JJA-
***** admits there is Top hand torque. He demonstrates there are handle forces perpendicular to the bat at the attachment of the top hand.
You have gotten off into the batSPEED argument and also sight of the fact that bat quickness is an important factor (s is starting the quick acceleration rearward behind the bater which is another topic).
The ONLY adjustment in *****'s models that quickens the unloading/rotation/extension of the bathead is more back arm weight which produces more handle torque via the top hand.
Ny4an proved THT in spite of trying to disprove it.
And you fell for his fog machine that tries to explain it away.
That is ridiculous in my opinion.
You are apparently claiming that tightening the grip is handle torque.
That is quite a stretch.
You are apparently claiming that tightening the grip is handle torque.
That is quite a stretch.
quote:Since there is universal agreement that aligning the 'knocker knuckles' produces the optimum grip,.......
Quincy, can you show us a video, or picture, of a MLB hitter swinging with this grip?
How in the world do you explain "torque" to student younger than 12 years of age? For that matter how many HS kids will understand it?
Hitting should be in english and one on one not on a website---every body is different and reacts differently
I have said it before and I say it now---all the fancy and new "catch phrases" are nothing but jibberish---hitting is not that difficult--the more "catch phrases" the more confusion
Hitting should be in english and one on one not on a website---every body is different and reacts differently
I have said it before and I say it now---all the fancy and new "catch phrases" are nothing but jibberish---hitting is not that difficult--the more "catch phrases" the more confusion
quote:The hands moving in opposite directions are torqueing the point between the two hands,
Yep!...This isn't so hard to explain...If you feel it, you should understand it....
quote:.....hitting is not that difficult--the more "catch phrases" the more confusion
I have to say, I agree with this statement...
Tom,
Once we establish that torque is not a significant contributor to swing speed, that the big muscles of the body are the primary contributors (as expected), then the importance of torque starts to diminish rapidly. We're now starting to argue about second order effects that although they are important in their own regard, the importance is far less critical than items like good rotation, good synchronization of the upper body to the lower body, etc.
We've argued about the importance of "torque" on swing quickness for years as you know. Unfortunately, you have stated on numerous occasions that you don't believe that swing quickness can be measured, only that you know it when you see it. I believe swing quickness is easily measured by frame count. If you've got less than 5 frames of delay, you've got MLB like quickness. If you don't, then you don't have an MLB swing. It's really that simple. But given you don't agree in measurables, I don't see much value in debating this any longer.
TRhit, you've got it right. Please don't mention torque to your students. It serves absolutely zero value. There isn't any merit to any of these arguments.
-JJA
Once we establish that torque is not a significant contributor to swing speed, that the big muscles of the body are the primary contributors (as expected), then the importance of torque starts to diminish rapidly. We're now starting to argue about second order effects that although they are important in their own regard, the importance is far less critical than items like good rotation, good synchronization of the upper body to the lower body, etc.
We've argued about the importance of "torque" on swing quickness for years as you know. Unfortunately, you have stated on numerous occasions that you don't believe that swing quickness can be measured, only that you know it when you see it. I believe swing quickness is easily measured by frame count. If you've got less than 5 frames of delay, you've got MLB like quickness. If you don't, then you don't have an MLB swing. It's really that simple. But given you don't agree in measurables, I don't see much value in debating this any longer.
TRhit, you've got it right. Please don't mention torque to your students. It serves absolutely zero value. There isn't any merit to any of these arguments.
-JJA
quote:Once we establish that torque is not a significant contributor to swing speed,......
I think Tom established the opposite.......
The Ortiz clip is a good example of the 'knocker knuckle' grip.
This one?...I don't see door knocking knuckles grip?
Bluedog,
Sorry, Tom has completely backed away from that position. He won't agree with Mankin that torque supplies 50% of the bat speed. I have asked him that question repeatedly, and he won't answer it. Feel free to ask him again, but I guarantee he won't agree that 50% of the swing speed is due to torque.
No, he knows that all of the data that has been presented in the last 5 years proves that position wrong. He has now been pushed into the corner that says that torque helps with swing quickness, though once again with no data to support that position. Even that position has grown so tenuous that he was recently forced to assert that swing quickness can't be measured, as once he agrees with that, it will be easy to show that torque doesn't help with swing quickness either. Of course, those of us who know that swing quickness can be quantified via frame count reached that conclusion long ago.
-JJA
Sorry, Tom has completely backed away from that position. He won't agree with Mankin that torque supplies 50% of the bat speed. I have asked him that question repeatedly, and he won't answer it. Feel free to ask him again, but I guarantee he won't agree that 50% of the swing speed is due to torque.
No, he knows that all of the data that has been presented in the last 5 years proves that position wrong. He has now been pushed into the corner that says that torque helps with swing quickness, though once again with no data to support that position. Even that position has grown so tenuous that he was recently forced to assert that swing quickness can't be measured, as once he agrees with that, it will be easy to show that torque doesn't help with swing quickness either. Of course, those of us who know that swing quickness can be quantified via frame count reached that conclusion long ago.
-JJA
quote:Originally posted by jja:
You're right, video doesn't lie, but the difficulty of course is explaining correctly what is happening in the video. The blur that Richard is so impressed with is not caused by torquing the bat handle, i.e., pushing and pulling on the handle with the hands.
I'll give you a hint as to the real cause. You could take a one-handed swing and make the bat "blur" as well. With one hand you can't apply torque to the bat (except through differential pressure in the hand which is almost zero). What is causing that blur if not torque? The answer is actually easy, but requires a real understanding of the physics of swing dynamics.
Tom, "N" did the simulation in order to show that top hand torque doesn't exist. It's obvious the simulation series did that conclusively. Using his own words to claim that he supports top hand torque is irrational. I don't know why you're so impressed with the portion of the simulation where the mass of the back arm went to ZERO and it impacted the swing significantly. That's a conclusion that should be obvious to anyone.
-JJA
I never said you can't make the bat blur. What I said was "you can't make it blur rearward" and that is the key.
quote:Of course, those of us who know that swing quickness can be quantified via frame count reached that conclusion long ago.
But, frame count won't do it........You can only guess as to the intent of "go" in a swing....
powertoallfields,
Would that do the trick for you? If I could show you a one handed swing that makes a rearward blur, would that convince you that handle torque as described by Richard et al does not describe the swing adequately?
Would that do the trick for you? If I could show you a one handed swing that makes a rearward blur, would that convince you that handle torque as described by Richard et al does not describe the swing adequately?
quote:Originally posted by jja:
powertoallfields,
Would that do the trick for you? If I could show you a one handed swing that makes a rearward blur, would that convince you that handle torque as described by Richard et al does not describe the swing adequately?
I'm open minded, but separation will still need to be in the swing when that blur occurs. Post it and we'll see.
Bluedog,
Only Richard defines frame count from "go". Ironically your post agrees with the position of most of us who believe his definition is inferior to the definition used by MLB scouts because there is too much uncertainty involved. Scouts, including of course the late DMac who introduced many of us to this important concept, define frame count from when the front foot comes down. Using this definition, swing quickness is easily quantified.
From this lifelong scout, who made his living scouting and signing players, he stated that he wouldn't sign guys who had a frame count greater than 5 frames. Having a guy who fed his family based on his ability to scout to make such a strong statement obviously means this statement has VERY high value. To me, it's obvious. If your swing has less than 5 frames of delay, MLB scouts will look at you. More than 5 frames, they pass. Whether you or I like his definition or not is irrelevant. If you want MLB scouts to like you, it's in your interest to play by their rules.
That's why I could care less what Richard, Tom or anyone says about swing quickness. Show me the swing. If it's less than 5 frames, it's MLB like at least in terms of quickness. More than 5 frames, I pass. That's pretty easy reasoning to follow for anyone don't you think.
The only reason Tom won't agree with this is that he knows that Englishbey has many students with less than 5 frames of delay and his personal animosity towards Englishbey won't allow him to admit that Steve E teaches MLB like swing quickness. Unfortunately that's all there is to it.
-JJA
Only Richard defines frame count from "go". Ironically your post agrees with the position of most of us who believe his definition is inferior to the definition used by MLB scouts because there is too much uncertainty involved. Scouts, including of course the late DMac who introduced many of us to this important concept, define frame count from when the front foot comes down. Using this definition, swing quickness is easily quantified.
From this lifelong scout, who made his living scouting and signing players, he stated that he wouldn't sign guys who had a frame count greater than 5 frames. Having a guy who fed his family based on his ability to scout to make such a strong statement obviously means this statement has VERY high value. To me, it's obvious. If your swing has less than 5 frames of delay, MLB scouts will look at you. More than 5 frames, they pass. Whether you or I like his definition or not is irrelevant. If you want MLB scouts to like you, it's in your interest to play by their rules.
That's why I could care less what Richard, Tom or anyone says about swing quickness. Show me the swing. If it's less than 5 frames, it's MLB like at least in terms of quickness. More than 5 frames, I pass. That's pretty easy reasoning to follow for anyone don't you think.
The only reason Tom won't agree with this is that he knows that Englishbey has many students with less than 5 frames of delay and his personal animosity towards Englishbey won't allow him to admit that Steve E teaches MLB like swing quickness. Unfortunately that's all there is to it.
-JJA
powertoallfields,
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. You believe that rearward bat blur is caused both by separation and handle torque or just handle torque? Please explain how separation would cause bat blur in the absence of handle torque.
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. You believe that rearward bat blur is caused both by separation and handle torque or just handle torque? Please explain how separation would cause bat blur in the absence of handle torque.
quote:Originally posted by jja:
Tom,
Once we establish that torque is not a significant contributor to swing speed, that the big muscles of the body are the primary contributors (as expected), then the importance of torque starts to diminish rapidly. We're now starting to argue about second order effects that although they are important in their own regard, the importance is far less critical than items like good rotation, good synchronization of the upper body to the lower body, etc.
We've argued about the importance of "torque" on swing quickness for years as you know. Unfortunately, you have stated on numerous occasions that you don't believe that swing quickness can be measured, only that you know it when you see it. I believe swing quickness is easily measured by frame count. If you've got less than 5 frames of delay, you've got MLB like quickness. If you don't, then you don't have an MLB swing. It's really that simple. But given you don't agree in measurables, I don't see much value in debating this any longer.
TRhit, you've got it right. Please don't mention torque to your students. It serves absolutely zero value. There isn't any merit to any of these arguments.
-JJA
http://www.hittingillustrated.com/library/HowardAnkiel.gif
This side by side is about as plain as it gets, IMO. Does Ankiel have separation at the start of his swing? Yes! Does he have it at go? I think the answer is no. I think by the time he commits to the swing most of his hips are lost. This is also why he strikes out so much. I think there are a few in MLB with this swing, but not many and not too many successful ones.
One quick question, could Jimmy Rollins or Brian Roberts hit the ball out of the park with this swing?
quote:Originally posted by jja:
powertoallfields,
I'm not sure I follow your reasoning. You believe that rearward bat blur is caused both by separation and handle torque or just handle torque? Please explain how separation would cause bat blur in the absence of handle torque.
Put up the clip and we'll see if it is happening. That's about as open minded as I get without seeing something happen.
Gotta go out for a few hours, talk to you guys later.
quote:Originally posted by jja:
powertoallfields,
Would that do the trick for you? If I could show you a one handed swing that makes a rearward blur, would that convince you that handle torque as described by Richard et al does not describe the swing adequately?
I'd like to see this. Make sure you tie the top hand behind your back. And not "load" it against your bottom hand like Englishbey did.
Quincy, why are you avoiding my questions? You must not know the answers.
quote:Only Richard defines frame count from "go". Ironically your post agrees with the position of most of us who believe his definition is inferior to the definition used by MLB scouts because there is too much uncertainty involved.
No, I do define frame count from "go"......The only irony in my post is the irony you dreamed up........
Richard's "go" theory is superior to any scout's definition who disagrees with him, IMO.......
powertoallfields,
It appears that several topics are being mixed up here. I thought the topic was rearward bat blur, not other topics like separation. The assertion (I believe) was that bat blur was caused by torquing the handle, not that bat blur was caused by torquing the handle and separation. If I'm incorrect in this assumption, please let me know now. What I can show is "rearward bat blur" in a one handed swing which thus proves conclusively that the "rearward bat blur" is not caused by handle torque.
I'll agree Howard has a better swing than Ankiel. Both have "rearward bat blur" though, don't you agree?
It appears that several topics are being mixed up here. I thought the topic was rearward bat blur, not other topics like separation. The assertion (I believe) was that bat blur was caused by torquing the handle, not that bat blur was caused by torquing the handle and separation. If I'm incorrect in this assumption, please let me know now. What I can show is "rearward bat blur" in a one handed swing which thus proves conclusively that the "rearward bat blur" is not caused by handle torque.
I'll agree Howard has a better swing than Ankiel. Both have "rearward bat blur" though, don't you agree?
quote:Originally posted by XV:
Quincy, how does one check his swing if he is using "extension" to "power" the swing, in other words, "using the triceps" that you preach about?
How does one check his swing if he is using handle torque to power the swing?
The answers to these two questions will show what you know about a high-level swing, and how the human body works.
Hint: the answer is not the same for both questions.
The answer is actually quite different for each.
In the tricep swing, a batter does not check swing. He follows Joe McCarthy's advice. If you're gonna swing, swing.
In the box grip swing, the bat is in the check swing position for the majority of the travel. Swing is initiated late by rear arm tricep flex.
JJA, please post that swing. I think many people would love to see it.
Bluedog,
I guess you're missing my point. It doesn't matter what you think, I think, Richard or anyone else for that matter. If you're trying to get your player drafted, you need to please the scouts. Period. This isn't rocket science. If the scouts use that measure, then you need to use that measure as well. You might want to use something else in addition for other reasons, but it isn't going to do your player any good to tell the scout that his measure is bad, to use Richard's instead. Good luck with that one.
For all the non-participants out there, this really is very simple. If your player/child has a swing with less than 5 frames of delay (as defined by DMac or bbscout), then the scouts will look at your player/child. If it's over 5, they'll pass. That's all there is to it. If your player/kid has a 6 frame swing, you'd better work on swing quickness if you want your player/child to get to a higher level. All of this other blather out there is just noise. You need to develop a quick (less than 5 frames of delay) and power (greater than ~75 mph swing speed) or you're out. It's as simple as that.
-JJA
I guess you're missing my point. It doesn't matter what you think, I think, Richard or anyone else for that matter. If you're trying to get your player drafted, you need to please the scouts. Period. This isn't rocket science. If the scouts use that measure, then you need to use that measure as well. You might want to use something else in addition for other reasons, but it isn't going to do your player any good to tell the scout that his measure is bad, to use Richard's instead. Good luck with that one.
For all the non-participants out there, this really is very simple. If your player/child has a swing with less than 5 frames of delay (as defined by DMac or bbscout), then the scouts will look at your player/child. If it's over 5, they'll pass. That's all there is to it. If your player/kid has a 6 frame swing, you'd better work on swing quickness if you want your player/child to get to a higher level. All of this other blather out there is just noise. You need to develop a quick (less than 5 frames of delay) and power (greater than ~75 mph swing speed) or you're out. It's as simple as that.
-JJA
So, are you saying if you're basically considered one of the top two hitters in college, and your frame count is more than five as per your way of counting frames, you won't get drafted?
Quincy,
Are you a great straight man or what! I hope everyone can see the "rearward bat blur" in the link your provided even with that young man who isn't even trying for power. It doesn't take much imagination to see that a similar swing from an adult could produce a swing speed in the 70 mph range. RQL says he can still get over 70 mph and he's in his 50's.
All I would have provided is a similar swing but with a radar measuring the swing speed to show one can get 70+ mph in a one handed swing. This video I think gets the basic idea just fine.
With a one handed swing, the torque is basically zero. If torque was such a huge factor, contributing 50% of the swing speed as Mankin maintains, then that kid should be able to put his other hand on the bat, start torquing and double his swing speed. That notion is obviously ludicrous.
Are you a great straight man or what! I hope everyone can see the "rearward bat blur" in the link your provided even with that young man who isn't even trying for power. It doesn't take much imagination to see that a similar swing from an adult could produce a swing speed in the 70 mph range. RQL says he can still get over 70 mph and he's in his 50's.
All I would have provided is a similar swing but with a radar measuring the swing speed to show one can get 70+ mph in a one handed swing. This video I think gets the basic idea just fine.
With a one handed swing, the torque is basically zero. If torque was such a huge factor, contributing 50% of the swing speed as Mankin maintains, then that kid should be able to put his other hand on the bat, start torquing and double his swing speed. That notion is obviously ludicrous.
Yes, BlueDog, you got it!!! If you recall, DMac talked about Drew Stubbs of Texas, who had a 5.5 frame swing coming out of Texas. The guy is fast as a deer, with a cannon of an arm, with incredible athleticism, and DMac forbid his organization from drafting the guy. The Reds did in fact draft Stubbs at 7th in the draft anyway, but so far his minor league career has been poor due to his hitting. So, yes, DMac's organization refused to draft him despite the fact he was widely considered to be the finest athlete in college baseball at the time all because the frame count of his swing was 5.5 frames.
Hand torque supplies a higher batspeed than powering with the shoulders.........That is what we are saying........
The extra advantage is late swing adjustabilty, also.......
You certainly may argue with Mankin if you so choose on the 50% stuff........
The extra advantage is late swing adjustabilty, also.......
You certainly may argue with Mankin if you so choose on the 50% stuff........
quote:Yes, BlueDog, you got it!!!
I must not have gotten what you are saying......He was drafted very highly after all...
quote:then you need to use that measure as well.
Obviously, not all Scouts use that measure.......
Many top College hitters with a five frame swing, as per the way you count it, can't hit in the Minors........
Bluedog,
In actuality, Richard does not believe that torque enhances bat speed, at least significantly. At least that's what he believed the last time we engaged on Shawn's site. His belief was that it was good for late adjustability, swing quickness and the like, but power wasn't the primary purpose of handle torque. He may have changed his opinion again here, but he was right to begin with. There is no data, none whatsoever, that supports the position that torque significantly impacts swing speed.
Ah, yes, having a 5 frame swing or better does not GUARANTEE success. You're absolutely right there. That's why DMac was working on Brett's swing despite the fact he had a 4 frame swing. But if you don't have a 5 frame swing, you would never have been drafted by DMac's team. So a 5 frame swing and a 75+ mph swing is not a sufficient condition for being a great MLB hitter, but it is a necessary one.
In actuality, Richard does not believe that torque enhances bat speed, at least significantly. At least that's what he believed the last time we engaged on Shawn's site. His belief was that it was good for late adjustability, swing quickness and the like, but power wasn't the primary purpose of handle torque. He may have changed his opinion again here, but he was right to begin with. There is no data, none whatsoever, that supports the position that torque significantly impacts swing speed.
Ah, yes, having a 5 frame swing or better does not GUARANTEE success. You're absolutely right there. That's why DMac was working on Brett's swing despite the fact he had a 4 frame swing. But if you don't have a 5 frame swing, you would never have been drafted by DMac's team. So a 5 frame swing and a 75+ mph swing is not a sufficient condition for being a great MLB hitter, but it is a necessary one.
JJA-
Changing the subject again. You have no other alternative.
Handle torque exists at the mechanical level in mlb pattern swings.
N$$an's model shows how this force can quicken the swing.
Without handle torque there is no early batspeed, nor is there a control mechanism for late adjustment/plane matching.
Frame counting is not useful unless you know first you are comparing apples to apples, that is, counting frames comparing hitters who are already sorted into pattern, mlb or non mlb (such as "PCR").
Once sorted into pattern, landmarks can be identified consistently enough to apply some frame counting, BUT in any case whether or not the hitter has an MLB pattern swing is FAR more important than frame counting.
You should learn to recognize the pattern which bluedog is trying to explain to you.
No amount of swing quickening can enable a PCR swing to work in MLB. MLB requires early batspeed and late adjustment. Batspeed alone or trying to calculate percentage of batspeed due to torque is a waste of time. As Mankin says (below) you need quick acceleration around the entire swing plane, beginning with rearward acceleration.
PCR hitters who adhere to the PCR guideline that says torque does not exist in the swing are FORCED into a non mlb pattern which lacks early batspeed and can not be effective no matter how short you make the swing in terms of frame count. This is why PCR or "PCRW" is always OBSESSED with bat drag. There is no other alternative if you adhere to the guidelines.
How you conceptualize the pattern/goal at the mechanical level can have a big influence on how you communicate for teaching as Mankin's points out here:
http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/14865.html
-----------
"When practicing your swing, it is important to keep in mind that the purpose of swing mechanics is not to get the hips to rotate ahead of the hands and shoulders, or even to take the hands to the zone. The ultimate purpose of all swing mechanics is to attain maximum acceleration of the bat-head around the 'entire' swing plane.
"With this in mind, when setting up your practice program, I would suggest that one of the most limiting factors to a hitter’s development is his tendency to only concentrates on those mechanics that swing the bat-head forward toward the ball. However, in a high level swing, before the bat-head arcs forward toward the ball, it must first be accelerated rearward from its launch position behind the head back to the lag position (first 90 degrees of acceleration).
"Therefore, as you prepare to initiate your swing, I would suggest you envision mechanics that would accelerate the bat-head around the entire 180+ degrees to contact -- instead of just concentrating on mechanics that accelerate the bat forward the last 90 degrees (from the lag position).
"As a hitter initiates the swing, it is very tough to keep his hands back when he is concentrating on swinging the bat-head forward. If a coach would have the hitter envision the bat-head first accelerating back toward the catcher at initiation, the batters hands would have to stay back to accelerate the bat-head in that direction.
"When we ask the body to perform an athletic movement, the sub-conscious mind will set up a motor program for the rest of the body to aid in accomplishing the task.
"Therefore, I have found that if I can get the batter to correctly envision the bat-head first accelerating rearward to the lag position before he directs his energy toward the ball, the more likely he will generate the most productive hip and shoulder rotation to accomplish the task.
"If, on the other hand, the batter’s vision of the swing is only forward, he will have the tendency to first extend the hands. This is mainly accomplished by using the arms to thrust the hands and knob, which does not require good hip and shoulder rotation. With this vision of the swing, keeping the hands back is at odds with his forward vision. He now has to consciously think, “Hips First.” -- Using cues to override a batter’s natural tendency to think forward is not as effective as changing how they invision the swing.
"Once I feel the batter is starting to have the correct vision of the swing, I use the cue, “Rotate the heel (initiate lower-body rotation) – Rotate the bat-head (initiate the acceleration back toward the catcher”). I ask the student, “what must you do with the top-hand as your elbow lowers to accelerate the bat-head back at the catcher?” After a few attempts, they learn to hold back (or pull back) the top-hand at the shoulder and allow shoulder rotation to accelerate the bat-head back. When they start to get the bat to accelerate correctly, the hips just naturally rotate ahead of the hands and they have the “L” in the back-leg at contact."
Jack Mankin
----------
Changing the subject again. You have no other alternative.
Handle torque exists at the mechanical level in mlb pattern swings.
N$$an's model shows how this force can quicken the swing.
Without handle torque there is no early batspeed, nor is there a control mechanism for late adjustment/plane matching.
Frame counting is not useful unless you know first you are comparing apples to apples, that is, counting frames comparing hitters who are already sorted into pattern, mlb or non mlb (such as "PCR").
Once sorted into pattern, landmarks can be identified consistently enough to apply some frame counting, BUT in any case whether or not the hitter has an MLB pattern swing is FAR more important than frame counting.
You should learn to recognize the pattern which bluedog is trying to explain to you.
No amount of swing quickening can enable a PCR swing to work in MLB. MLB requires early batspeed and late adjustment. Batspeed alone or trying to calculate percentage of batspeed due to torque is a waste of time. As Mankin says (below) you need quick acceleration around the entire swing plane, beginning with rearward acceleration.
PCR hitters who adhere to the PCR guideline that says torque does not exist in the swing are FORCED into a non mlb pattern which lacks early batspeed and can not be effective no matter how short you make the swing in terms of frame count. This is why PCR or "PCRW" is always OBSESSED with bat drag. There is no other alternative if you adhere to the guidelines.
How you conceptualize the pattern/goal at the mechanical level can have a big influence on how you communicate for teaching as Mankin's points out here:
http://www.batspeed.com/messageboard/14865.html
-----------
"When practicing your swing, it is important to keep in mind that the purpose of swing mechanics is not to get the hips to rotate ahead of the hands and shoulders, or even to take the hands to the zone. The ultimate purpose of all swing mechanics is to attain maximum acceleration of the bat-head around the 'entire' swing plane.
"With this in mind, when setting up your practice program, I would suggest that one of the most limiting factors to a hitter’s development is his tendency to only concentrates on those mechanics that swing the bat-head forward toward the ball. However, in a high level swing, before the bat-head arcs forward toward the ball, it must first be accelerated rearward from its launch position behind the head back to the lag position (first 90 degrees of acceleration).
"Therefore, as you prepare to initiate your swing, I would suggest you envision mechanics that would accelerate the bat-head around the entire 180+ degrees to contact -- instead of just concentrating on mechanics that accelerate the bat forward the last 90 degrees (from the lag position).
"As a hitter initiates the swing, it is very tough to keep his hands back when he is concentrating on swinging the bat-head forward. If a coach would have the hitter envision the bat-head first accelerating back toward the catcher at initiation, the batters hands would have to stay back to accelerate the bat-head in that direction.
"When we ask the body to perform an athletic movement, the sub-conscious mind will set up a motor program for the rest of the body to aid in accomplishing the task.
"Therefore, I have found that if I can get the batter to correctly envision the bat-head first accelerating rearward to the lag position before he directs his energy toward the ball, the more likely he will generate the most productive hip and shoulder rotation to accomplish the task.
"If, on the other hand, the batter’s vision of the swing is only forward, he will have the tendency to first extend the hands. This is mainly accomplished by using the arms to thrust the hands and knob, which does not require good hip and shoulder rotation. With this vision of the swing, keeping the hands back is at odds with his forward vision. He now has to consciously think, “Hips First.” -- Using cues to override a batter’s natural tendency to think forward is not as effective as changing how they invision the swing.
"Once I feel the batter is starting to have the correct vision of the swing, I use the cue, “Rotate the heel (initiate lower-body rotation) – Rotate the bat-head (initiate the acceleration back toward the catcher”). I ask the student, “what must you do with the top-hand as your elbow lowers to accelerate the bat-head back at the catcher?” After a few attempts, they learn to hold back (or pull back) the top-hand at the shoulder and allow shoulder rotation to accelerate the bat-head back. When they start to get the bat to accelerate correctly, the hips just naturally rotate ahead of the hands and they have the “L” in the back-leg at contact."
Jack Mankin
----------
quote:
Are you serious? How far is he hitting the balls? Looks like it won't get past the infielders. Show me someone who can hit a ball 400 feet with a one-handed swing. Show me someone who can adjust to a pitch he is not looking for with a one-handed swing. Pick any hand, it doesn't matter because it is not possible. You need both hands to "do work" in the high-level swing.
JJA, I know you're a smart person.....Smarter than me, for sure....I like to swing a bat and test stuff.....
I'm not sold on the bat quickness thing.....Give me batspeed when I need it and I'll take that.....I don't think I'm too interested in quickness, as I'm floating the bat before I "go".......I do believe hand torque helps a hitter to square up the bat on the ball.....IOW, to make better contact....
If I swing with a PCR type of swing, then swing with a hand torque swing, I make more solid contact with the ball with the hand torque swing......I, also, hit the ball farther...So, maybe it's quickness or something else, but, it does happen....
I'm not sold on the bat quickness thing.....Give me batspeed when I need it and I'll take that.....I don't think I'm too interested in quickness, as I'm floating the bat before I "go".......I do believe hand torque helps a hitter to square up the bat on the ball.....IOW, to make better contact....
If I swing with a PCR type of swing, then swing with a hand torque swing, I make more solid contact with the ball with the hand torque swing......I, also, hit the ball farther...So, maybe it's quickness or something else, but, it does happen....
You asked for blur, not distance.
Blur never did interest me...Blur can be anything....
Now, distance does interest me....
Now, distance does interest me....
Blur is a good indicator of acceleration.
Most of the swings being described would not serve a 5'11" batter weighing 190 pounds as a power hitter.
What would be the difference in Mickey Mantle's home run total if he were as big as Frank Howard?
Most of the swings being described would not serve a 5'11" batter weighing 190 pounds as a power hitter.
What would be the difference in Mickey Mantle's home run total if he were as big as Frank Howard?
quote:If you recall, DMac talked about Drew Stubbs of Texas, who had a 5.5 frame swing coming out of Texas. The guy is fast as a deer, with a cannon of an arm, with incredible athleticism, and DMac forbid his organization from drafting the guy. The Reds did in fact draft Stubbs at 7th in the draft anyway, but so far his minor league career has been poor due to his hitting. So, yes, DMac's organization refused to draft him despite the fact he was widely considered to be the finest athlete in college baseball at the time all because the frame count of his swing was 5.5 frames.
1st of all Stubbs was the 8th overall pick.
2nd he signed for 2 million dollars.
3rd Dmac was the only scout who uses that gage. Scouts don'y count frames. Heck they don't have time to sit and count frames if they did.
Scouts want BAT SPEED period. They don't care if its 10 frames as long as it results in consistently hard contact. Dmac may have told you he counted frames. I'll bet he didn't have to. Good swings are easy to pick out. Hitters is another story.
quote:For all the non-participants out there, this really is very simple. If your player/child has a swing with less than 5 frames of delay (as defined by DMac or bbscout), then the scouts will look at your player/child. IF IT"S OVER 5 FRAMES, THEY WILL PASS. That's all there is to it. If your player/kid has a 6 frame swing, you'd better work on swing quickness if you want your player/child to get to a higher level. All of this other blather out there is just noise. You need to develop a quick (less than 5 frames of delay) and power (greater than ~75 mph swing speed) or you're out. It's as simple as that.
4th guess that makes the above comments FALSE and from someone who doesn't really know.
5th in Stubbs 1st full season of pro baseball he hit 29 doubles and had 5 triples and 12 HR's and hit .270.....thats pretty darn good.
6th the player wasn't in Dmac's area and he didn't have that kind of pull.
7th The Nationals picked 15th so you will never know if they would have picked Stubbs.
8th Stubbs is a true centerfielder with plus power.True centerfielder means a 70-80 runner on 80 scale with 60-70 power on 80 scale with a 50-60 arm on 80 scale. His avg will not be a big issue with the extra bases that he will get. Those kinds of guys don't come along everyday. The Reds feel like they can help him improve as a hitter.
9th any scout who didn't see Stubbs that was in his area would have been fired.
