Skip to main content

24 replies

Which part of the ball should you aim to hit?

Replies sorted oldest to newest

M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by vertigo_911:
Says a lot on the title. Mankin says that the 'lower middle' part and Charley Lau Jr. says the upper inside part to pull the knob to. But if you want more line drives and home runs, which part of the ball should I aim to hit for? BTW, I'm back to practicing rotational mechanics...




The center! Make believe the ball is flat instead of 3D and aim for the center. Do the same as far as what field to hit to (except for special circumstances), aim for the middle and adjust to pitch location (wait longer on outside and sooner on inside).
T TG500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by vertigo_911:
Says a lot on the title. Mankin says that the 'lower middle' part and Charley Lau Jr. says the upper inside part to pull the knob to. But if you want more line drives and home runs, which part of the ball should I aim to hit for? BTW, I'm back to practicing rotational mechanics...
Charlie Lau set back hitting ten years - Ted Williams
Last edited by TG
T tom.guerry100+ posts
trying to hit inside ball and hitting ball hard up middle or slightly oppo as in "inside seam drill" can be a good way to avoid rushing things.

Williams recommended "setting sites higher" when slumping.

As you go along, you tend to want to load up and hit more and more with the back arm, especially if you have back arm as dominant arm (Williams did not). As you do this, the swing gets longer and loopier, more like a deep v instead of a shallow U. This usually makes you late and low, so you can get back on track/shorten up and still avoid rushing by setting sites higher.
As Williams said, most iof the time he missed, he missed low.
M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by vertigo_911:
Better player doesn't equal better teacher... Rudy Jamarillo never played in MLB and he is the best MLB hitting instructor right now, for example.

If you check out Lau's accomplishment as a teacher however, I'll take his advice and results over Williams and pull hitting...




Williams was not just a player. He was a Manager, hitting Coach, and author of books on hitting. He lived, slept and ate hitting. The last player to hit over .400.

Career stats:

BA .344 7th all time and best since 1960

OB% .482 1st all time

SL% .634 2nd all time

OPS 1.11 2nd all time


You can have Lau, I'll take Williams. Take Lau's best student and compare him to Williams and then look at the student on film and see if he actually did what Lau taught. I doubt it.
V vertigo_91110+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by micmeister:
Williams was not just a player. He was a Manager, hitting Coach, and author of books on hitting. He lived, slept and ate hitting. The last player to hit over .400.

Career stats:

BA .344 7th all time and best since 1960

OB% .482 1st all time

SL% .634 2nd all time

OPS 1.11 2nd all time


You can have Lau, I'll take Williams. Take Lau's best student and compare him to Williams and then look at the student on film and see if he actually did what Lau taught. I doubt it.


I know Williams was a player, manager for Senators and wrote a book on hitting. Yeah, the pull hitting can just murder the pitches inside and middle, but since the smart pitchers know that they generally cannot really hit outside pitches well (Williams hit less than .250 on low outside; take a look at where pitchers generally pitch to Giambi) I consider it as a big advantage. George Brett could hit to all fields (and I do see that he does what Lau teaches, his swings are similar/same to Lau's students' swings in his DVD), under Lau, Reggie Jackson hit his only .300 in 1980 (under Lau's teaching) and half of his HR's that year went to opposite fields. I can list more. I don't know if people denounce Lau's methods while knowing how his mechanics work (which is the worst thing that could happen when talking about 'gurus'...)
Last edited by vertigo_911
Q Quincy1,000+ posts
The best hitting style is the one that works for you.

Setting your aim at a moving target requires some allowance for the change in location from the point the ball is at when you decide to swing and where the contact point will be.

The best contact point will always be center of the ball. The hard part is getting the good part of the bat on that center.
M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by vertigo_911:
quote:
Originally posted by micmeister:
Williams was not just a player. He was a Manager, hitting Coach, and author of books on hitting. He lived, slept and ate hitting. The last player to hit over .400.

Career stats:

BA .344 7th all time and best since 1960

OB% .482 1st all time

SL% .634 2nd all time

OPS 1.11 2nd all time


You can have Lau, I'll take Williams. Take Lau's best student and compare him to Williams and then look at the student on film and see if he actually did what Lau taught. I doubt it.


I know Williams was a player, manager for Senators and wrote a book on hitting. Yeah, the pull hitting can just murder the pitches inside and middle, but since the smart pitchers know that they generally cannot really hit outside pitches well (Williams hit less than .250 on low outside; take a look at where pitchers generally pitch to Giambi) I consider it as a big advantage. George Brett could hit to all fields (and I do see that he does what Lau teaches, his swings are similar/same to Lau's students' swings in his DVD), under Lau, Reggie Jackson hit his only .300 in 1980 (under Lau's teaching) and half of his HR's that year went to opposite fields. I can list more. I don't know if people denounce Lau's methods while knowing how his mechanics work (which is the worst thing that could happen when talking about 'gurus'...)




Okay, George Brett is your guy, huh?

BA .305

OB% .369

SL% .487

HR 317

SO per at bat 11.39


Williams hit 521 HRs and only struck out 10.86 times per at bat. Maybe George should have pulled the ball more, huh? The pitching must have really sucked when Williams played too I guess since he struck out so few times and according to you had a tremendous weekness on outside pitches.

By the way, Brett did work with Lau, but he was a rotational hitter. Watch the hips open first in his swing and he was not out on his front foot nor did he swing down (THE SINGLE WORST ADVICE EVER GIVEN) and the main reason Williams made the quote about Lau.
Last edited by micmeister
V vertigo_91110+ posts
In Lau method you are NOT swinging down... again, an example of not really understanding the method. You are starting down (maybe this is confused with swinging down) while pulling the knob, but the gravity takes over and the barrel gets automatically drops (which makes a square contact, not an ugly chop swing); that makes a square contact with a ball, this is a reason why George Brett doesn't look he's swinging down. Again, the knob-pulling starts down,you firm-up the front leg and the bat barrel is dropped and goes out to the ball, and makes a square contact. The firming up of the front leg makes the bat head out in rotational way (so the bat goes linear-rotational); that is the reason why Brett looks 'rotational', or maybe all Lau students are 'rotational'. Lau also says the front hips lead the way, so that doesn't count...

The typical 'linear' swing that people blabber as Charlie Lau's 'accomplishment'...:

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis?p=12&n=1&m=20&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=9

the above swing is NOT a Charlie Lau swing; I can name at least 3 or 4 components that this hitter is doing wrong in terms of Lau swing. By the way, I use both rotational (Englishbey, not Epstein or Williams) and Lau swing, and I'm doing this becuase of some wrongs views on Lau's accomplishments. But that doesn't mean Lau method is perfect either. But I did adopt some aspects of the Lau swing to my rotational swing. Williams was blessed with great ability and back then was a time when pitchers threw softer than now (Bob Gibson topped out at 90mph when the speed gun was installed in Busch Stadium according to Dr. Mike Marshall)

The best hitting style is the one that works for you.

That'd be reason why that I advocate Charley Lau... I did studied Willaims's method after buying his book in May. But I went something like 3 for 13 with a lot of strikeouts. I then adopted Lau's method and went 8-for-20 (and about 8 walks and 2 SF) for the rest of Travel team league
Last edited by vertigo_911
M micmeister500+ posts
Here is the difference in what I believe and what Lau teaches. Although his teachings have been changed somewhat.

The Absolutes of Hitting
The Lau philosophy of hitting is taught exclusively at our schools. Our philosophy is based on what we call the laws or absolutes of hitting:

Achieve a balanced stance-AGREE
Launch the bat from a 45 degree position off the back shoulder-PERSONAL PREFERENCE
Develop a rhythm to alleviate tension-AGREE
Stride with front foot closed-DISAGREE I believe front foot should be at 45 degrees.
Take a direct path to the ball; pull the knob to the ball-Don't agree with PULL knob, I believe guide or direct knob
Develop good weight transfer -- from a firm rigid back-side to a firm rigid front-side-DISAGREE IMO, weight should be balanced over back thigh. If you have a proper swing, the weight will transfer from back to front at contact to through extension.
Keep head still and down at contact-AGREE
Hit through the ball with lead arm extension and flat hands-AGREE
Finish the swing high-AGREE
Hit to all fields-AGREE hit ball where it is pitched.
Last edited by micmeister
M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by vertigo_911:
In Lau method you are NOT swinging down... again, an example of not really understanding the method. You are starting down (maybe this is confused with swinging down) while pulling the knob, but the gravity takes over and the barrel gets automatically drops (which makes a square contact, not an ugly chop swing); that makes a square contact with a ball, this is a reason why George Brett doesn't look he's swinging down. Again, the knob-pulling starts down,you firm-up the front leg and the bat barrel is dropped and goes out to the ball, and makes a square contact. The firming up of the front leg makes the bat head out in rotational way (so the bat goes linear-rotational); that is the reason why Brett looks 'rotational', or maybe all Lau students are 'rotational'. Lau also says the front hips lead the way, so that doesn't count...

The typical 'linear' swing that people blabber as Charlie Lau's 'accomplishment'...:

http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis?p=12&n=1&m=20&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=9

the above swing is NOT a Charlie Lau swing; I can name at least 3 or 4 components that this hitter is doing wrong in terms of Lau swing. By the way, I use both rotational (Englishbey, not Epstein or Williams) and Lau swing, and I'm doing this becuase of some wrongs views on Lau's accomplishments. But that doesn't mean Lau method is perfect either. But I did adopt some aspects of the Lau swing to my rotational swing. Williams was blessed with great ability and back then was a time when pitchers threw softer than now (Bob Gibson topped out at 90mph when the speed gun was installed in Busch Stadium according to Dr. Mike Marshall)

The best hitting style is the one that works for you.

That'd be reason why that I advocate Charley Lau... I did studied Willaims's method after buying his book in May. But I went something like 3 for 13 with a lot of strikeouts. I then adopted Lau's method and went 8-for-20 (and about 8 walks and 2 SF) for the rest of Travel team league




I think, if you want to be a base hitter, then Lau's philosophy could be for you. But his MLB lifetime stats don't back that up. BA .255; 16 HRs in 1170 at bats with 150 SOs. Tony Gwynn did well with it though, although he used rotational mechanics too. I think people take bits and pieces of whoever's style they like and fits with their swing and goals.

When you say you "adopted Lau's method", what did you change in your swing?
handyrandyhandyrandy100+ posts
There is teaching how to and there is performing a physical task..being a great performer does not automatically make you a great teacher of that task. Be it golf or basketball(my areas of strength) or baseball(NOT), many of the greatest instructors or coaches were NOT the best at performing said task-good or very good, perhaps, but not necessarily elite.
Because someone was a very good or even world-class performer does not necessarily mean they can teach it to people less talented-some can't relate to people with less natural talent.
Just a hunch, but I would bet that Tiger Woods would not be a great instructor-maybe, but I doubt if he could relate to my MUCH lower talent level.
M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by handyrandy:
There is teaching how to and there is performing a physical task..being a great performer does not automatically make you a great teacher of that task. Be it golf or basketball(my areas of strength) or baseball(NOT), many of the greatest instructors or coaches were NOT the best at performing said task-good or very good, perhaps, but not necessarily elite.
Because someone was a very good or even world-class performer does not necessarily mean they can teach it to people less talented-some can't relate to people with less natural talent.
Just a hunch, but I would bet that Tiger Woods would not be a great instructor-maybe, but I doubt if he could relate to my MUCH lower talent level.




I absolutely agree that just because you are great at something doen't make you a good teacher, but you can learn much by watching someone do something that well and that is how I use Mr. Williams. I believe I am a very good teacher, but I will be the first to admit, I don't know everything there is to know about hitting and like golf, it will never be mastered.
N nls420910+ posts
Lau or Williams, which is the better approach?

Both of them will "work" in the sense that you can be a fairly competent hitter using both approaches. Both will result in success in terms of overall performance at the high school level, taking all things in consideration.

However, which method will result in pushing the player to the next level? I have to say it is the Williams method, as explained by Epstein.

Regarding hitting ability and power, two of the five skills used to measure a player, the Williams method clearly benefits the average player more than Lau's principles.

It comes down to power. A more rotational model will result in greater power, no question about it. Please name me a power hitter besides Frank Thomas that has used Lau-like principles to drive the ball, particularly with a firm front-side?

Bonds - rotational
Aaron - rotational
Jackson - rotational
Pujols - rotational
Griffey Jr. - rotational
Jimmy Wynn - rotational
Kirby Puckett - rotational

Six players of different sizes who could all drive the ball. And this is why the Williams/Epstein method is of most benefit to most players. It builds power and bat speed.

If you want to be primarily a singles hitter I have no problem with Lau. However, to play at the next level, college or pro, using Lau principles you had better have a great deal of speed and a great arm because if you don't have those skills you aren't going to get the looks you want.

Ask a scount if, all other things being equal, they want a kid with a high batting average and poor bat speed or one with great bat speed and a mediocre average.

Singles hitters in the mlb without speed and/or an arm are an extreme rarity. Sean Casey is one but why doesn't he play every day? Remember, Gwynn was fast when he came up.

If, however, you are like 90% of the population and aren't fast, don't have a plus arm and aren't Frank Thomas or even Brett size you had better be able to drive the ball.

It's a hard cold fact but it is true.

All that being said, neither method will work for any hitter (with extremely few exceptions like Vlad G.) if they aren't smart hitters. You have to pay attention to the mental aspects of hitting. Epstein does a great job of addressing this part of hitting. Epstein also does a great job of translating Williams into more common language and presents tools for using a rotational hitting model.
M micmeister500+ posts
quote:
Originally posted by nls4209:
Lau or Williams, which is the better approach?

Both of them will "work" in the sense that you can be a fairly competent hitter using both approaches. Both will result in success in terms of overall performance at the high school level, taking all things in consideration.

However, which method will result in pushing the player to the next level? I have to say it is the Williams method, as explained by Epstein.

Regarding hitting ability and power, two of the five skills used to measure a player, the Williams method clearly benefits the average player more than Lau's principles.

It comes down to power. A more rotational model will result in greater power, no question about it. Please name me a power hitter besides Frank Thomas that has used Lau-like principles to drive the ball, particularly with a firm front-side?

Bonds - rotational
Aaron - rotational
Jackson - rotational
Pujols - rotational
Griffey Jr. - rotational
Jimmy Wynn - rotational
Kirby Puckett - rotational

Six players of different sizes who could all drive the ball. And this is why the Williams/Epstein method is of most benefit to most players. It builds power and bat speed.

If you want to be primarily a singles hitter I have no problem with Lau. However, to play at the next level, college or pro, using Lau principles you had better have a great deal of speed and a great arm because if you don't have those skills you aren't going to get the looks you want.

Ask a scount if, all other things being equal, they want a kid with a high batting average and poor bat speed or one with great bat speed and a mediocre average.

Singles hitters in the mlb without speed and/or an arm are an extreme rarity. Sean Casey is one but why doesn't he play every day? Remember, Gwynn was fast when he came up.

If, however, you are like 90% of the population and aren't fast, don't have a plus arm and aren't Frank Thomas or even Brett size you had better be able to drive the ball.

It's a hard cold fact but it is true.

All that being said, neither method will work for any hitter (with extremely few exceptions like Vlad G.) if they aren't smart hitters. You have to pay attention to the mental aspects of hitting. Epstein does a great job of addressing this part of hitting. Epstein also does a great job of translating Williams into more common language and presents tools for using a rotational hitting model.




I agree with everything you've said here. I just wish Epstein would have taken it a step further. He never really explains the role of the hands in the swing. I think Lau does a good job of explaining the hands purpose, but his method does not take full advantage of the core or legs.

Add Reply

Post
Baseball Sale Canada

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×