View Full Version : Mike Schmidt Study
Anyone ever read Mike's book? I find it very interesting that a lot of rotational people do not believe that there is a "hybrid" swing--a swing with both rotational and weight-shift components. Yet this is exactly the type of swing that Mike talks about in his book. And if I remember correctly, he was a pretty successful hitter--for both average and power. He specifically talks about the downward swing , getting on top of the ball, level shoulders, and emphasis on ground balls/line drives---all things that are "no-no's" in the rotational theory?
Anyone have thoughts or opinions, both positive or negative, on Mike's philosophy?
Chris O'Leary
07-26-2006, 09:28 AM
Anyone ever read Mike's book? I find it very interesting that a lot of rotational people do not believe that there is a "hybrid" swing--a swing with both rotational and weight-shift components. Yet this is exactly the type of swing that Mike talks about in his book. And if I remember correctly, he was a pretty successful hitter--for both average and power. He specifically talks about the downward swing , getting on top of the ball, level shoulders, and emphasis on ground balls/line drives---all things that are "no-no's" in the rotational theory?
In my experience this hit-the-ball-into-the-ground approach works only when you are talking about Little Leaguers under the age of 10 and major leaguers who play in parks with Astroturf infields (which Schmidt did). It stops working as soon as the infielders become good at fielding the ball and when playing on a soft clay or grass infield.
chesspirate
07-26-2006, 10:34 AM
I own the book, have read it many times. It's one of those things where the hitter "feels" something to make it happen, even if in reality he isn't "doing" what he "feels"
I would say that the biggest BAD example in that book is his representation of level body segment rotation. Basically a swing that will only hit the pitch up unless severe hands to the ball disconnection occurs.
Also, Mikes understanding of "rotation" is kinda limited, he really was describing more of a spinning action, especially overswing type swings. Just check out wich hitters he used as examples in his book besides himself, interesting choices.
I like his section on mental practice though, probably slightly ahead of his time in baseball in that regard, and the history of the swing was fun to read, just his observations are slightly off IMHO.
hellborn
07-26-2006, 10:52 AM
Anyone ever read Mike's book? I find it very interesting that a lot of rotational people do not believe that there is a "hybrid" swing--a swing with both rotational and weight-shift components. Yet this is exactly the type of swing that Mike talks about in his book. And if I remember correctly, he was a pretty successful hitter--for both average and power. He specifically talks about the downward swing , getting on top of the ball, level shoulders, and emphasis on ground balls/line drives---all things that are "no-no's" in the rotational theory?
Anyone have thoughts or opinions, both positive or negative, on Mike's philosophy?
I have the book and enjoyed it. I feel that his idea of "swinging down" is more that the hands start high in the stance and end up somewhat lower at the completion of the swing, not so much that the bat is necessarily going down at the time of impact. Don't have the book handy to check that, though.
The historical part of the book was the most interesting to me. Not sure that I agree with all of his broad characterizations, but I think that he's onto something. I especially like that he gives my favorite Hack Wilson photo (see my header) a full page to illustrate "rotational" hitting!
swingbuster
07-26-2006, 10:57 AM
If you want to understand " finish Low" look at Clemente clip , Aaron swings and even Kevin Sanda's HR swing. Look at location of the bat at the finish. Watch the ball fly.
Thanks for the replies....
Chris that's a good point about the astroturf.
Pirate and Hellborn, I agree about some of his observations, especially in relation to the book's photos. Some of the hitter's he used to illustrate his points weren't very good choices.
He has one section where he talks about keeping the bat barrel above the hands--again, against rotational theory--but then I look at the photos of Mike throughout the book and almost every photo shows the barrel below his hands.
I think the book has some good thoughts, but it was a little before it's time, coming out before all this scientific study of the swing that's occurred the last 5 years. It would be interesting if Mike could go back and do an updated version. The copyright on this one is 1994.
Hellborn, he talks about a downward swing in order to get the barrel down to a level position and on the same plane as the pitch. His thoughts were that the pitched ball was not on as much of a downward plane as Ted Williams had claimed.
I am a definite proponent of downward motion toward ball, and then upward through contact. Many rotationalists claim that the rotational swing is strictly an upward swing, but I believe that there is still downward movement at the beginning of the swing--if you watch the top end of the bat, it has to go downward to get to the strrike zone before it starts it's way back up......
dougmac
07-26-2006, 11:42 AM
When a hitting coach is talking about the swing path, he should be talking about the 1 foot or so before impact and the 1 foot or so after impact. That is the path that is referred to by a good hitting coach. That path is a slight upswing with 95% of the real good hitters in the big leagues. Video proves this where there is no argument.
Dougmac, if a GOOD hitting coach only focuses on that approximate 2 foot area of the swing path, are they neglecting other parts of the swing? My question to you involves the begining of the swing. When a hitter initializes movement of the top end of the bat--no matter how they initialize that movement--is that also part of swing path, or is that pre-swing?
For example, though there should be some rearward pre-swing loading movement, I believe once the swing starts, the top end of the bat should be moving forward and downward. We emphasis this because too many times we see hitters, hitters who aren't professional hitters, wrap the end of the bat back around their head or drop the top end back and toward the ground causing a looping swing.
Just looking for your thoughts. Thanks for the reply!!
Sorpe
07-26-2006, 02:07 PM
Schmidt's most recent book (published this past spring), while not an instructional book, does reiterate that he believes the swing is a "downstroke." He even cites Barry Bonds as the best proof of this.
Thanks for that tidbit Sorpe! I'm glad that someone supports my position of the downward swing, even if he is "just" a Hall-of-Famer!!
MSandman
07-26-2006, 03:16 PM
If you want to understand " finish Low" look at Clemente clip , Aaron swings and even Kevin Sanda's HR swing. Look at location of the bat at the finish. Watch the ball fly.
Just for reference:
http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro/hank.gif http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro//ClementeRoberto2.gif http://members.cox.net/masanda/Kevin's%201st%20HR.gif
And tho swingbuster didn't cite these:
http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro/young_1.gif http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/pro/Mantle.gif
Jake Patterson
07-26-2006, 04:07 PM
In my experience this hit-the-ball-into-the-ground approach works only when you are talking about Little Leaguers under the age of 10 and major leaguers who play in parks with Astroturf infields (which Schmidt did). It stops working as soon as the infielders become good at fielding the ball and when playing on a soft clay or grass infield.
I would agree with Chris on this
dougmac
07-26-2006, 04:08 PM
Thanks for that tidbit Sorpe! I'm glad that someone supports my position of the downward swing, even if he is "just" a Hall-of-Famer!!
http://dmcmillan.topcities.com/Bonds01.mpeg
http://dmcmillan.topcities.com/barrybonds.mov
http://dmcmillan.topcities.com/barry1993.mpg
Maybe Mr Schmidt would like to comment on the three swings of Mr Bonds above. As I mentioned before about the great hitters swinging into the ball with a slight upswing from about a foot before contact to a foot after contact.........here it is on video. Maybe Mr deezledog or Mr Sorpe would like to comment on the above swings too. The path that the bat is on when at contact is where it counts the most.
Video is the key to finding things out about the swing, but if you want to quote a Hall of Famer, maybe you should quote Ted Williams, who hit about 75 points higher than Schmidt for his career and about 44 points higher than Bonds.
Dougmac, i am not trying to argue whether you are right or wrong! I am just bringing up some points for discussion. That's how we make advancements--analyzing the data and the past. We all aren't as knowledgeable as you obviously. I have never claimed to be an expert--in fact, in most of my posts I have stated that I am trying to learn more, and learn why the things I've been taught and things I have taught in the past may not be the best methods. I am sorry that not all of us here are as far along as you--I didn't know that when I signed up for the site that I had to agree with a certain philosophy or have already attained a certain level of understanding about that philosophy. Again, the "best" swings may show that a certain method is the most successful, but if you view sandman's clips, it shows that their have been some pretty successful swings that don't conform to the rotational philosophy.
dougmac
07-26-2006, 07:17 PM
Deezledogg, I am not trying to pick on you. I commented on your post and I too like Sandman's clips......especially the side view of Clemente and the clip of Mantle. If you look at those clips, you will see the bathead on a slight upswing in both clips. Did you look at the clips of Bonds that I provided?
You don't have to agree with anything that I say, but if you post things that are not correct, you can influence other people that are just learning about the swing and if I see something that is incorrect, I will comment on it.
As far as rotation goes, 100 % of all big leaguers are rotational hitters.....some do it bettter than others, but they all rotate and video proves that too.
It's ok to say if I'm wrong about something. It doesn't bother me a bit. My points in earlier posts regarded information from Mike Schmidt's book. I don't know Mike personally, so I am not sure if what he wrote about is what he practiced. But if you're saying I'm wrong about my points, you're saying Mike is wrong. I guess I just don't understand how successful major league hitters from the past who did things differently or who weren't strictly rotational could be "wrong."
dougmac
07-26-2006, 09:31 PM
It's ok to say if I'm wrong about something. It doesn't bother me a bit. My points in earlier posts regarded information from Mike Schmidt's book. I don't know Mike personally, so I am not sure if what he wrote about is what he practiced. But if you're saying I'm wrong about my points, you're saying Mike is wrong. I guess I just don't understand how successful major league hitters from the past who did things differently or who weren't strictly rotational could be "wrong."
You made comments from Schmidt's book, and I posted three clips of Bond's swinging with a slight upswing........did you look at the clips, or are you just going to read the book of a guy who hit .267 lifetime. If you don't want to look at clips and see for yourself what is actually happening, then you should read Ted Williams book, as he hit .344 lifetime.
The great hitters from the past did not do things differently than the great hitters today. They are/were rotational.........period. Try and hit a ball without rotating.If you can find a great hitter that did not rotate his hips and shoulders, post it and I will buy you a steak dinner. If you can find a great hitter with power that swings down........post it.
If you look at schmidt's book, you will see pictures of him standing there showing how you should swing down, and then on the next page he has pictures from games of himself not doing what he is teaching. What it shows is that he is trying to teach something that he did not do.
Have you looked at the clips of Bonds?????? did you check the clips of Mantle and Clemente??????? those guys are 40 years apart and they all have a slight upswing. So did Williams, Ruth, Musial, Aaron, Robinson, Mays........along with G Brett, Bonds, Sandburg, L Walker and Pujols. It does not matter what era they played in.......the great power hitters all had a slight upswing. The proof is in the video, not someones opinion.
brett
07-26-2006, 10:05 PM
This is an issue which I have long pondered. Charlie Lau "taught" weight shift and "swing down" but all of his best hitters were highly rotational with slight uppercuts.
I don't have any answers, just observations as I have read and studied swings since the age of 14. I also hit well enough to make a D II squad but was to slow to get in a game. I have hit many 450 foot batting practice homeruns.
First, having hit fly balls as an assistant at the high school level, I can tell you that if you want to launch a ball without much effort-in hitting for outfield practice- you want to meet the ball when your swing is still dropping. Yes, you want to downswing and undercut the ball. As in golf, the backspin will carry the ball.
Now the swing still ends up having an uppercut to it-my back hand is at the level of my neck at the end of the swing.
Also, I remember hearing about how an upercut would put downspin on a line-drive and keep it from hanging in the air too long. Will Clark's liners would head to the ground like a curve ball because of the top spin.
Finally, there is a linear weight shift when batting, but it simply is changed into a rotational motion. There are some good hitters who could straighten out their rotational motion a little at the end to place the ball-Boggs for example, but his swing was very rotational.
Anyway, I don't know if you want to put backspin or topspin on a ball. My best guess is that swinging down and uppercutting are the same thing. My best guess is that if the bat reaches its lowest point and starts to rise in the hitting zone, the hitter will hit all kinds of productive hits-backspin homeruns and top spin liners.
Anyone ever read Mike's book? I find it very interesting that a lot of rotational people do not believe that there is a "hybrid" swing--a swing with both rotational and weight-shift components. Yet this is exactly the type of swing that Mike talks about in his book. And if I remember correctly, he was a pretty successful hitter--for both average and power. He specifically talks about the downward swing , getting on top of the ball, level shoulders, and emphasis on ground balls/line drives---all things that are "no-no's" in the rotational theory?
Anyone have thoughts or opinions, both positive or negative, on Mike's philosophy?
dougmac
07-26-2006, 10:17 PM
You put backspin on a ball by hitting it below the center of the ball. You put topspin on a ball by hitting it above the center of the ball. It will happen if you swing down, level or up.
If you swing down and hit the center of the ball.......where is the ball headed???? If you swing slightly up and center the ball, where is it headed????
dannyboy
07-26-2006, 11:12 PM
the pitcher pitches from a mound 10 inches higher than the batter. releases the ball somewhere close to ear height. and throws to a batter's knees.
the ball is on a downward trajectory. i estimate it at between 6 to 10 degrees. a late breaking curve maybe 10 to 12 degrees.
why would a batter not want to match the trajectory of the pitch with his bat for as long as he possibly could.
swinging down at an angle that is not in line with the pitch trajectory will permit only one contact point. why would a hitter wish to burden himself with such a small window for timing error?
You put backspin on a ball by hitting it below the center of the ball. You put topspin on a ball by hitting it above the center of the ball. It will happen if you swing down, level or up.
If you swing down and hit the center of the ball.......where is the ball headed???? If you swing slightly up and center the ball, where is it headed????
Yeah, I don't know where this " swing down at the ball" crap has came from; it's total rubbish!
Dougmac,
Yes i viewed your clips--seen them many times before.
Yes, I've read Ted William's book--3 times.
Yes, Mike Schmidt's photos don't always agree with what he is saying.
Yes, there is a slight upswing in all of those clips of the other guys.
Yes, every hitter uses rotation.
Yes, you're right, I'm wrong.
The great hitters from the past did not do things differently than the great hitters today.
Do those swings of Aaron and Clemente look like the swings of today's hitters? They are rotational swings, but a different style......
If you can find a great hitter with power that swings down........post it.
My point has never been that the hitter makes contact with a downward swing. My point has been, that with the position that the bat starts in, and the position that it has to get to in the strike zone, it has to START in a downward manner before it can start on an upward path. Every video you talk about shows that--the top end of the bat starts high, goes down and then comes back through on an upward plane. I am not trying to dismiss the upward swing at all. But show me a video where the top end of the bat is in a higher position during the swing than it was in during the stance.
the pitcher pitches from a mound 10 inches higher than the batter. releases the ball somewhere close to ear height. and throws to a batter's knees.
the ball is on a downward trajectory. i estimate it at between 6 to 10 degrees. a late breaking curve maybe 10 to 12 degrees.
why would a batter not want to match the trajectory of the pitch with his bat for as long as he possibly could.
Ray, in his book, Mike Schmidt "claims" that the degree of the downward angle of the pitch is less than what you have stated. But Dougmac has already proven that Mike is wrong, that I am wrong, and that he is right, so check with him.
dannyboy
07-27-2006, 05:48 PM
Deezeldogg,
Ray, in his book, Mike Schmidt "claims" that the degree of the downward angle of the pitch is less than what you have stated. But Dougmac has already proven that Mike is wrong, that I am wrong, and that he is right, so check with him.
You sound upset.
My questions were rhetorical in nature. I don’t have to check with Dougmac, because I have performed my own due diligence.
Why did you ask?
Anyone have thoughts or opinions, both positive or negative, on Mike's philosophy?
What would you have me do?
Stop posting in this thread.
Or
Give my reasons why I believe Schmidt/Ellis are wrong.
Jake Patterson
07-27-2006, 06:34 PM
As far as rotation goes, 100 % of all big leaguers are rotational hitters.....some do it bettter than others, but they all rotate and video proves that too.
Doug, I agree with the above statement. I would add however, that not all the rotational hitters use a rotational swing 100% of the time. Matsui comes to mind. He sometimes uses some pretty ugly swings to get the job done. I checked Siggy's site all the pro swings there are rotational.
To answer the Hybrid question. We've beat the linear vs rotational theory to death.
Here's some of my thoughts:
1. I feel good hitters use whatever swing they can when trying to hit a specific pitch. sometimes the swings are less than perfect. Again Matsui is a good example here.
2. A rotational swing is what all the current great hitters are using, bat angle dependent on ball position.
3. Teaching young players a linear swing as a stepping stone to optimal hitting is fine. Its easier to teach and the basics can be used for rotational hitting.
4. Hitting a ball down results in ground balls and a low batting average.
From a youth instructional standpoint - I feel many coaches are so hung up on the perfect swing they miss many of the foundational issues necessary for many children to learn.
swingbuster
07-27-2006, 07:41 PM
Where are the hands at foot plant. That is what matters as that is the point in time the swing begins. You must give it a reference point. Bonds pumps, gets the hands back up, swings down and tilts his body changing the orbit to up.
It is not as simple as swing up or down IMO
Ray, I'm not upset at all about what you said. Sorry if it seemed that way. I just don't like the fact that new people sign up to this site to try and learn how to become better hitting teachers and then they get banged on by resident experts because they question some of the things that are discussed. I've been very up front about my experience and I've never claimed to be an expert; I want to learn, but at the same time I don't want to be force fed anything without doing the research, just as you said you do. And part of research is questioning why people do what they do. That's why I am questioning why Mike Schmidt discusses these things in his book.
chesspirate
07-27-2006, 11:03 PM
...new people sign up to this site to try and learn how to become better... I want to learn, but at the same time I don't want to be force fed anything without doing the research,. And part of research is questioning why people do what they do.
And part of research is research... There are 33pages of threads in this "coaching & fundamentals" thread that have been written in THIS Year alone. Over 50 in all.
Feel free to question, have a ball, but taking the time to read the old posts not only would shine some light on stuff that gets covered again and again, but also give you an idea to members posting styles (this may be more important in the long run anyway)
thanks chesspirate, that's good advice.
brett
07-28-2006, 08:11 AM
You put backspin on a ball by hitting it below the center of the ball. You put topspin on a ball by hitting it above the center of the ball. It will happen if you swing down, level or up.
If you swing down and hit the center of the ball.......where is the ball headed???? If you swing slightly up and center the ball, where is it headed????
I agree. I never really thought about physics when I was hitting anyway-and my background is in physics.
I think that hitters can get into mechanical problems when they start the bat too low. This is the most common mechanical problem I've seen with high school kids at least.
All good swings start with a downward movement.
All good swings end with an uppercut. Its a pendulum. A high bat has more potential energy.
All of the swings in the videos here could be describes as both swinging down, and uppercutting.
I have never seen a swing that could be described as linear. All swings are rotational. A linear weight shift can be part of a rotational system.
I do have a new theory though, and that is that a good swing actually should follow a slight curve through the hitting zone-like the bottom of a pendulum. I think that this might maximize the potential for contact. I also believe that the rotational swing does "go linear" for a short stretch in the hitting zone ie the bat rotation actually stops briefly and the bat coasts without rotation. I would describe it as a rotational wind up and first half of the swing, then the batter "throws" the bat-not letting go-just ceasing rotation, then the batter recovers with a rotational follow through.
And as for hitting flies to the outfield, yes you hit below the center, but you can also downcut in this situation. I don't think it is a good idea against pitching.
Also, the movement of the bat can be down or level in the horizontal plane of the batter, but up in the horizontal plane of the field, or camera view.
Lastly, just an observation. I probably hit my first ball 450 feet at a weight of 178 pounds, with a bench press of 190 and 275 squat.
At 215 with a 370 bench and 475 squat I can not hit the ball any further today.
All good swings start with a downward movement.
All good swings end with an uppercut. Its a pendulum. A high bat has more potential energy.
All of the swings in the videos here could be describes as both swinging down, and uppercutting.
Thank you Brett!! That's exactly what I've been trying to say!!
I do have a new theory though, and that is that a good swing actually should follow a slight curve through the hitting zone-like the bottom of a pendulum. I think that this might maximize the potential for contact. I also believe that the rotational swing does "go linear" for a short stretch in the hitting zone ie the bat rotation actually stops briefly and the bat coasts without rotation. I would describe it as a rotational wind up and first half of the swing, then the batter "throws" the bat-not letting go-just ceasing rotation, then the batter recovers with a rotational follow through.
I would definitely agree with your theory Brett!
Sorpe
07-28-2006, 08:55 AM
Just to keep things straight, I merely repeated what Schmidt says in his latest book. I did not say that I agree with it. I don't. I remain surprised that the issue of swinging down or up comes up so often. Of all the things that are clear on video, that is one of the clearest.
I do not doubt that many hitters, even some of the greatest, feel that they are swinging down. This gap between feel and reality is one of the causes for so much disagreement. It is interesting for me, an average baseball player at best (we won't mention the worst), to sit here and disagree with a Hall of Famer. Yet I do. My eyes tell me so.
...but taking the time to read the old posts not only would shine some light on stuff that gets covered again and again, but also give you an idea to members posting styles (this may be more important in the long run anyway)
Ditto! (I added the bold.)
Kevin G
08-03-2006, 05:09 PM
Yeah, I don't know where this " swing down at the ball" crap has came from; it's total rubbish!
It's very common for elite athletes to think they are doing something that in fact they aren't. " feel isn't real ! "
My father in-law played MLB in the late 50's and early sixties. He swears you hit down on the ball. I'm pretty sure the Yankees organization was teaching it. So there's 50 years of accumulated crap. (and there's more: see below)
Sometimes the best in the sport are the last ones you should be talking to. He regrets now that he allowed himself to get screwed up by tinkering with his swing based on what some of the great hitters told him they were doing. The problem was it was all based on feel, and they all felt something different.
The reason I'm here is that my 7 yr old son has a sweet swing in both baseball and golf. Truly natural efficient motions in both with exceptional eye hand coordination. It is my firm belief that alot of simmilarities exist between the two. But I also believe there are a couple of big differences that negatively effect the other. I've already seen it.
The problem is that my father in-law does't want anyone messing with his baseball swing: including me. But I already think I see some golf hurting his baseball swing. He's rolling his hands before ball contact as if he's squaring up the clubface. (seen it on video) My father in-law doesn't think this is a problem, but from what I'm learning the trailing palm should face the sky 'till impact. I think this is a huge but easily fixed problem ..IF ..I can get in there now and teach him the difference.
Any thoughts?
chesspirate
08-03-2006, 06:37 PM
video tape the kids swing, and put it next to the best... Slow mo. frame by frame. Prove your position.
Jake Patterson
08-03-2006, 07:01 PM
Lastly, just an observation. I probably hit my first ball 450 feet at a weight of 178 pounds, with a bench press of 190 and 275 squat....
When I hit my first ball 450' I had to hit it twice.
Jake Patterson
08-03-2006, 07:23 PM
The tip of the bat, the knob and hands all DO come down during the swing. They do not stay parallell to the ground when swinging do they?
12227
It may just be a simplistic way for coaches to provide cues to a hitter.
Kevin G
08-03-2006, 07:39 PM
video tape the kids swing, and put it next to the best... Slow mo. frame by frame. Prove your position.
Understand my hesitation in setting up this proof. I need to be sure not only that I'm right, but that it needs to be fixed sooner rather than later.
When and if I get involved with his mechanics grandpa is going to have to come to terms with what he doesn't know. He is a GREAT guy, but it still could get contentious. Proof of what I see on video isn't the issue, its going to be that I have enough credibility to override his belief that it is not important. Ever challenge an ex professional athlete about any aspect of their sport?
So I'd like to focus on that question first. Should I even be worried about it?(the rolling of the hands prior to ball contact)
My son loves baseball. He can't watch a ballgame on TV without getting the whiffle ball bat, a helmet and something to hit. He's been doing this since he was less than 2 yrs old. Thousands of swings. My thinking is he's old enough now, and his sheer repetition would be harmful with bad mechanics.
Thoughts? ...and thanks in advance. Tweenarock and a hard place....
Kevin G
08-03-2006, 07:41 PM
Sorry, I should have started a new thread?
chesspirate
08-03-2006, 07:45 PM
well the "swing down" part does belong in this thread, but anyway.
Yes, if the hands are doing what you say they are doing, this must change as soon as possible.
How about this... Get a video of his swing, post it up here, get some ideas from posters around the board and compare it to video of pro's and come to your own conclusions.
As long as you keep looking, it's better to look and be wrong than to just not work at it at all. Most guys have gone this route, learning all along the way.
Kevin G
08-03-2006, 07:59 PM
Any help on how to post a digital video clip?
Jake Patterson
08-03-2006, 08:08 PM
The reason I'm here is that my 7 yr old son has a sweet swing in both baseball and golf. Truly natural efficient motions in both with exceptional eye hand coordination. It is my firm belief that alot of simmilarities exist between the two. But I also believe there are a couple of big differences that negatively effect the other. I've already seen it. Any thoughts?
Tween,
This has been discussed several times here at BBF. What specifically do you think a golf swing can ruin for a 7 y/o? I believe the "golf ruins a baseball swing" theory is urban legend. I have yet to have anyone explain to me in an intelligent manner why a golf swing hurts a baseball swing. The rotational applications in both are very similar.
I have heard the arguments for muscle memory, but that can be easily corrected with a few sound swings in either sport.
In my 20 years I have had numerous players play both and I just don't see it being a problem until the HS level and that is due to the fact that can't put in the amount of time you need to in order to be serious about both sports. My youngest played up to college and he played both baseball and golf. He finished HS with a .348 BA and had a 10 handicap. Where I think it becomes important is when the child decides (not the parent) to play the sport seriously. That shouldn't happen until he's 13 or 14.
I feel both have more simularities than they do differences. At seven let him play what he wants to play.
WonderMonkey
08-03-2006, 08:22 PM
Tween,
This has been discussed several times here at BBF. What specifically do you think a golf swing can ruin for a 7 y/o? I believe the "golf ruins a baseball swing" theory is urban legend. I have yet to have anyone explain to me in an intelligent manner why a golf swing hurts a baseball swing. The rotational applications in both are very similar.
I have heard the arguments for muscle memory, but that can be easily corrected with a few sound swings in either sport.
In my 20 years I have had numerous players play both and I just don't see it being a problem until the HS level and that is due to the fact that can't put in the amount of time you need to in order to be serious about both sports. My youngest played up to college and he played both baseball and golf. He finished HS with a .348 BA and had a 10 handicap. Where I think it becomes important is when the child decides (not the parent) to play the sport seriously. That shouldn't happen until he's 13 or 14.
I feel both have more simularities than they do differences. At seven let him play what he wants to play.
I won't let my son play on game day or anytime that he won't have a chance to take some swings to get back in baseball groove. For instance if we have a tourney that starts on Friday I won't let him play golf on Thursday. If he wants to play on Wed. that's fine because on Thursday we will probably go to the cage and I'll toss him a bucket or so.
Jake Patterson
08-03-2006, 08:25 PM
I won't let my son play on game day or anytime that he won't have a chance to take some swings to get back in baseball groove. For instance if we have a tourney that starts on Friday I won't let him play golf on Thursday. If he wants to play on Wed. that's fine because on Thursday we will probably go to the cage and I'll toss him a bucket or so.
This is the right thing to do.... I did the same with my youngest. My oldest wasn't as good at either sport as his brother and it really didn't matter.
Thanks for that illustration Jake, that's the exact point I've been trying to make over and over. It may not be a downward motion in the sense of the old "chopping down the tree," but it is a downward movement before it becomes on upward movement.
hellborn
08-04-2006, 08:14 AM
Just to keep things straight, I merely repeated what Schmidt says in his latest book. I did not say that I agree with it. I don't. I remain surprised that the issue of swinging down or up comes up so often. Of all the things that are clear on video, that is one of the clearest.
I do not doubt that many hitters, even some of the greatest, feel that they are swinging down. This gap between feel and reality is one of the causes for so much disagreement. It is interesting for me, an average baseball player at best (we won't mention the worst), to sit here and disagree with a Hall of Famer. Yet I do. My eyes tell me so.
I just looked at the book last night, and Schmidt pretty clearly says that it FELT like he was swinging down, but the bat path was actually level at contact. The photos of him in the book seem to indicate a slight uppercut at that point, just like the majority of the clips we see here.
I wonder how much of this "feeling" of swinging down results from a really well-struck HR or XBH-type ball leaving the bat at a higher angle than the uppercut of the bat itself??
Kevin G
08-04-2006, 10:17 AM
Tween,
This has been discussed several times here at BBF. What specifically do you think a golf swing can ruin for a 7 y/o? I believe the "golf ruins a baseball swing" theory is urban legend. I have yet to have anyone explain to me in an intelligent manner why a golf swing hurts a baseball swing. The rotational applications in both are very similar.
I have heard the arguments for muscle memory, but that can be easily corrected with a few sound swings in either sport.
In my 20 years I have had numerous players play both and I just don't see it being a problem until the HS level and that is due to the fact that can't put in the amount of time you need to in order to be serious about both sports. My youngest played up to college and he played both baseball and golf. He finished HS with a .348 BA and had a 10 handicap. Where I think it becomes important is when the child decides (not the parent) to play the sport seriously. That shouldn't happen until he's 13 or 14.
I feel both have more simularities than they do differences. At seven let him play what he wants to play.
Thanks for the replies. He wants to play both, all the time, and that's really where it becomes more of a problem.
I'd bet I know the golf swing as well as you guys know the baseball swing.
My son will be probably be a scratch golfer before he GETS to HS.
I'll start I different thread to discuss the mutually hurtful elements of golf visa vis baseball.(as I see them) Hopefully they can easily be overcome.
Thanks again everyone.
PS - he's not serious, just seriously good at both. When he was 2 he could hit my overhand pitching (yes, it was soft) and flip MY 3 wood upside down (he's left, I'm right) and hit a golf ball off the ground.
Jake Patterson
08-04-2006, 10:21 AM
My son will be probably be a scratch golfer before he GETS to HS.
Years ago I coached a championship LL team. My SS - one of the best I've seen- went on to become the number one ranked junior amatuer in MA, and a premier golfer at UCONN.
As parents of young children, we have no idea what our children will become. All we can do is influence...
Kevin G
08-04-2006, 10:44 AM
Years ago I coached a championship LL team. My SS - one of the best I've seen- went on to become the number one ranked junior amatuer in MA, and a premier golfer at UCONN.
That sounds like good news.
As parents of young children, we have no idea what our children will become. All we can do is influence...
I see this kind of admonishment a lot here.
Correction: My son will probably be breaking par before HS. Hopefully my son will BE a happy well adjusted kid, DOING whatever gives him fulfillment.
He won't be doing anything if the schoolwork is being ignored.
Thanks again.
dannyboy
08-04-2006, 04:45 PM
from The Science of Hitting by Ted Williams and John Underwood
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzep5xd2/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/williamsslightupswing.jpg
from the Mike Schmidt Study by Mike Schmidt & Rob Ellis
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzep5xd2/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/schmidtellislevelswing.jpg
questions to ask yourself:
is a major league pitch level?
is a major league swing level?
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzep5xd2/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ramirez.gif
Jake,
Not wanting to be disrespectful, but the path of the bat head in the still you posted is very misleading. Take a look in the Ramirez clip at the head of the bat and it’s path. The sweet is on plane with the pitch before it reaches his rear knee.
http://baseball-fever.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=12227&d=1154654174
Deezeldogg,
The ball is on a 6 degree downward trajectory.
.
Jake Patterson
08-04-2006, 09:25 PM
Jake,
Not wanting to be disrespectful, but the path of the bat head in the still you posted is very misleading. Take a look in the Ramirez clip at the head of the bat and it’s path. The sweet is on plane with the pitch before it reaches his rear knee.
.
Agree, this is why using stills in general can be misleading. I am working with BBF to see if we can expand our file size limits so we can posts larger files without having to post to an alternate site. I'll keep you posted....
ALONG THESE LINES
I took the stills that Chris posted in one of the pitching threads - 64 frames - and made a flip book (ala Topps flip books). GREAT TOOL! The best of both worlds..
Chris, would like more...
Very nice clip and diagrams Ray. If you look at the diagram of Schmidt's so called level swing, it is actually drawn as an uppercut with a small area of levelness--barrel on plane with the pitch, before it begins its upward trajectory.
The difference in the Williams diagram and the Ramirez clip is the swing is downward, level just below the plane of the pitch, then upward.
Interesting.....
tom.guerry
08-10-2006, 04:52 PM
Tweena-
Golfers may or may not roll the wrists to square the clubface. The tendency nowadays is to roll the wrists (which is actually twisting/pronation/supination of the forearms), but there are still some players that square the clubface by body rotation who keep the wrists from rolling before contact.
The most similar style golf swing to hitting is the old hips and hands swing of Bobby Jones. He turned the hips a lot and lifted the arms so the club was WAY past parallel at the top, BUT he had very little twist/separation between the shoulders and hips. HE was only an occasional player (6-8 mos/yr at most) and found that he had to keep the wrists from rolling to get any consistency. Another thing he did was get the lead arm internally rotated in the lead shoulder and keep it that way through contact although they did not think of this as internal arm rotation/make that distinction in those days, just thought of it as combined arm/forearm twist or lack thereof.
The Jones type swing was necessary to optimize timing as required to make the old hickory shaft clubs perform consistently. Also, having a swing where the clubface squares by torso turn and not forearm twist requires a grip that permits this. Same is true in hitting.
When it comes to hitting MLB style, wrist roll is a KILLER flaw. The best evidence is from Jack Mankin's detailed swing study where he studied a large number of MLB players for several years. Those who rolled the wrists before contact were all out of baseball before the end of his study. He reports this on his website - batspeed .com.
You do have to keep the palms flat/avoid forearm twist before contact and keep the lead arm internally rotated in the shoulder socket through contact in all good swings. When you look closely at some swings in good players who are going well, you WILL see what can be confused with a rolling of the wrists/forearm twist. On closer inspection, however, you can usually see that the actual mechanism causing this appearance is the pinching of the lead shoulder/shoulder blade toward the spine to shorten/hook the swing radius while the lead arm remains internally rotated in the shoulder socket and the forearms remain stable/nontwisting.
Wrist rolling/forearm twist can also be seen when the arms have to extend prematurely to reaccelerate the bathead when there has not been good rotation/coil/uncoil to power the swing. The Lau "top hand release after contact" cue can be good at improving this situation/encouraging the right extension sequence which requires good coil of the body and good rotation to power the swing without wrist roll before contact.
Jake Patterson
08-10-2006, 05:46 PM
Tom, have you or any of your contemporaries ever conduct reasearch examining the differences and similarities between a golf swing and a baseball swing?
In the mean time here's the best in golf in super slow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDgoxxJD8h4
tom.guerry
08-10-2006, 06:59 PM
Jake-
The closest thing is the work by skilltechnologies who have databases of high level golf and hitting swings and have noted similarities, primarily "xfactor stretch".
I have looked at lots of golf and hitting videos as a way of each shedding light on the other and have found this helpful, but there are lots of pitfalls.
An excellent source of lots of nice golf videos is the "free" golf digest site which has many high quality golf clips.
My contention is that the Bobby Jones swing is the most similar to hitting because it optimizes timing/minimizes timing error.The golf swing has transitioned away from this and become less and less like hitting because of the metal shaft technology. The golf swing is now about maximizing clubspeed via maximizing xfactor/separation between shoulders and hips and making other adjustments that control where errors are likely to occur - in other words, hit the ball VERY far and know IF you miss, which side you will miss to. Hogan was the first to take this approach to the "modern" swing.
This is VERY different from optimizing timing while maintaining acceptable spatial error and clubspeed which the hitting and Jones type swings accomplish.
SO I would say the best way to compare golf to hitting is to say how would you modify the Jones swing (described in great detail by Jones - see BOBBY JONES ON GOLF) to resemble the hitting swing to optimize performance in an environment (mlb) of limited reaction time and where on the fly location adjustment is required. I have detailed this elsewhere.
The current player with a swing most like hitting is Jim Furyk who started late and was left alone by his dad who was a golf pro. His swing has an arm loop with significant hip action (in the typical "modern" modern swing, hip turn back is limited so more separation can be created between hips and shoulders without lifting the arms much) and lack of torso/hip separation very similar to hitting - "hips and hands". See golf digest where Furyk's dad describes his son's swing. Furyk has taken much of the loop out over the years.
swingbuster
08-10-2006, 07:41 PM
I always read your post with interest as I love baseball and golf. I now square the club with the body rotation vs an attempt to use the hands. Amazing control of the direction.
I might add. Learning the importance of finding the " line of direction of the feet " and setting your body parts( shoulder line) up to it properly and coiling against it have made me a pretty good player with consistency.
x-factor is alive and well and functioning in both sports. Learning about it has made profound changes in my ability to play and coach both sports
Tom,
can you please explain what X-factor is ?
EL,
deaconspoint
08-11-2006, 08:38 AM
Tom,
can you please explain what X-factor is ?
DITTO!!
Tim
tom.guerry
08-11-2006, 09:37 AM
Erik-
"xfactor" is a measure (motionanalysis derived) of separation between shoulders and hips. Same as what Epstein would call "torque angle".
This did NOT correlate very well with level of play.
When more research was done, it was "xfactor STRETCH" which was found in high level golfers unlike less skilled ones.
This means it is not the absolute amount of stretch which is important, but the DYNAMICS of the strech so that trunk coiling is not interrupted and ends with a last quick increase (xfactor stretch).
This is the best description of what has been called creation of a good loading "cusp" here.
This "cusp" lets the body unload via momentum transfer as near instantaneously as possible. Not as instantaneously as a rigid mechanical system/model, but as fast as human tissues (not just muscle but soft tissues/elasticity working on bony levers) can support (WAY quicker tham muscle contraction alone can accomplish). See graphs on page 2 of link:
http://www.advancedmotionmeasurement.com/html/XFactorStretch1.htm
Tom,
thanks for the link I'll check this out.
EL,