Rotational Rubbish

[Rydell]

I am new to this site, however I am curious as to why many seemingly intelligent baseball bloggers/instructors think rotational machanics is the Rosetta Stone to cure most baseball swings. I realize that in all stick & ball motions, the body rotates and through impact quite rapidly. However, I feel that this concept can be OVERDONE, especially when rotating B4 the front foot plants.

[PhilliesPhan22]

I like my over simplified theory on hitting...see ball, hit ball:D

[jbooth]

I am new to this site, however I am curious as to why many seemingly intelligent baseball bloggers/instructors think rotational machanics is the Rosetta Stone to cure most baseball swings. I realize that in all stick & ball motions, the body rotates and through impact quite rapidly. However, I feel that this concept can be OVERDONE, especially when rotating B4 the front foot plants.

You don't rotate the shoulders before foot plant, but you better get the hips going first, and have them (and the legs) be the force that rotates the torso and accelerates the bat, if you want to hit it hard and get maximum batspeed.
You rotate in what I term, HHH, the sequence of the primary objects that move is;
Hips, Handle (with back shoulder), and bat Head. Of course, you have to rotate CORRECTLY, but the harder you rotate, the farther the ball goes. You can rotate improperly, but I don't think you can OVERDO rotation.

Would you tell these guys to stop rotating before front foot plant?

http://firstpickclub.com/video/BAbreuhips.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/bondships.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/griffeyhips.gif
http://firstpickclub.com/video/delgadohips.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/dleehips.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/giambihips.gif
http://firstpickclub.com/video/jeterhips.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/ortizhips.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/pujolships2.gif http://firstpickclub.com/video/ramirezhips.gif

[jbooth]

I like my over simplified theory on hitting...see ball, hit ball:D

If your vision is good, you can see the ball, but if you don't have body control and proper movement of the bat, you may not hit the ball, and if you do, you may not hit it very hard.

The goal is to; see ball, and hit ball hard, often, and you can't do that by just flailing away in any old fashion.

[Jake Patterson]

I am new to this site, however I am curious as to why many seemingly intelligent baseball bloggers/instructors think rotational machanics is the Rosetta Stone to cure most baseball swings. I realize that in all stick & ball motions, the body rotates and through impact quite rapidly. However, I feel that this concept can be OVERDONE, especially when rotating B4 the front foot plants.

I think you need to go back and read some old threads. There is a reason so many instructors are teaching it and it ain't because it don't work.

[Mark H]

I am new to this site, however I am curious as to why many seemingly intelligent baseball bloggers/instructors think rotational machanics is the Rosetta Stone to cure most baseball swings. I realize that in all stick & ball motions, the body rotates and through impact quite rapidly. However, I feel that this concept can be OVERDONE, especially when rotating B4 the front foot plants.

I'm aware of at least four definitions of "rotational mechanics" depending on who you talk to. The term is pretty much useless now that so many have approrpiated it for their own marketing purposes so I have no idea whether I agree with you or not. My goal is to learn from the best. However, even with that as the gold standard there is much disagreement about what we see when we look at a clip of a MLB hitter. IOW, you are WAY late to the argument. That discussion happened about ten or fifteen years ago. What's efficient and effective and how do you get kids better today than they were yesterday without teaching them something that will have to be undone rather than added to. That's the question. As the kids would say, the word "rotational" is really kind of yesterday IMO. Now if you'd like to define what you mean by rotational, that could be a discussion.

[Chris O'Leary]

I realize that in all stick & ball motions, the body rotates and through impact quite rapidly. However, I feel that this concept can be OVERDONE, especially when rotating B4 the front foot plants.

I don't disagree.

However, this isn't unique to rotational mechanics. People can do this wrong regardless of how they hit.

[korp]

Rotation should definitely not start until the front foot is down.

[jbooth]

Rotation should definitely not start until the front foot is down.

Rotation of what? Did you even look at the 10 video .gifs that I posted above?

Their pelvic bone has started moving in a rotational manner before the front foot is fully weighted.

The hips start rotation before the front foot is fully weighted, and then the rotation is finished with all the weight on the front foot.

[Mark H]

Yep, if you watch frame by frame you'll often see hitters with both heels in the air at the same time due to pelvic rotation. Hopefully the back hip joint never quits moving forward till it's finished rotating.

[MarkL]

Yeager's printouts will tell you all you need to know about hip rotation and when/ how it occurs.

[MarkL]

with both heels in the air at the same time due to pelvic rotation.

That's funny--the hips are pulling the heels off the ground...Sounds like that middle-out garbage SE continues to revise....

[Mark H]

Maybe you should watch more video of elite hitters?

[MarkL]

The back heel coming up is a result of the "back-leg-push"

NOT from the hips pulling it off the ground..---as you SE and nybong/pcr posse believe...

[Jake Patterson]

I'm aware of at least four definitions of "rotational mechanics" depending on who you talk to. The term is pretty much useless now ....

I would assume Rydell is implying rotational versus linear. Not Rotational A versus Rotational B... I could be wrong.

[Erik]

Yeager's printouts will tell you all you need to know about hip rotation and when/ how it occurs.


MarkL,



Does yeager have anything new in drills that's not offered on his site?




EL,

[virg]

I would assume Rydell is implying rotational versus linear. Not Rotational A versus Rotational B... I could be wrong.

I think Rydell's key word was "overdone", and his objection is to the excessive violence some believe in and love to see in a swing. If so, he gets my vote.

[jbooth]

The back heel coming up is a result of the "back-leg-push"

NOT from the hips pulling it off the ground..---as you SE and nybong/pcr posse believe...


Well, you can decide what you believe causes it, but here are both heels off the ground.

http://firstpickclub.com/video/heelsup.gif

[Rydell]

You don't rotate the shoulders before foot plant, but you better get the hips going first, and have them (and the legs) be the force that rotates the torso and accelerates the bat, if you want to hit it hard and get maximum batspeed.
You rotate in what I term, HHH, the sequence of the primary objects that move is;
Hips, Handle (with back shoulder), and bat Head. Of course, you have to rotate CORRECTLY, but the harder you rotate, the farther the ball goes. You can rotate improperly, but I don't think you can OVERDO rotation.

Would you tell these guys to stop rotating before front foot plant?

1) By initiating the swing with hip rotation, a player will immediately firm up his front side prematurely. He will hardly ever hit an outside pitch or off- speed well.

2) Bat Speed has much more to do with the shortening of the arc of large radius than rotation.

[jbooth]

1) By initiating the swing with hip rotation, a player will immediately firm up his front side prematurely. He will hardly ever hit an outside pitch or off- speed well.

2) Bat Speed has much more to do with the shortening of the arc of large radius than rotation.

Well, I guess Ted Williams and Barry Bonds did it wrong all their career according to you. Ted's mantra was "The hips lead the hands."

He also said that the MOST important part of the swing was to cock the hips during the stride and get the hips turned to let them pull the hands. But, what did he know? He only hit .344 lifetime with a HR every 14 AB's. Hit over .360 a couple of times and .401 once.

BTW, your number 2 above is complete fallacy. If you don't use the hips correctly, you won't get your optimum batspeed. It's very difficult to hit the ball out of the park unless you get the hips going.

[Mark H]

Well, you can decide what you believe causes it, but here are both heels off the ground.

http://firstpickclub.com/video/heelsup.gif

MarkL you seem angry all the time. What's up?

[Mark H]

Well, I guess Ted Williams and Barry Bonds did it wrong all their career according to you. Ted's mantra was "The hips lead the hands."

He also said that the MOST important part of the swing was to cock the hips during the stride and get the hips turned to let them pull the hands. But, what did he know? He only hit .344 lifetime with a HR every 14 AB's. Hit over .360 a couple of times and .401 once.

BTW, your number 2 above is complete fallacy. If you don't use the hips correctly, you won't get your optimum batspeed. It's very difficult to hit the ball out of the park unless you get the hips going.

Yeah Jim but every time you think all the nails are hammered in place someone new to most of the conversation shows up. Maybe that's a good thing. It can be kind of fun actually if they have an open mind and an ability to reason to go along with their strong opinions and passion.

[Rydell]

Well, I guess Ted Williams and Barry Bonds did it wrong all their career according to you. Ted's mantra was "The hips lead the hands."

He also said that the MOST important part of the swing was to cock the hips during the stride and get the hips turned to let them pull the hands. But, what did he know? He only hit .344 lifetime with a HR every 14 AB's. Hit over .360 a couple of times and .401 once.

BTW, your number 2 above is complete fallacy. If you don't use the hips correctly, you won't get your optimum batspeed. It's very difficult to hit the ball out of the park unless you get the hips going.

1) That was obviously Ted's "feeling", as it was Ben Hogan's "feeling", in golf. Jack Nicklaus said in book of Golf my way(Chap 6), that the head doesn't move in his swing. All the videos of him swinging proved that his head moved, eventhough he said it didn't.
In Baseball (like golf), the head and spine move 4-8 inches forward from load to front heel plant.
AGAIN, YOU CAN'T JUST ROTATE AROUND 2 HIPS, 2 LEGS & 2 SHOULDERS. There Must be first a forward move 1st into the front pivot point B4 any real rotation.

2) The only high speed hinge in the the human body is the top hand (palm up) snapping around its forearm.(approx 75% of the bat speed) Just like hammering a nail from the side.
Imagine if you were to tape up your wrists and arms, whereby, you created 1 single unhingeable lever. You couldn't hit a ball anywhere, even with massive legs and thighs. However, imagine sitting on a bucket and using just my arms and wrists, I could still propel the ball deep into the outfield.

You seem to be an intelligent guy, I hope your not parroting that guy on bat speed.com

[hiddengem]

1)
In Baseball (like golf), the head and spine move 4-8 inches forward from load to front heel plant.





How far forward does this guy's head move? Its actually further back at contact that it was at set up.
http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08150/bonds747a884.gif (http://xs.to)

[jbooth]

1) That was obviously Ted's "feeling", as it was Ben Hogan's "feeling", in golf. Jack Nicklaus said in book of Golf my way(Chap 6), that the head doesn't move in his swing. All the videos of him swinging proved that his head moved, eventhough he said it didn't.
In Baseball (like golf), the head and spine move 4-8 inches forward from load to front heel plant.
AGAIN, YOU CAN'T JUST ROTATE AROUND 2 HIPS, 2 LEGS & 2 SHOULDERS. There Must be first a forward move 1st into the front pivot point B4 any real rotation.

2) The only high speed hinge in the the human body is the top hand (palm up) snapping around its forearm.(approx 75% of the bat speed) Just like hammering a nail from the side.
Imagine if you were to tape up your wrists and arms, whereby, you created 1 single unhingeable lever. You couldn't hit a ball anywhere, even with massive legs and thighs. However, imagine sitting on a bucket and using just my arms and wrists, I could still propel the ball deep into the outfield.

You seem to be an intelligent guy, I hope your not parroting that guy on bat speed.com

All, I can say is; you've got a lot to learn about the kinesiology of the swing.

And, your belief that you stated above is completely opposite of proven facts.

There's at least 3 guys I can name with PhD's who've studied the physics and the human movement of the swing, and they all disagree with what you stated. There's something called the kinetic chain that you might want to research.

You seem to be intelligent also, but ignorant of the facts. And, no, I don't agree with batspeed.com on some things, but rotation IS what creates power.

And, a baseball hitter's head moves during the stride for some hitters, but once the front foot is weighted, it never moves more than 2 inches after that.

[MarkL]

BOOTH:but here are both heels off the ground

Never said it didn't happen...just strongly disagree on how...


BOOTH:Well, you can decide what you believe causes it,


And what do you believe here Booth????

[Rydell]

All, I can say is; you've got a lot to learn about the kinesiology of the swing.

And, your belief that you stated above is completely opposite of proven facts.

There's at least 3 guys I can name with PhD's who've studied the physics and the human movement of the swing, and they all disagree with what you stated. There's something called the kinetic chain that you might want to research.

You seem to be intelligent also, but ignorant of the facts. And, no, I don't agree with batspeed.com on some things, but rotation IS what creates power.

And, a baseball hitter's head moves during the stride for some hitters, but once the front foot is weighted, it never moves more than 2 inches after that.


You can fill a room with PHD's, and get many different opinions, some a 180 degrees from other "PHD experts". AGAIN, practically speaking, what would propel the ball farther...a) All arm & wrist angles "locked- up" w/ a violent hip rotation...OR...b) hitting off a bucket w/ a free arm swing.

I'm familiar with the concepts of energy moving from the ground up and through the legs ,hips and outward. However, eventhough the hips are powerful, they are a secondary speed producers to your hands and arms. Your only connection with the bat is through the hands. (75 % of Bat Speed is produced when a player shortens the arc of a large radius with the late snapping of his palm up top hand around the forearm.)

I guess we will have to agree to disagree as to the primary source of power, however, I have enjoyed reading many of your thoughts on the swing in other posts and look forward to dialogue with you

Bob

[Rydell]

How far forward does this guy's head move? Its actually further back at contact that it was at set up.
http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08150/bonds747a884.gif (http://xs.to)

Check out the head movements of Ruth, Mays, Mantle, DiMaggio, and Aaron.

[MarkL]

Its actually further back at contact that it was at set up

He moves back during the load & from then until the foot lands the head moves forward...and look at the movement of the spine....."set up" is irrelevant here....where the stride begins/ends is what matters....

[LAball]

The rotation is good for power, thats a given. But adjustability for me is the most important thing. So, what makes a swing adjustable, for check swings,, and such?

[jbooth]

You can fill a room with PHD's, and get many different opinions, some a 180 degrees from other "PHD experts".

Yeah, they may start with varying OPINIONS, but then when they all put their heads together and study and analyze, they separate fact from fallacy or opinion, and come to agreement. If some aspect cannot be determined to be a fact, then opinions may still be kept.

AGAIN, practically speaking, what would propel the ball farther...a) All arm & wrist angles "locked- up" w/ a violent hip rotation...OR...b) hitting off a bucket w/ a free arm swing.

I would say, "a", so why don't we try an experiment to see whose opinion is correct.

Define the parameters and how each will be measured.

[MarkL]

Quote:
BOOTH:but here are both heels off the ground
Never said it didn't happen...just strongly disagree on how...


Quote:
BOOTH:Well, you can decide what you believe causes it,

And what do you believe here Booth????
__________________

[MarkL]

MarkL you seem angry all the time. What's up?

not angry just irritated at your/pcr silliness.

like this:


both heels in the air at the same time due to pelvic rotation.

pelvic rotation brings both heels off the ground huh-----show me how the pelvis gets the front heel off the ground....

[LAball]

Is pelvic rotation caused from the the force from the abs and trunk, or from the rear leg?

[jbooth]

Quote:
BOOTH:but here are both heels off the ground
Never said it didn't happen...just strongly disagree on how...


Quote:
BOOTH:Well, you can decide what you believe causes it,

And what do you believe here Booth????
__________________

You drive off the backside, onto the front foot, while rotating. Sometimes both heels are up because it's similar to walking. When you walk and take a step forward your back heel comes up before your front foot touches. In a swing, since you want to land on the ball of the front foot first, sometimes both heels are up at the same time.

It's a push, block, push as Yeager states, but the pushes come from the muscles in the upper leg and pelvic area. The glutes and quads and other muscles, so you could say that the force comes from the middle, but the leg bones are the levers that utilize the force from the muscles and ground reaction force, to turn the torso. The legs turn the torso, but the primary force is generated from the upper leg muscles, not the feet or lower legs.

[MarkL]

Is pelvic rotation caused from the the force from the abs and trunk, or from the rear leg?

Rear leg driving forward then by front leg "Blocking then pushing"-Yeager

pelvic rotation caused from the the force from the abs and trunkThis is middle-out--& wrong---& what Nyman-Dixon and Englihbey believe---


ps-I love the title of this thread-rotation--Soooo over-hyped and misunderstood...--rotation helps to transfer the momentum, but if you "try" to rotate your dead....

[jbooth]

rotation helps to transfer the momentum, but if you "try" to rotate your dead....

I don't know about that. It's a feel that you have to learn. You can't just push sideways, because you won't get good rotation, and yes, you can't just think rotation either. It's shift and rotate almost simultaneously.

[jbooth]

Is pelvic rotation caused from the the force from the abs and trunk, or from the rear leg?

It's primarily from the muscles in the upper leg that attach to the pelvic bone.

These muscles, and others are what start the hip rotation. This is the front view. The MAIN muscle involved is your butt muscle. The gluteus maximus. It abducts the upper leg which pushes the pelvic bone into rotation.

http://firstpickclub.com/images/leg-muscles.jpg

The abs and trunk muscles (internal and external obliques) turn the shoulders after the leg muscles turn the hips. Those muscles attach the ribs to the pelvic bone which turns the shoulders.

[Rydell]

The rotation is good for power, thats a given. But adjustability for me is the most important thing. So, what makes a swing adjustable, for check swings,, and such?

Use the front knee for adjustments...

1) Stride in time, front foot should be down or nearly so with the ball still approx 25 ft to go to the plate.

2) If you recognize off-speed or ball heading to the outer 1/2 of the plate, keep the front knee "soft" until the ball get deep.

THIS IS THE PRIMARY PROBLEM w/ PURELY ROTATIONAL HITTING....IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE THE FRONT SIDE FIRMS UP TOO QUICK.

[MarkL]

BOOTH:It's shift and rotate almost simultaneously.

nope---"back leg push forward" generates all the rotation prior to block---

Yeagers #s : hips from -28 degrees to 0-8 degrees from beginning to end of stride....


ok Booth --what are you doing (muscles) to rotate during-as you said- push?????? are you trying hard to rotate or just a little??????

[jbooth]

Use the front knee for adjustments...

1) Stride in time, front foot should be down or nearly so with the ball still approx 25 ft to go to the plate.

2) If you recognize off-speed or ball heading to the outer 1/2 of the plate, keep the front knee "soft" until the ball get deep.

THIS IS THE PRIMARY PROBLEM w/ PURELY ROTATIONAL HITTING....IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE THE FRONT SIDE FIRMS UP TOO QUICK.

Yes, your front knee needs to be flexed as the front foot touches down, but that doesn't mean you don't rotate into front foot plant. You adjust by holding the hands back and keeping the front shoulder in while the hips get going. You release the hands according to the speed and location.

[LAball]

It's primarily from the muscles in the upper leg that attach to the pelvic bone.

These muscles, and others are what start the hip rotation. This is the front view. The MAIN muscle involved is your butt muscle. The gluteus maximus. It abducts the upper leg which pushes the pelvic bone into rotation.

http://firstpickclub.com/images/leg-muscles.jpg

The abs and trunk muscles (internal and external obliques) turn the shoulders after the leg muscles turn the hips. Those muscles attach the ribs to the pelvic bone which turns the shoulders.

So fire the Glut for an explosive hip rotation?

The diagram also shows the "Cute cut" and the longest muscle of the body. I bet mine's longer then yours !:rofl:

[jbooth]

ok Booth --what are you doing (muscles) to rotate during-as you said- push?????? are you trying hard to rotate or just a little??????

When you load the back leg your front hip should turn in toward the plate just a little, as Ted Williams taught. Then when you push off the backside, the hips will naturally start to rotate into front foot plant, and then the block and push (or brace up) of the front leg, finishes the rotation. So, I guess the answer is; I'm trying hard not to restrict the rotation, and trying not to just slide sideways.

I think cues like drive off the back leg, rotate on the front leg, and turn the middle are all good thougts. It all happens so fast, you just have to develop the feel. For ME, it's just "turn in, load the back leg, and shift and turn onto the front leg."

[jbooth]

So fire the Glute for an explosive hip rotation?

Yes, basically. But, you have to use the front leg too. The rear glute firing is the explosion that gets the torso moving, but the front leg muscles must stop the forward momentum and stabilize the torso, and finish the rotation.

[MarkL]

The MAIN muscle involved is your butt muscle. The gluteus maximus. It abducts the upper leg which pushes the pelvic bone into rotation.


Actually the gluteus MEDIUS abducts the leg......not the big BUTT muscle....


but I think we mostly agree the it is MOVEMENT of the LEGS that creates rotation.....and it is NOT a Dixon/Nyman/englishbay middle-out move....I am sure they will try to spin/redefine, but the toothpaste is out of the tube.....


For ME, it's just "turn in, load the back leg, and shift and turn onto the front leg."

I agree with this...-except you shouldn't try to turn onto the front leg--turning happens w/ push and nearly all of the positive rotation happens after "front leg blocks"...


and turn the middle are all good thougts

This is a bad thought--you are just trying not to tick off the posse here.........What are you, BOOTH, doing/teaching to turn----- other than the back leg push??????????????????????????????????????????

[jbooth]

Actually the gluteus MEDIUS abducts the leg......not the big BUTT muscle....


You're right, but the MAXIMUS helps out, and finishes the extension. The quads and the maximus are more involved in the front leg action.

but I think we mostly agree the it is MOVEMENT of the LEGS that creates rotation.....and it is NOT a Dixon/Nyman/englishbey middle-out move.

Yes, the legs are the levers that turn the torso. The torso does not move the legs, although the muscles involved, as you agree, could be described as muscles in the middle. Although, I don't see it that way. To ME, they are leg muscles. Muscles "in the middle" (abs, obliques, etc) are not STARTING the rotation, although they ARE involved in the overall rotation at some point. Essentially, AFTER the legs move the pelvic bone.

[MarkL]

To ME, they are leg muscles. Muscles "in the middle" (abs, obliques, etc) are not STARTING the rotation


agree-agree-agree-----The middle-does not rotate the hips----LEG MOVEMENT ROTATES the HIPS.....

[jbooth]

This is a bad thought--you are just trying not to tick off the posse here.........What are you, BOOTH, doing/teaching to turn----- other than the back leg push??????????????????????????????????????????

No, I'm distinguishing a thought/feeling from the absolute action. I don't know about you, but I've had no success trying to tell a kid to push/block/push, or explain in detail, the exact muscle actions and then have him actually be able to do it.

Turn into the front foot, works well from a teaching/communication aspect.

[MarkL]

I use push off the backside all the time--like you are driving off the rubber...

again:
What are you, BOOTH, doing to turn----- other than the back leg push?????????????????????????????????????????? What other body movements???

[MarkL]

MarkL,



Does yeager have anything new in drills that's not offered on his site?




EL,

The last drills I got from Dr. Yeager were from his pro workouts.

[LAball]

I can get leg moves the pelvic. but it feels to me like the front leg adductors rotate the hips ( the blocking part ) I cant feel much push from the back legs.

[Golfchicago]

1) That was obviously Ted's "feeling", as it was Ben Hogan's "feeling", in golf. Jack Nicklaus said in book of Golf my way(Chap 6), that the head doesn't move in his swing. All the videos of him swinging proved that his head moved, eventhough he said it didn't.
In Baseball (like golf), the head and spine move 4-8 inches forward from load to front heel plant.
AGAIN, YOU CAN'T JUST ROTATE AROUND 2 HIPS, 2 LEGS & 2 SHOULDERS. There Must be first a forward move 1st into the front pivot point B4 any real rotation.

2) The only high speed hinge in the the human body is the top hand (palm up) snapping around its forearm.(approx 75% of the bat speed) Just like hammering a nail from the side.
Imagine if you were to tape up your wrists and arms, whereby, you created 1 single unhingeable lever. You couldn't hit a ball anywhere, even with massive legs and thighs. However, imagine sitting on a bucket and using just my arms and wrists, I could still propel the ball deep into the outfield.

You seem to be an intelligent guy, I hope your not parroting that guy on bat speed.com

I agree that the head does move some in a golf swing. Jack's swing is outdated and not the modern swing. Nobody emualtes Jack's swing today. The modern swing does teach to rotate around your rear axis(leg) and then your front axis(leg) with minimal head movement. Many tour players actually have their head move backwards at impact. Go to you tube and find any video of Jack where he moves 4 to 8 inches forward. It isn't there because he doesn't move his head forward that much. The other important issue is that in golf you are winding your shoulders much more than baseball so there will be some movement off the ball or else you will reverse pivot. I've been to Leadbetter and Butch Harmon who teach minimal head motion but Jimmy Ballard who I have been to and is also considered one of the best instructors in the Country teaches huge head movement. The 4 to 8 inch transfer you are talking about. Very few pros were successful with that swing, but needless to say it did work very well for Curtis Strange and Hal Sutton. That doesn't mean it is the most efficient way to swing a golf club. I know my golf, but I am learning baseball. I am interested in understanding why Babe and some others had a huge shift forward. It is obviously an acceptable swing model. Is it the most efficent? could he have been more efficent or maybe that was the best swing for his body type? Some guys are super stars with any swing model. Look at how many times Tiger changed his swing and how many times he has won. If you are blessed with a lot of talent you can still be successful with some flaws. My questions are- what is the most efficent way to swing a bat and is one swing good for everybody in baseball?

[Mark H]

1) That was obviously Ted's "feeling", as it was Ben Hogan's "feeling", in golf. Jack Nicklaus said in book of Golf my way(Chap 6), that the head doesn't move in his swing. All the videos of him swinging proved that his head moved, eventhough he said it didn't.
In Baseball (like golf), the head and spine move 4-8 inches forward from load to front heel plant.

One more example of an elite athlete feeling like he did something different that what he really did. Happens all the time.

1)AGAIN, YOU CAN'T JUST ROTATE AROUND 2 HIPS, 2 LEGS & 2 SHOULDERS. There Must be first a forward move 1st into the front pivot point B4 any real rotation.

Nyman said years ago you need some momentum for good rotation to happen. You don't necessarily need a lot, but you do need some.

1)2) The only high speed hinge in the the human body is the top hand (palm up) snapping around its forearm.(approx 75% of the bat speed) Just like hammering a nail from the side.
Imagine if you were to tape up your wrists and arms, whereby, you created 1 single unhingeable lever. You couldn't hit a ball anywhere, even with massive legs and thighs. However, imagine sitting on a bucket and using just my arms and wrists, I could still propel the ball deep into the outfield.



Pretty much everyone here would agree with the need to keep the hinge angle (angle between front forearm and bat) from opening too soon. Many call it the bat lag position when they check exactly this. Momentum transfer from the large proximal parts to the smaller faster distal parts should be pretty well understood after being discussed here and elsewhere on the net for years. Got anything else you are concerned about?

[Mark H]

I'm familiar with the concepts of energy moving from the ground up and through the legs ,hips and outward. However, eventhough the hips are powerful, they are a secondary speed producers to your hands and arms. Your only connection with the bat is through the hands. (75 % of Bat Speed is produced when a player shortens the arc of a large radius with the late snapping of his palm up top hand around the forearm.)

If you had said "happens when" rather than produced you might have gotten a better reaction on here. You are confusing momentum transfer with momentum/power development. Not surprising since momentum is the least understood factor in sports.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree as to the primary source of power, however, I have enjoyed reading many of your thoughts on the swing in other posts and look forward to dialogue with you

Bob

You can disagree but there just isn't enough muscle mass to produce the necessary force with the arms. We've all been down this road and area of discussion a dozen different ways. Most of us know exactly what you are talking about and have walked the road you are walking now but are just farther down the road. Keep the passion though.

[Mark H]

The rotation is good for power, thats a given. But adjustability for me is the most important thing. So, what makes a swing adjustable, for check swings,, and such?

Well, having a very quick swing allowing you to gather as much information as possible before committing is the biggest key. Staying connected helps that quickness AND allows you to check your swing as late as possible, stop swings being a very good method for checking a lot of things. If you are looking for adjustability after launch that's a salvage operation made possible by being as close to right before launch as possible. Sometimes, you just get fooled.

[Mark H]

not angry just irritated at your/pcr silliness.....

Well that attitude doesn't really help either one of us, does it?

like this:




pelvic rotation brings both heels off the ground huh-----show me how the pelvis gets the front heel off the ground....

Well I don't think much happens without pelvis involvement since that's what the legs and trunk are attached to but I would say it's not just the pelvis, it's a total systems thing. Howzzatt? :)

[Rydell]

Yeah, they may start with varying OPINIONS, but then when they all put their heads together and study and analyze, they separate fact from fallacy or opinion, and come to agreement. If some aspect cannot be determined to be a fact, then opinions may still be kept.



I would say, "a", so why don't we try an experiment to see whose opinion is correct.

Define the parameters and how each will be measured.

I have done that experiment in golf..I was a golf pro for over 10 years...Subjects were fellow golf pros(same physics principals apply)...Used wood splints and tape. The arms became 1 lever. When the ball was hit well it went NOWHERE compared to players hitting on their knees. When the ball was struck well it would go from 225-245 yds

What I also have done lately and you could experiment as well is with a swing speed radar. These are the results:

1) letting go of the top hand produces 2-3 more mph than keeping it on
2) hitting with wood vs metal (same weight, length). A player will swing the metal faster by 3-4 mph

[Mark H]

Use the front knee for adjustments....

That's certainly part of it, but again, it's not a front knee thing or a pelvis thing it's a total system thing.



2) If you recognize off-speed or ball heading to the outer 1/2 of the plate, keep the front knee "soft" until the ball get deep..

Old news. Sure. Been there for years. It's not just the front knee though it's a sink/sit of everything.

THIS IS THE PRIMARY PROBLEM w/ PURELY ROTATIONAL HITTING....IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE THE FRONT SIDE FIRMS UP TOO QUICK.

No not at all. Someone is lying to you. Exactly whose version of "rotational" are you talking about. If forced to use the term "rotational", I'm talking about what MLB hitters actually do when studied on slow motion video. If we see THAT differently, as some do on here, that's a different matter. Arguing what "rotational" hitting is without being specific about what that means to you is discussing apples and oranges. If we are going to disagree, let's make sure we agree on what we disagree about which means we have to define our terms better and the term "rotational" has been redefined several times in recent years. Let's see, there's Williams, Epstein, Mankin, Rightview..., there's four. Who else has a different definition for "rotational" guys?

[Mark H]

Actually the gluteus MEDIUS abducts the leg......not the big BUTT muscle....


but I think we mostly agree the it is MOVEMENT of the LEGS that creates rotation.....and it is NOT a Dixon/Nyman/englishbay middle-out move....I am sure they will try to spin/redefine, but the toothpaste is out of the tube.....


.

If you stopped being irritated you might find differences being more semantic than actual. But you've already got emotion involved. Not good. If you are ever down Houston way, let me know and we can stand in front of each other discussing and demonstrating. You might be surprised. I would suggest your understanding of what Steve teaches and what Dixon was describing is surface rather than deep. Probably won't get past this till you get past the emotion.

[Go Cardinals]

Mark, I believe he is talking about a gate swing... no extension ever anywhere... just connected all the way around.

If yes, I know several people who are told to do so, and they hit well to the opposite field.

[Mark H]

There's been so much discussion here I should take a moment and ask you which post you are referring to?

I'll check back later guys. Got to get outside.

[Go Cardinals]

There's been so much discussion here I should take a moment and ask you which post you are referring to?

I'll check back later guys. Got to get outside.

58






.

[jbooth]

I have done that experiment in golf..I was a golf pro for over 10 years...Subjects were fellow golf pros(same physics principals apply)...Used wood splints and tape. The arms became 1 lever. When the ball was hit well it went NOWHERE compared to players hitting on their knees. When the ball was struck well it would go from 225-245 yds

What I also have done lately and you could experiment as well is with a swing speed radar. These are the results:

1) letting go of the top hand produces 2-3 more mph than keeping it on
2) hitting with wood vs metal (same weight, length). A player will swing the metal faster by 3-4 mph

Below is a re-post of something I put up awhile back.

Watch this video and then make comments if you wish.

I should have stated in the video, that I'm NOT saying that in a real swing, the hands do nothing, and just hold onto the bat, and I DO believe that the hands torque or "snap" the bat, but they do it VERY LATE, just before contact, NOT early in the swing.

The video is simply made to show that the bat CAN get around very well without ANY hand forces being applied. It gets around from rotation of the body.

The primary objective is to make the hands/knob accelerate from the shoulder (launch position) to contact, at as high a rate as possible. Extra force from the hands that try to accelerate the batHEAD is a secondary objective, and is applied LATE, IMO.

Watch and tell me what YOU think.

It's a streaming video;

http://wms17.streamhoster.com/firstpick/notht.wmv

I don't know exactly what you did in your experiment, but if you prevented any hinging action during the rotation only test, then of course you would be restricting the acceleration of the club head. That's not a good comparison. You would be preventing any double pendulum action. Lee Trevino once said, "Swing the handle not the clubhead, and use your legs." He did alright.

[MarkL]

Originally Posted by Rydell View Post
THIS IS THE PRIMARY PROBLEM w/ PURELY ROTATIONAL HITTING....IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ADJUSTMENTS, BECAUSE THE FRONT SIDE FIRMS UP TOO QUICK.


You are right Rydell....You won't get much substance from MarkH...He kinda like those annoying, beeping pop up ads on this page....Little more than an advertiser for a web site..

[MarkL]

What are you, BOOTH, doing to turn-(during the stride)---- other than the back leg push?????????????????????????????????????????? What other body movements???

[PhilliesPhan22]

If your vision is good, you can see the ball, but if you don't have body control and proper movement of the bat, you may not hit the ball, and if you do, you may not hit it very hard.

The goal is to; see ball, and hit ball hard, often, and you can't do that by just flailing away in any old fashion.

I know. My statement is meant to be facetious.

[jbooth]

What are you, BOOTH, doing to turn-(during the stride)---- other than the back leg push?????????????????????????????????????????? What other body movements???

The back leg can operate in more than one manner. I'm in agreement with you, but you have to be more precise than just saying that it is nothing more than a push from the back leg. You can push in more than one way.

You need to push in an manner that insures pelvic rotation, and not just a sideways slide of the hips and torso.

You need to angle the hips as you load, and insure that the front leg doesn't stop the rotation, but rather assists with it.

It's possible to push off the back leg and not get rotation. Do you think rotation is automatic with every type of push?

[MarkL]

Do you think rotation is automatic with every type of push?

no----I agree

BOOTH:when you push off the backside, the hips will naturally start to rotate into front foot plant, and then the block and push (or brace up) of the front leg, finishes the rotation.

and I agree w/ that!

But when you say things like turn onto the front leg or turn the middle are good cues---I have a problem....

as you said "when you push off the backside, the hips will naturally start to rotate into front foot plant"...There is NO SENSE of Turning...Just driving the pelvis forward.....Turn from the middle is garbage.....


H/SE is in spin mode---I guess Middle is from knee caps to neck....get that toothpaste back in there----we all know what he meant---we've seen the DVDs....

[randy]

anytime I mention push to my kids, I get back leg extension-not good.

[4for4]

anytime I mention push to my kids, I get back leg extension-not good.

Yep. Push/Block/Push in all it's glory.

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis/hipdrift.gif

I guess no two pushes are created equal.

No, I'm distinguishing a thought/feeling from the absolute action. I don't know about you, but I've had no success trying to tell a kid to push/block/push, or explain in detail, the exact muscle actions and then have him actually be able to do it.

Turn into the front foot, works well from a teaching/communication aspect.

Makes a lot of sense!

As does this:


...the pushes come from the muscles in the upper leg and pelvic area. The glutes and quads and other muscles, so you could say that the force comes from the middle, but the leg bones are the levers that utilize the force from the muscles and ground reaction force, to turn the torso. The legs turn the torso, but the primary force is generated from the upper leg muscles, not the feet or lower legs.

[4for4]

as you said "when you push off the backside, the hips will naturally start to rotate into front foot plant"...There is NO SENSE of Turning...Just driving the pelvis forward.....Turn from the middle is garbage.....

Well Booth described it in the context of what Williams said and that makes sense. It's much the same as the concept of forward by turning. You on the other hand advocate this:

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis/hipdrift.gif

Reminds me of the Yeager bat drag drill on his DVD.

[4for4]

Rear leg driving forward then by front leg "Blocking then pushing"-Yeager

ps-I love the title of this thread-rotation--Soooo over-hyped and misunderstood...--rotation helps to transfer the momentum, but if you "try" to rotate your dead....

Yeah, that's it. Pitchers and hitters don't rotate, they just push back and forth.

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis/hipdrift.gif

[Slapper23]

Jim, you seem to be wined and dined lately. You're being recruited - politicked. I think though you are too independent to let that happen and I respect you for it. But I've been seeing a lot of this activity lately.

Mike

[MarkL]

forward by turning.

Turning what??????

The body moves forward by the back leg pushing against the ground....

forward by turning implies that internal muscles bring the body forward...The body needs an external force to move forward......

[4for4]

Turning what??????

The body moves forward by the back leg pushing against the ground....

forward by turning implies that internal muscles bring the body forward...The body needs an external force to move forward......

This is so rudimentary that it doesn't merit comment beyond this:

http://photos.imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis/hipdrift.gif

Push/Block/Push in all it's glory. No two pushes are created equal.

[jbooth]

anytime I mention push to my kids, I get back leg extension-not good.

Yes, that's why you can't JUST say push. You have to describe HOW to push. You can't push by leg extension, and you can't push sideways. It has to be a push into rotation.

I usually tell them to drive the spot at the top of the rear leg, next to the groin, around toward the ball, without sliding sideways or extending the back leg.

[jbooth]

But when you say things like turn onto the front leg or turn the middle are good cues---I have a problem....

Why? Any cue can work if the student understands WHAT needs to be done. HOW he thinks of doing it, how he feels it, or the cue he picks to help remember how to do it, is irrelevant.

There is NO SENSE of Turning...Just driving the pelvis forward...

Not for ME. I have to think of turning, otherwise I just push sideways.

I have always disagreed with Dixon's statement that the hips turn the legs, from the point of view that it is NOT a kinesiologically correct statement. But, I have no problem if a student feels like he's moving from the middle. He may think that, but the leg bones and the muscles that apply force to them, are doing the job.

[MarkL]

usually tell them to drive the spot at the top of the rear leg, next to the groin, around toward the ball

I like that and use that, but would leave out the word "around"....I have no sense of "turning" when doing this...the drive forward and block rotates the hips...If you say around--they tend to prematurely and excessively internally rotate the back knee/leg......

[jbooth]

Jim, you seem to be wined and dined lately. You're being recruited - politicked. I think though you are too independent to let that happen and I respect you for it. But I've been seeing a lot of this activity lately.

Mike

I have no idea what you mean by this. Wined and dined by whom? And recruited by whom?

And yes, you know darn well that I have my OWN beliefs of how things work. And, it may be that I agree with some parts of each of the beliefs of two people who essentially are in opposition with one another.

[jbooth]

I like that and use that, but would leave out the word "around"....I have no sense of "turning" when doing this...the drive forward and block rotates the hips...If you say around--they tend to prematurely and excessively internally rotate the back knee/leg......

And, if you don't use "around" sometimes they just slide. That's why you have to watch them and coach them. We're nitpicking words here. We both know WHAT has to happen and how the body needs to do it, the next phase is describing to the student, how to execute the move. It's been my experience that there is no, one single cue, word or phrase that works for every student.

[MarkL]

t's been my experience that there is no, one single cue, word or phrase that works for every student.

agree--but even in your swings--which you say aren't your best--but even so:

the push/shift is weak-I believe because you are too concerned with turning--which compromises shift/drive and you prematurely/excessively internally rotate the back knee/leg...If you would quit thinking turn and let the drive/block rotate you ----this would be fixed....

Forget about turning jim it is holding you back---

Like you said:
"drive the spot at the top of the rear leg, next to the groin, toward the ball"

Then let the front leg finish the rotation----

[korp]

Rotation of what? Did you even look at the 10 video .gifs that I posted above?

Their pelvic bone has started moving in a rotational manner before the front foot is fully weighted.

The hips start rotation before the front foot is fully weighted, and then the rotation is finished with all the weight on the front foot.
True there is gonna be some rotation before the weight is going but roughly 95% of their rotation is post foot plant. Why? ... because the front leg has to be planted to act as a counter force. Also at the end all the weight is not necessarily on the front foot ... that would result in a swing called linear ... some will transfer however.

[jbooth]

True there is gonna be some rotation before the weight is going but roughly 95% of their rotation is post foot plant. Why? ... because the front leg has to be planted to act as a counter force. Also at the end all the weight is not necessarily on the front foot ... that would result in a swing called linear ... some will transfer however.

Dr. Yeager is a rotational teacher, and he says that a force equivelant to 123% of your body weight, is on the front foot during the last part of rotation. After ball contact, the weight goes back on the back foot. There is no significant weight on the back foot at contact with the ball.

And, I would say that much more than 5% of the rotation is complete before foot plant. I haven't analyed that to make an intelligent observation, but in looking at those .gifs I posted above, the hips and shoulders have both progressed in rotation before the front foot is FULLY weighted. The hips more than the shoulders. And, both are well along their way by the time the foot IS fully weighted.

[tom.guerry]

chicagogolf-

it makes it hard to have the conversation when there is no shared understanding of a swing model, and a swing model has many components.

in baseball recently, nyman has created some models then made the mistaken assumption that this limits how the swing is sequenced to a single pattern that he describes in his PCR literature.

as is now well known in golf there are different patterns in spite of the underlying model being the same.

here is the simplest effective model by Jorgenson, the late author of physics of golf;

http://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swing1.php?ref=

You have a stop at the wrists (torque opposing inertia), torque at the shoulder and forward momentum of the whole apparatus.

that is a useful model for predicting results of collison, BUT it does not say anything about how you swing.

the best info there is Hardy 1 v 2 plane swings which both harness the physics of the model but in very opposed ways.

the MLB swing must be quick and adjustable, and only the 2 plane type pattern works for this. in this case, more os a "shift" back then forward is necessary which shifts the base of the spine which is synched to tilting the shoulders in the MLB pattern which then lest yuo adjust torso/spine angle late/on the fly with upper body/hands in control.

this is very different from the 1 plane PCR type swing markH and other PCR posse members describe here.

this swing is very much like the 1 plane golf/Hogan swing where you stand on the front leg as the transition move, then turn the torso like heck.

this works fine for a sport with a stable spine angle, but not for one where you need to adjust on the fly.

[ssarge]

the best info there is Hardy 1 v 2 plane swings which both harness the physics of the model but in very opposed ways.

the MLB swing must be quick and adjustable, and only the 2 plane type pattern works for this.


Tom, if you are going to quote Hardy, you HAVE to quit saying this. Hardy SAYS that the one plane golf swing is what is most reprenentative of the baseball swing. He SAYS it.

Now, I know you think you know what he REALLY means, but this is what he SAYS. Selective quoting of his material to better make your point is just wrong.

[ssarge]

From The Plane Truth About Golf, by Jim Hardy:

(emphasis added)

"The actions of the arms in the one -plane downswing is very similar to that of a baseball swing .That is, at the top of the backswing, your left arm is across your chest with your right behind you, folded with the elbow pointing slightly behind you. Now if you look at the great power hitters in baseball. you'll see that from this position, they turn their shoulders and upper torso as hard and fast as they can toward the coming pitch.

"The torso is like an inner of centripetal force whose movement activates the bat, which recieves the outer or centrifugal effect when this force and its effects are applied correctly, the bat comes thru with crashing speed to meet the ball.

"Its the same principle in the one plane golf swing. You dont throw your arms and club at the ball; rather they get thrown around by the turn of the shoulders and torso."

[ShawnB]

It's all called utter nonsense.

There are many goods things said about the swing and rotation.

Yeager does say some good things about the "middle out" though, He says this will cause muscled up rotation. And after many years of trying different things and finding my rotation actually getting worse, I came across a couple of video clips of my own swing before I went crazy with the mechanics and "how to" part.

Derenne says in his book that when you break the swing down into parts you should never forget the whole.

This is true regardless of what your think happens in an elite swing.

Just thinking middle out isn't a good thing, this is even more true if your intefering with the motion by focusing on specific muscles. Thinking that it's all about the legs can be just as bad.

Rotation isn't merely leg driven, it's not merely hip driven. If anything a great hitter utilizes 100% of their entire body. And you can't utilze the entire body with one muscle group dominating the motion.

[ShawnB]

Scott,

That sounds pretty good.

I gave up on golf after I got mad one day and swung really hard. I ended up looking out my rear end and really hurting my back.

I did experience the perfect swing. It was when I was first learning and just tee'd off with two terrible swings. The third shot went straight and somewhere around 300 plus ft. I do remember how how I did it, although I never seriously ever tried to perfect my swing. You know what I did, absolutely nothing!

[Mark H]

You are right Rydell....You won't get much substance from MarkH...He kinda like those annoying, beeping pop up ads on this page....Little more than an advertiser for a web site..

All the hate and anger Mark. Let it go, it's bad for you. By the way, what are referring to that he's right about?

[Mark H]

The back leg can operate in more than one manner. I'm in agreement with you, but you have to be more precise than just saying that it is nothing more than a push from the back leg. You can push in more than one way.

You need to push in an manner that insures pelvic rotation, and not just a sideways slide of the hips and torso.

You need to angle the hips as you load, and insure that the front leg doesn't stop the rotation, but rather assists with it.?



It's possible to push off the back leg and not get rotation. Do you think rotation is automatic with every type of push?

This all goes to Dixon's point. Elite athletes move the pelvis differently than the rest of us.

[Mark H]

as you said "when you push off the backside, the hips will naturally start to rotate into front foot plant"...

Not necessarily.

[QUOTE=MarkL;1162547]There is NO SENSE of Turning.....

Are you talking about your own personal feel or have you read everyone's mind?


t

[Mark H]

anytime I mention push to my kids, I get back leg extension-not good.


BINGO!


.

[Mark H]

Yes, that's why you can't JUST say push. You have to describe HOW to push. You can't push by leg extension, and you can't push sideways. It has to be a push into rotation.

I usually tell them to drive the spot at the top of the rear leg, next to the groin, around toward the ball, without sliding sideways or extending the back leg.

I'd just dump the term push that causes me to have to explain a bunch of qualifiers about push but if it works for you, then it works for you.

[Mark H]

Jim, you seem to be wined and dined lately. You're being recruited - politicked. I think though you are too independent to let that happen and I respect you for it. But I've been seeing a lot of this activity lately.

Mike

He's a man with interesting things to say about hitting that show an ability to reason logically as opposed to the HI ideas and adherents. He's come far over the years IMO. Honestly, and I say this in all seriousness, judging by your posts, you have regressed. I would suppose the blame can be laid at the feet of Richard and his ideas.

[ShawnB]

MarkH,

One thing I don't like that Yeager says is the push and the move is aggressive in his video. Lau says the same thing in his book.

You often down play balance in the swing. When in fact just about every ML hitter I've heard talk, speak about balance. And I believe I understand what they are saying. Balance comes down to not doing to much. If your doing something that is not productive it will often show up in balance.

[Mark H]

Why? Any cue can work if the student understands WHAT needs to be done. HOW he thinks of doing it, how he feels it, or the cue he picks to help remember how to do it, is irrelevant.



Not for ME. I have to think of turning, otherwise I just push sideways.

I have always disagreed with Dixon's statement that the hips turn the legs, from the point of view that it is NOT a kinesiologically correct statement. But, I have no problem if a student feels like he's moving from the middle. He may think that, but the leg bones and the muscles that apply force to them, are doing the job.

Dixon was saying elite athletes move differently than the rest of us and he tried, quite well I think, to characterize this difference. Saying the terms aren't correct from a kinesiological or physics view point is to miss what he noticed about the difference.

[Mark H]

I like that and use that, but would leave out the word "around"....I have no sense of "turning" when doing this.. ......

Well feel/sense of turning would be an individual personal thing but unless you are an elite athlete I wouldn't be surprised your sense/feel would be "no sense of turning". Reminds of Richard saying he tried something with the bat and "felt" what Bonds was doing. I thought that was as amusing as his rafter whack video.

[Mark H]

True there is gonna be some rotation before the weight is going but roughly 95% of their rotation is post foot plant. Why? ... because the front leg has to be planted to act as a counter force. Also at the end all the weight is not necessarily on the front foot ... that would result in a swing called linear ... some will transfer however.

Too bad MLB killed Siggy's vids. I'd like to link that Derek Lee video right here.

[Mark H]

It's all called utter nonsense.

There are many goods things said about the swing and rotation.

Yeager does say some good things about the "middle out" though, He says this will cause muscled up rotation. And after many years of trying different things and finding my rotation actually getting worse, I came across a couple of video clips of my own swing before I went crazy with the mechanics and "how to" part.

Derenne says in his book that when you break the swing down into parts you should never forget the whole.

This is true regardless of what your think happens in an elite swing.

Just thinking middle out isn't a good thing, this is even more true if your intefering with the motion by focusing on specific muscles. Thinking that it's all about the legs can be just as bad.

Rotation isn't merely leg driven, it's not merely hip driven. If anything a great hitter utilizes 100% of their entire body. And you can't utilze the entire body with one muscle group dominating the motion.

So you are saying it's not about this part or that part but it's a total system problem with a total system/body solution?

[Mark H]

MarkH,

One thing I don't like that Yeager says is the push and the move is aggressive in his video. Lau says the same thing in his book.

You often down play balance in the swing. When in fact just about every ML hitter I've heard talk, speak about balance. And I believe I understand what they are saying. Balance comes down to not doing to much. If your doing something that is not productive it will often show up in balance.

I really really don't have a problem with the concept knowledgeable baseball people are trying to get across when they talk about balance. Problem is, I see too many kids criticized when they fall across the plate and have to step to catch themselves, like you see ML hitters doing, after hitting a low outside pitch. Then the next pitch, the kid gets an up pitch, doesn't fall over and dad or volunteer coach or even, God forbid, the paid coach down at the fancy cages says, "See, THAT'S what I'm talking about". Well duh coach, he didn't fall over when the pitch stood him up. THAT'S the source of my heartburn over the cue "balance". Too often gets bad results with people who don't study this stuff like the folks on here. Same thing with the word "push". With Jim standing there teaching the result is likely fine. Then the kid's dad or the kid talks to some other dad or kid about Jim teaching push and bad things happen. Not because Jim is teaching the wrong thing but because the word "push" likely makes average dad or kid think of knee extension. So I don't say push because, IME, push implies knee extension in the minds of most people.

[jbooth]

Too bad MLB killed Siggy's vids. I'd like to link that Derek Lee video right here.

How's this one?

http://firstpickclub.com/video/dleesviewhands.gif

[Mark H]

There you go. :)

[MarkL]

MarkH:both heels in the air at the same time due to pelvic rotation.

You never answered my question H:

pelvic rotation brings both heels off the ground huh-----show me how the pelvis gets the front heel off the ground....

[MarkL]

BOOTH:There is no significant weight on the back foot at contact with the ball.

agree...


BOOTH:And, I would say that much more than 5% of the rotation is complete before foot plant. I haven't analyed that to make an intelligent observation, but in looking at those .gifs I posted above, the hips and shoulders have both progressed in rotation before the front foot is FULLY weighted.

As a total % you may be right Booth...Yeager documented max neg. hip rotation between -12 and -28 deg. during the stride....
back to between 0 and +7deg when the front heel dropped....
to between +74 and +86 deg at contact

so on average the hitter goes

-18 stride
+3 foot plant
+80 contact

on those #s approx 80% of rotation happens after foot-plant..

also on Yeager's printouts he notes that the hips reach top speed a full .1 sec AFTER the heel drops...


BTW you stopped the Lee clip 1 frame too late--after foot down....The hips turn a lot of degrees in 1 frame after foot plant..

I think you will agree with Yeager that there is hip movement, (you can call it rotation I guess) prior to block, but the hips are neutral at foot plant (0 to +7deg) (square to camera)..

[Golfchicago]

chicagogolf-

it makes it hard to have the conversation when there is no shared understanding of a swing model, and a swing model has many components.

in baseball recently, nyman has created some models then made the mistaken assumption that this limits how the swing is sequenced to a single pattern that he describes in his PCR literature.

as is now well known in golf there are different patterns in spite of the underlying model being the same.

here is the simplest effective model by Jorgenson, the late author of physics of golf;

http://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swing1.php?ref=

You have a stop at the wrists (torque opposing inertia), torque at the shoulder and forward momentum of the whole apparatus.

that is a useful model for predicting results of collison, BUT it does not say anything about how you swing.

the best info there is Hardy 1 v 2 plane swings which both harness the physics of the model but in very opposed ways.

the MLB swing must be quick and adjustable, and only the 2 plane type pattern works for this. in this case, more os a "shift" back then forward is necessary which shifts the base of the spine which is synched to tilting the shoulders in the MLB pattern which then lest yuo adjust torso/spine angle late/on the fly with upper body/hands in control.

this is very different from the 1 plane PCR type swing markH and other PCR posse members describe here.

this swing is very much like the 1 plane golf/Hogan swing where you stand on the front leg as the transition move, then turn the torso like heck.

this works fine for a sport with a stable spine angle, but not for one where you need to adjust on the fly.

Tom,

These are my choices for swing models.

1. one plane

http://www.mountainweb.com/oneplanegolfswing/Jim_Hardy_info.html

I like this version of one plane better because I don't like Hardy's backswing idea.(start the lawnmower drill)

2. Two plane David Leadbetter "The Golf Swing"

I agree there are a ton of variances. Brady Riggs has a great website explainig common variances the pros have.
I am still new to the baseball swing theories and appreciate your advice.

Tom, I love Trevor Immelman's swing, you? one planer with no lawnmower start motion.

[Slapper23]

He's come far over the years IMO.

Far as in coming closer to PCR philosophy? Jim, I guess from what you're implying, was just a poor sap who had all the wrong ideas, but now he has seen the light (agreeing more with you, therefore he has come far)? Is that it?

and I say this in all seriousness, judging by your posts, you have regressed.

As in moving away from PCR concepts and therefore your hitting opinion? Yes. PCR didn't do it for me, despite all the haranguing and condescension contained in PM's and emails from on high. When I began to look closely at what was being said compared to video of ML hitters, it was obvious to me ML hitters were doing things differently than PCR hitting philosophy.

Mike

[tom.guerry]

chicago -

watch out for those "natural" 1 planers.

odds of being one go up if you think of the swing as swinging around as opposed to down.

they would also go up if your hero from birth was gary player.

other natural one planers - Snead, Knudesen.

Hogan had to work at it.

[Mark H]

You never answered my question H:

pelvic rotation brings both heels off the ground huh-----show me how the pelvis gets the front heel off the ground....

Any number of ways to get the front heel off the ground and it's a B#$%^ to get the front heel off the ground if the leg's not attached to the pelvis but seriously it would be more accurate to say good pelvic rotation often causes you to end up with both heels off the ground. Think of the Elvis move. Is a shift part of it? Sure. But I count that as part of the package. You remember. That Dixon forward by turning move you like so much. ;) Still irritated?

[Mark H]

Far as in coming closer to PCR philosophy? Jim, I guess from what you're implying, was just a poor sap who had all the wrong ideas, but now he has seen the light (agreeing more with you, therefore he has come far)? Is that it?

I see you have learned from Tom the ability to tell everyone what they really meant. Like Tom, you are wrong.



As in moving away from PCR concepts and therefore your hitting opinion? Yes. PCR didn't do it for me, despite all the haranguing and condescension contained in PM's and emails from on high. When I began to look closely at what was being said compared to video of ML hitters, it was obvious to me ML hitters were doing things differently than PCR hitting philosophy.

Mike

I wouldn't describe it as moving away from concepts I agree with since you never displayed a good understanding of such. I'd describe it more as hanging out with Richard will lower your SAT score.

[Chris O'Leary]

The back heel coming up is a result of the "back-leg-push"

NOT from the hips pulling it off the ground..---as you SE and nybong/pcr posse believe...

This is wrong.

The push starts the stride/weight shift which helps the hips rotate which PULLS you up onto your back toe.

[hiddengem]

I'd describe it more as hanging out with Richard will lower your SAT score.

How would this happen? What is it you don't agree with him on?

[tom.guerry]

chicago-

leadbetter has really gone 2 plane, initially unwittingly as Hardy describes here:

JH:

"...... it [dominance of 2PLANE instruction by pro teachers messing up 1 planers] is what eventually got me back into teaching and then the book[s]. David [Leadbetter], plus others were teaching the one-plane swing and got the arms and club stuck behind them in the downswing (as I did also until I figured out how not get it stuck). This was happening not only in their student's games but in their own as well. The solution they settled on was to get the arms more out in front of them and when this created problems, they then touted slowing down the body. With out knowing it they had started to "morph" into a two-plane swing (arms in front and timed with the body turn). The real tragedy is that the golfing world bought into it. The arms and club stuck behind you became the curse of the day. As I point out in my book, it is caused by thrusting the arms out in front of you (particularly the right elbow)on the downswing. The farther you thrust the arms out in front the farther the club opens and lays off behind you (stuck). The opposite is what you want. On the downswing, the tighter and lower on your chest the left arm is while the right elbow remains up and behind you the more the club closes and comes out in front. ARMS BACK/CLUB OUT....ARMS OUT/CLUB BACK. That's how they work, so to put the arms farther out in front and still try to swing around the torso was exactly the wrong direction to head in. So when, arms out in front and slow down the body still did not cure the one-planer, David droped the last vestige of the one-plane swing (club around the torso) and incorporated an early wrist set that broke the club up more vertically and not so much around the body. The final result was to leave the arms in front, the body turning in time with the arms and to get an early wrist set that would work the club more upright and not so much around the body....result, a complete transformation to a two-plane swing. I do not mean to criticize David for his work. I have nothing but a world of respect for him What he has done has been through great dedication and effort to help people play better golf. He saw problems with the one-plane swing and set about to fix them. It is just my opinion that in his quest to fix the problems, he did in fact fix the one-plane problems but at the same time moved away from a one-plane swing concept alla Hogan, Snead and Knudsen to the two-plane swing concept. "

JH

Applying info based on the Hardy 1v 2 plane filter can help sort out some of the disagreement here.

For one, there is lots of talk of hip/pelvis "rotation". As Hardy points out, this is a very poor way to describe the hip motion when learning to swing.

Then their is MarkH's claim that shoulder rotation is important and MarkL's claim that it ruins separation.

As Hardy points out, rotating shoulders is great for 1 plane, death for 2 plane, in fact, this is the single most important determinant of swing pattern.

So if you emphasize shoulder turn in MLB, you mess the pattern up. better to "bypass" the shoulders in this sense. It's hips and hands in MLB.

I think it is just as likely there are 2 opposed patterns in hitting just as in golf.

PCR hitting and 1 plane golf are about "swinging around" with active shoulders.

2 plane golf and MLB hitting are swingdown blend of hips and arms(golf)/hands(MLB).

Given the ecological requirements of MLB, only the 2 plane swing down pattern succeeds.

[MarkL]

The push starts the stride/weight shift which helps the hips rotate which PULLS you up onto your back toe.

O'leary-you have been pcr'd........kinda like being punk'd only worse....


You now admit -like the rest of 'em -that the back leg is pushing off....
your heel doesn't come up as part of that????? come on....
Push off and keep the heel flat very unnatural.....


But hey --you are a self-proclaimed analyst...

[Mark H]

Looking at the Derek Lee clip earlier in this thread, do you see much ankle extension?

[Chris O'Leary]

O'leary-you have been pcr'd........kinda like being punk'd only worse....

You now admit -like the rest of 'em -that the back leg is pushing off....
your heel doesn't come up as part of that????? come on....
Push off and keep the heel flat very unnatural.....

It's very easy to stride/shift sideways and not have the back heel come up.

That's called having a dead lower half.

I have seen it a lot, generally in kids who are very strong and who can survive just by swinging with their upper halves.

I have a video clip of Greg Luzinski that shows the same basic thing.

[MarkL]

Looking at the Derek Lee clip earlier in this thread, do you see much ankle extension?


I see heel coming off ground before block as part of back leg push...

you somehow see the pelvis pulling it off---wrong wrong wrong

[MarkL]

It's very easy to stride/shift sideways and not have the back heel come up.

That's called having a dead lower half.

I have seen it a lot, generally in kids who are very strong and who can survive just by swinging with their upper halves.

I have a video clip of Greg Luzinski that shows the same basic thing.


huh????

In good hitters the back heel comes up as part of push forward..


like H:

you somehow see the pelvis pulling it off---wrong wrong wrong

[Mark H]

I see heel coming off ground before block as part of back leg push...

you somehow see the pelvis pulling it off---wrong wrong wrong

I suggest don't get too tied to your terminology but rather look for the meaning trying to be conveyed. Certainly the push forward as you call it or the carry forward as Dixon calls it, supplies the momentum/energy but then the heel comes up as the pelvis rotates and moves forward pulling it up. If it were pushing up we would see knee extension and or ankle extension-two flaws I often see in female fastpitch hitters who have been told to push the hip around.

[Golfchicago]

chicago -

watch out for those "natural" 1 planers.

odds of being one go up if you think of the swing as swinging around as opposed to down.

they would also go up if your hero from birth was gary player.

other natural one planers - Snead, Knudesen.

Hogan had to work at it.
Boy you are not kidding about Ben. As great of a player that he was, he hit a ton of practice balls daily. Nothing that I am interested in. My hero is Jack. That is who I followed when I was a kid, how about you?

[tom.guerry]

chicago -

I started watching golf in the late 50's so my alltime hero was Arnie, of course. he was a one plane swing as hard as possible guy and all my teachers were 2 plane tempo guys, so I was Totally screwed up.

I ended up becoming a long drive contestant for a few years in the 70's at state level becasue I could kill the ball and keep it in. Never hit it 400 which was my goal.

I could not figure out the swing until Hardy's info came out. I am only now starting to be able to predict where the ball is likely to go.

as you pointed out, Immelman does not show the full lawnmower action. This brings up some important points.

1- arm action is the key to swings and differs between patterns.

1 plane swing is back arm dominant/lawnmower which jim likens to the throwing part of an overhand throw as in "twist and throw".

2 plane swing is lead arm dominant and overall arm dominant as far as shoulders and body being responsive to the arm swing, BUT the back arm action is important is setting the pattern/how the arm lifts and stays in front controls the pattern, but in a "permissive way" which lets the lead arm do its thing.

the MLB hitting swing pattern is also controlled by the back arm action/sequence which is not like EITHER 1 or 2 plane golf.

Instead, the back arm action is like the LOADING (not thorwing) astion/sequence of the back arm in the overhjand throw.

For the actual end of loading and the swing, the lead/left arm becomes dominant with late top/right/back hand contribution, much like the 2 plane golf swing.

Because the MLB pattern resembles the early/loading action of the overhand throw and because the 2 plane type pattern is better for adjusting on the fly, it is the only one that you see succeed at the MLB level.

2- With respect to Immelman, I suspect that even though his arm action is less, he has the same lawnmower/close the "A" type sequence in miniature form.

for teaching purposes, this often needs to be exaggerated as in the lumberjack/lawnmower/twist and throw action Hardy describes.

Likewise the overhand throwing action loading is something to exaggerate in learning the MLB pattern which is a point of emphasis by Don Slaught in hios rightview software/analysis/instruction for baseball and fastpitch.

[Golfchicago]

Tom, In your previous post you quoted Hardy saying that Lead teaches a one plane wing. Am I correct on that? Because he doesn't, He teaches two plane. His nickname is Leadposion. Some skeptics say he has ruined some swings. That is whole nother Jerry Springer episode. I am a one planer. My problem with Hardy's theory starts with his lawnmower motion with the arms. By dragging the arms back the hands get to deep. it creates a inside to over move although it isn't over the top but at the same time it isn't a true one plane swing. Jeff Quinney is probably Hardy's student that best replicates this motion. Some of Hardy's other stars like Jake, Pernice and Olin Brown don't do that. I like their motion better. In fact I really like Pernice's motion.
If we want to talk about a lawnmower motion, I like the way the core/torso moves with limited lateral motion. That is what I strive to replicate, but not that hand motion. Tom check out Chuck Quinton's site oneplanegolfswing.com and let me know what you think. Tom, do you agree that there are similarities between baseball and golf on the downswings once the transition is made and the rotation kicks in?

[Slapper23]

I see you have learned from Tom the ability to tell everyone what they really meant. Like Tom, you are wrong.

Mark, that's ok, I read your post and your meaning is very clear. You can try to spin it however you want.

And lowering my SAT score from hanging around with Rich? Your frustration is really showing, Mark. Some of the personal comments you've made lately, although juvenile, point to a larger issue with you.

Remember now, we're just arguing about hitting, not your religion. But then again.... :D

Best regards,
Mike

[tom.guerry]

chicago -

transition and downswing is very similar between 2 plane golf and MLB hitting.

MLB is more hips and hands while 2 plane golf is arms dominated.

[Ifubuildit]

You come across as a bitter individual much like Rich. Is it that your religion showing?

Elliott.

[Mark H]

And I fear I come across poorly in my responses. I've made it clear I have little respect for Richard and less for Slapper. I leave it at that.

[Slapper23]

Me bitter? Not at all. Just havin' a little fun with Marcus. Buildit, the religion comment is a good one. Much of this stuff is discussed like people arguing religion, I'll grant you. I just have a different viewpoint on the swing, and share a common goal I'm sure most everyone has in wanting to become a better teacher and to improve kids' hitting.

But I am glad Mark has finally decided to "leave it at that."

Mike

[Ifubuildit]

Your right. The analogy of hitting and religion is not bad. Through the course of history religions have manifested other forms of religion. It has been no different with hitting.

We all tend to learn from those who came before us then we try to adapt those concepts to new ideas and develop new methods that become the basis for what we teach our kids or players. It is human nature.

Having gone through several coaches when I was younger and then becoming a coach and now an instructor has given me enough insight to state that nothing is ever constant. All of it is evolution. Each of the individuals on here thinks they have the correct genetic code for hitting.

The reality is their genetic code comes from the DNA of many before them. I have used the concepts of many hitting instructors and currently use the one you attack the most. Why? I see the results of it weekly in the success of my students. Is it pure Englishbey? No. They get a dose of my genetic code too. I use the concepts of PCR and Epstein, and Williams and Lau and many others. Some of whom are on this board to determine the truth about hitting.

That truth is found in the success of my students.

Elliott.

[Ifubuildit]

Your right. The analogy of hitting and religion is not bad. Through the course of history religions have manifested other forms of religion. It has been no different with hitting.

We all tend to learn from those who came before us then we try to adapt those concepts to new ideas and develop new methods that become the basis for what we teach our kids or players. It is human nature.

Having gone through several coaches when I was younger and then becoming a coach and now an instructor has given me enough insight to state that nothing is ever constant. All of it is evolution. Each of the individuals on here thinks they have the correct genetic code for hitting.

The reality is their genetic code comes from the DNA of many before them. I have used the concepts of many hitting instructors and currently use the one you attack the most. Why? I see the results of it weekly in the success of my students. Is it pure Englishbey? No. They get a dose of my genetic code too. I use the concepts of PCR and Epstein, and Williams and Lau and many others. Some of whom are on this board to determine the truth about hitting.

That truth is found in the success of my students. Look for your own truth Slapper. Dont just find one and say this is it. I have reached the mecca.

Those who choose to quit learning over the course of time will fail.

Just like religions have come and gone in our history.

Elliott.

[Slapper23]

Buildit, I liked your post and agree with the majority of it. "It" is all about evolution - a constant learning process where one's personal swing beliefs change and evolve over time. It's a journey, plain and simple, and it never ends.

I closely studied and tried the hitting philosophy you say you like, but it didn't work for me. I'm sure this kind of thing happens with a lot of people trying and throwing out different hitting approaches. If it works for you, more power to ya.

I also use concepts from different hitting "gurus'", including Setpro. I think you misread me and my hitting beliefs, Buildit. I've never said "this is it." I may prefer one school of thought over another, but IMO that's part of the journey. Do I like the content found on HI.com? For the most part, yes. Do I think HI comes closer to reality in describing and understanding the ML swing compared to EH.com? Yes. But when you say I supposedly have "found it", "this is it", you fail to realize my liking and use of Epstein, Yeager, Ted Williams, and Mankin material.

So, you and I may not be that far apart on the swing. But please don't make faulty assumptions about my choosing to quit learning. You would be way off the mark (no pun intended.)

Mike

[Ifubuildit]

I try not to make assumptions about anyone I interact with on a web site. To do so is often unproductive in my experience. Your entitled to your opinion about what methods more or less fit your template as to create a MLB hitter.

The funny part of this is that neither of the sites you mention ever generated a single MLB hitter to my knowledge. At least not yet. So, I guess I would state until they do how do your know? That doesnt mean I know either by the way. Yet both sides talk a good game. I hope that one day one of my students will reach that level. There are those convinced that they never will. Let you in on a little secret. While I like PCR and accept Englishbey I stay away from Nyman. He and Richard are cut from the same cloth in my opinion.

Not talking hitting now. Talking personal experience with them. I dont have time for large egos. Because they waist my time and offer a one sided perspective on hitting. Much like some on this site.

Until such time as one of these gentlemen on here gets a guy to the bigs who is successful under their guide then all of this is just speculation about the best approach.

The proof is in the result..

Elliott.

[wogdoggy]

I try not to make assumptions about anyone I interact with on a web site. To do so is often unproductive in my experience. Your entitled to your opinion about what methods more or less fit your template as to create a MLB hitter.

The funny part of this is that neither of the sites you mention ever generated a single MLB hitter to my knowledge. At least not yet. So, I guess I would state until they do how do your know? That doesnt mean I know either by the way. Yet both sides talk a good game. I hope that one day one of my students will reach that level. There are those convinced that they never will. Let you in on a little secret. While I like PCR and accept Englishbey I stay away from Nyman. He and Richard are cut from the same cloth in my opinion.

Not talking hitting now. Talking personal experience with them. I dont have time for large egos. Because they waist my time and offer a one sided perspective on hitting. Much like some on this site.

Until such time as one of these gentlemen on here gets a guy to the bigs who is successful under their guide then all of this is just speculation about the best approach.

The proof is in the result..

Elliott.

well chances are you may never see the proof off any of the website teacher gurus you mentioned..never

[Ifubuildit]

Time will be the judge of that one. It would be dogmatic to think otherwise.

[BoardMember]

well chances are you may never see the proof off any of the website teacher gurus you mentioned..never

Unfortunately, the best indication available for some of us stops at the highest collegiate level in the nation. At this point, collegiate athletic scholarships are the best we can use to judge success.

There is no MLB "test" for female athletes.........

[Ifubuildit]

I think you forgot about this one.

http://www.profastpitch.com/

Granted limited in size but this would be the only equal at this time for female hitters.

Elliott.

[BoardMember]

I think you forgot about this one.

http://www.profastpitch.com/

Granted limited in size but this would be the only equal at this time for female hitters.

Elliott.

Oh you mean the pro-fastpitch league that has collapsed in on itself at least 3 times over the past 15 years?

Tough to use that for a judgement of success......

[Jake Patterson]

well chances are you may never see the proof off any of the website teacher gurus you mentioned..never

Respectfully disagree. I see it every day.

[wogdoggy]

Respectfully disagree. I see it every day.

who has "turned' out a pro from scratch of a hitting website ? steve? paul? mankin? dixon? yeager? ..? i'd like to see just one.

i do realize girls can only get so far,as pointed out by bm..

[Jake Patterson]

who has "turned' out a pro from scratch of a hitting website ? steve? paul? mankin? dixon? yeager? ..? i'd like to see just one.

i do realize girls can only get so far,as pointed out by bm..
You know Wog I never really looked at this and I have to tell you I couldn't care less. What I see is a method of teaching youngsters that sets the up for future success. Now - I would love to talk about the hundreds of kids I have seen who have moved successfully through MS to HS to College using these techniques... but I won't.

Plus I see it more as a linear versus rotational question versus a SE vs Nyman vs mankin vs.... question.

[wogdoggy]

You know Wog I never really looked at this and I have to tell you I couldn't care less. What I see is a method of teaching youngsters that sets the up for future success. Now - I would love to talk about the hundreds of kids I have seen who have moved successfully through MS to HS to College using these techniques... but I won't.

Plus I see it more as a linear versus rotational question versus a SE vs Nyman vs mankin vs.... question.

this originally came from elliots post as the proof is in the results...can we assume every method can produce results? of course but which guy has the trophy? answer NONE but personally I dont care..

[jima]

In the end, the trophy is more about talent than any of the various techniques discussed here.

[BoardMember]

In the end, the trophy is more about talent than any of the various techniques discussed here.

We have a little inside joke amoung the coaches in my org. when meeting to select talent for the next level. Ironically, it fits a few others around baseball/softball world as well.

No matter how hard you try, YOU JUST CAN'T POLISH A TURD.........:dance

[gameth]

Well, you can decide what you believe causes it, but here are both heels off the ground.

http://firstpickclub.com/video/heelsup.gif

I'm going to go out on a limb here. I would be willing to bet that if you connected the hitter up to a EMG it would show that soleus and common leg adductors are firing when that back heel lifts off the ground.

Not sure that would qualify as the hip lifting the heel up. I would say its the soleus muscle doing the brunt of the work. Infact, I would say that if the batter had a strain to that muscle he would not be able to get the heel up "in this manner" without some major pain.

Now once the rotation of the pelvis has started I think the rotation and inertia/weight shift to front side are what gets the back foot on its toe.

[tom.guerry]

I like Yeager's way of describing the desired sequence:

back leg load

back leg push

front leg block

front leg push

as he says, back leg push should not overlap with front leg block.

do not push while blocking.

[jbooth]

I'm going to go out on a limb here. I would be willing to bet that if you connected the hitter up to a EMG it would show that soleus and common leg adductors are firing when that back heel lifts off the ground.

Not sure that would qualify as the hip lifting the heel up. I would say its the soleus muscle doing the brunt of the work. Infact, I would say that if the batter had a strain to that muscle he would not be able to get the heel up "in this manner" without some major pain.

Now once the rotation of the pelvis has started I think the rotation and inertia/weight shift to front side are what gets the back foot on its toe.

I would say that almost every muscle in the leg is firing when the swing starts, but I would guess that the soleus is acting more as a stablizer, since a hitter is already on the ball of the foot to start, with the knee flexed, and the back leg needs to stay flexed. The heel comes up as the shift and rotation occur, and that action is powered primarily by the muscles in the upper leg; mainly the gluteus medius, gluteus minimus, tensor fasciae latae, and sartorius.

The torso shifts and turns as several muscles abduct the rear upper leg.