Road to a High-Level Swing: Nyman and/or Englishbey PCR?

[fungo22]

I'm going to offer a platform for Guerry to make his case. Swingbuster can contribute, but I'm going to ignore his posts, because I'm going to attempt to be civil, and "a good man knows his limitations." I'm going to try to be good. And as a token of my good faith, I'm not going to say what my "limitations" are in this context. In fact, I'll do my best to stay out of it.


The NYman swing is not/never will lead to a high level pattern.
The weird Nyman spinhook quick swing with early adjustment and late batspeed may work just fine in fastpitch. GREAT!

It is NOT an MLB swing.You must get familair with and believe in the destination you are headed for and live with it. If you don;t understand the destination, any road will get you there,but potential will not be realizable.

Why then do we hear all this mlb as truth detector stuff if that is not the destination.
This is a pretty strong contention. If you can demonstrate this, you will have achieved something. If you need to post clips to prove your point, do so. Or request those that you don't have and we'll post them for you if we can. I think we've been through all this before at other venues, but I'm willing to take another look at Guerry's case. I'm sure there are other inquirers out there who would consider it a valuable service.

Please leave golf and throwing mechanics out of it. They are functional red herrings. I think they are false analogies, but even if golf and throwing are in some way analogous to hitting, arguing from them are "arguments from analogy" and no such argument is valid. If you need me to prove this (again), I will be happy to copy and paste my logic textbook citations from Shawn Bell's site. In short, if you know something about swing mechanics, then prove it in the context of swing mechancs.

Remember who your audience is. You have borrowed or created numerous terms, the definition of which are known only to you or perhaps to Swingbuster. I'll start: A "high-level" swing is one exectuted by most MLB hitters and certain NCAA fastpitch softball hitters (Richardson, Fernandez, Rivera, Bustos, M. Smith, and others). It has the following qualities: (1) sufficiently quick to the ball to hitt 90+ baseball pitching and 60+ NCAA softball pitching, (2) sufficiently accurate to the ball to maintain .275+ average at high levels, and (3) producing bat speed sufficient to hit dingers. I welcome amendments or modifications to this definition, but no circular definition/arguments (e.g., a high-level swing contains PCR or a universal arm action). These are propositions to be proven by evidence and arguments - not simply by definition.

The question is whether the PCR swing, as taught by Nyman and/or Englishbey, is a "high-level" swing or a potential transition (developmental stage) to a "high-level" swing. Tom says "no." Is that an unsupported assertion or is it something he can demonstrate with reasonable arguments?

[ssarge]

"a good man knows his limitations."

Clint Eastwood, "Magnum Force"?

Not quite, "I know what you're thinking. . .Did he fire six shots, or only five? Now, seeing as this is a 44-Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you have to ask yourself one question. . .Do I feel lucky?. . . Well, do ya. . .punk?"

But still good.

Regards,

Scott

[ssarge]

It has the following qualities: (1) sufficiently quick to the ball to hitt 90+ baseball pitching and 60+ NCAA softball pitching, (2) sufficiently accurate to the ball to maintain .275+ average at high levels, and (3) producing bat speed sufficient to hit dingers.
Those are the qualities.

Regards,

Scott

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Ok, so....

Group A and B both agree on most techniques and approaches when it comes to a high level swing, right?

The difference is, when teaching youngsters,

Group A chooses to focus more on building blocks, knowing full well that eventually the young hitter will need to make further adjustments and hone his technique. These "further adjustments and techniques are agreed upon by both groups?

Group B chooses to teach those future required adjustments and techniques right off the bat, believing that this will provide them with the tools to progress through the years and develop better?


Is this correct, or no?

[swingbuster]

Group A chooses to focus more on building blocks, knowing full well that eventually the young hitter will need to make further adjustments and hone his technique. These "further adjustments and techniques are agreed upon by both groups?

Group B chooses to teach those future required adjustments and techniques right off the bat, believing that this will provide them with the tools to progress through the years and develop better?


In fairness, of the further adjustments, only one is an absolute. The other a strong maybe for many players

1. weight shift

2. Bat plane transition/ hand set/ hand torque/ bhut

[Mark H]

Ohfor's posted clips proved 2 was not an absolute for MLB hitters.

[bbjunkie]

Clint Eastwood, "I know what you're thinking. . .Did he fire six shots, or only five? Now, seeing as this is a 44-Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you have to ask yourself one question. . .Do I feel lucky?. . . Well, do ya. . .punk?"

Isn't that from Dirty Harry?

[swingbuster]

He did indeed Mark and he missed one of them...ARod I think the statement above clearly indicates it is not an absolute.

What about weight shift. Don't talk about momentum transfer to me if your saying it doesn't include weight shift. Don't hide behind that STRAW MAN deal. It jsut confuses people

[Ifubuildit]

Gentlemen,

If your going to go through this exercise then remember your audience. Quit using Acronyms other than MLB. If you do then put the meaning in brackets behind it. There will be people who other than those of us who study this for a living. (You know who you are and yes, I am looking in the mirror) who do not understand them.

Looking forward to this one.

Elliott.

[LClifton]

Gentlemen,

If your going to go through this exercise then remember your audience. Quit using Acronyms other than MLB. If you do then put the meaning in brackets behind it. There will be people who other than those of us who study this for a living. (You know who you are and yes, I am looking in the mirror) who do not understand them.

Looking forward to this one.

Elliott.
Good point Elliott.
I will, if no one objects, put my daughter out here in full light to explain (from the cage) the elements of the swing that we are working on. I have before and after clips showing improvement.
Actually, (selfishly) I am looking for critique on the teaching side of it.
Does this fit this thread? If not, I'm O.K. with that too. I'm content to just watch as those more qualified than I, attempt to decipher the differences.
Private message me and let me know if this does not fit this thread.
Like Elliott, I'm looking forward to this.
LClifton

To Ursa:
Remember the thread when we began to talk about how we teach various aspects of the swing? It turned into some pretty good discussion.

Sincerely,
LClifton

[fungo22]

Ok, so....

Group A and B both agree on most techniques and approaches when it comes to a high level swing, right?

The difference is, when teaching youngsters,

Group A chooses to focus more on building blocks, knowing full well that eventually the young hitter will need to make further adjustments and hone his technique. These "further adjustments and techniques are agreed upon by both groups?

Group B chooses to teach those future required adjustments and techniques right off the bat, believing that this will provide them with the tools to progress through the years and develop better?


Is this correct, or no? It is a good start as a general summary, in my opinion. However, I would add three qualifications:

(1) Group A would argue that Group B underestimates the difficulty of rooting out the old foundations (motor program, neuromuscular wiring and attending "muscle memory") and replacing it with the PCR "building blocks." I suspect it is because they lack an understanding of what high-level hitters are doing physiologically to create the movements that set them apart as high-level hitters.

(2) Group A would argue (as Mark points out and Ohfor has demonstrated with his clips) that some of what Group B advocates as "universal" and fundamental to a high-level swing (arm action) is not at all essential. Swingbuster seems to be rethinking his position on this issue, but I'm afraid Tom is pretty committed to it.

(3) Group A agrees with Group B that high-level swings have some separation and "whipping" action which is achieved in part by an optimally synchronized sequencing of loading and unloading segments in the "kinetic chain" (although Group B seems to think Group A does not understand this). However Group A would argue that separation and high-level sequencing of the loading and unloading of body segments is an adjustment that can more effictively be taught and incorporated after the PCR building blocks are set in (new motor program, neuromuscular wiring and attending "muscle memory" are established). Tom contends that the PCR model cannot be a building block to a high-level swing, which I understand to mean that the separation/sequencing must be taught from the beginning (which is why I started this thread). I would add that Tom believes that a "universal arm action" is the key to getting the sequencing right.

Or at least that seems to be his position based on the comments I quoted in the first post in this thread. However, Tom is in several other threads trying to get someone, anyone to explain to him just exactly what PCR is, so I'm not sure how soon he will be able to enter this discussion to support his assertion that PCR cannot be a developmental stage to a "high-level" swing.

So in the meantime, yes, the first Harry Callahan quote was from "Magnum Force" and Scott's was from the original "Dirty Harry." I'm impressed that you got so much of it right, Scott. But I want to amend your quote as follows.

"I know what you're thinking. . .Did he fire six shots, or only five? To tell you the truth, in all the excitement, I kind of lost track, myself. Now, seeing as this is a 44-Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you have to ask yourself one question. . .Do I feel lucky?. . . Well, do ya. . .punk?"

Or at least that's how I remember it. There are two versions of essentially the same speech. One near the beginning at the bank robbery and one at the conclusion, where the guy felt lucky but wasn't.

For those of you who have trouble following the discussion because of goofy terminology, please feel free to jump in and request a definition. We use too many technical terms on one hand and pull too many out various body orifices with the other.

[4for4]

For those of you who have trouble following the discussion because of goofy terminology, please feel free to jump in and request a definition. We use too many technical terms on one hand and pull too many out various body orifices with the other.

I was following this whole question pretty good and all, but then you used a term I'm having trouble with. What does "punk" mean?

[biocat777]

I'll start: A "high-level" swing is one exectuted by most MLB hitters and certain NCAA fastpitch softball hitters (Richardson, Fernandez, Rivera, Bustos, M. Smith, and others). It has the following qualities: (1) sufficiently quick to the ball to hitt 90+ baseball pitching and 60+ NCAA softball pitching, (2) sufficiently accurate to the ball to maintain .275+ average at high levels, and (3) producing bat speed sufficient to hit dingers. I welcome amendments or modifications....

I submit the following suggestion to amend the softball part of this definition....

A) 70+ Olympic softball pitching (let's not forget there is a pitcher out there by the name of Ueno who can consistently hit 70mph)....

B) Producing bat "quickness" sufficient to allow "that extra millisecond" of "wait-wait-wait" time in order to recognize the pitch "in-flight" and still have enough time to "explode" and make adjustments on the "fly" in order to hit the ball "HARD" somewhere.

May be too much "lingo", but this "wait-wait-wait (in order to judge the pitch better) and then explode" (generate tremendous bat "quickness") concept in my opinion is very key!

Just my thoughts...

Steve (Biocat777)

[fungo22]

A) 70+ Olympic softball pitching (let's not forget there is a pitcher out there by the name of Ueno who can consistently hit 70mph).... Math is far from my strongest subject, but 60+ seems to include 70+. I'm not sure how many of even the good ones can hit 70+ consistently. I'll settle for hitting 60+, which (as far as I know) is closer to the rank and file of NCAA pitching. I could be wrong.

B) Producing bat "quickness" sufficient to allow "that extra millisecond" of "wait-wait-wait" time in order to recognize the pitch "in-flight" and still have enough time to "explode" and make adjustments on the "fly" in order to hit the ball "HARD" somewhere. Yup. You got the idea. I was just trying to keep my definitions succinct and yet inclusive.

[fungo22]

I was following this whole question pretty good and all, but then you used a term I'm having trouble with. What does "punk" mean?:laugh

To be precise, it was Harry who used the term. I just quoted him, and that only after Scott quoted him. It's not really a term I use.

Punk.

[ssarge]

Fungo:

Nailed me on the omited sentence from Dirty Harry. I am chastened (not the same as CHASTE - we have Cletus for that.)

And of course, "Marvelous" was to follow in "The Enforcer." Not to mention the "Shetland pony w/ Mrs. Green" speech. (which Tyne Daley explained was "conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor, which is actually a felony.") Memorable.

Now, go ahead and make my day!

Best,

Scott

[Mark H]

He did indeed Mark and he missed one of them...ARod I think the statement above clearly indicates it is not an absolute.

What about weight shift. Don't talk about momentum transfer to me if your saying it doesn't include weight shift. Don't hide behind that STRAW MAN deal. It jsut confuses people

I'm saying the accurate term for what you are trying to say is momentum development and yes, I think it is an absolute. I think Paul was right when he said you need at least a little. If you can handle a lot without screwing up your swing, great.