understanding what a perfect swing looks like, and how to learn how to execute it. He's looking for success as a hitter, not just looking to make his swing look perfect. Pro hitters all have pretty darn good swings, their ability to succeed or not, is based on the ability to make adjustments and hit the stuff the high level pitcher is throwing at them. They all hit great in BP, it's the ability to hit in a game that gets them a good paycheck.

[fungo22]

You're not getting the point any better than Ohfor and fungo22.
Did you read my post? You must not have gotten my point any better than Swingbuster typically gets it. I just read your entire post. I don't disagree with it. So which point among your pontifications do you think I failed to get, oh Sage and Seer of the Big Picture?

[jbooth]

Did you read my post? You must not have gotten my point any better than Swingbuster typically gets it. I just read your entire post. I don't disagree with it. So which point among your pontifications do you think I failed to get, oh Sage and Seer of the Big Picture?

Post #63 was a very good one. Post #68 was the one I was referring to. You did not get the point that his swing was not perfect because he intentionally changed it to adjust to the pitch. A flaw is something that is consistently wrong, that you need to fix. A game swing that isn't perfect doesn't mean you have an ingrained flaw, it just means you didn't swing perfectly on that pitch. Is his best swing perfect? Probably not. Did he have a flaw last year? Yes.

You made a very good point, (I got it), that the focus of the forum is on the perfect swing and not about the big picture of hitting. HG and I are on the same wavelength in that, we don't think there is only ONE way to move the bat to achieve success, and you don't HAVE to make a perfect swing, regardless of your theory of what a perfect swing is; in order to get a hit.

I haven't responded to all of your posts, but you have made some very good points recently, on several posts within several different threads.

[fungo22]

Post #68 was the one I was referring to. You did not get the point that his swing was not perfect because he intentionally changed it to adjust to the pitch. If you think I didn't get this point, then you need to reread both #63 and #68 where I acknowledged that this is what he was doing.

A flaw is something that is consistently wrong, that you need to fix. A game swing that isn't perfect doesn't mean you have an ingrained flaw, it just means you didn't swing perfectly on that pitch. Is his best swing perfect? Probably not. Did he have a flaw last year? Yes. I don't understand why you are defining the word "flaw" for me. But for the record, I agree with your definition. I'll reread my post again, but I don't recall claiming that HG's swing had a flaw.

You made a very good point, (I got it), that the focus of the forum is on the perfect swing and not about the big picture of hitting. HG and I are on the same wavelength in that, we don't think there is only ONE way to move the bat to achieve success, and you don't HAVE to make a perfect swing, regardless of your theory of what a perfect swing is; in order to get a hit. You and HG are not the only ones with access to that wavelength. We can be on the same wavelength without making a big deal about it. Post #63 was an attempt to explain why some of us might seem to ignore the wavelength under discussion. Circumstances dispose us to give more time and attention to a diffferent wavelength.

I haven't responded to all of your posts, but you have made some very good points recently, on several posts within several different threads. Thanx. Did you think any of them were funny?

[hiddengem]

The Reason I'm not as tilted, Richard, is because this pitch was in and up in the zone. I felt I did a pretty dang good job of adjusting my posture AND using my hands to stay on top of this fastball. I made contact on if not inside my front foot on an inside pitch, which is plenty deep in the zone. Custs, pitch was below his belt and middle away, which would call for a more tilted position. He too made contact on his front foot and in just about the same position as I.

[dougmac]

Now I have to question your intellectual honesty and "star stuckness" or your ability to analyze swings.

HG has no tilt. Because he has no tilt his swing plane does not match his shoulder turn plane. Because his swing plane isn't perp to the spine, he can not adjust to pitches with his posture. He has to swing with his arms. Yes, he plays at a high level. Apparently very athletic. Good for him. Great for him. I'm pulling for him.

I'm also pulling for Jim to learn swing analysis. Now, I'm pulling for you.

Both you and Jim have "spoken the truth" before but now you ignore the truth. Why? Because he's your friend? Star struckness? Afraid to hurt feelings? Go ahead an enable him. I won't be a party to that.

You both have stepped on the wrong side of quality instruction. You have to offer honest evaluation or you're hurting HG, and every reader of this site.

As far as carry over from H-M site. In the last few weeks I've agreed with Jim many times. In fact, I don't remember the hitter but the swing was very similar to HG's. Jim was saying the same things I'm saying. I posted agreement. But, now that it's HG, now that a couple of balls were well hit, he can't see straight.

HG's results, although improved, will be inconsistent because his swing doesn't offer HG enough decision time. Every ball shown is hit out front. Check out the difference between where Cust hits the ball and where HG hits the ball. Probably a 2-3 foot difference. The time that takes is the difference between adjusting for pitch speed and location and not.

As I said before, maybe these are adjustment swings. Fine. Show me fastball down central. If I'm wrong I'll tell you I'm wrong. But the way these swings start lead me to believe they all start that way.




Last year in "AAA" Cust hit .257 with 19 home runs and 75 RBI. He also walked 115 times which is good. He punched out 153 times which is not good and in almost 4000 AB's in the minor leagues, he has punched out once ever 3 AB's which is not good at all. If he really had a great swing to go along with the patience he shows at the plate, he would be in the big leagues, but he is basically a minor league Rob Deer. At least Deer hit his 200 home runs in the big leagues. In his 148 AB's in the big leagues he hit .220 with 5 home runs and 58 strikeouts. I will take David's swing anytime over Cust's.

[Ohfor]

Once a player has reached a high level of swing mechanic, whether he has success or not, depends on his ability to time the swing correctly and to make adjustments to get the bat on the ball.

Genius at work folks.

Duh.

And would a guy who has to start his hands early have an easier or a harder time timing pitches?

Would a guy who has to start his hands early have an easier or a harder time adjusting to location?

Would a player who launches his swing from his center have an easier time doing both?

You are right that someone doesn't get the point.

[hiddengem]

Last year in "AAA" Cust hit .257 with 19 home runs and 75 RBI. He also walked 115 times which is good. He punched out 153 times which is not good and in almost 4000 AB's in the minor leagues, he has punched out once ever 3 AB's which is not good at all. If he really had a great swing to go along with the patience he shows at the plate, he would be in the big leagues, but he is basically a minor league Rob Deer. At least Deer hit his 200 home runs in the big leagues. In his 148 AB's in the big leagues he hit .220 with 5 home runs and 58 strikeouts. I will take David's swing anytime over Cust's.

I appreiciate that Doug. You know whats funny, our roving hitting instructor is Rob Deer.

[jbooth]

You are right that someone doesn't get the point.

Yep, and it's still you.

[hiddengem]

And would a guy who has to start his hands early have an easier or a harder time timing pitches?

I don't know, I time pitches as good if not better than Cust. He miss hits balls and flat out misses balls just as much as I do. The only difference between him and I is that when he hits the ball square the ball goes alot further than mine. He's 60 lbs heavier than me.

[hiddengem]

http://members.cox.net/sandmanbaseball/HG%20vs.%20Cust%20-%20shoulder%20rotation%20near%20contact.gif

http://members.cox.net/sandmanbaseball/HG%20vs.%20Cust%20-%20shoulder%20rotation%20near%20contact.jpg

What are you trying to show here, Sandman? Cust has more of an uppercut, his axis is further back toward the catcher, his ball is down, my ball is up and I'm on top of the ball better than him.

[hiddengem]

Good Swing?

http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/Hill.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[Ohfor]

This is a better launch, one that allows better use of the shoulders with rotation from the center even though adjustment for a low pitch was necessary. Uses tilt and arm extension to get to this pitch.

This hitter is inside the bat arc, inside the merry go round, powering the swing with rotation from the center.

Sits to hit.

Hits the ball deep in the zone.

I would say good swing or at least on the way to one. Shows good signs.

I suppose you're going to say he's a pitcher.:D

[hiddengem]

This is a better launch, one that allows better use of the shoulders with rotation from the center even though adjustment for a low pitch was necessary. Uses tilt and arm extension to get to this pitch.

This hitter is inside the bat arc, inside the merry go round, powering the swing with rotation from the center.

Sits to hit.

Hits the ball deep in the zone.

I would say good swing or at least on the way to one. Shows good signs.

I suppose you're going to say he's a pitcher.:D

No, he's a decent hitting catcher, that tells me all the time he'd love to have my hand speed. I think he's hitting .240 or so. Because he lacks it, good fastballs often beat him. He's a great 5pm hitter however.

He doesn't time pitches better than me, actually worse. Doesn't adjust to locations better than me, actually worse. But his swing is better than mine, rotates from his middle better than me. How can this be?

[fungo22]

He doesn't time pitches better than me, actually worse. Doesn't adjust to locations better than me, actually worse. But his swing is better than mine, rotates from his middle better than me. How can this be? I realize that these are rhetorical questions, but we all admit that there is more to being a successful hitter at ANY level than having and efficient (PCR) swing. I mentioned some of those requisite/variables in another post.

The issue that most concerns me is not whether there is more to being successful than PCR. That is not disputable. The issue is - all variables equal - whether the hitter with good PCR stands a better chance of being successful. I suppose that question is rhetorical as well.

[Ursa Major]

Ohfor replied to my last post as follows:
"Now I have to question your intellectual honesty and "star stuckness" or your ability to analyze swings....
HG has no tilt. Because he has no tilt his swing plane does not match his shoulder turn plane. Because his swing plane isn't perp to the spine, he can not adjust to pitches with his posture. He has to swing with his arms....
But the way these swings start lead me to believe they all start that way."Well, I never professed to be an expert at analyzing swings, and just because I don't see everything the way you do doesn't make me intellectually dishonest. My points were directed to a couple of comments of yours that I felt were not entirely accurate. As to tilt, I think HG's own response speaks for itself. But, if you slow down the one swing where he was hitting a ball lower down (mid-thigh high), you'll see that he tilts during the swing so it looks like he is perpendicular at "contact", though I admitted it's hard for you or me to be 'right' or 'wrong' given the camera perspective.
http://s95294420.onlinehome.us/userfiles/DMsacHR1a.gif
So to go on and say that he starts all his swings "that way" without saying what "that way" is or addressing what adjustments he makes after the start certainly is not intellectually rigorous, even if it's not actually intellectually dishonest.

The problem in learning from you is that you seem to enjoy speaking hyperbolically to put others down, which calls into question the opinions that flow from them. That's the way that scientific inquiry works -- a pronounced bias by the scientist leads others to question his credibility. Credibility is lost when you speculate about matters of which you do not know, such as where you assume that I'm starstruck in dealing with HG; believe me, I've had a lot more intimate contact with folks (including athletes) a lot more famous than he is, thank you. If I have a bias its because he's uncommonly generous with his time and his devotion to sharing the game with others, including my son on the one occasion we met briefly. But I'm happy to call him on some of his flaws where I see them -- we've talked about his tendency to "walk away from his hands". But I just didn't see the two you mentioned. We've talked about tilt; please educate me on the "shoulder stopping" issue you raised.

Jojab said: Since when is sitting down and talking with someone in person a precursor to analyzing a video clip of their swing? Since when do we ask where a hitter bats in the line-up or how much they weigh before offering up an opinion?
Ursa, you may not like Richard’s over the top approach but I’d challenge you to go back and find where his analysis of a swing has been off. He is often the first one to offer up an opinion when someone posts a clip. I can recall on another site where someone posted Upton’s swing clip with no identification of who it was and asked for an analysis. Richard stepped right up and said it was outstanding. He calls them like he sees them regardless of who is holding the bat. Jojab, you missed the point about "sitting down with someone." Ohfor derided HG's conclusion that Jim Booth had pretty advanced knowledge about hitting. Ohfor obviously based his conclusion on what Jim has posted here, and I know that Jim (like many others) is frustrated that trying to explain hitting concepts via the written word is not always succesful. By contrast, HG has actually met Jim in person and they've talked hitting for several hours. So, I believe HG has insight about Jim's analytical skills that Ohfor does not. And, of course, HG has credentials that Ohfor does not.

I have no desire to go back and prove that Ohfor is wrong in his swing analyses in general. I too have defended his knowledge in the face of others complaining about his antics. I don't care about showing I'm smarter than he is in general and I never have professed to be, but I think I can offer specific observations and am willing to have him or others show me I'm wrong. Calling me names does not show me that. Taking a clip, breaking it down, and offering cogent analysis might.

And I'm not doubting Ohfor's willingness to lend his opinion. So do Swingbuster and TomG, but that doesn't necessarily make them geniuses. And I'm glad that he's willing to buck others to offer his own opinions. He's just gotta back it up.

[Ursa Major]

Fungo22 said: I realize that these are rhetorical questions, but we all admit that there is more to being a successful hitter at ANY level than having and efficient (PCR) swing. I mentioned some of those requisite/variables in another post.

The issue that most concerns me is not whether there is more to being successful than PCR. That is not disputable. The issue is - all variables equal - whether the hitter with good PCR stands a better chance of being successful. I suppose that question is rhetorical as well.You and Jim touch on some critical issues that really drive to the heart of what can and should be achieved by the discussions here. I disagree with Jim to the extent he truly believes that "the focus of this forum is on understanding what a perfect swing looks like." That's certainly not my goal and the goal of many of us who teach younger (say, under 13 year old) hitters. Your point really drives to the heart of what we can hope to achieve -- giving the hitter the basic framework (such as PCR) on which he or she can add the fine tuning that actually allow him or her to hit pitches with a desired result (line drives, home runs, whatever) thrown by a specific universe of pitchers in a specific competitive environment. This fine tuning includes adjusting to pitches thrown elsewhere or elsewhen you'd like to and what compromises you might have to make to be able to hit the highest percentage of pitches you're likely to see (and thus accept that you may hit poorly against pitching that you're not gearing toward). And, I think it's fair to say that a professional level ballplayer will have to make (and can make) more adjustments to pitches than will a 12 year old Little Leaguer, so a straight PCR model will have less applicability to him than to the kid hitter. This is why I laugh when certain people rush in to offer advice about a hitter's claimed hitting problems without knowing the age or playing level of that hitter.

So, I don't think the question "of whether the hitter with good PCR stands a better chance of being successful" "is rhetorical as well". For a ten year old, I'd guess the answer is a 95% probabability of being "yes". For a major leaguer, the answer is more complicated and likely to apply in a lower percentage of hitters, depending on your definition of "PCR". (E.g., does Ryan Howard hit with PCR, or is he just a big ox?)

[Ohfor]

Well, I never professed to be an expert at analyzing swings, and just because I don't see everything the way you do doesn't make me intellectually dishonest. My points were directed to a couple of comments of yours that I felt were not entirely accurate. As to tilt, I think HG's own response speaks for itself. But, if you slow down the one swing where he was hitting a ball lower down (mid-thigh high), you'll see that he tilts during the swing so it looks like he is perpendicular at "contact", though I admitted it's hard for you or me to be 'right' or 'wrong' given the camera perspective.
http://s95294420.onlinehome.us/userfiles/DMsacHR1a.gif
So to go on and say that he starts all his swings "that way" without saying what "that way" is or addressing what adjustments he makes after the start certainly is not intellectually rigorous, even if it's not actually intellectually dishonest.

The problem in learning from you is that you seem to enjoy speaking hyperbolically to put others down, which calls into question the opinions that flow from them. That's the way that scientific inquiry works -- a pronounced bias by the scientist leads others to question his credibility. Credibility is lost when you speculate about matters of which you do not know, such as where you assume that I'm starstruck in dealing with HG; believe me, I've had a lot more intimate contact with folks (including athletes) a lot more famous than he is, thank you. If I have a bias its because he's uncommonly generous with his time and his devotion to sharing the game with others, including my son on the one occasion we met briefly. But I'm happy to call him on some of his flaws where I see them -- we've talked about his tendency to "walk away from his hands". But I just didn't see the two you mentioned. We've talked about tilt; please educate me on the "shoulder stopping" issue you raised.

Jojab, you missed the point about "sitting down with someone." Ohfor derided HG's conclusion that Jim Booth had pretty advanced knowledge about hitting. Ohfor obviously based his conclusion on what Jim has posted here, and I know that Jim (like many others) is frustrated that trying to explain hitting concepts via the written word is not always succesful. By contrast, HG has actually met Jim in person and they've talked hitting for several hours. So, I believe HG has insight about Jim's analytical skills that Ohfor does not. And, of course, HG has credentials that Ohfor does not.

I have no desire to go back and prove that Ohfor is wrong in his swing analyses in general. I too have defended his knowledge in the face of others complaining about his antics. I don't care about showing I'm smarter than he is in general and I never have professed to be, but I think I can offer specific observations and am willing to have him or others show me I'm wrong. Calling me names does not show me that. Taking a clip, breaking it down, and offering cogent analysis might.

And I'm not doubting Ohfor's willingness to lend his opinion. So do Swingbuster and TomG, but that doesn't necessarily make them geniuses. And I'm glad that he's willing to buck others to offer his own opinions. He's just gotta back it up.

Simply unbelievable.

Your clip showing his position at contact and professing it shows tilt is unbelievable to me.

Do you know what and when and where the tilt should be visible?

Do you know the benefits of tilt?

I do not call extending the arms to reach a low pitch as evidence of tilt. That's quite a bit late.

[Ohfor]

...Calling me names does not show me that.

Pointing out the fact that you write and profess PCR and then talk the opposite when analyzing "a friends" clip is calling you names? Calling you intellectually dishonest is name calling? The only name calling I've seen in this thread comes from jbooth.

Taking a clip, breaking it down, and offering cogent analysis might.

Not if you don't pay attention. I've said nothing different about any other swing clip ever posted. I've said it hundreds of times. You've often agreed.

These swings are evidence of swing plane not matching shoulder turn plane. Which arguably could be ABSOLUTE #1. It's a clear indication of poor rotation from the center. Among other things. It effects his ability to be successful.

If my posts would have been about a 12 year old kid you'd have said "great post". If my post would have been about a high school kid you'd have said "great post". But......it was about a professional hitter who happened to go deep on these swings. Well, at every level, athletes have success without doing things in the optimal manner. I bet HG was highly successful as a kid, as a prep, as a collegiate etc. I also bet the success level decreased gradually as he went up the ladder. True for most everyone I guess. But, those that go the distance demonstrate not only outstanding athletic ability but also great mechanics.

Any discussion about the catcher, who swings pretty good, yet is no better than HG, would be better "framed" if we could compare him to himself. Him with the mechanics he has versus him with the mechanics HG has. That would be the only true analysis. Ask the catcher to hit by taking his hands to the ball and not rotating from the center. Asking him to abandon his good swing plane.

HG has different athletic abilities than this guy. Could this guy play second base? Could HG catch? Will HG ever hit with the power this hoss can muster? Will the catcher ever hit for the avergage HG might. Those athletic abilities are different. Each has his own genetic potential. Neither will reach it without great mechanics. Maybe the catcher has reached his. Maybe he has maxed out. Maybe he still needs to refine the mechanics some.

I don't believe HG has reached his potential based on the fact that he has some success with less than optimal mechanics (my opinion). Then again, considering what it takes to change, his age, and his level of "muscle memory" it may be his best option to continue on as is.

[jbooth]

The issue is - all variables equal - whether the hitter with good PCR stands a better chance of being successful. I suppose that question is rhetorical as well.

Anyone who wants to get to the top, must always strive for perfection and continuously work on their swing to get it to the best that it can be.

I'm not implying that you should just live with your little flaws just because you are successful, and yes, I believe that a hitter with good PCR stands a better chance than one who does not. However, just having good PCR doesn't guarantee that you will be successful.

Example of 2 hitters;

Hitter "A" has perfect mechanics, and hitter "B" is fundamentally sound, but not perfect, but he has great instincts, reactions and an ability to adjust, where "A" is not quite as good at that.

Off the tee, they will both hit great.

In soft toss, they will both hit great.

In BP you may start to see "B" hit the ball well more consistently, although "A" may whack some harder and farther than "B"

In game situations with a good hard thrower who has 4 pitches, "B" will probably get more hits.

Also, Ted Williams talked about style versus technique. There are more than one way to execute a swing and have it contain the components necessary to hit the ball and hit it hard. SOME (not all), of the Nyman followers seem to think that you have to swing exactly like his swing model, or you will never make it.

Hitters have different physical makeup and mental makeup and skill levels. To develop a good HITTER, not just a good SWINGER, you have to understand how the physics work, and the VARIOUS ways the body can produce the needed physics, so that you can devise a swing STYLE that fits the hitter, so that HE can be successful with HIS sytle, provided that that style still contains the necessary components.

You don't have to put your hands in one exact spot to load, you don't have to have one exact bat angle at load. You don't need one exact knee bend/spine tilt. You don't have to have one exact stride style.

AND, you have to be willing to adjust (let the technique breakdown) in some situations, to get a hit. The goal is to hit the ball, and get on base. They pay you if you can do that, and they don't much give a rats behind how you do it.

Certain things that you do will guarantee that you will fail when you get to the top level, but other things, although not necessarily "by the book", will still allow you to succeed at the top.

When you teach someone, they need to understand what is important and why it is important. They need to understand that they MUST accomplish certain things and do them in a certain sequence, but then you have to let them be athletes, and let them develop through trial and error, under your guidance, a way that THEY can execute the correct fundamentals.

[Ohfor]

Poppeycock.

I couldn't have demonstrated Jim's lack of ability to recognize what works and what does not work any better than his last post.

Let me translate his post...

Jim looks at the back of a baseball card and says....."this guy has a good swing".

Look at the numbers. Wow, he does things right.

He has no abiltiy to distinquish what all the greats are doing.

[jojab]

Ohfor’s analysis has really sparked some interesting discussion. We have Jim Booth explaining to all of us novices that he knows more than Nyman and the rest of us and that just having great mechanics won’t guarantee that the hitter will be able to hit. He even started a thread where he shows us hitters that are hitting HR’s with less than optimal mechanics. Gee, who would have thought that was possible? We have Ursa Major clamoring that Ohfor should use an analysis of a clip to make his point. We even have HG saying that he produces better results than some players with what could be termed better PCR mechanics.

IMO, in the rush to defend our beloved HG, the points Ohfor made in posts 21 & 22 are missed. He never said he didn’t like HG, that HG couldn’t hit, that HG was doomed to fail, etc. All he said was that HG had something going on that was less than the optimal for HG.

I know stills are often times difficult to rely upon in a swing analysis but read what he says here and look at comparison between HG and Pujols (this is the fastball swing of HG’s as that one looked the “best”) (note that their bats are in approximately the same place in these two swings):


“…watch your shoulder rotation stop to allow the arms/hands to take over.

Compare your shoulder rotation to that of Cust..........or Bonds.........or Pujols.........or Manny.

The type of shoulder rotation you see from the other guys is quicker which allows another frame or two of read time. They hit the ball deeper than you do. Their shoulders go to contact ahead of the hands. Yours (shoulders) are behind them (hands). Their body is inside the swing arc. Yours is behind it. Their axis of rotation is like a merry go round's axis. Yours is like gear A turning gear B. Yours is like your hands pushing the merry go round.

Check out Cust's hands and how they are almost "at his rear hip" at launch and they move to the ball with the rear hip. This is the ultimate connection.

This is also a key to both timing and hitting the ball deep.”

Go back and watch the clips very slowly, frame-by-frame. Answer these questions: What is powering the knob of the bat around the corner? Is it being driven from the middle?

[hiddengem]

I think one of the main reasons I stop the rotation of my shoulders and my arms tend to take over is because I cross stride. This comparison between me and pujols displays that to me, and probably me only because I know my swing and where I stepped. Also, the Pujols swing was taken directly from his side, my swing was taken from the end of the dugout toward first base.

My guess is that if I were to have stepped straight in this swing, I would better be able to rotate fully and correctly. This is something I've tried to shake but have a terrible time overcoming, I just don't feel comfortable doing anything different and my performance suffers.

Further, because I cross stride I tend to be pretty closed and anything on the inside, and I feel the need to pull my hands and arms in to get the barrell to the ball.

Is this optimum, obvioulsy not, but my athletic ability has allowed me to "adapt" to this and still have success at a high level.

[jbooth]

Poppeycock.

I couldn't have demonstrated Jim's lack of ability to recognize what works and what does not work any better than his last post.

Let me translate his post...

Jim looks at the back of a baseball card and says....."this guy has a good swing".

Look at the numbers. Wow, he does things right.

He has no abiltiy to distinquish what all the greats are doing.

You must be a real insecure person, and you obviously need to see a shrink, and to top it all off, you don't have much IQ either.

Your translation makes my point. You didn't get the point of the post at all. And whether you think so or not, I know what they do and how they do it and what makes the body move the bat, and the bat move the ball.

I don't look at numbers and assume the guy does it right. But, he must be successful however he's doing it, or he wouldn't have a card to look at. And your statement shows an idiotic thought process. What is "right" and why would "right" with low numbers be better than good numbers, doing what you think is wrong? The goal is to be successful and get good paycheck. It IS possible to do that without necessarily doing it EXACTLY according to what YOU think is "right."

If you don't see a response from me, to any more of your posts, it won't mean I didn't read them, or that I'm afraid to respond, it just means I'm ignoring you, which I did before, and should have continued to do.

Go ahead and talk me and everybody else down, so you can feel good about yourself, I'll just ignore you.

[Ohfor]

You must be a real insecure person, and you obviously need to see a shrink, and to top it all off, you don't have much IQ either.

Your translation makes my point. You didn't get the point of the post at all. And whether you think so or not, I know what they do and how they do it and what makes the body move the bat, and the bat move the ball.

I don't look at numbers and assume the guy does it right. But, he must be successful however he's doing it, or he wouldn't have a card to look at. And your statement shows an idiotic thought process. What is "right" and why would "right" with low numbers be better than good numbers, doing what you think is wrong? The goal is to be successful and get good paycheck. It IS possible to do that without necessarily doing it EXACTLY according to what YOU think is "right."

If you don't see a response from me, to any more of your posts, it won't mean I didn't read them, or that I'm afraid to respond, it just means I'm ignoring you, which I did before, and should have continued to do.

Go ahead and talk me and everybody else down, so you can feel good about yourself, I'll just ignore you.

Who's the one talking who down?

All you can do is offer stupid bull sh*t about the swing. It's required because of the statements you made earlier. Now, your hole is deeper and deeper and deeper. So, instead, to save face, you attack me.

Please talk about the swing plane issue. Or, the shoulders/hands relationship. Or, the rotation from the center.

We'll see who has the IQ on this stuff.

Will you post your clip of rotation where you use the wall while demonstrating? We plebes would like to see the maestro in action.

[dougmac]

I appreiciate that Doug. You know whats funny, our roving hitting instructor is Rob Deer.



David, Rob could run, throw and field well to go along with his tremendous power. He can still take a real good BP and hit balls a long way and is about 43-44 years old now. He is a good guy too that I see in the Instructional league in the fall. Say hi to him next time he is in town. He closed off his stride too, and would take balls and hit them 450 feet, but they would be 20 feet foul. If they moved the foul pole about 20 feet to the left, he would have hit about 400 home runs.:D

[ssarge]

It seems to be that at each step of the pyramid, there are fewer guys doing it differently - or that their degrees of difference (don't know how else to phrase it) are less. Giftedness evens out as the air rarifies, and mechanics become the trump card.

Assuming the validity of the assumption, this argues strongly to me to find the points of commonality (not difference) among those at the top of the pyramid, and attempt to make that the basis point for teaching kids. With that as a foundation, it would seem to me that the next step would be to determine the developmental process that will best accomplish learning those same points of commonality. And determine the cues and communication skills that will best enable a kid to assimilate the instruction.

Which obviously can vary by kid.

Accomplish all of that perfectly, and it's no guarantee. At best, it permits a shortening of the STILL necessary trial-and-error process.

But on the positive side, the simplicity of those points of commonality - and their relative effectiveness - generate some great early results. Which keeps a kid interested, motivated, and being given a continuing opportunity to play.


There are some things I personally have found less than helpful in the process. Regretably - this is not at all directed at David or others here who have played at a high level - the cues / comments of individual high level hitters are among those things I haven't generally had much luck with.

As is obviously demonstrable, most elite hitters don't describe their swing well or acurately. Perfectly natural that they would describe what they FEEL, and they do. But it often doesn't dovetail w/ reality that technoplogy can assist us to view.

Feelings are also individual. And the feelings of a world-class hitter aren't even close to those of a 12 year old just learning.

Finally, there is the challenge of communication. Those listening to the descriptions of elite hitters in order to themselves teach kids take those instructional words at face value. They have no other choice. It is fine to say - as some on this board do - that instructors are all trying to teach the same thing using different words. I DOUBT highly they are all trying to teach the same thing. But absent the "insider" hitting lexicon, folks listening are going to take the words to mean what the words mean in plain English.


HOW a great athlete accomplishes adjustment w/ a less than perfect swing is interesting to me. Understanding HOW the best HITTERS attempt to swing - in order that adjustments need to be less frequent - is VITAL to me. That is the basis point for teaching kids to hit, IMO. For obvious reasons, not the least of which is that adjustments are intuitive and reactive, may vary by hitter, and very difficult to "teach" (as opposed to developing through trial-and-error). But easier on all those levels if the foundation PERMITS the adjustments. Got to learn the foundation first.

Regards,

Scott

[hiddengem]

David, Rob could run, throw and field well to go along with his tremendous power. He can still take a real good BP and hit balls a long way and is about 43-44 years old now. He is a good guy too that I see in the Instructional league in the fall. Say hi to him next time he is in town. He closed off his stride too, and would take balls and hit them 450 feet, but they would be 20 feet foul. If they moved the foul pole about 20 feet to the left, he would have hit about 400 home runs.:D

Did you know of Robby's close call with Death? He had a blood clot in his wrist, that apparantly was pretty serious. He had surgery but still everything isn't right. He's a great guy and we've talking hitting quite a bit this year. Before his surgery I was told he was still impressive with the stick.

I've tried to fix my stride issue and when I step straight, it feels like I'm stepping toward third base and I have no chance on anything middle away. I just feel completely pulled off of everything.

[hiddengem]

Here is another shot of Cust hitting this offseason. No doubt he's got a nice swing.
http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/BPCust.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

This is also Cust demonstrating why he hits the ball like he does.
http://img10.picsplace.to/11/Custworkout.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[Ohfor]

What's his history? I've never heard of him until you posted. Where's he from? Sign out of high school? college? position?

Nice swing.

[hiddengem]

From Jersey, 1st Round Pick in or around 99 with the Dbacks out of high school. He's played in the big leagues for the Rockies, Orioles and possibly the Dbacks but not sure. He's an outfielder...used to be brutal out there. Lets put it this way, he has to hit in order to keep his job.

[dougmac]

1st round (30th overall pick) by the D-Backs in 1997. Has been called up by the D-backs in 01, the Rockies in 02 and the Orioles in 03 and 04.

[Ursa Major]

Ohfor said: Calling you intellectually dishonest is name calling? Well, that and "starstuck". (I think you meant starstruck.) Remember that I live in Berkeley, and them's is fighting words in our academic community. Sorta like calling someone a "Hilary Clinton liberal" in your part of Missouri, I'd imagine. The point is that you ascribe motives to others (or charge them with idiocy) for their opinions rather than simply addressing the merits of the opinions.
Pointing out the fact that you write and profess PCR and then talk the opposite when analyzing "a friends" clip is calling you names? Well, that's another problem -- ascribing to others opinions that they've never voiced. As I recall, all I said was that I thought his tilt was fine (as you claim he has no tilt) and his shoulders didn't "stop" (and sure, they slow down as HG agrees, but you were going too far to make your point). That doesn't mean I disagree with the theory of PCR.

Your penchant for hyberbole is another problem in getting to the merits of your opinions. After three swing clips, you seem to profess that HG has "no tilt". Your words. I showed a clip on a lower pitched ball that shows his head and shoulders lower during the course of the swing as he adjusts to the ball -- i.e., since his legs aren't bending, that must mean that his spine is tilting over. (You can use the top of the dugout behind him as a reference point.) That observation is wholly independent of what his arms are doing, so I don't "call extending the arms to reach a low pitch as evidence of tilt," as you think I do. I've conceded that I can't be sure from this vantage, but it seem physically impossible for the lowering of the head to occur without the spine tilting over (as it doesn't look like he just dipped his head). Please tell me what I'm missing here rather than asking me to define my terms and provide a discourse on the advantages of tilting.
If my posts would have been about a 12 year old kid you'd have said "great post". If my post would have been about a high school kid you'd have said "great post". But......it was about a professional hitter who happened to go deep on these swings.Certainly, your points would have more validity as to the swing of a younger hitter. But we were talking about a Triple-A level hitter. So, what's your point?

Anyway, as I said. I'm not here to prove you wrong. I don't learn anything from that. I'd rather get to the meat of what's right about everyone's analyses and learn from it. Perhaps you could benefit from such an attitude. (Jim too!) For example, the shoulder slowing/stopping issue that you raised is a good point, and I perhaps could have elaborated to give you credit for what is a correct observation poorly articulated. It did indeed give rise to a good discussion by HG of his "cross stride" problem.

If we can all calm down a little bit, we might even move the discussion to what seems to be the issue that logically next flows from that observation -- what effect does having the hands continue forward as the shoulders slow or stop in that fashion lend themselves to the Nyman/Mankin fishhook/angular displacement, etc.? Is it good, bad? For what age level? Kid hitters do that all the time to try to maintain bat control and increase their chances of making contact.

[Ohfor]

...what effect does having the hands continue forward as the shoulders slow or stop in that fashion lend themselves to the Nyman/Mankin fishhook/angular displacement, etc.? Is it good, bad? For what age level? Kid hitters do that all the time to try to maintain bat control and increase their chances of making contact.

Wow.

No wonder.

[Ohfor]

After three swing clips, you seem to profess that HG has "no tilt". Your words. I showed a clip on a lower pitched ball that shows his head and shoulders lower during the course of the swing as he adjusts to the ball -- i.e., since his legs aren't bending, that must mean that his spine is tilting over. (You can use the top of the dugout behind him as a reference point.)

Double Wow.

If there was evidence of tilt, the swing plane would match his shoulder turn plane. Or be very close to it throughout most of the swing.

Do you really believe it does?

Honestly?

Does this ring a bell?

http://www.teachersbilliards.com/cd301_Planes2_lr.gif

He does this to varying degrees in all three clips.

[Ohfor]

...rather than asking me to define my terms

Where?

But we were talking about a Triple-A level hitter. So, what's your point?


Triple wow.

[Ohfor]

...That doesn't mean I disagree with the theory of PCR.

Get with the picture. You write and profess PCR. Yet, a friend is not really PCRing and you say it's ok. Based on the results, I guess.

Then you use the video to say what's not there is.

Two options.

You don't really believe PCR is all that.

Or

You're ignoring your friends deficiencies.

[Ursa Major]

Wow...
Double wow...
Triple wow...
I guess having an adult conversation -- much less an intellectually valuable conversation -- with you is beyond the realm of possibility.
Yet, a friend is not really PCRing and you say it's ok.Please read what I've said several times. I'm not addressing your criticisms of his lack of PCRing except to note that it looks to me like -- in one facet in one swing -- he seems to do it, and to suggest you've gone a little overboard in saying that he never tilts. I'm not throwing him overboard by saying it's okay if he doesn't swing correctly. And I'm not addressing your other criticisms of his "PCRing".

[Ohfor]

...except to note that it looks to me like -- in one facet in one swing -- he seems to do it...

This is exactly what I'm addressing. Maybe a little study time is necessary.

It must be your belief that at or near contact he can suddenly tilt. In 1 or 2 thirtieths of a second. After he's moved his hands forward so that the body is now "outside the arc of the bat". Which means at the point in time when the arms have taken over. Good luck trying that.

I don't believe it's there at all (see above edited post).

I'll wait while you get Jim's message.

[Ohfor]

I guess having an adult conversation -- much less an intellectually valuable conversation -- with you is beyond the realm of possibility.


A good teacher has to meet his student at the student's level.

[jbooth]

No, he's a decent hitting catcher, that tells me all the time he'd love to have my hand speed. I think he's hitting .240 or so. Because he lacks it, good fastballs often beat him. He's a great 5pm hitter however.

He doesn't time pitches better than me, actually worse. Doesn't adjust to locations better than me, actually worse. But his swing is better than mine, rotates from his middle better than me. How can this be?

He's late on fastballs and his quickness isn't optimum because he doesn't get his hips started soon enough and he doesn't effeciently get off his back foot quickly enough. His SWING is good once it gets going (except for hips turning with the shoulders instead of ahead).

[Ohfor]

He's late on fastballs...

You're the best Jim.

See one clip and say he's late on fastballs. Plural.

[Ohfor]

...he doesn't get his hips started soon enough..

Well, well.

IF a hitter swings from his center, it's his hips that initiate the swing.

Are you saying something else starts his swing?.....and that his hips are late in relation to that?

Hmmm.

That would not be swinging from your center.

[jbooth]

I guess having an adult conversation -- much less an intellectually valuable conversation -- with you is beyond the realm of possibility.


Truer words have never been written.

[Ohfor]

Jim

Come on.

Now you're going to have to say you won't respond to me again.

For the third time in two days.:D

I really think you're avoiding the hitting issues you don't yet understand.

[Stealth]

Just curious if any of you who keep bickering back and forth ever played the game of baseball. You guys are bunch of 5 year olds!

Post your opinions and move forward - I get sick and tired of reading your bs, it ruins it for everyone. Get a life!

[fungo22]

And, I think it's fair to say that a professional level ballplayer will have to make (and can make) more adjustments to pitches than will a 12 year old Little Leaguer, so a straight PCR model will have less applicability to him than to the kid hitter. I don't see how the necessity and ability to make more adjustments makes PCR less applicable to professional level hitters. But perhaps I don't undertand what you mean by "applicability."

So, I don't think the question "of whether the hitter with good PCR stands a better chance of being successful" "is rhetorical as well". For a ten year old, I'd guess the answer is a 95% probabability of being "yes". For a major leaguer, the answer is more complicated and likely to apply in a lower percentage of hitters, depending on your definition of "PCR". (E.g., does Ryan Howard hit with PCR, or is he just a big ox?) I really can't believe that you think that a high percentage of hitters have a better chance of being successful without PCR. Unless I have completely misunderstood you, you're saying either that PCR are not qualities of the majority of MLB swings or that these qualities do not factor into the tremendous efficiency of their swings. I observed that raising the issue was rhetorical because I thought PCR was obviously one of the factors that set high-level hitters apart from the rest of the hacking riffraff. If you are denying this, then let's put on the gloves, counselor cause I think things are fixin' to "get just a little bit rowdy." (SSarge, I've got you on this one.)

[hiddengem]

Double Wow.

If there was evidence of tilt, the swing plane would match his shoulder turn plane. Or be very close to it throughout most of the swing.

Do you really believe it does?

Honestly?

Does this ring a bell?

He does this to varying degrees in all three clips.


Richard are you telling me that these 2 swings look the same?
Also, I'm curious as to why you can't have a professional conversation about something, without feeling the need to "Big League" those involved?

http://www.teachersbilliards.com/cd301_Planes2_lr.gif
http://img8.picsplace.to/img8/16/DMMemphis.gif (http://picsplace.to/)

[Ursa Major]

Thanks for the reminder, Stealth. I usually try to stay clear of these battles for just this reason, but I thought maybe I could learn if I was missing something about what this "tilt" stuff. It seemed simple -- (1) post clip, (2) ask someone to pinpoint what if anything I wasn't seeing. It didn't work that way for me. Quadruple wow, dude.

Instead, it somehow degenerated into -- "if you don't tell HG that his deficiencies are exactly what I , the king of Central Missouri pocket billiards, say they are, you're guaranteed to lead him into a life of misery, bad swings, and chronic athlete's foot, (or something)." Well, I'm going to back away from the debate -- since it's not going anywhere helpful, as you note. And, I'm not going to try to decipher and debate Ohfor's inconsistent mumblings about HG's swing, as I don't have delusions that I am qualified to offer comprehensive hitting advice to someone who's got the fifth highest slugging percentage on his Triple-A roster.

[hiddengem]

I don't have delusions that I am qualified to offer comprehensive hitting advice to someone who's got the fifth highest slugging percentage on his Triple-A roster.

..........

[jbooth]

Just curious if any of you who keep bickering back and forth ever played the game of baseball. You guys are bunch of 5 year olds!

Post your opinions and move forward - I get sick and tired of reading your bs, it ruins it for everyone. Get a life!

You're right. I let him get me out of control. It won't happen again.

[fungo22]

I don't have delusions that I am qualified to offer comprehensive hitting advice to someone who's got the fifth highest slugging percentage on his Triple-A roster. HG is doing relatively well, but in my opinion this sort of argument should be beneath you, counselor.

I don't particularly care for Ohfor's rhetoric and I'm sometimes confused about his substance (a little too much riddle-me-this for a simple, straight-forward mind like mine), but Ohfor's