http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUICwzVXapw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLnJ_vK3uHc
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Very nice find Quincy.
So what is each doing with their hand/arm?
So what is each doing with their hand/arm?
Both hitting it out of the infield which you claimed was impossible.
Gray batted .259 in over 200 at bats playing in the majors. He did better than guys with two arms then and are doing today.
Gray batted .259 in over 200 at bats playing in the majors. He did better than guys with two arms then and are doing today.
quote:Originally posted by Quincy:
Both hitting it out of the infield which you claimed was impossible.
Gray batted .259 in over 200 at bats playing in the majors. He did better than guys with two arms then and are doing today.
It's impossible USING JUST SHOULDER ROTATION. JJA is the one advocating to just rotate my shoulders and hold on to the bat.
It's possible because one his supinating his top hand and the other is pronating his bottom hand. Once again you post something and don't even know what's going on. Remember when I was talking about using the hands and forearms. Thanks for posting a video demonstrating what I stated before.
You actually think they're just rotating their shoulders and holding on to the bat like JJA? No wait, you said to pull down on the handle of the bat. Are their knocker knuckles aligned?
He did better than guys with two hands because his one hand torqued the bat. Didn't JJA state that was impossible? Woops! The guys with two hands just applied force in the same direction. The guys with two hands pulled on the handle.
You make yourself such an easy target Quincy. You haven't learned your lesson yet. And you said I don't teach.
One hand torque now?
Wasn't handle torque applied with two hands in opposite directions?
You don't teach, you heckle.
Wasn't handle torque applied with two hands in opposite directions?
You don't teach, you heckle.
You actually know what handle torque is now. See you're learning. I've gotten through to you. Handle torque is not "applied". "Force" is applied. "Torque" is a measure/result of the force x lever arm at the pivot point.
I can torque the bat with one hand. You can't?
I can torque the bat with one hand. You can't?
How does a video of a guy hitting with one arm turn into an arguement ?
Internet heckler
Absolutely !
I know a 1 arm ball player and he is amazing to watch. He hit a HR the last time I watched him. It is amazing to see the joy in their eyes when they make a play.
I know a 1 arm ball player and he is amazing to watch. He hit a HR the last time I watched him. It is amazing to see the joy in their eyes when they make a play.
Gives a little insight as to what arm hitters feel is more powerful in the swing. Jim Abbott also swung the bat left handed while only being able to use his left hand.
Is it stone throwing time?
Is it stone throwing time?
I liked how Pete Gray used his would-be top hand to swing, but the Japanese guy was using his would-top top hand to "punch" the ball through the infield...
That is impressive on both accounts. Both represent two different time periods of the game. But still that is really amazing that they can play with only on arm. Very impressive.
Great clips Quincy. I was out of town so I missed this last week.
XV, give me a break. A one-armed guy is applying handle torque? LOL!!!! Mankin defines handle torque as one hand pushing and the other pulling in order to create torque. You can't create handle torque in this way by only one hand pushing or pulling. That's laughable. The only way to create handle torque with a single hand is through differential pressure of the single hand on the bat, i.e., with one side of the palm "pushing" and other side of the palm "pulling". No rationale person can believe a single hand can supply significant torque to the bat. That's just a ridiculous position to take.
Once again, it's rotation that powers the swing, not handle torque. This is a very simple, but very dramatic example that makes it easy for everyone to see and understand.
What more do you handle torque guys need before you punt on that notion that handle torque is a significant contributor to swing speed? The lopsided nature of this "debate" is almost embarrassing.
-JJA
XV, give me a break. A one-armed guy is applying handle torque? LOL!!!! Mankin defines handle torque as one hand pushing and the other pulling in order to create torque. You can't create handle torque in this way by only one hand pushing or pulling. That's laughable. The only way to create handle torque with a single hand is through differential pressure of the single hand on the bat, i.e., with one side of the palm "pushing" and other side of the palm "pulling". No rationale person can believe a single hand can supply significant torque to the bat. That's just a ridiculous position to take.
Once again, it's rotation that powers the swing, not handle torque. This is a very simple, but very dramatic example that makes it easy for everyone to see and understand.
What more do you handle torque guys need before you punt on that notion that handle torque is a significant contributor to swing speed? The lopsided nature of this "debate" is almost embarrassing.
-JJA
quote:Originally posted by jja:
Great clips Quincy. I was out of town so I missed this last week.
XV, give me a break. A one-armed guy is applying handle torque? LOL!!!! Mankin defines handle torque as one hand pushing and the other pulling in order to create torque. You can't create handle torque in this way by only one hand pushing or pulling. That's laughable. The only way to create handle torque with a single hand is through differential pressure of the single hand on the bat, i.e., with one side of the palm "pushing" and other side of the palm "pulling". No rationale person can believe a single hand can supply significant torque to the bat. That's just a ridiculous position to take.
Once again, it's rotation that powers the swing, not handle torque. This is a very simple, but very dramatic example that makes it easy for everyone to see and understand.
What more do you handle torque guys need before you punt on that notion that handle torque is a significant contributor to swing speed? The lopsided nature of this "debate" is almost embarrassing.
-JJA
So you weren't born with the ability to rotate/twist your wrist/forearm?
weird...
Once again, JJA shows himself as a pseudoscientist mischaracterizing the position of others to support his own agenda rather than try to clarify.
JJA knows Mankin's theories and yet continues to have to misrepresent them as his only defense. We have been down this road many times, the first time was when he flamed out at Batspeed.com:
http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/18768.html
Mankin wrote(fed up with JJA's obfuscating):
Hi All
JJA has made statements on this board that not only misrepresent my work, he also distorts Adair’s principles governing bat speed development as defined in his book.
In an earlier post you (JJA) claimed that I believed that a CHP could only be created by applying THT and BHT. That was a complete falsehood. A CHP is generated from keeping the hands back and allowing body rotation to fling them into a circular path. Applying torque is in addition to developing a CHP.
Now you state “However, I believe the major difference between the two is Jack’s insistence that top hand torque and bottom hand torque are PRIMARY contributors to batspeed, even more so than circular hand path.” – That is equally false. I have never stated that THT and BHT are more important or produce more bat speed than from the CHP. I have always maintained that the basis for rotational mechanics is the CHP. It must be developed first then the batters must learn to apply torque without altering the production of the CHP. The CHP accounts for 50+% of bat speed generated from rotational mechanics.
Many of your statements regarding Adair’s swing model is at odds with what he actually states in his books (first and second edition). We need to clarify if you agree with the actual principles defined by his book.
I need a short concise answer (a simple “yes” or “no) to the following Adair positions. – (1) He states in his book that the body moves forward about 18 inches at 7 mph during the swing. (not before rotation, but during the swing).
JJA, do you agree that the body moves forward 18 inches at about 7 mph during the swing? Yes or no. You can explain the reason for your answer later.
We can move to another of his positions once you give a clear answer to the above question.
Jack Mankin
JJA knows Mankin's theories and yet continues to have to misrepresent them as his only defense. We have been down this road many times, the first time was when he flamed out at Batspeed.com:
http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/18768.html
Mankin wrote(fed up with JJA's obfuscating):
Hi All
JJA has made statements on this board that not only misrepresent my work, he also distorts Adair’s principles governing bat speed development as defined in his book.
In an earlier post you (JJA) claimed that I believed that a CHP could only be created by applying THT and BHT. That was a complete falsehood. A CHP is generated from keeping the hands back and allowing body rotation to fling them into a circular path. Applying torque is in addition to developing a CHP.
Now you state “However, I believe the major difference between the two is Jack’s insistence that top hand torque and bottom hand torque are PRIMARY contributors to batspeed, even more so than circular hand path.” – That is equally false. I have never stated that THT and BHT are more important or produce more bat speed than from the CHP. I have always maintained that the basis for rotational mechanics is the CHP. It must be developed first then the batters must learn to apply torque without altering the production of the CHP. The CHP accounts for 50+% of bat speed generated from rotational mechanics.
Many of your statements regarding Adair’s swing model is at odds with what he actually states in his books (first and second edition). We need to clarify if you agree with the actual principles defined by his book.
I need a short concise answer (a simple “yes” or “no) to the following Adair positions. – (1) He states in his book that the body moves forward about 18 inches at 7 mph during the swing. (not before rotation, but during the swing).
JJA, do you agree that the body moves forward 18 inches at about 7 mph during the swing? Yes or no. You can explain the reason for your answer later.
We can move to another of his positions once you give a clear answer to the above question.
Jack Mankin
tom guerry -
JJA can speak for himself, but where did Mankin get this idea? During the swing the body is rotating, not moving forward. If anything, it moves back a little due to momentum of the swing. Perhaps he's confusing the stride with the swing.
quote:JJA, do you agree that the body moves forward 18 inches at about 7 mph during the swing? Yes or no. You can explain the reason for your answer later.
JJA can speak for himself, but where did Mankin get this idea? During the swing the body is rotating, not moving forward. If anything, it moves back a little due to momentum of the swing. Perhaps he's confusing the stride with the swing.
quote:Originally posted by bbdoug:
tom guerry -quote:JJA, do you agree that the body moves forward 18 inches at about 7 mph during the swing? Yes or no. You can explain the reason for your answer later.
JJA can speak for himself, but where did Mankin get this idea? During the swing the body is rotating, not moving forward. If anything, it moves back a little due to momentum of the swing. Perhaps he's confusing the stride with the swing.
Read above a little more.
quote:I need a short concise answer (a simple “yes” or “no) to the following Adair positions. – (1) He (Adair)states in his book that the body moves forward about 18 inches at 7 mph during the swing. (not before rotation, but during the swing).
Adair actually states this and Mankin is asking if JJA agrees with this or not...as it seems as though JJA takes Adair's words as gospel.
Geez, louise, go on a trip and look what you find when you get back?
Lots of words, Tom, no content. The posts accurately depict what I wrote. Adair's physics is correct, his swing model is basically correct but his model (as your correctly copied above) has much more forward movement during the swing than most pros have (though some swings of Aaron, Mays, and Ruth have shown that type of forward movement).
So what does this have to do with handle torque for a one-armed guy? I hope everyone sees through this transparent attempt to deflect attention from the issue at hand. The one-armed swing destroys that notion that handle torque is a significant contributor to a swing since you can't apply handle torque as Mankin says with a one-armed swing.
Write all you want, Tom, it doesn't change the facts no matter how many pages you fill. Is this all you have? A bunch of posts on off-topic items? How can you explain the fact that Pete Gray hit 5 minor league home runs with a 1 armed swing?
Lots of words, Tom, no content. The posts accurately depict what I wrote. Adair's physics is correct, his swing model is basically correct but his model (as your correctly copied above) has much more forward movement during the swing than most pros have (though some swings of Aaron, Mays, and Ruth have shown that type of forward movement).
So what does this have to do with handle torque for a one-armed guy? I hope everyone sees through this transparent attempt to deflect attention from the issue at hand. The one-armed swing destroys that notion that handle torque is a significant contributor to a swing since you can't apply handle torque as Mankin says with a one-armed swing.
Write all you want, Tom, it doesn't change the facts no matter how many pages you fill. Is this all you have? A bunch of posts on off-topic items? How can you explain the fact that Pete Gray hit 5 minor league home runs with a 1 armed swing?
No JJA, you are a pseudoscientist misrepresenting both Adair and Mankin.
As Jack points out, this model is wrong:
"In his model, he contends that during the swing, kinetic energy is developed from the body moving forward about 18 inches at 7 mph. He concludes that the final 30 mph bat speed is generated from the transfer of that kinetic energy as the hand-path straightens and slowed to a near stop in a "crack of the whip" type action."
As even ***** admits, Jacks circular handpath model is better.
Let me know if you want to revisit the torque/misrepresentation of Jack's model too.
As Jack points out, this model is wrong:
"In his model, he contends that during the swing, kinetic energy is developed from the body moving forward about 18 inches at 7 mph. He concludes that the final 30 mph bat speed is generated from the transfer of that kinetic energy as the hand-path straightens and slowed to a near stop in a "crack of the whip" type action."
As even ***** admits, Jacks circular handpath model is better.
Let me know if you want to revisit the torque/misrepresentation of Jack's model too.
quote:Adair's physics is correct, his swing model is basically correct but his model (as your correctly copied above) has much more forward movement during the swing than most pros have (though some swings of Aaron, Mays, and Ruth have shown that type of forward movement).
Tom is correct about alot more than what you give him credit for, JJA....
