Case in Point - Internet Gurus

And we care about this on HSBBW because??????

B25,

I would recommend that dads not use their son, or let their son be used, as a guru's poster boy.

The Dick Mills example was certainly a lesson. And watch out for s-e-t-p=r=o. As N$man says, "his success is your success".

Not very healthy I would say.

quote:

I would recommend that dads not use their son, or let their son be used, as a guru's poster boy.

I agree.......Not a good idea!!

I has been a rather slow week for me on the HSBBWEB so i thought I would add my two cents to this thread.

The movie in question was based on a play of the same name. I am not sure what the "dogma" involved was but I am willing to discuss it since I have nothing better to do right now. The trial involved the criminal charge of teaching evolution in public schools. It was based on reality. The real conflict was over whether Darwin's theories could be taught in public schools. Tenessee had passed a law criminalizing the teaching of anything that contradicted or was inconsistent with the biblical story of creation.

William Jennings Bryan [in real life a 4 time Democratic candidate for President of the US] voluntered to be one of the prosecutors of John Scopes, the real life teacher charged with criminal conduct. Clarence Darrow [played with a fictional name by Spencer Tracey in the movie; see picture above] voluntered for the defense.

In the play, Bryan was called by Darrow as an expert witness on the Bible since the judge would not allow into evidence any expert testimony about the validity of Darwin's science. Under Darrow's heavy cross-examination Bryan began to alter the creation story by admitting that a day might have been more than 24 hours during creation, etc. The play shows news reporters from "the east" writing biased reports about the trial and belittling the locals and their "ignorant beliefs" [happens a lot today]. The play also shows universal local support for politician Bryan as the defender of the "truth and the faith" [happens a lot today also].

The consequences of the news acccounts of the actual trail for Bryan were severe. He never again won the nomination of his party for President. The teacher Scopes was fired from his job, was convicted of the crime and fined
less than $20.00 but received no jail time which prevented any appeal. Darrow went back to Chicago and had many more wins and losses at criminal trails throughout his brilliant career. The reporters left satisfied that they had exposed to the civilized world that only ignorance and prejudice reamined in the Tenessee town and the locals declared victory and went home convinced that their opinions and beliefs had prevailed.

No, I don't believe the play should be pointed to as an example of how dogma hurts the ones around you. Otherwise you have to take the very politically uncorrect position on this site that the creation story in the Bible is dogma. Or you have to say that Darwin's theories are dogma which is, of course, nonsense. I don't believe that either of those written presentations regarding the history of man is dogma. Rather, I choose to believe that this play made into a movie shows how normally rational people can get worked up, intolerant and even indignant about differences of opinion and how many so called and by some revered experts really don't know what they are talking about when they are pressed.

If you want a real good movie about how dogma can hurt people around you [or even yourself], watch the Da Vinci Code; or read the book.

TW344

quote:

Originally posted by tom.guerry:
B25,

I would recommend that dads not use their son, or let their son be used, as a guru's poster boy.

The Dick Mills example was certainly a lesson. And watch out for s-e-t-p=r=o. As N$man says, "his success is your success".

Not very healthy I would say.

Tom, you bring up a great point. Video of that young man is on this site in several places as THE example of this person's beliefs and improvement. If you cast stones at others, then you'd better be sure that you have not set your own child out there. I agree 100%. I do feel for the boy and continue to wish for his success. I would say that if you took the guru's son and the young man the guru attacked, there is no comparison AND only one of these two has any chance of playing professinal ball. (Ironic isn't it that the one attacked may someday have a MLB swing because he's in MLB.)

Pronk, I could care less if you enjoy this post. The point of this and the rational for it is that some member alinged with the messiah of hitting should realize that his message isn't working for his own son. For a year he could blame someone else. Now for the last 2 years he needs to blame himself. Pronk, that family that was attacked reads this site and so I wanted to show support. Pronk, I would point out that you haven't made a similar objection whey the guru made similar posts. Why is that? Of course I'll go look on at that other webside for one of your other identities and see if you objected there to his post. If so, I apologize.

TW344, are you aware that the producers of Inherit the Wind have a disclaimer that it is not supposed to be a facual represention the Scopes Monkey Trial? Have you seen the video? The Dogma presented was McCarthyism and what that was doing to society. They wanted to show the effects of this fictionalized account of the monkey trial on a home town. Do you remember the preacher and how he drove his daughter Rachael away? Do you remember the testimony of Matthew Brady? BRADY SYMBOLIZED MCCARTHY AS HE TESTIFIED ON PUBLIC TV ABOUT COMMUNISM IN THE ARMY! This movie and script are very close to Murray's The Crucible.

Yes, I can compare some of these hitting gurus and what their followers do to this! An attack on this family would be one such case.

Mills even went so far to put his son's picture on money/bills as part of the promotion of making your kid a bonus baby following the program.
That was way over the line.

It is really a shame that anybody wold resort to attacking a player and his family over a swing style.

This is a sure sign of a pathetic neophyte or a more pathetic standard bearer of the dogma being protected.

While some make comical arguments for their lack of understanding of the nature of the swing, only their theory or style should be criticized or applauded.

Just as with dogma, there is no 'WAY' that works for all. There are only constants.

Quincy, you are very wise. Your comments are why I make it plain that I'm no expert. Even with as long as I've been at this, I seem to learn more. Will Rogers once said, "Every man is ignorant only on different subjects." He was pretty smart as well. BTW, you won't see me putting up my daughter's swings. We are fortunate that she has made varsity as a freshman in a very successful program but SHE HAS A LONG WAY TO GO. I'd never put her video up on a public site for others to rip apart.

The way I read that post, it was an offer to help the kid. Now if Gregg thinks Rich is nuts or whatever, no big deal.

On the flip side how good was Steve's kid? Epstein's? Well Jake had some minor league time but my point is to compare Robert to Brandon is absurd. Are you suggesting that if Paul or Gregg were to adopt Brandon that he'd suddenly blossom into a legit pro-prospect? Rhetorical question of course, I know you aren't saying that but what I am trying to say is comparing kids to make a point about instructors can work against you.

It seems unreasonable to compare players.

We should limit our comments to the styles being suggested, endorsed or promoted and the results they are offerring.

Would Rod Carew have won so many batting titles had he had a swing like Bonds, Mantle or Ruth?

Would Ichiro be as good if he had a swing like Bonds?

Our bodies are different based on many factors, not the least genetics. We would better serve players by adapting 'their swing' to get the results they are looking for or the best possible result.

The arguments that take place concerning the 'WAY' to swing a bat are foolish.

We would better serve the board to never get personal even in our disagreements.

We do a dis-service to any player by attacking them for their performance, unless they are in the MLB.

Should we have ARod change his swing because he doesn't hit in the playoffs?

Even an artist with a bat will run into umpires with different strike zones, defenses that just catch everything hit or pitchers crafty enough to fool them.

In my opinion, we should concentrate on the stance, weight shift, hip turn and a swing that is short to the zone and long through it.

...and if you put your son out there constantly in video as the example of a swing philosophy, you had better not attack others. This is especially true when you present yourself as THE authority on the swing and have all of the answers, and you attack others for their beliefs. I said it elsewhere and I'll repeat it again, there is something wrong with someone who apparently takes PLEASURE in hoping that an 18 year old will fail.


Pronk, on the flip side isn't relavant here. Neither, as far as I know, posted video of their children both in attacking one person hitting philosophy and then posted video of how his "discoveries" have radically improved his son's swing. Neither did so on several websites. Neither does so right now. That's a huge difference. BTW, if you read that post as an offer of true help, I apologize for my post here and there. However, I believe most know that "help" was the real point of that post.

Pronk,

It isn't unreasonable to ask if what an instructor advocates actually works in real life or not. For better or for worse, Richard's only example is his son, and based on that sole example, one can for good reason be very skeptical that Richard's advice works. Maybe Go Cardinals or someone else will emerge to be his "poster boy" but for now, he doesn't have anyone who has used his teachings who has achieved a high level swing.

As an aside, I don't buy lack of athleticism as being an excuse for not having high level mechanics. Virtually anyone can get high level mechanics through lots of practice, but that doesn't always translate to becoming a high level hitter. There are lots of guys out there that you have never heard of in the golf world that have near perfect mechanics, but just aren't great players. There is no reason his son can't get high level mechanics, and from what I understand, Richard seems to indicate he likes his son's mechanics. Obviously I disagree.

As for the other guys, yes, absolutely 100% what they teach needs to be evaluated based on the players they produce. Englishbey has a bunch of guys playing at high levels, of course Epstein as well. When an instructor has lots of players, their son doesn't matter. It's just in this particular case, both Richard and ***** are using someone's son to advocate their position, which is unfortunate in some ways. But this will persist until both gentleman produce players outside of those two that have a known track record of using their methods.

-JJA

Quincy mentions the "constants". The old name was "absolutes".

I agree there are "constants" and they are difficult to pin down, but almost everyone who has swung in the mlb pattern has felt/recognized some.

What do you do to deal with how to define constants ?

Or do you give up ?

N&m$n , as an engineer, gave up. he said there was no such thing as absolutes. No such thing as "good mechanics". What you could learn the most from was an engineer able to understand a swing well enough to build a ground up model that would permit the understanding and consistency that would explain the swing with the same engineering principles that underlie the artificial model, then providing structure for how to approach learning the swing.

Unfortunately, building models involved OVERsimplifying the swing pattern to the point of not resembling how MLB hitters swing. N$man thought the simplest way was to adjust the torso up/down by bent at waist, then adjusting handpath in/out which was possible because if you hook/pull the handpath, you speed rotation up enough to get the inside pitch.

This is NOT how MLB hitters adjust for power hitting.This can be an option for 2 strike hitting or placement hitting or for other settings such as softball where hot bats are a factor.


So, if the N%man engineering approach is unsatisfactory, how DO you make the absolutes method work ?

I think there are 2 important approaches:

1- compare all authors describing MLB swing and "reconcile them". They are all describing the same pattern, so this is possible.

2-get perspective on the pattern from some other vantage point. The experience in golf provides this, the approach being best described by Jim Hardy in his PLANE TRUTH FOR GOLFERS series. More on golf:

In golf, where the ball on tee permits a much wider array of successful pattern/hybrids (which is a FAR more varied and complex situation than MLB), Hardy has figured this out.

There are 2 basic patterns that result in consistent/repeatable impact which are defined by how the arms connect to the torso. ALL golf info can then be sorted at a high level as belonging to one pattern or the other and the rest of the info that does not sort into one or the other is useless info.

Usually, the key info in each pattern is incompatible or the opposite of what is best for the other.

The 1 plane golf swing uses the shoulders to swing the arms around the body as the body turns. (PCR like)

The 1 plane swing tends to have a plane that is too flat/"shallow" and a path that is too wide. Remaining aspects of the pattern must work to make the swing trajectory steeper and more narrow.

The 2 plane golf swing swings the arms up and down as the body turns back and forth. (MLB like where it is OK to maximize swing plane steepness to the point of being "vertical" to match pitch, because you do not have to worry about squaring clubface in hitting).


The plane tends to be more steep and path/"sides of swing" too narrow in 2 plane golf.

Other pattern attributes must adjust the swing to be less steep and narrow if this is your preferred pattern.

ALMOST EVERY as aspect of the 2 golf patterns has an opposite requirement.

How you set up, where the weight is caried, how the hips move, sequence,etc,etc


Advice for one pattern is DEATH to the other.

For example, take the following golf "cues":

-Keep hands in front of body/chest.

This kills the 1 plane swing, but is sound advice for 2 plane

-Hit against a firm front side.

great for 2 plane, death to 1 plane.

-Stay down to ball.

great for 1 plane, death to 2 plane.

-Stay behind ball.

great for 2 plane, death to 1 plane.

ETC.

Now it turns out, the same 2 basic patterns exist in hitting, BUT only the 2 plane type pattern works in MLB which is why the cue "swing down" is still popular. MLB alos has to adjust spine/torso angle on fly (more influenced by shoulder tilt at top of torso, not bend at waist which is too proximal for adjusting on fly) as well as angle of connected lead arm ("weathervane").

Analytically, the ONE pattern that works in MLB is what Willams described as the "slight UPswing".
it is the equivalent of making everything a "low ball" type swing as oppose to swinging the bat around the body in the shoulder plane as you might think would be god for high ball.

These are 2 ENTIRELY different patterns, and, unfortunately, N$m&n, knowing nothing about hitting, chose to popularize the low level/"high ball" pattern that does not work, AND IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH, MLB hitting.

It isn't just that s-e-t-p-r-o (PCR/PCRW) info isn't perfect or has a different spin, it is that it has popularized on the internet with MANY followers, especially/moreso in softball (where it can be an improvement) a swing model and supporting info that will PREVENT learning the mlb pattern by training the body to move in an incompatible way, adjusting by bend at waist, brute force rotation, swinging bat actively with shoulders turning perpendicular to spine, just holding on to bat with hands, etc..

As DMAC noted, there is no way this can lift the low ball.

There is no way to adjust late. it is like swinging as if everything is a high ball you want contact by swinging the bat around the body with the shoulders, like making everything a tomahawk/swing down, NOT the slight upswing that Williams described (and many the other MLB authors such as Lau,LauJr,Peavy, Epstein, Slaught, Yeager, Mankin, etc.)

This "pattern based approach" has been figured out in golf AND it applies to the MLB swing.

IF you want to discover "constants" they should reside in these descriptions and in the descriptions of others describing this particular pattern, and should be reconcilable as compatible across numerous such descriptions.

There ARE absolutes, just as in golf. This is a good way to find them.

So is taking hacks yourself.

BUT, in MLB, the successful MLB pattern due to the requirement to adjust on fly is MUCH more homogeneous which makes this "reconciliation across multiple authorities" much easier than in golf.

You just have to figure out how to filter out the impostors like N%m&n.

If you are spreading the PCR?W info, you are an enabler, PREVENTING progress toward the mlb swing.

Tom,

You can write pages and pages, but the facts are that Steve E has now taught lots of players who have swing speeds in excess of 75 mph and have swing quickness less than 5 frames. In other words, he has many students with quick, powerful swings. And even without your seal of approval, colleges are shelling out precious dollars to get these swings into their program. Obviously they see something you don't, and they're speaking with their wallet which speaks volumes louder than a guy with a grudge on the internet.

-JJA

quote:

.....colleges are shelling out precious dollars to get these swings into their program.

JJA, does this include College baseball programs?

Good question for Steve. I don't know if he has any college baseball scholarships yet. He very well may but I really don't know. He hates it when I speculate so I'm not going to. Ask him on his public forum and I'm sure he will answer you.

-JJA

JJA, I don't think I'll do that, but, thanks anyway...

The reason I asked is, hitting in softball is pretty dysfunctional on all levels....Doesn't take much to vastly improve most softball hitters.....

There's pros and cons of taking that position. Tom has pretty much come out and said that Steve E will never produce a college baseball scholarship. The downside to taking that position is that there will be an awful lot of crow to eat if/when it happens, and it may already have, I just don't know.

quote:

Originally posted by BlueDog:
JJA, I don't think I'll do that, but, thanks anyway...

The reason I asked is, hitting in softball is pretty dysfunctional on all levels....Doesn't take much to vastly improve most softball hitters.....

So far, BlueDog, you have displayed a profound ignorance of what a high level swing is. If you don't wish to look at what Steve offers and/or knows, that's your choice. Personally, I don't care as you apparently don't actually teach or coach, but I do wish you'd stop holding yourself out as some kind of expert.

Tom - You've been misrepresenting what pcr is for a long time on a lot of different forums. You too should refrain from claiming some special knowledge of what "THE" perfect swing is.

quote:

If you don't wish to look at what Steve offers and/or knows, that's your choice.

This could be the funniest thing you've ever said on here...........

BB-

PCR SHOULD be able to work on occasion in college with hot bats, less so now that the new regulations are in place.

Not likely to work in MLB with beter pitching and wood bats.

Depends on what your goal is.

College scholly for fastpitch, go for PCR if you can't throw overhand well.

College scholly for BB, PCR would be last resort.

N$man now says he does not coach, he just purveys info, so he isn't responsible for Stock.

Now N$$an wants you to pony up and buy his NEW info, including his explanation of "torque".

How is Stock doing with his "old" information ?

STEVE E is coaching AND purveying PCR info.

Is that the old info or the new info ?

How's that work ?

So I am a hypocrite for not posting why do we care? You obviously didn't get the point which was "We care about this on HSBBW because..." **** you have an obsession with Rich. My whole point of "why do we care", was why do you feel a need to start a new thread at HSBBW... something anyone can clearly read over there? I didn't respond to that thread, since there is nothing for me to offer. The proper action is to let a thread die it's own death, via natural causes.

You chose not let it die and bring it up here. Probably because it's dead here. At least this place gets a little interesting when Rich sneaks his way in. Carry on, back to the snooze fest.

quote:

Originally posted by CoachB25:

Pronk, on the flip side isn't relavant here. Neither, as far as I know, posted video of their children both in attacking one person hitting philosophy and then posted video of how his "discoveries" have radically improved his son's swing. Neither did so on several websites. Neither does so right now. That's a huge difference. BTW, if you read that post as an offer of true help, I apologize for my post here and there. However, I believe most know that "help" was the real point of that post.

Pronk, and did you read this previous post of mine?

Note the quote, "BTW, if you read that post as an offer of true help, I apologize for my post here and there. Am I obsessed with Rich? Nope, I could care less other than his establishment really does have very good wings to eat. I would change the blue awnings to red to match the sign. However, that's just personal preference. The point isn't about some obsession, it is first about attacks by "gurus" on any site that attack 18 year old kids and their family. As noted, this thread was also a demonstration of support for that family who I've been told read this site from time to time and are registered members.

Pronk, I do feel better knowing, and since you seem offended by my statement of hypocracy, that when various other people attacked on other sites, you'll step in with similar comments. In knowing that, I apologize again.

Finally, perhaps one positive aspect of this is that the use of video by anyone of their child on public websites leave them open to all kinds of negative responses. Should anyone profess to be an "expert" which I undoubtly am not, they might "Inherit the Wind." Pronk, PM.

quote:

Originally posted by jja:
Tom,

You can write pages and pages, but the facts are that Steve E has now taught lots of players who have swing speeds in excess of 75 mph and have swing quickness less than 5 frames. In other words, he has many students with quick, powerful swings. And even without your seal of approval, colleges are shelling out precious dollars to get these swings into their program. Obviously they see something you don't, and they're speaking with their wallet which speaks volumes louder than a guy with a grudge on the internet.

-JJA

bat speed with no adjustibility gives you an eventual plumber lawyer or indian chief as well..just because you have batspeed doesnt mean anything..you need to put the bat on the ball..and dead hands hold the bat and turn just wont give you that..more noticable on outside pitches,

wogdoggy,

These arguments have been hashed over and over so there is no point doing it again. I am surprised, however, you can argue that bat speed "doesn't mean anything" as clearly power is the #1 item on every coaches wish list. Bat speed is clearly extremely important. Everybody wants a powerful swing, and power is generated from bat speed.

Finally, I'll just point out that the colleges are giving out scholarhips to get those EH students into their program. They aren't doing this in a vacuum, with video analysis done by Tom who gives the thumb up or down on a swing. They obviously like what they see in real games, i.e., batting average, power, etc. If these players had no "adjustability" they would obviously exhibit low batting average and high strikeouts, properties that are inconsistent with a scholarship offer. So obviously they have "adjustability" or else they wouldn't be successful in games.

-JJA

quote:

Originally posted by jja:
wogdoggy,

These arguments have been hashed over and over so there is no point doing it again. I am surprised, however, you can argue that bat speed "doesn't mean anything" as clearly power is the #1 item on every coaches wish list. Bat speed is clearly extremely important. Everybody wants a powerful swing, and power is generated from bat speed.

Finally, I'll just point out that the colleges are giving out scholarhips to get those EH students into their program. They aren't doing this in a vacuum, with video analysis done by Tom who gives the thumb up or down on a swing. They obviously like what they see in real games, i.e., batting average, power, etc. If these players had no "adjustability" they would obviously exhibit low batting average and high strikeouts, properties that are inconsistent with a scholarship offer. So obviously they have "adjustability" or else they wouldn't be successful in games.


u cant hold on to the bat and turn and have adjustibility from torso tilt,,the hands play a part..i hear hulk hogans batspeed is 90mph..


again you can have great bat speed and still stink..ever hear the old saying just keep the ball off his bat?


-JJA

quote:

Originally posted by wogdoggy:

quote:

Originally posted by jja:
wogdoggy,

These arguments have been hashed over and over so there is no point doing it again. I am surprised, however, you can argue that bat speed "doesn't mean anything" as clearly power is the #1 item on every coaches wish list. Bat speed is clearly extremely important. Everybody wants a powerful swing, and power is generated from bat speed.

Finally, I'll just point out that the colleges are giving out scholarhips to get those EH students into their program. They aren't doing this in a vacuum, with video analysis done by Tom who gives the thumb up or down on a swing. They obviously like what they see in real games, i.e., batting average, power, etc. If these players had no "adjustability" they would obviously exhibit low batting average and high strikeouts, properties that are inconsistent with a scholarship offer. So obviously they have "adjustability" or else they wouldn't be successful in games.


u cant hold on to the bat and turn and have adjustibility from torso tilt,,the hands play a part..i hear hulk hogans batspeed is 90mph..


again you can have great bat speed and still stink..ever hear the old saying just keep the ball off his bat?
the same CRUD can be said about nymans "stoplight",,just because ***** says this,,is it true?
turn like hell and good luck on those outside pitches
-JJA

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wogdoggy:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wogdoggy:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by jja:
wogdoggy,

These arguments have been hashed over and over so there is no point doing it again. I am surprised, however, you can argue that bat speed "doesn't mean anything" as clearly power is the #1 item on every coaches wish list. Bat speed is clearly extremely important. Everybody wants a powerful swing, and power is generated from bat speed.

Finally, I'll just point out that the colleges are giving out scholarhips to get those EH students into their program. They aren't doing this in a vacuum, with video analysis done by Tom who gives the thumb up or down on a swing. They obviously like what they see in real games, i.e., batting average, power, etc. If these players had no "adjustability" they would obviously exhibit low batting average and high strikeouts, properties that are inconsistent with a scholarship offer. So obviously they have "adjustability" or else they wouldn't be successful in games.


u cant hold on to the bat and turn and have adjustibility from torso tilt,,the hands play a part..i hear hulk hogans batspeed is 90mph..


again you can have great bat speed and still stink..ever hear the old saying just keep the ball off his bat?
the same CRUD can be said about nymans "stoplight",,just because ***** says this,,is it true?
turn like hell and good luck on those outside pitches

wogdoggy,

Sure, Hulk Hogan could have a 90 mph swing and his batting average might be well below 0.100. Who would give him a baseball scholarship? Nobody of course. No one has ever said that bat speed is everything, but it certainly a very important factor in evaluating players as any scout will tell you. Everyone wants power. That's obvious.

The "adjustability" as I think you define it allows you to get the bat on the ball as you put it earlier. If Steve E students are getting scholarships, then by definition they must have "adjustability" of some sort. You don't get scholarships hitting 0.100. The HI guys can speculate there is no "adjustability" but in practice there obviously is or else these kids wouldn't be hitting 0.300-.400+ with power as well. Making blanket statements that a method can't do something is silly when there is lots of evidence to the contrary. The better question is how those methods achieve these excellent results in practice in spite of what you perceive as flaws.

-JJA

quote:

again you can have great bat speed and still stink

Yes, but you can't have a great swing without bat speed.

quote:

Originally posted by jja:
wogdoggy,

Sure, Hulk Hogan could have a 90 mph swing and his batting average might be well below 0.100. Who would give him a baseball scholarship? Nobody of course. No one has ever said that bat speed is everything, but it certainly a very important factor in evaluating players as any scout will tell you. Everyone wants power. That's obvious.

The "adjustability" as I think you define it allows you to get the bat on the ball as you put it earlier. If Steve E students are getting scholarships, then by definition they must have "adjustability" of some sort. You don't get scholarships hitting 0.100. The HI guys can speculate there is no "adjustability" but in practice there obviously is or else these kids wouldn't be hitting 0.300-.400+ with power as well. Making blanket statements that a method can't do something is silly when there is lots of evidence to the contrary. The better question is how those methods achieve these excellent results in practice in spite of what you perceive as flaws.

-JJA

JJA,

I'll give you one example of a great High School Hitter and a very good College hitter, but who is struggling in Minor League ball. Isaiah Howes who played for The University of Louisville. He is struggling with the 97, 98mph fastball and the higher velocity breaking pitches. Yes, I know most hitters do, but the very good ones can adjust because they have adjustability built into their swings. The reason those guys sometimes struggle in the beginning is because they haven't seen that good Pitching day in and day out. He will have to change his swing to be successful at that level. The earlier they learn to do the right things, the quicker they will move on.

powertoallfields, will they have to change their swing or change their reaction time? In saying this, the ability to practice specifics in the swing will enable one to gain the improvements. Also, say John is hitting .400 (any level) and has the ability to make it to the bigs. How can we sit here and say that John doesn't have a MLB swing. How are we to judge him. As you stated, no one walks up to the 97 mph heater and dominates it. Could you then also make the scenerio that once John changes that swing, he might not be able to hit the 92 mph heater since he is no longer doing what made him successful?

quote:

Finally, I'll just point out that the colleges are giving out scholarhips to get those EH students into their program.

JJA, since you keep saying this, I must ask you again....Are you including College baseball programs in your statement?

quote:

Originally posted by CoachB25:
powertoallfields, will they have to change their swing or change their reaction time? In saying this, the ability to practice specifics in the swing will enable one to gain the improvements. Also, say John is hitting .400 (any level) and has the ability to make it to the bigs. How can we sit here and say that John doesn't have a MLB swing. How are we to judge him. As you stated, no one walks up to the 97 mph heater and dominates it. Could you then also make the scenerio that once John changes that swing, he might not be able to hit the 92 mph heater since he is no longer doing what made him successful?

Coach,

I was refering to Isaiah. I don't know John, so I couldn't judge that one. I saw the flaws in Isaiah's swing in the College World Series last year. He is a hard worker and if given the right instruction he will make it work.

Coach,

I'll also give you an example of the other type hitter I was refering to, Ben Revere. He had the teachings of John Cohen type of mechanics and he adapted very quickly. There are swings that can make it in High School and College, but just can't do it in the Big Leagues. Some of those types of players can even do fairly well in Minor League baseball, but they can't handle the best of the best.

Smart hitters have a tendency to wait for the best pitches to hit.

Example #1 : Batter can't catch up to fast ball so he waits for the off speed pitch.

Example #2 : Batter has trouble hitting breaking stuff so he looks fast ball.

Example #3 : Batter has trouble hitting breaking stuff and can't catch up to the fast ball so he bunts.

Example #4 : Batter with two strikes chokes up on bat and crowds plate.

Pronk,

You know richard's personality better than most on this site, I would imagine. If you say that you took the post copied below to be an actual offer of help and not a slap then you are either INCREDIBLY naive or simply not being honest. You are a grown man. There's simly no reason to come on this board and blindly defend someone of his ilk.

If you agree with richard and want to be his disciple, do so at your son's risk, but you will look less silly and gullible if you don't go out of your way to defend his lack of character and manners.



Mr. Stock....Need Help With Your Son's Swing?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just let me know.

Compare his rear hip action to all the greats.

It ain't right.

That tilt HAS to go.

But, first you'll have to denounce the narcissist.

This is a sincere offer.

quote:

Originally posted by jja:
wogdoggy,

Sure, Hulk Hogan could have a 90 mph swing and his batting average might be well below 0.100. Who would give him a baseball scholarship? Nobody of course. No one has ever said that bat speed is everything, but it certainly a very important factor in evaluating players as any scout will tell you. Everyone wants power. That's obvious.

The "adjustability" as I think you define it allows you to get the bat on the ball as you put it earlier. If Steve E students are getting scholarships, then by definition they must have "adjustability" of some sort. You don't get scholarships hitting 0.100. The HI guys can speculate there is no "adjustability" but in practice there obviously is or else these kids wouldn't be hitting 0.300-.400+ with power as well. Making blanket statements that a method can't do something is silly when there is lots of evidence to the contrary. The better question is how those methods achieve these excellent results in practice in spite of what you perceive as flaws.

-JJA

jja its nothing against steve or richard etc...its about theory ...after hearing about "pcr" and "tip and rip" I decided that the professional baseball swing more resembles a golf swing.I believe bhut creates loft on the ball.. and when you tell somebody the hands just hold the bat you rob thier athletism.I believe in seperation of the lower and upper body with stretch versus a turned connection.Donny swingbuster started making more sense to me all the time...post after post. we talked about the other concept and why it wouldnt work.he was always a gentlemen to me EVEN though i did my share of railing on him.he had nothing to gain or lose but always took the time.. d mac also impressed me with this e mail


Here are some guys who tip the bat. One thing I have noticed is that not all major leaguers tip the bat, but every one of them that does hits with power......every one of them. Something to think about.

Doug.

wogdoggy,

If you're getting good results with yourself and/or your students using Donny's stuff, that's great, honestly. The most important outcome is to make the game more fun for those who play it, and if his stuff is working for you over other methods, that's great.

My point as you can probably tell is that torque isn't what is happening. You can manipulate the bat using your hands and not require torque. If you want to say you're manipulating the bat with your hands, fine. But when people go around saying that torque contributes 50% of bat speed, that it's what separates good players from bad, well, that's simply wrong and I'm going to challenge anyone who says it. I don't like bad information being fed to people who haven't been on boards like this very long. If people want to describe it as something else, I'll go away. And they should, because it isn't torque. That's all I'm getting at.

-JJA