Weighted Balls Velocity Program

I would suggest searching the topic on this forum. You will see plenty of threads. Some people are big proponents (me) while others are more leary or don't think they offer much benefit. You can read through all the discussions, which have been quite extensive and educational.

The owner of Driveline Baseball (Kyle Boddy) is a member here and a regular contributor. I'm guessing Driveline is probably one of the weighted programs you are considering. My son has been doing Driveline's remote training since March. This is a little different than the free weighted ball program they offer on their site (you buy the supplies, it's just the written program that's available at no cost). But the overall concept is the same. He's picked up 10 mph in velocity since the Spring. He's 15, so it's hard to know if it's because of the program or growth. Most likely, a combination. The biggest upside is how strong and healthy his arm feels. He had zero pain through the Spring and summer seasons.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions. Good luck!

I would like to see a study that compares weighted balls with the same volume of Regulation throwing.

 

of course the weighted balls help velocity but a max effort throwing program with Regulation balls will probably help too.

 

Players gain x mph is hardly a proof, especially when we are talking 12-16 year olds who are still growing.

 

I'm not against weighted balls and I have gained about 15 mph of batspeed in an overload underload program (from 65 to 80+in my late 20s) but I don't really know how much I would have gained had I swung a normal bat at full effort every day.

 

I would definitely not start it before the mechanics are good.

 I like the 4oz. and 6oz weighted balls. A regular baseball is 5oz, and when you work out with a 6oz it will strengthen the arm but its not so heavy that it changes arm mechanics. the 4oz ball teaches your arm to speed up without changing arm mechanics again. I have never liked the heavy balls that kids struggle to throw.

Concur, as well as the long term impact. It is for that reason joemktgson has not used weighted balls, and instead uses the Throwers 10 program.

I actually have one and will go find it and post it. The original study on them goes back to John Bagonzi who got his PHD based on using weighted balls. Ron Wolforth perfected it and now Kyle Boddy continues to further refine the program(s).

 

There are a whole bunch of reasons to do them and they are rapidly becoming standard programs in colleges. It is not only about velocity, but arm care and control. Go to kyle's website and you can get some good background on them.

OK here it is:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/...b28/view?usp=sharing

 

This is the first of two studies, I don't have the second one, but it was pretty controlled given it was a HS, anyway there is clear evidence a proper program, and this includes the program and instruction are beneficial for pitchers.  

All great. One more thing. Would it be okay if I was doing the weighted balls while doing offseason lifting for football (3x per week)? I don't want to damage my arm. (Note: If I were to pick one, it would be football. I play NG/OG and weigh only 215 pounds. Need to bulk up.)

I only read the first few pages but this study seems not be controlled at all. 

 

A correct setup would include a comparable group doing the same volume of throws and the same accessory exercises but using standard balls. seems more like an advertisement than a study.

 

btw I don't believe that using 4-7 ounce balls can hurt a player more than a standard ball ( the baseball just has an arbitrary weight) but I would also like to know if it is really better than throwing normal balls.

 

i don't rule it out that it is better either, just would like to see a real study.

Until it's out of my control, I'm going with Dana Cavalea and no weighted balls.  This is one of those things that seem to split people on this board.  To each his own.

All I'll say is that I find it funny how many people require rigorous blinded studies on weighted ball throwing before they'll consider it yet will put tons of unhealthy stuff into their body and train for baseball in any number of untested non-peer reviewed ways.

 

Must be something about them.

 

Everyone knows my love for science and adherence to data. No one in the velocity development world has the sports science tools that I have to evaluate training techniques (and I've even run control vs. two A/B groups of velocity testing, you can find the data on my blog). I've come to accept that it's not enough for some people. All I can do is do right by the 50+ pros (6 big leaguers) and 40+ colleges that use our stuff. I don't waste a lot of time defending my program to others; it's time I could use supporting and researching the work I already do.

 

that's what the old School coaches who have their pitchers run poles say too. you are becoming one of those guys.

 

just kidding I know you put a ton of Research into it but you have to understand that People are more carefull with weighted balls than they are with other stuff like running poles because that Kind of Training is very stressfull and often considered dangerous. and I would actually agree with that asuming that many of the Kids doing weighted balls are not as well conditioned as your guys.

 

in short what were your findings regarding OL/UL Training vs just throwing Baseballs?

 

I know you would not suggest a Training form that is not proven but I think you understand as well as anybody that "pitchers improve 5 mph on average" that many programs Claim don't say much when they are done by pretty much untrained Teenagers.

 

of course you don't Need to defend your stuff but I think it would be sad if a mind like yours would revert to "my big league Clients are proof enough" (which is the same many old mlb coaches who teach to swing down and other stuff you frown upon say) although I can understand that your time is limited and you have better stuff to do.

I'd like to read your studies too. Thanks.

I think you put this pretty well.  I don't doubt the validity of what he says, but the "my big league players" proves I am right stuff is really off putting.  It basically says, that I am the smartest guy in the room, and you are all idiots if you don't believe every word I say.  That's not really a good way to convert people.  He may believe that he doesn't need to convert people, and frankly, he may not need to; but, it would be cool if he took a different approach and tried to help those that may be stuck in the old ways.

I wanted to address the notion that when proponents claim increases in mph that it might be explained by physical growth. With most programs this can be dismissed. Most programs are time contained. I use a program (much of it stolen from Kyle) that I run once a year for eleven weeks. Most programs are run on anywhere from a 6 week to 12 week time. When you are showing average improvements over that short of a period, growth can't be that big of a factor. Last year, I showed a 5.5 mph average increase. That is from the start to the end of the program. However, I only had seven participants and there is another factor that could be a contributor with my kids. At least half were new to me and I completely overhauled their mechanics which could have led to increases without the weighted balls. In fact, of those whose mechanics were not tinkered with during the program, the average was probably closer to 2.5 or 3 mph, which I still consider substantial. 

I know I have mentioned this before, but it applies to this thread as well. (I am not talking about Kyle's program in particular, just about any velocity gain studies overall)

 

Personally, I would primarily be interested in looking at proven gains above 85 mph.

 

Many, many kids can reach 80 or so depending on growth, age, strength improvements, weight gains, technique improvements, etc.  Many kids can have 10 mph improvements in a year, below 85 mph.

 

 

What exactly is the 6oz ball designed to do?  Does it simply add strength to the entire pitching motion or is it supposed to provide benefit (i.e. added strength) to some specific portion (I assume much of the leg and core do not gain any real benefit but interested in back, shoulder, arm and hand type stuff)?  Does the 6oz ball get thrown 100% - if so, does this provide additional stress (additional - not necessarily catastrophic) on the UCL?  Also, keep hearing comments about decelaration - how does the 6oz and 4 oz ball affect decelaration?  Lastly, assuming you have a home scale, can you save some bucks by using your waterlogged balls (always looking for a good use for these)?

There are some ten muscles that run across the ucl and provide support. It has been shown that the human ucl can only really withstand somewhere around an 85 mph (I'm working from memory here) throw without breaking. What allows a person to throw harder without tearing the ucl is support provided by those muscles. Unfortunately, little we do outside of actual throwing does much to increase the strength of those muscles. Throwing a 5oz. ball can only build the muscles up to a certain point. Adding one ounce or 20% to the load helps to build them up a little more. It would be like doing curls for building the bicep. At some point you flatten out any gains in muscle mass/strength and have to increase the weight/load to see further gains.

the human ucl can only really withstand somewhere around an 85 mph

Didn't Fleisig et al forget to factor in the rotating/lunging torso?

Right. That study, by itself, was misleading because it took into account nothing but forces on unsupported ucl tensile strength.  Interesting, but not really helpful.

There are control vs. A/B studies on my blog (drivelinebaseball.com/blog) from the 2013-2014 offseason. As for disclosing reams of EMG / force platedata, if I felt that I had anything to prove to messageboards and it was somehow beneficial to my business, I'd do it. I've done it in the past - you can ask anyone who has known me for years - and it just leads to a circular argument and mostly a waste of my time. I've lived the IRB approval pathway and I've spend hundreds of hours chopping up actual data and performing ANOVA analyses and so forth, again, much of which is freely available on my blog. Believe me when I say I'm right there with most of you wanting solid peer-reviewed evidence in a lot of things in life. 

 

But at some point after disclosing 95% of my work for free and at no charge, you just get tired of answering the same questions worded differently, most of which are asked in bad faith.

Fleisig is misquoted all the time and attributed to saying things that he never really said. Not saying anyone here is saying that, but Dr. Fleisig did not "forget" to factor in the torso. He was merely stating the UCL tensile strength was sufficient for X stress and since it fails above Y newton-meters of force, other variables must support the elbow/UCL/etc in the throwing motion. 

 

Science doesn't always have to be "applicable" or "conclusive." Fleisig's studies are extremely useful if someone is willing to think about them instead of take the data at face value. The more you want a derivative work to be conclusive with a p-value < 0.05 with a group of pro pitchers who ate 4000 kcals/day and threw exactly 40 weighted balls vs. a group of pro pitchers who did the same thing but threw exactly 40 normal balls at the same RPE... well, duh. This isn't going to happen. And the lack of this "study" being done does not invalidate the work. And this is my biggest problem with most of the detractors of weighted balls - my program, House's program, Wolforth's program, whatever - is that they have little respect for the massive complexity of such a study to be done and the orthodoxy and stubbornness of "Well, this wasn't done therefore it doesn't work!" This is not "scientific" or "evidence-based." This is being ridiculous for the sake of being a contrarian and using "science" as a shield for your beliefs.

 

This is also a good point on why I try not to comment on message threads. I wasn't using the 50+ big leaguers as "evidence" that I'm right, I was merely stating that doing right by them and the colleges/MLB teams I work with is more important than convincing a bunch of message board posters. Which, it is. No offense to you all.

I just wanted to make it clear that Fleisig's study of ucl strength wasn't meant to take all of those things into account. By "misleading" I meant that others misuse a simple piece of info that was never meant to prove any more than it states.

I've got a question about hand strength and pitching.  Can strengthening the "hand" muscles improve pitching (velocity and/or movement/spin)?  Do the weighted balls work to strengthen the "hand" muscles similar to other exercises - thinking about the finger curl with weights?  Started thinking about hand strength and it seems a lot of the strength comes from muscles in the forearm, but maybe some that extend above the elbow.  Have zero familiarity with the group of 10 muscles noted above and just trying to get a very basic understanding of 1) strengthening goals and then 2) exercises to achieve #1.  Do the weighted ball programs themselves describe in any detail exactly what strengthening is achieved?  Not questioning results but rather trying to get a better understanding of how the pitching mechanic flows from the muscles - which ones add velocity versus others that may simply keep the joints (shoulder/elbow/wrist) from hyper extending.  May be way above my ability to really understand, but wanted to see if someone could outline in plain english.

This is an extremely complex topic, but I do like some of the simpler analogies. No one in their right mind would have a bicep workout of 10 set of 20 reps. And you would never hit the biceps hard for 2 or 3 days in a row without a proper rest/recovery period. I believe recovery is one of the most, if not the most important factors in the pitcher safety equation.

 

You might if you were only curling 5 ounces. However, I prefer to curl at least 12 ounces and, on occasion, 40 ounces.

I do weighted balls a little different. My pitchers work up to 8 ounces at the end, never go under 4 ounces, only throw three times a week, and all throwing is full speed fro the mound at 60' 6". This has worked well for me, though not recommended by many of the other programs. It's also hell on catcher's mitts.

Edited: wrote 9 were I meant 8.

Just a quick post on the Fleisig study. There is some serious data collection errors in this study due to "cosign errors" in measuring the velocities. CADad who used to post here and actually is a "rocket scientist" pointed them out but never received a response from his inquiries that I was aware of. 

 

There is such a body of work on the subject and Kyle is continuing to add to it both qualitatively and quantitatively, that if you are a pitcher with any kind of serious talent it has to be an area that you need to look into if you want to maximize your talent. 

 

This research goes back over 50 years by Dr John Bagonzi as I posted earlier he received his PHD on the subject where he studied and proved that they improved pitching velocity and performance.

 

http://www.rickerfh.com/memsol.cgi?user_id=1551481

 

The Russians and Bulgarians also did a lot of research into dynamic over and underload training and this is where Kettlebells come from.  

 

Again everyone has to do the research and decide for themselves but there is a HUGE body of work on the subject, however it is not easy to find. 

 

So Kyle just did not dream this stuff up, but from what I have seen (granted from a distance) he is taking a very scientific approach and trying to understand and extend the knowledge in this area.

 

just my two cents.

 

One additional antidote on the subject. My son's DIII college program has been using weighted balls for at least 7 years and they are consistently one of the top pitching programs in the country and consistently have guys throwing over 90. Now granted they do a lot more than just weighted balls, but it has been a corner stone of the program for years.  

 

Btw I'm not doubting Ol/ul training but I would like to see the extra gain compared to just throwing.

 

I think that it makes mostly sense for pitchers who are already highly trained. A lower trained guy will get the same benefit from a simple long toss program with game balls but if you are already trained very well it can can help to break motor speed barriers that have been created.

 

the biggest effect is probably not arm strength but tricking the neurons to fire faster.

Here is a problem. Who is going to do such a study? If you are a guy taking money to train pitchers (or even if you've taken on training them on a volunteer basis) you either believe in weighted balls or you don't. For me, I do the exact same throwing I have done in the past - and do in-season - without weighted balls. My experience is that weighted balls provide more of an increase in velocity as the same work with 5 oz only balls. So, am I to take some pitcher who is paying me to use my best judgment in increasing his velocity and then put him into a placebo study group? Conversely, if I don't believe in weighted balls and think they may be a danger, am I to take a pitcher paying for my supposed expertise and put him into a weighted ball group that I don't believe will help and might even hurt? The only way it works is to find two separate instructors, doing opposite programs and compare. I believe that has been done. I've tried both and shown gains with that I did not see without. Maybe someone else has a different result with at least a handful of kids. If so, I'd be interested in hearing from them. I have yet to hear from any instructor who used weighted balls on a group of pitchers and had no success or had injuries.

 

Long toss? To assume that it would accomplish the same as weighted balls, you first have to assume that long toss uses the exact same muscles as throwing from a mound - I personally don't believe that and ASMI seems to concur.

 

Yes, one benefit of the Underweight part of the work is basically teaching the arm to overcome natural velocity barriers based on weight load.

My player did the following:

 

Went from 84-90mph in one year using the weighted balls that I mentioned above.

He also grew 2 inches and put on 10-15 lbs that year.

The next year:

Went 90-92mph with no weighted ball program.

he also grew 2 inches and put on 10-15 lbs that year.

So did the weighted ball program work?....I have no real way of finding out, but some folks will give credit to whatever aid or workout that they are doing at the time. I suppose thats ok.

Yeah, those kind of timetables make it impossible to tell. Like I said, I do eleven weeks before the season and then only use weighted balls a little bit in-season as maintenance. The gains I see are quick. They are steady and noticeable gains within the eleven week period. I would have a question for you. With the weighted ball season, how long into the program before you saw noticeable velocity gains?

 

edit: I misspoke a little. The gains I speak of come from an eleven week period at the end of fall. I then start a second program 7 or 8 weeks before the HS season starts. Gains are bigger here, but I attribute some of that to the normal gains from starting the season after a layoff.

Doctor, did he do all of this without any arm problem?

 No arm problems from this program, a 6oz ball is enough to work the throwing muscle groups without having to shotput or even take a short step and change your form.

There may be a better way, but I haven't found it.

Those are fantastic results. Congratulations.

 

kyle, would you agree with that (i.e. the gains of OL/UL compared to a Standard Long toss Regime) mostly come into Play with advanced athletes)?

 

are you doing that with all athletes, regardless how they are trained?

 

regarding injuries I don't really think a 6 oz ball is not an increased risk, that is just a Little more. it is not like marshall guys who throw 6 lbs shot puts, just 30 grams more.

I'm so thankful for this thread! I was just told by my son's trainer to research this topic and make an informed decision.  Thank you everyone for sharing so much information here!  This is an amazing resource for baseball!

As always, this topic is getting a lot of discussion from both sides.

 

One thing I will add, from our experience, is the Max Velo program we are using through Driveline is not just a weighted ball program. There are many different facets to it, including weight training, other throwing exercises and mechanical review through video. My son did a lot of work on his mechanics and throwing patterns prior to ever picking up a weighted ball. They also pay attention to whether he is in season or out of season and when he may be pitching.

Anyone familiar with this program... http://velocityplusarmcare.com/ ?

 

Just wondering?