No, sorry, all those studies have been proven to have scientific errors in their reports.
3.12
"Escamila et al. failed to respect three facets of science.
1. They did not read, or if they did, interpret correctly the original works they cited. The double-checking of the original published articles should remove the perpetuation of misrepresentations that creep into the literature. That behavior is one of the basic tenets of scholarship. Science is about minimizing error. That did not occur in this case.
2. The works used to construct arguments should be valid and reliable, that is, they should be "true". The authors mixed scientific with non-scientific papers giving them all equal credibility when developing their arguments. When formulating hypotheses for research, the derivative premises must be true. That was not respected in this case.
3. The arguments developed for weighted ball throwing used mixed modalities. A paper using a resistance device was treated as being equivalent to actually throwing an object. Other mixed modality papers were also referenced, further muddying the picture. That type of reasoning leads to the production of false conclusions, as it did in this case."
3.6
"The belief that heavier or lighter stimuli will improve the velocity of pitching is at odds with other baseball-skill research. Otsuji, Abe, and Kino****a (2002) and Southard and Groomer (2003) studied the effect of swinging with a weighted bat on normal-bat velocity. As would be predicted, the weighted-bat had a negative effect in that it slowed the velocity of the normal bat swing despite subjects reporting the normal bat feeling lighter and being swung faster. In accord with the principle of specificity of neuromuscular patterning, Southard and Groomer also observed that the swing pattern with the normal bat was altered significantly after using an overweight bat.
Another investigation of under- and overloaded training stimuli was performed by Bauer, Sale, Zehr, and Moroz (1994). young men trained for five weeks using three sets of ballistic elbow extensions with a load equal to 10% of maximal isometric strength. Additional training (three sets of five repetitions) was performed at 0, 10, or 20% of the load. Neither the under- nor overload supplementary ballistic training provided any benefit beyond that attained by training with the target performance. Movement training was very specific. Effects gained from the other "like" activities did not transfer or benefit the target action. Much training time could be wasted performing activities based on the specious conclusion considered here.
One has to ask, how could the velocity and neuromuscular patterning of one baseball skill, batting, be harmed by using a heavier bat, when another skill, pitching, is improved supposedly by using a heavier ball? It is beyond credibility to believe that there is a different neuromuscular effect and principle for overweight implement use for the two very high velocity skills in the same sport.
A factor to consider here is that the bat studies were independent scientifically validated studies. Papers in the weighted-ball area are often unacceptable in research design or contain elemental review errors, such as investing generalizations in one author (and not exhibiting independent verification)."
24.6
"Neuromuscular patterning. The neuromuscular patterning of skill development is very specific. Slight oritentations in the speed of execution of the "same" skill produce totally different biomechanical and neuromuscular organizations (Councilman, 1968; Pipes, 1978). This feature seems to be neglected by many baseball coaches. Factors such as fatigue produce alterations in the patterning required to execute the "same" skill (Williams, McEwan, Watkins, Gillespie, & Boyd, 1979). Even within the realm of strength training, it is apparent that the inital major gains in strength are not through hypertrophy (a physiological phenomenon) but neuromuscular reorganization of existing physiological resoureces (Sale, 1974; Sale & MacDougall, 1981). For baseball, in which a light to moderate strength component is required, the best way to develop strength is to do the skill at a maximum effort (Costill, Sharp, & Troup, 1980)... The need for training is to focus on the specificity of training because of the extremely limited, specific effects of exercise and skill learning. It can be argued persuasively that the neuromuscular patterning of pitching skills is the major determinant of baseball pitching performance.
The implications from neuromuscular patterning as a feature of the principle of specificity are several. The activities of training should be analyzed so they are qualitatively the same as those required for a game. Each of the various types of pitches should be treated as discreet skills and not assumed to be "similar", particularly at the advanced levels of the sport. The potential exists that auxiliary training activities may produce competing and often dominant neuromuscular patterns which reduce or even hinder pitching skill.
The exacting requirements of specific neuromuscular training demands that there be a reduction in the use of auxiliary, non-specific activities for training athletes and dveloping skills."
So, the fact that you're not throwing off the mound, there's 1 way it's not going to transfer over. Another way is that, if you're not doing it with game-time intensity, there's another way it's not going to transfer over.
Oh and, why practice what you're not going to use in a game, when the arm is just a control device? The body delivers the arm. What's a 7 oz baseball going to do to help the body MOVE FASTER. I'd love to hear your explanation.
Ta-da
