Skip to main content

As far as a) Scout recognition and b) Hitting ability, does it matter whether or not a hitter takes a stride, as long as he loads/coils properly? I've found that I can hit better by not striding (but still loading as normal), but I'm not sure if this would detract scouts from recognizing and/or eventually signing me.

When I say no stride, imagine David Wright, or Albert Pujols. Travis Hafner is another one.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

You don't need to stride but you still have to have weight transfer from back to front.

What is important is rotation around your postiorial axis.

One other thing about no stride is that you'll keep your head movement down to minimum thus your eyes will track the ball better giving you a better chance of hitting the ball with solid contact.
Pujols may be a bad example, as he may be considered a strider. Wright, though, is not.

Most major league hitters have a front foot plant at the halfway point of the ball reaching the plate. Wright has his front foot on the ground as soon as the pitcher's throwing arm goes back to throw the ball.

This cannot be a stride, since it happens so early. The stride has more to do with WHEN it happens than anything else.

99.9% of ALL players who have ever played the game have strided, so that HoF argument holds no water. Jim Edmonds is an obvious no-strider.
Last edited by yesisbest
quote:
Originally posted by yesisbest:
Pujols may be a bad example, as he may be considered a strider. Wright, though, is not.

Most major league hitters have a front foot plant at the halfway point of the ball reaching the plate. Wright has his front foot on the ground as soon as the pitcher's throwing arm goes back to throw the ball.

This cannot be a stride, since it happens so early. The stride has more to do with WHEN it happens than anything else.

99.9% of ALL players who have ever played the game have strided, so that HoF argument holds no water. Jim Edmonds is an obvious no-strider.


Wright takes about a 12" stride. Smile
quote:
Originally posted by yesisbest:
If it was so asinine, you could have at least come up with a simple response, rather than a roll-of-the-eyes.


First of all, this troll has been on HSBBWEB before and it was boring.

Secondly, I have hit with David Wright for 2 of the last 3 years during the offseason. He has a stride.

The only thing you said in either of your posts that I agree with is Jim Edmonds being a no strider.

Not only am I not in the mood to feed your troll, I really don't feel like debating this topic again. Use the search function and hopefully it has survived the board transitions.
Last edited by redbird5
http://coachnick0.tripod.com/bbtoday/id10.html

IMPROPER STANCE WIDTH

PROBLEM:
The batter's stance is to wide or too narrow.
A stance too wide causes a loss of power and prevents hip involvement during the swing. A stance with the feet too close often causes the batter to stride too far or long. This causes the head and eyes to drop during the stride. This makes the hitters success ratio drop tremendously. It is hard enough to hit with a "quiet" head or with no movement. Overstriding makes it even more difficult to see the ball, identify the speed and type or pitch nand to hit the ball where it is pitched.

SOLUTION:
Have the batter assume a stance with the feet shoulder width apart. Have the batter take a short stride of no more than 6 inches. If the stance is slightly wider than the shoulders, simply picking the front foot straight up only an inch or two and putting it down may be all the stride the batter needs.
What works for you? That is what is important. If taking a stride works for you then of course stride. If you hit better without a stride then why would you want to? I dont think scouts are going to say "Man that kid can mash but you know what he doesnt stride so we dont need to look at him anymore". I personally like a short stride almost and pick it up put it down short stride as a timing device. Ive seen guys with long strides, short strides, and no strides. Some could hit some could not hit. If it works for you fine. If it doesnt why would you do it?
A stride can provide momentum which can be turned into power. Mantle is an example of this. A short stride simplifies the swing and makes hitting easier for some. Bonds is a good example of a short stride hitter who has enough power without having to convert momentum from the stride into power.

Or to put it more simply - I agree with Coach May.
quote:
Originally posted by CADad:
A stride can provide momentum which can be turned into power. Mantle is an example of this. A short stride simplifies the swing and makes hitting easier for some. Bonds is a good example of a short stride hitter who has enough power without having to convert momentum from the stride into power.

Or to put it more simply - I agree with Coach May.


After you stride, though, don't you come to a complete stop, though? So isn't all that momentum wasted?
The stride produces weight shift momentum........When the front foot touches, the weight shift stops and the momentum is turned into rotation........IOW, when the front foot touches the ground, the bat should be swinging.......It should be a seamless process.........And, it all should be controlled by the core of the body, the abdomen........
The article that Ramrod quoted implied that dropping the head during the stride was a bad thing.........I was pointing out that this information is wrong.....Dropping the head during the stride is actually a good thing and hitters should do it.....

Redbird, you are not so right.....Many amateur hitters try to stand tall and keep their head still during the entire swing process because of misinformation such as the article Ramrod printed that has been passed down for too many years in organized baseball............
Last edited by BlueDog

Reviving this thread from 2005.  Any new thoughts?  My son has never been a strider, yet hits well, and with power.  A stride tends to really mess him up, as he has tried to add it on three different occasions.  His weight shifts well.  I did read some research that seemed to prove no power is gained from a stride, when compared to no stride (while using good mechanics and weight shift), but still don't see too many other players out there that do not stride.  Opinions?  Thanks!

I guess what Coach May said 10 years ago is how I feel. Whatever works. When my son was a hitter (PO in college now). He did a pretty long stride( without measuring ever and purely on memory that is 2 years old, I would guess 18 inches ) and hit very well. For him is was a rhythm thing. We tried for years to get him to shorten his stride but every time we did we negated his power. For him when he was out of whack hitting, it wasn't about length of stride, it was where he strode too. When on he strode right at pitcher, planting foot about 2 -3 inches toward the plate from original foot position. When he was off he "pulled" his foot 2-6" toward 3rd base (RHH).

Now one of things I believe from watching him all those years, along with 1000's of other kids, is he always was fast twitch and got the bat thru the zone on time, Pulled inside pitches, lots of power to CF and RC. But at some point the velocity of pitch began to get to him form a timing point of view. He was not in a set, foot on the ground, hips rotating, bat thru the zone just in front of plate for great contact. He was just a hair late which resulted in balls to right side. For him that was about 90 MPH. Not sure if that was a stride thing or not. 

 

Do you have any examples of good hitters who do not stride?  IMO, if everything else works, then great.  You mention that his attempts to insert a stride have been unsuccessful, so apparently it is not something that on the surface would appear to benefit him.  I am a big fan of a 2" stride - more of a pick-up-the-foot and put it back down, but have never really been looking for home run power.  The short stride does require a slightly wider stance and does require the batter, IMO, to pay more attention to shifting weight.  My kids just look a little sloppy when they start taking larger strides.  

Just MHO but to stride or not to stride is not really the question. 

To quote (liberties taken) from Hannibal Lecter "First principles, Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature? What does the stride do? 

So the question becomes what is the stride to the swing? (I would propose the purpose is to set a definitive stable base from which the swing can begin) What is it's nature? (It provides a timing mechanism such that all aspects of the swing are coordinated) What does the stride do? (I propose it establishes the decision point from which a hitter elects to swing or withhold the swing)

In this train of thought any method a hitter uses that accomplishes these the purpose (stable base), nature (Proper timing and coordination) and function (Provides a decision point) of a stride is in fact a stride.  So whether it is a lifted heal, an inward twist of the front knee, a lifted foot, a tiny step, a larger step, a rocking motion etc. etc. we have, in fact taken a "stride" in it's most simplistic form and success is the measure we use to denote if you have accomplished your "stride"

I call dibs on the first "Silence of the lambs" quote used on the forum!!!!!

 

MDBALLDAD,

Nice response.  Appreciate it.  Helps to hear similar thoughts from others out there.  I guess in my realm of work, my son does a "closed chain" stride (heel lift, hip/knee turn in/load the back side, foot never completely leaves the ground) versus an "open chain" or conventional stride where the foot leaves the ground completely.  Never thought of it that way before.  One of my favorite movies, by the way.   Thanks! 

 

SULTAN,

If I am deciphering your "coil inward properly", correctly (internally rotating the back hip and inward trunk rotation, closing down, etc), then that is not a problem without a stride.  At least not for my son.  He has a wide stance to begin with such as RJM suggests, and seems to end up in the same position, a good hitter with a stride ends up, anyway.   When I watch and break down video of different hitters (MLB guys), they all end up doing similar things when it counts the most.   I guess results will tell the story as he moves forward.  We shall see how it turns out.  Will give a future update.  I am probably not the only one out there with a stride-less son.     

This is interesting reading:

http://www.chrisoleary.com/pro...ertPujolsStride.html

Not sure if the author is promoting the stride or no-stride approach that Mr. Pujols does.  He does seem to coil pretty well without a stride, if we are talking about the same thing. 

 

 

 

Bagwell actually picked his stride foot up and brought it closer to catcher.  Fellas, it's all about what makes you feel good in the box.  If you can't hit you have a hitch in your swing, if you 'can' hit that hitch is a timing mechanism.   Lots of MLB swings would be considered ugly and worthless to most hitting 'instructors'.  But, those guys have figured out how to feel comfortable and make it work.  I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it!  Yogi would probably like that line!

Ohio Dad posted:

OVERTHEHILL,

With all the good advice on here, the fact that 2018 hits for average and power, and as you say: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!, 2018 will remain strideless.  Thanks again to all who contributed. 

 

 

I agree with "if it ain't broke don't fix it." But what about "it ain't broke but it could be better?" After an all conference soph year of high school a hitting instructor/pro scout changed my son's swing and approach. He went from .340 to .520. Granted some of the improvement was due to being bigger and stronger. But a majority was the hitting changes.

Last edited by RJM

Add Reply

Post
.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×