Debunking the "Swing Down on the Ball" approach

"Swing down on the ball" is a misunderstanding of swinging down to the ball.

Swinging down on the ball would create a chop swing limiting the height on the ball batted.

Yes, you're right on. But it amazes me how much this is being taught still. Have you found this to be the case?

I doubt I could find the article anymore but I do know that in some specific cases Ted Williams would tell young players who were upper cutting excessively to "swing down on the ball". He also felt there was a place for players with speed who hit ground balls.

I find it fun to see how things go back and forth in hitting instruction. I remember being taught to have my elbow high when hitting by Jim Lefebvre's dad. He admired Yaz. Recently, instructors would tell everyone how wrong that was while a large portion of mlb hitters were doing it successfully.

Hitting is a very individual thing. Some things and some cues work for one hitter and don't work for another. Some things and some cues work at one age and don't work at another.

Generally speaking hitters should be trying to hit line drives and their size and power relative to the players they are competing with then determines whether they should be trying to hit low line drives, frozen ropes, line drives just over the infielders or trying to loft the ball over the fence.

I'd stick with the old timers like Yaz.

Old fashioned top hand hitters seemed to get the most hits and exercised better bat control. Top hand creates a swat rather than a labored bat carrying swing.

This pic is from Williams book. He talks extensively about how the bat comes through the ball. Pick it up, it's a good read with lots of visuals. The Science of Hitting

Williams Swing Plane

I've just refreshed my memory by reading Mike Epstein on Hitting. If rotational mechanics are used, it's impossible to swing down and stay back. It just cannot happen. With a linear swing, it's easier because the hitter is not rotating around an axis. Matching the plane of the swing to the plane of the ball is one of the three universal techniques that most great hitters utilize. The other two being hands stay inside the ball and hips lead the hands.

The problem with that is, pitches don't have planes....

quote:

The problem with that is, pitches don't have planes....

oh geez......

quote:

Originally posted by Prime9:

quote:

The problem with that is, pitches don't have planes....

oh geez......

Agreed, let's please not go down that road. We're just communicating that swings that can continue through the strike zone for the longest amount of time stand the best chance of connecting with a baseball... whatever "plane" the pitch may be on

Swinging down on the baseball cuts the zone in half and does not move through the zone, and therefore cannot have the same chance of success.

Blue Dog, stop trying to introduce logic into the discussion. Shame on you.

quote:

Originally posted by johnny appleseed:
With a linear swing, it's easier because the hitter is not rotating around an axis.

Linear hitters may or may not rotate, they just don't make use of the rotation. Their hands and arms are on their own.

If I remember correctly, in the Science of Hitting, Williams states that hitters like Nap Lajoie (sp?) were better off swinging down on the ball. Different strokes for different folks.

It would be a little humorous trying to find a plane for a 12 - 6 curveball to swing on....

Curveball plane

quote:

Originally posted by BlueDog:
It would be a little humorous trying to find a plane for a 12 - 6 curveball to swing on....

Yes, which is why good curveballs don't get hit as you already know.

I heard a coach trying to teach this same thing by explaining to the players that they need to swing with a slight uppercut on the plane of the ball. He very well may be right, but no teenager is going to learn the proper mechanics by being told you should have a slight uppercut. All of this coaches players developed terrible uppercuts and when the wind was blowing they hit a few homeruns, otherwise they were terrible. We have been teaching this swing for years by simpling telling our players to finish their swing high, up around their head. Your science of the swing is fine and sounds great, but kids learn proper mechanics through drilling and muscle memory, they could care less about the science. I would be very interested to see some drills to teach players to "hit on the plane of the ball".

quote:

Originally posted by Auggie6:
I heard a coach trying to teach this same thing by explaining to the players that they need to swing with a slight uppercut on the plane of the ball. He very well may be right, but no teenager is going to learn the proper mechanics by being told you should have a slight uppercut.

hmmm... Many have success with this. Ted Williams wrote a book about this in 1971.

quote:

We have been teaching this swing for years by simpling telling our players to finish their swing high, up around their head.

I'm glad that works for you, but you can swing up or down and still finish high.

quote:

Your science of the swing is fine and sounds great, but kids learn proper mechanics through drilling and muscle memory, they could care less about the science.

I'm not sure that an "uppercut swing" would be described as "science", but they need to be doing the right drills, not just any drills.

Sultan,

I am not saying the swing is wrong, what I am saying is that you can't teach that swing by telling a kid, "swing with a slight uppercut". What I am asking for is proper drills to teach a player to swing on the plane of the ball.

quote:

I'm not sure that an "uppercut swing" would be described as "science",

Then Ted Williams messed up by naming his book the "Science of Hitting"