Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shoulder bypass? Hands pivot point?

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

  • Shoulder bypass? Hands pivot point?

    Where's the big circle around the hands?

    Where's the hands bypassing the shoulders?

    It's hard to read the angle numbers but, in the top row,
    left to right the forearm-to-bat angles in the 4 frames is 90, 93, 121, 166.

    Therefore, the bat moves in relation to the hands, 76 degrees from frame 1 to frame 4. That isn't a whole lot, and it doesn't happen until after the hands and shoulders have already moved a ways from the launch position.

    The middle row shows the hand movement around the head as the pivot point.

    The last row shows that the hands move faster than the shoulders, but they certainly don't "bypass" the shoulders. And, they don't speed up until after the shoulders start to rotate.

    The angles of shoulder line to hands in the 4 frames is 117, 107, 93, 76.

    A 41 degree acceleration AFTER the shoulders and hands start together.



    Last edited by jbooth; 04-01-2008, 05:31 PM.

  • #2
    The last row shows that the hands move faster than the shoulders, but they certainly don't "bypass" the shoulders. And, they don't speed up until after the shoulders start to rotate.
    Jim,

    Your use of "bypass the shoulders" is not the way we define it. Maybe you don't understand what "we" mean when saying the shoulders are bypassed. But I have explained clearly enough in past posts what the term means and it is far different that you seem to be saying in the post above.

    My definition of it would be more related to the Al Kaline quote in the Mike Schmidt thread a few weeks back...
    “My secret was to always keep that front shoulder closed until the last instant. That way my hands had to start.”
    and Frank Howard;s quote...
    Frank Howard: “Lock up that front side until the hands begin working.”
    Those quotes come close to my definition of "bypass shoulders." Not bypassing the shoulders would be a swing with immediate front shoulder/lead arm pulling of the bat...therefore, no shoulders bypassed.

    Mike

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Slapper23 View Post
      Jim,

      Your use of "bypass the shoulders" is not the way we define it. Maybe you don't understand what "we" mean when saying the shoulders are bypassed.
      OK, I will grant that I don't understand it. How could I, or anyone else? It has got to be the most nonsensical description of anything that you could possibly come up with.

      My definition of it would be more related to the Al Kaline quote in the Mike Schmidt thread a few weeks back...

      and Frank Howard;s quote...


      Those quotes come close to my definition of "bypass shoulders."
      Again, I don't think your term is a good description of what you mean, and I don't think the statements of the MLB'ers that you quoted is close to what you describe.

      Not bypassing the shoulders would be a swing with immediate front shoulder/lead arm pulling of the bat...therefore, no shoulders bypassed.
      And, that would be what actually happens whether you believe it, or not.

      There is arm and hand action prior to the front shoulder movement that sets the bat on plane, and moves the hands into the launch spot, but the first force, and primary force to move the bat toward the ball, is the rotation of the shoulders. The kinetic chain would be broken, and the flow of energy coming out of the torso would get "bypassed" and you would be left with arm power only, to move the bat, if you get the hands going ahead of the shoulders. That's what disconnection is. Your definition of "bypass" is a description of "disconnection." How can you bypass the shoulders and have the bat stay connected to torso rotation?

      If what you quoted means what you say, then why has the saying "keep the hands back" been around about a 100 years? How do you "get them going" and also "keep them back?"
      How do you "bypass" the shoulders and "stay connected" and let the energy flow through the kinetic link? If you bypass the shoulders you destroy the link. Unless I still don't understand what you mean. I guess the question for you is; How do you bypass the shoulders?

      Where is Frank "bypassing the shoulders" in this clip? His shoulders are turning while his hands stay back as the bat flattens. The knob moves toward the ball at the same time his shoulders turn. I don't see his hands going forward before the shoulders. His hands are LOCKED back at the rear shoulder, and turning with it.

      http://firstpickclub.com/video/robinson1.mpg

      Can you find ONE swing in the video below where the hands move toward the ball and the front shoulder is not moving? If the shoulder and hands are both moving, where is the bypass? Or, what is it?

      http://wms17.streamhoster.com/firstp...portsfilms.wmv

      You mentioned that Kaline said "My secret was to always keep that front shoulder closed until the last instant. That way my hands had to start."
      Well, where does he do that in this clip? Is this another case of pros not knowing what they really do? You can see the front shoulder stretch and pull his hands via his front arm. His hands don't move forward before the shoulder opens. I think you misunderstood what he meant. He meant that he kept the shoulder in until the last instant so that his hands had to start when the shoulder turned.

      http://firstpickclub.com/video/kaline.wmv

      Keeping the front shoulder in, means that it doesn't open when the hips open, nor open as you set the bathead before launch. It DOES make the hands go to the ball. That's what Kaline is doing. He is leaving the shoulder in while he starts the hips and sets the back elbow. Then the shoulders turn and the hands move at the same time, being pulled by the shoulders. The upper arms become active as soon as the shoulder turns. The pulling with the arms is part of what accelerates the hands ahead of the shoulders eventually, but the shoulder starts the hands moving. The arms don't move the knob toward the ball before the shoulder does.
      Last edited by jbooth; 04-01-2008, 10:58 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by jbooth View Post
        Where is Frank "bypassing the shoulders" in this clip? His shoulders are turning while his hands stay back as the bat flattens. The knob moves toward the ball at the same time his shoulders turn. I don't see his hands going forward before the shoulders. His hands are LOCKED back at the rear shoulder, and turning with it.
        The shoulders or the hands?..........

        Originally posted by Slapper23
        Not bypassing the shoulders would be a swing with immediate front shoulder/lead arm pulling of the bat...therefore, no shoulders bypassed
        It would appear that the above statement doesn't hold up to video..........The shoulders clearly begin to turn before the hands begin to advance........

        Last edited by BoardMember; 04-01-2008, 10:47 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BoardMember View Post

          Originally posted by Slapper23
          Not bypassing the shoulders would be a swing with immediate front shoulder/lead arm pulling of the bat...therefore, no shoulders bypassed
          It would appear that the above statement doesn't hold up to video..........The shoulders clearly begin to turn before the hands begin to advance........

          Well, you and I both know that NOTHING that H-I leader says about how the upper body works, is even close to reality. No torque, no forearm swivel, no bypass of the shoulders, and no pivoting of the bathead around the hands. He is truly Oh-for.

          Comment


          • #6
            I've been wondering about the Kaline and Howard quotes and think it might be a postural issue. Video does not support their swing thoughts, but it may be a cue to stay in hitting posture...IMO

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by RayR View Post
              I've been wondering about the Kaline and Howard quotes and think it might be a postural issue. Video does not support their swing thoughts, but it may be a cue to stay in hitting posture...IMO
              Yes, and I agree with what you have stated in the past, that the scaps start to move just before, or at the instant that the clavicle (shoulder joint moves). I believe they do use the arms to pull the knob and help the shoulders move the bat, but they do it in synch with the shoulder not before, and not after, shoulder movement.

              If you pull the knob early, you disconnect. If you pull it late, the hands are trapped behind and really have to be pulled to catch up with the shoulders.

              I don't believe that you just hang on to the bat and let the shoulders do all the work, but you can't get the hand movement out of synch with the shoulder rotation, and THAT is very tricky.

              And, when I refer to hand movement, I mean that the upper arms are moving them toward the ball, not that the muscles in the hands are doing much of anything to move the bathead.

              Comment


              • #8
                Jim,



                I don't believe that you just hang on to the bat and let the shoulders do all the work, but you can't get the hand movement out of synch with the shoulder rotation, and THAT is very tricky.



                Getting it all working together means everything. This can be learned but feeling it and controlling is the effect from thousands and thousands of swings in many different conditions.





                EL,

                Comment


                • #9
                  teacherman is just as wrong now as he was when he was the leading parrot for pcr and Steve E...Booth-you have done a good job of breaking him down...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Mark, you have more passion than information where Steve is concerned. Yeah, Paul and Yeager had a slap fest. So what? They both have great things to say. In any case, that was Paul who is not Steve and they are not identical and I don't think Yeager needs your protection. Don't become, behaviorally, that which you criticize. Tom and Richard spend a lot time criticizing Steve. Partially out of ignorance on Tom's part, partly out of never quite getting it even though he seemed to on Richard's part, but mostly out of emotion on both their parts. For whatever reason, they, more often than not, misrepresent Steve. If you wish to criticize Steve, be specific and I'll tell you if you are correctly representing Steve's views. If you correctly represent his views and still wish to criticize them, great! No problem.
                    Last edited by Mark H; 04-02-2008, 08:27 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mark H View Post
                      Mark, you have more passion than information where Steve is concerned. Yeah, Paul and Yeager had a slap fest. So what? They both have great things to say. In any case, that was Paul who is not Steve and they are not identical and I don't think Yeager needs your protection. Don't become, behaviorally, that which you criticize. Tom and Richard spend a lot time criticizing Steve. Partially out of ignorance on Tom's part, partly out of never quite getting it even though he seemed to on Richard's part, but mostly out of emotion on both their parts. For whatever reason, they, more often than not, misrepresent Steve. If you wish to criticize Steve, be specific and I'll tell you if you are correctly representing Steve's views. If you correctly represent his views and still wish to criticize them, great! No problem.

                      I have SteveE's DVDs and see nothing on them that resemble what Yeager teaches on his. Unless there is major revisionism going on, (i.e. Yeager was right Nyman was wrong) I just can't reconcile the two.





                      I went through this last month with Ssarge:

                      Ssarge: My POV - AGAIN - is that Yeager has a great description of the MLB swing.

                      Ssarge:IMO, Yeager does a fine job of identifying and describing the movement pattern and forces of an MLB swing.

                      Very useful for understanding at the instructional level.


                      Ssarge:I value my Yeager materials. I've gained real value and insight from them.

                      Ssarge:Yeager has some great material.



                      I still tryin' sarge, what were the best MECHANICAL descriptions that you found useful w/ Yeager and how does that correlate with PCR???

                      I think it is great that a "posse" member appreciates another "guru's" material, but I just can't put the two together on any point.


                      ssarge-

                      I have also studied both Yeager and Englishbey and I would be very interested in hearing how you reconcile the two.

                      Yeager's emphasis is on the legs driving hip rotation by "pushing" "mass" into the front leg which then transfers momentum to front hip---i.e. ground up..Englshbey talks about 'turning from the middle"

                      Englishbey says to "just hold on to the bat and turn"-----Yeager does not want the batter to ever think "turn".

                      Yeager also talks about separation constantly, Englishbey PConnectionR wants the shoulders and arms and bat to rotate as a unit...

                      Yeager spends more time on the stride and its pupose than he does on any other part of the swing...Englishbey prefers that it be eliminated..

                      elbow slotting vs no-elbow slotting
                      Ground-up vs middle-out
                      hands vs no-hands

                      Ssarge--please show us how you have reconciled Yeager's material with PCR...I just don't see it....



                      BTW his drills are mainly just workouts with pro players and I don't know how many he has sent out...I am glad that I have one---

                      For what ever reason, Ssarge was afraid to give specific MECHANICAL descriptions on Yeager's DVDs that he found useful/compatible w/ SE's DVDs.


                      So I will try w/ you H- what were the best MECHANICAL descriptions that you found useful w/ Yeager and how does that correlate with PCR??? (no directions to the website please)
                      Last edited by MarkL; 04-02-2008, 09:08 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MarkL View Post
                        I have SteveE's DVDs and see nothing on them that resemble what Yeager teaches on his. Unless there is major revisionism going on, (i.e. Yeager was right Nyman was wrong) I just can't reconcile the two.)
                        Sounds like a discussion you should have with Steve. He'll wear out your cell phone battery or discuss it longer than your stamina will allow in person with someone trying to understand what he teaches.



                        Originally posted by MarkL View Post
                        For what ever reason, Ssarge was afraid to give specific MECHANICAL descriptions on Yeager's DVDs that he found useful/compatible w/ SE's DVDs. )
                        I don't know that afraid would be the word I would use. Like me, he's not on here to fight. If someone's looking for help, Scott will bust himself. If someones looking to fight and argue, he's not much interested though it is possible to get him aggravated. Tom and Richard are interested in fighting though. They love it and I recommend them for anyone looking to wrangle. I find it a poor use of my time.


                        Originally posted by MarkL View Post
                        So I will try w/ you H- what were the best MECHANICAL descriptions that you found useful w/ Yeager and how does that correlate with PCR??? (no directions to the website please)
                        Sounds like a discussion you should have with Steve if you really want to understand what he's thinking as relates to what Yeager said. I'm not on here to fight. I'm on here to point the searchers to what I think is good info. I do my best to remember that though Tom and Richard can sometimes annoy me enough to wrangle a bit.

                        On Steve, I will tell you if you are correctly following him if you mention something specific. I will leave it to you and him to work out the communication problem.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          same old-same old.....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Step outside your point of view for a moment and try to see the irony in that post.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              And, that would be what actually happens whether you believe it, or not.
                              Ah!...and there's the rub.


                              Mike

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X