Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Marshall's Straight Driveline??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Coach45
    replied
    The driveline we're working with scribes a more elliptical pathway and yes it's straighter.

    Leave a comment:


  • dm59
    replied
    Sounds great!! I'm guessing, though, that a straight driveline is not involved. Maybe straightER, such as elliptical, but not straight. Correct?

    Leave a comment:


  • Coach45
    replied
    Thanks for clarifying that velocity is the specific issue you're addressing. Although it's completely anecdotal I've got two nine year olds that I've been working with since about Christmas. Their catchers are now scared of them and teammates don't want to play catch with them, and it's not because they can't control the ball. One of the catchers keeps telling my little lefty not to throw so hard. It's kind of fun.
    Last edited by Coach45; 03-23-2008, 10:40 PM. Reason: spelling

    Leave a comment:


  • dm59
    replied
    Originally posted by Coach45 View Post
    I suppose that depends on how you quantify or qualify 'effective'. The current mechanic with all it's variants is very effective at instigating injuries.
    No argument here. Only that this conversation is intended to be solely about velocity and not safety, which is another conversation altogether.

    So, looking at all of the posts in this thread, keep in mind that all thoughts are relative to velocity and nothing else.

    Leave a comment:


  • Coach45
    replied
    Originally posted by dm59 View Post
    Short, straight path = rapid acceleration requirement

    Longer, arcing path = build-up of momentum over time

    The question now becomes, which one is more "effective" for the human body? Not "efficient" but "effective".
    I suppose that depends on how you quantify or qualify 'effective'. The current mechanic with all it's variants is very effective at instigating injuries. It also retires hitters. On the flip side, at least in theory a straighter driveline should make it easier to throw strikes because the ball is not constantly flying tangent to the arc. At the same time we already know that the more skilled athletes adapt to this arc well enough to throw strikes. Also in theory, using a straighter driveline we increase the likelihood of being able to throw with the forearm close to vertical at release. With a vertical forearm we stand a better chance of efficiently throwing pitches that can break to both sides of the plate. If a pitcher can do this we have in essence put both a lefthanded and righthanded pitcher on the mound at the same time.

    I think you're correct that it needs to be more explosive. Contemplate this: the final component of arm acceleration as we know it now takes on the order of 0.02 seconds. It's already explosive. I'm suggesting wee need for the body to catch up and move more quickly, sequentially, otherwise the arm is chronically late, just hanging around waiting for everything else to happen. And during that time all we create all sorts of alignment problems.

    Though proving it over a longer haul is going to take time, I believe the longer arc actually allows too much time between sequencing of segments, and this causes loss of inertia. This stopping and restarting of the shoulder joint and elbow joint, violently playing crack the whip while moving segments in one direction and then another, particularly while the joints are accelerating toward hyperextension or hyperflexion, is largely responsible for the damage to arms. Fixing the problem entails putting each segment in the right place at the right time, in sequence. I would call that efficient, and it's largely a matter of timing.

    I think you're correct that the entire sequencing needs to be more explosive. The body sequencing needs to take place within a condensed timeframe otherwise the arm just hangs around waiting for something to happen, and this is when alignment and timing of segments gets out of wack. Think of working backward from a final acceleration time of 0.02 seconds...we already know this time is realistic.
    Last edited by Coach45; 03-23-2008, 02:07 PM. Reason: Added final comments.

    Leave a comment:


  • dm59
    replied
    Originally posted by Dirtberry View Post
    The problem here is mixing apples and oranges if you are trying correlate a hammer throw with it’s built up momentum opposed to an object starting from 0 velocity. When “Over early rotation”(traditional) pitching initial forward force application starts it heads toward the opposite facing bag, when a straight initial forward force application is started it is already gaining forward momentum, now you have already lost forward velocity With early rotation, now add in the loss that as you attain by fighting to get it back to straight.
    Again, so what? I'll possibly agree that straight force application is more "efficient" but I do propose that the longer, arcing path is more "effective". More time and distance upon which to build up momentum. The important thing, from a practical perspective is, at the end of it all, the velocity at release. More time and distance over which to build up momentum through force application.

    Originally posted by Dirtberry
    ...the force applied along a curved pathway (longer distance than a straight line) also means that it takes longer to cover the distance then answer is no.
    Bill. Let's flip that around and look at it this way. In order to reach the same velocity, using a straight, and therefore shorter, path, you will require a far more rapid acceleration than the longer path of the arc. It will need to be much more explosive.

    Short, straight path = rapid acceleration requirement

    Longer, arcing path = build-up of momentum over time

    The question now becomes, which one is more "effective" for the human body? Not "efficient" but "effective".

    Leave a comment:


  • Coach45
    replied
    Yes, it comes with a mac native browser: Safari. But you'll do better to download Mozilla Firefox (free) for whatever platform you're working on.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dirtberry
    replied
    does it come with a web browser?

    Leave a comment:


  • Coach45
    replied
    Originally posted by Dirtberry View Post
    Coach45,

    Your forcing me to dump my well working Pentium III.
    That’s not related to this thread!
    ????????????????????????? Get a Mac. Get a life.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dirtberry
    replied
    Dm59

    The problem here is mixing apples and oranges if you are trying correlate a hammer throw with it’s built up momentum opposed to an object starting from 0 velocity. When “Over early rotation”(traditional) pitching initial forward force application starts it heads toward the opposite facing bag, when a straight initial forward force application is started it is already gaining forward momentum, now you have already lost forward velocity With early rotation, now add in the loss that as you attain by fighting to get it back to straight. Imagine taking it to an extreme by just leaving your arm straighter to get as much arc length that you can. Now add in the loss of finishing short because of arc(elbow down across the chest).
    I see straighter as more forward length quicker.
    Marshall knows this tenet of his will probably never get met but getting closer to it is optimum.

    XV84,

    “Marshall pitchers "push" the ball.” Not true they have just as much whip and snap as traditional, they drive the ball then pronate snap it. They just do it with less deleterious ligament involvement.

    Coach45,

    Your forcing me to dump my well working Pentium III.
    That’s not related to this thread!

    Leave a comment:


  • Coach45
    replied
    Originally posted by dm59 View Post
    Doesn't a longer path offer more opportunity for force application?
    Possibly, but not necessarily. If the force applied along a curved pathway (longer distance than a straight line) also means that it takes longer to cover the distance then answer is no. If it covers a longer distance in the same time frame the answer is yes, because velocity also has a time component. The mathematical relationship between the two is not linear, it's a function of π (pi). This becomes a circular argument (no pun intended) unless you can measure the time/distance factors involved, and that means using something like 3-D motion capture analysis (which we have done).

    The real issue you're hinting at is this: can centrifugal force be harnessed in a productive way that doesn't damage the arm? I think the answer is yes. The hips and shoulders have width and as such generate rotational force when fired forward. As such there MUST be lateral displacement of the ball as the hips and torso turn. (This is one reason why a straight driveline Marshall postulates is flawed. Interestingly enough when we looked at his technique on the motion sensor-based system the glove knee, center of mass, and throwing shoulder end up almost in vertical alignment...and that's a really bad idea on a number of accounts. And this vertical alignment happens as his students TRY to adopt a straight driveline.) The question becomes how to practically and productively minimize the lateral displacement of the ball, and the answer is an elliptical pathway vs a circular one when viewed from overhead. It works, in conjunction with inward rotation of the upper arm and forearm pronation timed to coincide with release, preserves velocity. By combining these elements we've ended up with a repeatable, teachable skill.

    Leave a comment:


  • XV84
    replied
    DM, you are still missing the point. Hammer throwers are not applying force in the direction of the throw. They are applying force to maintain the radius of the arc. This force is called centripetal force. They are "pulling" the hammer towards their body while rotating/spinning. They are not pulling sideways.

    The path maybe longer, but the fact is it isn't straight. It isn't straight because the direction of the forces are different.

    They spin to generate rotational/angular momentum/acceleration.

    Marshall pitchers don't "build momentum" like traditional pitchers do. They simply "apply force" in a straight (as possible) line. Traditional pitchers "rotate" to create centrifugal forces that accelerate the ball to fly away from the body. This is what causes, as Coach45 mentioned, extension of the elbow. Marshall pitchers "push" the ball.
    Last edited by XV84; 03-22-2008, 06:49 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • dm59
    replied
    The point isn't whether it's a perfect, circular path and it's not that a shot putter's mechanics are different than a pitcher. The question is about the length of the path that momentum is built up over. A "not straight" one is longer. The shot putter builds up momentum as he spins. Again, why does a hammer thrower spin more than once? Doesn't a longer path offer more opportunity for force application?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dirtberry
    replied
    Dm59,

    Making comparisons using an extra lever (hammer, bat, club) will never work to explain these different movements. You lumped Shot puter in with these also another distinct mechanic even though the shot put is casted as straight as you can get. New era Batting coaches have also mis-renamed (some thing already named) what they see as rotational that implies a circular path when it is also Elliptical.

    Leave a comment:


  • dm59
    replied
    I'm very confident that you've found a way to help the elbow in this situation. I'm just having conceptual difficulties with the arcing (or elliptical) path vs. a straight one (or approaching straight). It's the build-up of momentum idea. Golfers do it, hammer throwers, shot putters, etc. If they all shortened their path by attempting to straighten it, they would have less time for the build up of momentum, wouldn't they?

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X