Torque vs. forward momentum?

My son's pitching coach promotes this. I believe it promotes more of a linear approach as opposed to swinging the leg forward which promotes more of a rotational approach. He feels that it is better to get all your weight and momentum going towards the plate rather than around the body. Makes sense, although you will see a lot of guys with more of a rotational delivery. I'm not the expert, there may be more guys on here that can debate which is better. Hope my explanation makes sense.

The real power in pitching happens after foot plant. How you get there is different for different pitchers. Some kids tend to rotate too soon and I could see how this would help. Zito pitches like this. My son's coach wants him to think about leading with his heal to prevent this.

Rotation = Velocity

quote:

Originally posted by RobV:
Rotation = Velocity

The timing of the rotation has a lot to do with it. Rotating open too early kills it.

Well, one of the things my son has to constantly watch and work on is dragging his arm. He gets very good separation between hips and shoulders, but will have a tendancy to open his front shoulder a little too early. I think it's because of this, his coach wants him to work on staying back and not swinging that front leg around. You need rotation to throw, but I think a pitcher should get as much of his momentum going towards the target as he can. I think if you get too much side to side, it becomes wasted. As with most things, too much of anything is not good.

If you go to Chris O'Leary's site, he gives numerous examples of guys who are described as having a more 'linear' approach and many examples of shoulder injuries sustained, he believes, from such an approach.
Pitching Mechanic

I'm certainly not saying that Mr. O'Leary is the be-all-and-end-all of pitching mechanics, but he builds a solid argument against the linear approach, imho.

watching a kid around 15-16 throw a bullpen, I noticed that once he brought his leg up, he dropped it straight down about 2 inches off the ground, and then drove forward.

I too am no expert but don't believe it affects torque or velocity. The reason I say that is that forward rotation can't really begin until foot strike occurs, just as in hitting. The advantage I see in dropping the leg sooner and then moving forward, rather doing it later, would be to promote balance and lighten the foot strike. I always felt more controlled that way and found it a simpler movement to repeat.

I have watched a lot of slow motion pitching mechanics and I have never seen an advantage of liner over rotational. Because of the catapult effect of throwing a baseball it seems to make more sense to me if the body was more rotational while still striding with that rotation in a straight line. One of the best examples of this is Bob Feller-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ifb6dT-tso0

Looks like while Bob had a huge leg lift, he brought that leg down pretty close to center line and then out towards the plate. I watched the video several times and his delivery does not seem as rotational as some I have seen.

Both can work. It is whatever the pitcher has found to work for them that is important. Arm angles, etc. right at the moment of foot plant are pretty important even though there are different ways of getting there. O'Leary is a motivational speaker who has found a new group of ... to make money off.

Lets hope we don't start to wallow in a "linear vs rotational" argument on pitching mechanics.

I will agree that both can work just depending on preference. I know that my son when he first started pitching (9 yrs old) never even got sideways the whole first year. When he finally did get sideways his velocity didn't show any improvement, he just had less fatigue and looked better. For the first three years he just pitched from the stretch and showed no difference in velocity with either a quick slide step or high leg kick. Last year he began pitching from the windup and once again no improvement in velocity. I think mostly it's all mental and what really matters is hip and shoulder timing and proper separation....But then again, I am no pitching analyst either, I just know that for the most part a pitchers ultimate potential lies within the principles of proper mechanics.

Now, if only we could all agree on what the perfect mechanics really is. Is there even such a thing?

Pitching and hitting are very similar. The best start coiled or loaded, go linear, the front leg firms up, and you rotate around that front hip.

There is no such thing as linear only or rotational only anywhere in baseball. As ncball noted there are elements of each in hitting and pitching. I am not sure where this analogy came from, Wolforth I think, anyway one way to visualize pitching mechanics is: “legs are like the a rail car moving down a track, with a merry-go-round sitting on top of this for the trunk rotational aspect, with a ferris-wheel sitting on top of this for the vertical trunk rotation.” One pitching coach used this with my son to help him work on different aspects of his delivery. Gives an easy visual to talk to that kids can relate with. Many youth pitchers have too much “merry-round”, not enough “rail car” and the extra life and real velocity is developed once they get the “ferris-wheel” working.

For the love of Babe Ruth, the forward stride is not related to "linear" hitting. I don't know where you people read this stuff. "Linear" hitting is the lack of an "L" back elbow.

"Linear" has nothing to do with pitching.

quote:

Originally posted by ncball:
Pitching and hitting are very similar.

Amen.

quote:

Originally posted by SultanofSwat:
For the love of Babe Ruth, the forward stride is not related to "linear" hitting. I don't know where you people read this stuff. "Linear" hitting is the lack of an "L" back elbow.

"Linear" has nothing to do with pitching.

Sultan ... "Stride to balance" is a linear movement, "the Swing" is a rotational movement. That verbage, or some similar version, are oft used terms by lots of published hitting types.

Pitching and Hitting are "more than" similar from a Physics perspective. Both contain linear and rotational movement. Or did I "mislearn" Physics?

quote:

Originally posted by BOF:
Lets hope we don't start to wallow in a "linear vs rotational" argument on pitching mechanics.

This cracks me up... we have a linear vs rotational hitting argument breaking out in the pitching forum.

Run for the hills....

BOF, you crack me up.

I'm running too. Sorry I said anything. War over.

quote:

Originally posted by ncball:
Pitching and hitting are very similar.

I disagree. Hitting is all about adjustment. Pitching is taking a long run and focusing the power into one spot that has been predesignated before the pitching motion has even begun.

[quote]I disagree. Hitting is all about adjustment. Pitching is taking a long run and focusing the power into one spot that has been predesignated."

LA ....Hitters, most often, make adjustments between at bats or between swings, not during swings. You can do so, but not with power. The hitter sees the ball and swings to the spot where his "minds-eye" tells him he will make contact. Thus, the longer your mechanics allow you to wait, the more successful you will be.

When someone comments "Pitching and Hitting are similar," they are likely referring to the movements necessary to generate power (Mechanics) as they relate to the Laws of Physics. In that realm, they are very similar.