Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The swing we're working on...

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

  • #76
    Edmonds............

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by swingbuster
      ... Yeager, Peavy, you , and me agree on that.
      Hmmmm

      I wonder what John, Paul, George and Ringo think of it?

      Comment


      • #78
        I think no stire/Pujols style, you would still want to learn with lots of range of motion/stride,then shorten up once the sequence is mastered with fuller motion.
        Certainly you can also take a combined forward/backward chain type spproach as well with piece drills that involve no-stride as the kid gets older.

        Just as with pitching, you will have to both work out of windup and stretch, but just like throwing there needs to be lots of long toss/crow hop/full mtion stuff.

        Dixon may have some piece things that are nice to insert later.

        I am unable to find the "setpro" interpretation of "forward by turning" in my Dixon material. Maybe a page is missing, or maybe it was in the video.

        The setpro interpretation seems to mean the back and forth hip action with the hip actually turning back to show pocket stick butt out as you carry the weight forward (like the Williams metronomic description), but I can not remember Dixon making this point. he just seemed to emphasize forward turning in "forward by turning".

        Anybody see that in the Dixon stuff ?

        Comment


        • #79
          Donny and Tom:

          This time, I'm arguing not from theory, but from actual field experience. (Just like you, Donny). This IS important. It is imposible to know what works and how kids do / will react until you try things w/ a bunch of them.

          There is NO WAY that most kids learn to rotate correctly using the middle of their bodies if they are concentrating on their stride.

          Too easy to cheat and create force through weight shift. Which works, by the way. Until pitchers get good at changing speed.


          I will point out in advance - for those who don't know it - that I work mainly w/ female hitters, not male. Things MAY be different, though I doubt it.

          In fact, I think my observations may be even more relevant, because I can observe how good pitching effects kids at a younger age. I live and compete in the hotbed of age group FP for the country. By 14A JO FP - which means about age 12 for elite hitters - they are already seeing fairly elite female pitching. Speeds over 60mph from 40 feet (which translate to elite college speeds, since those pitchers pitch from 43 feet.) Which if you do the math, is a reaction time window pretty close or equal to that faced by MLB hitters (not saying the challenge is as tough because it isn't. But we're talking about 12 YOs full swinging in a 0.45 second window here, w/ some success. Noteworthy, I think.) Change-us about 12-15 mph slower (20-25%). Movement in both directions. MUCH better control than male pitchers (one BB per game by pitchers at this level is about the norm - and they aren't throwing it down the middle the rest of the time - these 14A elite pitchers live in the 4 corners). And then the elite pitchers and hitters go straight to 18Gold, which is prepatory for college, and actually includes many college players between their Freshman and Sophomore years. D1 pitchers come back after their Freshman year and compete at this level. And the best of the 14 -15 YO hitters join their slightly older peers and face them.


          All that to say this: My observational window is shorter. It is conducted on female athletes, who aren't as strong in their upper bodies, and can't (as easily) "cheat" to create force.

          And what I am saying is that the hitters who don't know how to rotate don't hit the ball very far. And that the ones who DO, can hit it out of the FP stadium.

          Further, I'm flat out maintaining that the stride often DOES get in the way of developing proper rotation IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES. And for those hitters for whom this is true, it is NOT AT ALL easy to overcome later.


          very hard to get a good inward turn if you are all stretched out as with no-stride.
          I don't see these as mutually exclusive. I agree that many hitters - stride or no stride - don't get a good inward turn. I don't see why difficulty is maximized by being a few inches wider. Or are you maintaining that the hitter who takes a 4-6" stride is ineffective, too?

          very hard to get godd weight shift with no-stride.
          If we substitute momentum for weight shift, I agree. Which is EXACTLY the point. It IS hard. It is also very hard to get "good" momentum WITH a stride. But you CAN create power w/ weight shift. It is sub-optimal, but you can do it. But when you don't take a stride, you are FORCED to learn to develop momentum to create power. And if you can do it with no-stride, you'll more likely be able to stride and carry the weight forward rather than just taking a step towards the pitcher. The later ABSOLUTELY being what most striders are doing. Dixon puts the number who create force correctly at less than 5%. In your experience, Tom, is that a wrong assessment?


          very hard to learn good arm action with feet stretched out/no-stride.
          There is a leap of logic here that I don't get. This is close to being a non-sequitar for me. I just don't see the correlation. Most no-striders are elevating the front heel before launch - which potentially puts them in the same position as "toe touch" for a striding hitter. Rotation into heel plant follows. We can argue about the sequence, I suppose. But for the point of THIS topic, it is a movement by the front foot that can be timed against and by which the upper body can be synced against. What's the additional difficulty?


          I'm not at ALL anti-stride. I think that those who create force well w/ the center of their bodies should not hesitate to use a stride, should that be their choice. But I also think that those who are striding - but NOT creating rotational force correctly - should immediately abandon the stride and concentrate all of their efforts on learning to rotate. I believe it is the most fundamental / foundational aspect of the swing. There are ways to approximate it's functionality which work at a young level. And don't work against better pitching. Which leaves the successful - but mechanically flawed - young hitter in a bind. Because it is NOT easy to remedially learn how to rotate "later." In fact, I have found it is generally impossible. I respect those w/ a different experience, if it is field tested. But that is MY experience.

          I'd also ask those evaluating to seriously consider the rigors of the FP environment. While I understand that FP is NOT BB, the challenge faced by the hitter is virtually identical. And the "high level" hitting challenge happens at a MUCH lower age for the female. If Osterman / Finch and Johnson / Zito represent a "10" in difficulty for a hitter in their respective environments (meaning the ultimate challenge), 12-14 YO male hitters are facing about a "3." And it is more like a "6" for the 12-14 YO female hitter. Maybe more than that. And so I believe - because of my environment - I have an advanatge when it comes to observing the developmental process, because it is a shorter window. And I am not at all arguing that the female hitter at the highest level has a more difficult challenge than the male hitter, That isn't true. What I AM saying is that the female hitter gets closer to the ultimate challenge she will ever face at a much younger age. Meaning she has to be better sooner. I believe there is relevance there, in terms of evaluating the developmental process.

          Then again, I could be victim of my bias. But my bias IS field tested, and not unique to me. MANY of the best hitting coaches in FP see "no-stride" as an important and / or justifiable step on the way to becoming an elite hitter. Not for ALL hitters. But for those who don't rotate well. Which frankly is most. And instructors at the top level are good enough to make the distinction. And the pitchers are good enough to make it FOR THEM, if you know what I mean.

          Best regards,

          Scott
          Last edited by ssarge; 03-14-2006, 01:47 PM.

          Comment


          • #80
            That is the Funniest Zinger...

            I have heard in a long time, but you have to have met Steve to fully appreciate the comparison.

            Originally posted by fungo22
            ...a redneck Jack LaLanne?

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Ohfor
              Hmmmm

              I wonder what John, Paul, George and Ringo think of it?
              I believe they DO hold some records for most hits.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by tom.guerry
                I think no stire/Pujols style, you would still want to learn with lots of range of motion/stride,then shorten up once the sequence is mastered with fuller motion.
                Certainly you can also take a combined forward/backward chain type spproach as well with piece drills that involve no-stride as the kid gets older.

                Just as with pitching, you will have to both work out of windup and stretch, but just like throwing there needs to be lots of long toss/crow hop/full mtion stuff.

                Dixon may have some piece things that are nice to insert later.

                I am unable to find the "setpro" interpretation of "forward by turning" in my Dixon material. Maybe a page is missing, or maybe it was in the video.

                The setpro interpretation seems to mean the back and forth hip action with the hip actually turning back to show pocket stick butt out as you carry the weight forward (like the Williams metronomic description), but I can not remember Dixon making this point. he just seemed to emphasize forward turning in "forward by turning".

                Anybody see that in the Dixon stuff ?
                I see Pujols and Michelle Smith and any number of others in the Dixon stuff. I see the key to momentum development and transfer in the Dixon stuff. It's not about the stride, it's not about the foot, it's about momentum development and transfer.

                And Scott is exactly right.
                Last edited by Mark H; 03-14-2006, 10:09 AM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Mark H
                  I believe they DO hold some records for most hits.
                  And, the way they could move those hips without striding was Dixon like..........from the center...............or was that Elvis?

                  Elvis has/had nothing on Steve E.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by ssarge
                    Donny and Tom:

                    This time, I'm arguing not from theory, but from actual field experience. (Just like you, Donny). This IS important. It is imposible to know what works and how kids co / will react until you try things w/ a bunch of them.

                    There is NO WAY that most kids learn to rotate correctly using the middle of their bodies if they are concentrating on their stride.

                    Too easy to cheat and create force through weight shift. Which works, by the way. Until pitchers get good at changing speed.


                    I will point out in advance - for those who don't know it - that I work mainly w/ female hitters, not male. Things MAY be different, though I doubt it.

                    In fact, I think my observations may be even more relevant, because I can observe how good pitching effects kids at a younger age. I live and compete in the hotbed of age group FP for the country. By 14A JO FP - which means about age 12 for elite hitters - they are already seeing fairly elite female pitching. Speeds over 60mph from 40 feet (which translate to elite college speeds, since those pitchers pitch from 43 feet.) Which if you do the math, is a reaction time window pretty close or equal to that faced by MLB hitters (not saying the challenge is as tough because it isn't. But we're talking about 12 YOs full swinging in a 0.45 second window here, w/ some success. Noteworthy, I think.) Changes about 12-15 mph slower. Movement in both directions. MUCH better control than male pitchers (one BB per game by pitchers at this level is about the norm - and they aren't throwing it down the middle the rest of the time - these 14A elite pitchers live in the 4 corners). And then the elite pitchers and hitters go straight to 18Gold, which is prepatory for college, and actually includes many college players between their Freshman and Sophomore years. D1 pitchers come back after their Freshman year and compete at this level. And the best of the 14 -15 YO hitters join their slightly older peers and face them.


                    All that to say this: My observational window is shorter. It is conducted on female athletes, who aren't as strong in their upper bodies, and can't "cheat" to create force.

                    And what I am saying is that the hitters who don't know how to rotate don't hit the ball very far. And that the ones who DO, can hit it out of the FP stadium.

                    Further, I'm flat out maintaining that the stride often DOES get in the way of developing proper rotation IN THE DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES. And for those hitters for whom this is true, it is NOT AT ALL easy to overcome later.



                    I don't see these as mutually exclusive. I agree that many hitters - stride or no stride - don't get a good inward turn. I don't see why difficulty is maximized by being a few inches wider. Or are you maintaining that the hitter who takes a 4-6" stride is ineffective, too?


                    If we substitute momentum for weight shift, I agree. Which is EXACTLY the point. It IS hard. It is also very hard to get "good" momentum WITH a stride. But you CAN create power w/ weight shift. It is sub-optimal, but you can do it. But when you don't take a stride, you are FORCED to learn to develop momentum to create power. And if you can do it with no-stride, you'll more likely be able to stride and carry the weight forward rather than just taking a step towards the pitcher. The later ABSOLUTELY being what most striders are doing. Dixon puts the number who create force correctly at less than 5%. In your experience, Tom, is that a wrong assessment?



                    There is a leap of logic here that I don't get. This is close to being a non-sequitar for me. I just don't see the correlation. Most no-striders are elevating the front heel before launch - which potentially puts them in the same position as "toe touch" for a striding hitter. Rotation into heel plant follows. We can argue about the sequence, I suppose. But for the point of THIS topic, it is a movement by the front foot that can be timed against and by which the upper body can be synced against. What's the additional difficulty?


                    I'm not at ALL anti-stride. I think that those who create force well w/ the center of their bodies should not hesitate to use a stride, should that be their choice. But I also think that those who are striding - but NOT creating rotational force correctly - should immediately abandon the stride and concentrate all of their efforts on learning to rotate. I believe it is the most fundamental / foundational aspect of the swing. There are ways to approximate it's functionality which work at a young level. And don't work against better pitching. Which leaves the successful - but mechanically flawed - young hitter in a bind. Because it is NOT easy to remedially learn how to rotate "later." In fact, I have found it is generally impossible. I respect those w/ a different experience, if it is field tested. But that is MY experience.

                    I'd also ask those evaluating to seriously consider the rigors of the FP environment. While I understand that FP is NOT BB, the challenge faced by the hitter is virtually identical. And the "high level" hitting challenge happens at a MUCH lower age for the female. If Osterman / Finch and Johnson / Zito represent a "10" in difficulty for a hitter in their respective environments (meaning the ultimate challenge), 12-14 YO male hitters are facing about a "3." And it is more like a "6" for the 12-14 YO female hitter. Maybe more than that. And so I believe - because of my environment - I have an advanatge when it comes to observing the developmental process, because it is a shorter window. And I am not at all arguing that the female hitter at the highest level has a more difficult challenge than the male hitter, That isn't true. What I AM saying is that the female hitter gets closer to the ultimate challenge she will ever face at a much younger age. Meaning she has to be better sooner. I believe there is relevance there, in terms of evaluating the developmental process.

                    Then again, I could be victim of my bias. But my bias IS field tested, and not unique to me. MANY of the best hitting coaches in FP see "no-stride" as an important and / or justifiable step on the way to becoming an elite hitter. Not for ALL hitters. But for those who don't rotate well. Which frankly is most. And instructors at the top level are good enough to make the distinction. And the pitchers are good enough to make it FOR THEM, if you know what I mean.

                    Best regards,

                    Scott
                    Real good sh*t..........said with the same Texan twang as........ship the sh*t.

                    I think I could fit in here (Texas). Don't know if I can hit with them but I can cuss with them.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Richard,

                      Real good sh*t..........said with the same Texan twang as........ship the sh*t.

                      I think I could fit in here (Texas). Don't know if I can hit with them but I can cuss with them.
                      If you haven't had chicken fried steak yet, make Steve take you somewhere that does it right, w/ biscuts and country gravy.

                      Soothes the fat guy's soul (talking about me, not anyone else). Nirvana.

                      Of course, whatever Texas guy you are eating it with will probably be spitting a vile brown liquid into a coke bottle WHILE he is eating. Which takes a bit of the edge off the experience (for some).

                      Regards,

                      Scott
                      Last edited by ssarge; 03-14-2006, 12:59 PM.

                      Comment

                      Ad Widget

                      Collapse
                      Working...
                      X