Why Are Lau's Techniques Mostly Ignored Here?

[JackB1]

2 of Lau's main swing techniques have helped me a lot, but I hardly ever see them discussed here. They are:

1) pulling the knob towards the ball with the hands

2) not letting the back/upper hand get too involved in the swing. The bottom hand dominates the swing and the top hand merely "comes along for the ride".

Do you guys feel these things are important in a good swing? Lau's drills where you swing mostly with the bottom hand while leaving the top hand on the bat, but "open", help me to learn to lead with the bottom hand.

Funny thing is, I apply this principle also to my golf swing and it helps there too.
My first move on the swing is inititated by pulling with my bottom hand. If my top hand gets too involved I will "chop" at the ball and hit a bad shot.

[Jake Patterson]

2 of Lau's main swing techniques have helped me a lot, but I hardly ever see them discussed here. They are:

1) pulling the knob towards the ball with the hands

2) not letting the back/upper hand get too involved in the swing. The bottom hand dominates the swing and the top hand merely "comes along for the ride".

Do you guys feel these things are important in a good swing? Lau's drills where you swing mostly with the bottom hand while leaving the top hand on the bat, but "open", help me to learn to lead with the bottom hand.

Funny thing is, I apply this principle also to my golf swing and it helps there too.
My first move on the swing is inititated by pulling with my bottom hand. If my top hand gets too involved I will "chop" at the ball and hit a bad shot.I've listen to Lau Jr. several times at the World Baseball Convention and other venues and I personally feel much of what he teaches is antiquated and is not supported by what we see with high speed video. He is not someone I would use when teaching youngsters.

[JackB1]

I've listen to Lau Jr. several times at the World Baseball Convention and other venues and I personally feel much of what he teaches is antiquated and is not supported by what we see with high speed video. He is not someone I would use when teaching youngsters.

What is "antiquated" about the 2 concepts I mentioned? It's hard to argue with his techniques when the future greatest HR hitter of all time (Arod) is his "poster boy".

[CoachHenry]

Many HOF players and exceptional hitters use different techniques. That doesn't validate them on a case-by-case basis. However if you can say that MANY good hitters use those techniques then you have something.

There is no doubt in my mind that what Lau teaches can help you be very successful if you dedicate yourself to it. However what he says happens doesn't show up when you slow down video and analyze. Are we analyzing too much? Maybe but facts are facts and there are some things that can't be argued with with overwhelming video evidence. However that doesn't stop us from doing so and is what makes this fun and interesting.

[tom.guerry]

Lau's stuff works pretty well because he knows the MLB stuff well enough to keep out of trouble (keeps from believing pseudoscientific principles which violate the swing, silly things like "there is no such thing as good mechanics" or hands are along for ride/etc).

Lau SR was the first to organize video analysis around the idea of a similar launch position when front foot was down. he dealt mainly with trying to improve excessively rotational hitters who were one dimensional pull hitters.

more basic flaws he described were "swinging while striding" and "top hand dominance".

to fix these he and now Lau Jr recommend weight shift emphasis, pulling the knob, lead arm dominance, front foot hitting, top hand relelase.

Lau teaches a pretty pure style of the MLB pattern (MLB "mechanics") that works best being somewhat off the plate with more emphasis on in vs out adjustment by timing of "front leg firmup"/degree of weight shift.

lots of good MLB pattern stuff.

mechanically, lead arm dominance and early torque (knob pull/starting one armed lead arm then adding top hand/open top hand drill) and weight shift emphasis are all features/ways of encouraging the (natural inborn/waiting to be developed) 2 plane type MLB pattern.

[Chris O'Leary]

I've listen to Lau Jr. several times at the World Baseball Convention and other venues and I personally feel much of what he teaches is antiquated and is not supported by what we see with high speed video. He is not someone I would use when teaching youngsters.

I recently spent 3 days with Lau Jr. and will say that he has updated some of his stuff.

For example, he helped me develop a more nuanced view of connection (e.g. sometimes you have to disconnect to get to a pitch that's outside). I also like his concept of the one-hand finish. How it helps you make sure you aren't cutting your swing short and helps you hit the outside pitch powerfully.

However, his book doesn't reflect this.

[Chris O'Leary]

There is no doubt in my mind that what Lau teaches can help you be very successful if you dedicate yourself to it. However what he says happens doesn't show up when you slow down video and analyze. Are we analyzing too much? Maybe but facts are facts and there are some things that can't be argued with with overwhelming video evidence. However that doesn't stop us from doing so and is what makes this fun and interesting.

What exactly do you think he gets wrong?

I spent a lot of time going over video with him and much of his thinking is similar to what we discuss here.

[CoachHenry]

It's always interesting to hear from people who have spent time with those we speak about and examine.

[CoachHenry]

What exactly do you think he gets wrong?

I spent a lot of time going over video with him and much of his thinking is similar to what we discuss here.

Those aren't my personal views. I was answering the "in general" question of why he isn't discussed more on this site. However it did come across as my personal thoughts.

[JackB1]

I wish someone would give specific examples of what
exactly is incorrect about Lau's concepts regarding the 2 items I
mentioned in the 1st post.

[Stealth]

I wish someone would give specific examples of what
exactly is incorrect about Lau's concepts regarding the 2 items I
mentioned in the 1st post.

You quote in your first post the bottom hand powers the swing. Many if not most believe it's the top hand that controls the barrel and powers the swing.

Gregg Jefferies who instructs locally is a BIG top hand guy - one example.

[Chris O'Leary]

1) pulling the knob towards the ball with the hands

This can lead to a proper swing, with the hands turning in front of the back shoulder and elbow, but it can also lead to disconnection if taken too literally.



2) not letting the back/upper hand get too involved in the swing. The bottom hand dominates the swing and the top hand merely "comes along for the ride".

I think this is a fine cue and is consistent with other bottom hand swings.

However, some of what Lau talks about in his book can result in a swing that is too arm-y.

[Chris O'Leary]

You quote in your first post the bottom hand powers the swing. Many if not most believe it's the top hand that controls the barrel and powers the swing.

Gregg Jefferies who instructs locally is a BIG top hand guy - one example.

I think both top and and bottom hand guys are mostly wrong.

It's the body that powers the swing.

[tom.guerry]

Chris said:

"I think both top and and bottom hand guys are mostly wrong.

It's the body that powers the swing."

I think what is most "right" is that the "bottom AND top hand" controlled upper body action CONTROLS the lower body. the lower body and good synch of upper and lower body and weight shift are what powers an MLB swing via early batspeed and late adjustability.

top hand dominance is the same thing as pushing the swing with the top hand which interrupts body coil and forces early disconnection. without much body coil, there is no adjustability and you only have so much stored energy to remain connected to before disconnecting and compensating by arm extension.

pulling the knob with the lead arm/lead arm emphasis improves this, but leaves you with a swing that is too long and lacks "early batspeed" both in spatial and timing terms.

spatially, the hands can not stay back as far/long.

timing wise, acceleration is not as quick and controllable because you do not get as controllable/quick a last little bit of torso load/coil ("cusp"/"x-factor stretch").

The only way to get MLB level early batspeed and late adjustability is by using BOTH hands well. the open top hand drill and the staged addition of the top hand to the bottom hand (Peavy and Mankin both have a nice progression here too) are a good way of learning this.

Also recognizing how similar the loading arm action is in BOTH the high level overhand throw and the MLB swing is important (Slaught).

Lau has some details wrong, BUT he has enough right to let the "attraction" of the full/natural/pure pattern take over guiding trial and error learning.

This means knowing the results that are to be expected as well as cues that encourage the mechanics that produce the expected results (ball flight).

So Lau's bottom hand lead arm emphasis is good.

What is not so good is interpreting his top hand advice as meaning the top hand is passive or just along for the ride. it is not. It has a very active role to play by working with the bottom hand early in a NON-pushing manner and working with the bottom hand late in more of a pushing manner so that handle torque is applied throughout the swing creating the optimal site/means of swing control.

[JJA]

Lau Jr is a baseball genius, knows more about the swing than virtually anyone on the planet. People don't discuss him because he doesn't have an active web site, has no desire to cater to the masses, has a prickly personality to say the least. But he could care less as he has a line out his Pembroke Pines home with major leaguers lined up for lessons at $350 per hour. I find it laughable with so many "experts" criticizing his stuff, that he doesn't understand fundamental concepts. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Old fashioned? I can't agree with that assessment. I know the dad of one of his students, a kid from New York with below average ability. His dad is rich and has been flying his son down to Florida several times a year to work with Charley. The kid recently had a showcase event in New York with Bobby Valentine as one of the evaluators, and Valentine picked out this kid's swing from more than 100 kids there and asked him who his instructor was. The kid really has a beautiful swing despite his below average ability.

Charley might not be a brain surgeon, can hardly use a computer to save his life, may be a poor public speaker to some, but the guy knows how to teach a baseball swing like few others. There is hardly anyone out there I would recommend people work with, but Charley is certainly one I would recommend without any hesitation at all. (Steve E is another.) Except if you have a sensitive personality, in which case he's absolutely the wrong guy for you to work with!!

-JJA

[FiveFrameSwing]

2 of Lau's main swing techniques have helped me a lot, but I hardly ever see them discussed here. They are:

1) pulling the knob towards the ball with the hands


On this topic, I'd appreciate anyone with thoughts on what Emanski terms "radial deviation" of the lead-arm wrist. My understanding is during the forward weight shift, as the hands launch, the wrist of the lead-arm cocks outward.

A local hitting instructor in my neck of the woods refers to this as "cupping".

Emanski considers this an important aspect. Would appreciate hearing from others on this topic.

[Mark H]

2 of Lau's main swing techniques have helped me a lot, but I hardly ever see them discussed here. They are:

1) pulling the knob towards the ball with the hands

2) not letting the back/upper hand get too involved in the swing. The bottom hand dominates the swing and the top hand merely "comes along for the ride".

Do you guys feel these things are important in a good swing? Lau's drills where you swing mostly with the bottom hand while leaving the top hand on the bat, but "open", help me to learn to lead with the bottom hand.

Funny thing is, I apply this principle also to my golf swing and it helps there too.
My first move on the swing is inititated by pulling with my bottom hand. If my top hand gets too involved I will "chop" at the ball and hit a bad shot.


Depends on HOW you pull the knob and yes, the top hand arm can be a huge source of problems. Too many people interpret "pull the knob" like this. http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis;jsessionid=3hghll3qp1.tiger_s?p=17&n=1&m=20&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=9

[PhilliesPhan22]

My impression of all the different approaches is that they accomplish the same end via different means. One way is no better than the next, and it is up to the individual hitter to determine what works best for him or her. TBH, they all sound like they teach the same thing, but with different wording.

[FiveFrameSwing]

Depends on HOW you pull the knob and yes, the top hand arm can be a huge source of problems. Too many people interpret "pull the knob" like this. http://imageevent.com/siggy/hitting/analysis;jsessionid=3hghll3qp1.tiger_s?p=17&n=1&m=20&c=4&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=9

My understanding of the cue "knob to the ball" is that it should target initial hand movement and that it is generally given to a student with a bad habit of initially dropping their hands.

Another cue that works better with some students is "stay on top of the ball". For some this cue works better in terms of not initiating their swing by dropping their hands.

In any event, the high tee drill you described a short while back is very helpful in this regard.

[Shake Zula]

Lau's technique works in its certain way. Last fall, I had struggles with the swings that were taught in the near batting cage (squish the bug, short swing, etc.) and I went out, bought Lau's DVD's and book and acquired a new swing--and I started to hit. I had 2 line drive triples that hit the fence, many doubles, and only 1 strikeout in ten something games. Now, I'm learning something new from Dr. Yeager's DVD's.... I'll see how that turns out

What I like about Lau's swing is that it really helped me making contact like 'pulling the knob' and 'direct contact'. It also introduced me the concept of weight transfer and swinging after striding... and relaxing. One questionable thing about Lau swing is the bottom hand dominance. I mean, I feel 'throwing' the bat with top hand seems more powerful and reasonable..

[FiveFrameSwing]

2) not letting the back/upper hand get too involved in the swing. The bottom hand dominates the swing and the top hand merely "comes along for the ride".


Think about Lau Jr's "bottom-hand top-hand assisted" drill (not the drill with the open top hand). I know many people that do this drill and sense a throwing action with the top-hand. I know Charley preaches pull/pull, but many do this drill and sense pull/throw, with the top-hand throwing at/near contact.

[Mark H]

My understanding of the cue "knob to the ball" is that it should target initial hand movement and that it is generally given to a student with a bad habit of initially dropping their hands.

.

Get a dozen instructors together, much less dads, and you will get multiple opinions of what this and other cues mean. This cue, like most, can be great or awful depending on the instructor's understanding and the player's interpretation. To use Steve's words, the cue lacks sufficient explanatory power. This allows it to be adapted to whatever the hearer's expectations are. Look at the clip from above of Rose and he sure looks like he's pulling the knob to me. But the knothead in the clip I linked is "pulling the knob" too. And selling some goofy cement trowel looking thing to promote his understanding of "pull the knob". So when someone tells me they pull the knob, I'd say most of the time they mean something entirely different from what Lau means. So I gotta' ask what they mean by "pull the knob".

[StraightGrain11]

My impression of all the different approaches is that they accomplish the same end via different means. One way is no better than the next, and it is up to the individual hitter to determine what works best for him or her. TBH, they all sound like they teach the same thing, but with different wording.

Right on. :thumbsup:

[Mark H]

You reckon these folks are teaching the same thing just in a different way as Lau or Epstein or Mankin or Englishbey? http://www.quickhands.net/pics.html

[tom.guerry]

FFS -

radial deviation as used by Emanski is a way to actively "hold the hinge angle" with the wrists as a way of keeping the hitter from unloading too soon. bat on deltoid does the same thing by controlling/limiting arm extension.

radial deviation can mean justwrist aBduction (no cupping) or you can lock up the lead wrist even more by cupping (wrist extension) in addition to the aBduction.

In a high level swing, this type of wrist action is too restrictive. you need to be able to turn the handle without prematurely unhinging the lead wrist from when the bat starts to uncock/untip (which is when the rotation into toe touch starts opening the lower body while hands sttay back) all the way contact.

There are many ways to describe the wrist feel such as staying neutral or locking the wrists,etc.

Mechanically, Mankin describes this best with emphasis on a nonbinding grip and what the arms and forearms are doing to create "tht/bht".

non-"rushed"/full torso loading/coiling will permit unhinging the wrists at the right time with the fine tuning (of swing plane orientation and bathead acceleration/timing) controlled by handle torquing forces in a high level swing.

This is like "throwing the bathead" primarily with forearm action/"immediate launch and spend", not throwing with one arm or the other.

[PhilliesPhan22]

You reckon these folks are teaching the same thing just in a different way as Lau or Epstein or Mankin or Englishbey? http://www.quickhands.net/pics.html

And I can use it to cement my sidewalk when I'm done;)

[Chris O'Leary]

You reckon these folks are teaching the same thing just in a different way as Lau or Epstein or Mankin or Englishbey? http://www.quickhands.net/pics.html

Exactly.

While the top-tier guys probably overlap 80 percent, there are many people out there who are teaching crazy, indefensible stuff.

[Baseball gLove]

And I can use it to cement my sidewalk when I'm done;)

I thought it was for holding toilet paper :rofl:

[PhilliesPhan22]

One of these days I'll get out and post my swing. I'm curious to see what you guys would say about it.

[wogdoggy]

be skepitical of any instructor who "FAVORS" one arm over another or one hand over another.if your swinging right both arms are doing the work and you shouldnt even be able to tell if one is working harder than the other.there is no power arm.

[Mark H]

And I can use it to cement my sidewalk when I'm done;)

There's always a silver lining. :)

[TG Coach]

Because Ted Williams said Charlie Lau set hitting back ten years.

[Go Cardinals]

What exactly do you think he gets wrong?

I spent a lot of time going over video with him and much of his thinking is similar to what we discuss here.

Did you invite him to come over here to bbf?

[JJA]

Charley is never going to go to BBF or any other web site. His view is that the internet crowd wants his information for free. Why should he give his information away for free when he can get paid $350/hour instead? That's his view, and frankly, I can't disagree with him.

[Go Cardinals]

Charley is never going to go to BBF or any other web site. His view is that the internet crowd wants his information for free. Why should he give his information away for free when he can get paid $350/hour instead? That's his view, and frankly, I can't disagree with him.

Makes sense

I figured that would be the answer, just hoped. Think about it, how cool would it be if someone like lau posted at bbf?

[PhilliesPhan22]

Makes sense

I figured that would be the answer, just hoped. Think about it, how cool would it be if someone like lau posted at bbf?

and have everyone tell him how wrong he his???? /sarcasm

[Go Cardinals]

and have everyone tell him how wrong he his???? /sarcasm

:applaud::applaud::laugh:laugh


too funny

[Shake Zula]

Because Ted Williams said Charlie Lau set hitting back ten years.

I don't really believe in that statement. In fact, Lau Sr. was much more advanced when developing his theory of hitting by using the video technology (which was basically unheard of as a hitting tool)

[Chris O'Leary]

I don't really believe in that statement. In fact, Lau Sr. was much more advanced when developing his theory of hitting by using the video technology (which was basically unheard of as a hitting tool)

Ted Williams' statement is mostly wrong (and according to Charley Jr. Williams said 50 years, not 10 years).

However, Charley Lau Sr. did believe in, and preach, extension and Power V at the point of contact. This idea, while it is believed and taught by some at the major league level, is simply wrong.

You should see some of the photos in Charley Lau Sr.'s book "The Art of Hitting .300" of George Brett demonstrating what Sr. thought was the ideal position at the point of contact. I'll try to scan one tonight.

They are laughable and counteract all the things Sr. got right.

I know that Charley Lau Sr.'s ideas destroyed my swing.

[TG Coach]

I know that Charley Lau Sr.'s ideas destroyed my swing.

Didn't you play all the way through LL?

[virg]

Charley is never going to go to BBF or any other web site. His view is that the internet crowd wants his information for free. Why should he give his information away for free when he can get paid $350/hour instead? That's his view, and frankly, I can't disagree with him.

Charley Jr often wrote on the HFE website. Mankin/ Nyman fans (stands for fanatics) would harrass him. Same ones still at it today, even here.

[tom.guerry]

Lau prefers to teach a long swing radius off the plate type swing which is why the swing focusses more on in/out adjustment rather than up/down.

the more you belly-up, the more it makes sense as Epstein recommends to look in or out and adjust up/down on fly and land with front foot open some.

The longer Lau type swing makes it easier to see and feel the sequences in the swing like the arm extension sequence and the weight shift.

he prefers this longer swing to the point of, for example, lead foot still closed when down and nearly fully extended to point of power V at contact.

If you belly-up and have a much shorter swing as with Aaron, for example, you have to have the front foot open by toe touch, and a quick swing like Aaron;s will also give the impression that he is adjusting in/out by where he wants the stride foot to go (wrong impression, but observation that stride foot placement varies in aaron is good).

Brett was senior's eventual poster boy (when he could not get aaron to fit his theory very well except for the "front foot hitting part"). he was well off the plate and turned his back to the pitcher quite a bit and landed with the front foot closed.

[JJA]

I am very familiar with those Brett photos. It's very unfortunate that Lau had to choose a swing sequence where the pitch that was low and outside, that showed Brett greatly extended at contact. Brett's position at contact has resulted in people believing that this is the position that Lau must be advocating for contact, for all pitch locations.

However, this simply isn't true. Lau Sr never advocated a "Power V" at contact. Look for a quote in the "Art of Hitting 0.300" and you won't find it. The closest you'll get is that note to the photo where he indeed mentions the extension. But he certainly didn't advocate it and absolutely never taught it. You don't get the swing of a George Brett trying for a power V at contact for the vast majority of pitches.

Still, because of the misinterpretations over the years really due to the difficulty of the written word and an unfortunate pitch location, Lau Jr's follow on book takes special pains to clarify in a similar photo in his book that extension shouldn't be taking place during contact, but takes place after contact. That it is should take place after contact is pretty self-evident as several people have pointed out but obviously wasn't made clear enough to some in the Art of Hitting 0.300.

And Virg, you're right, Lau made about 5 posts on Mankins web site several years ago, and then left after getting a taste of what we put up with here on a daily basis. That's when he made the decision he was done with web posting for good. As far as I know, he hasn't posted since.

-JJA

[Shake Zula]

Lau never said 'extension' at contact. He said 'contact and extend through it' to ensure the hitter hits the ball without cutting it off shortly. There was a picture of Biancalana (spelling) in Jr.'s book that proves his point

[wogdoggy]

I am very familiar with those Brett photos. It's very unfortunate that Lau had to choose a swing sequence where the pitch that was low and outside, that showed Brett greatly extended at contact. Brett's position at contact has resulted in people believing that this is the position that Lau must be advocating for contact, for all pitch locations.

However, this simply isn't true. Lau Sr never advocated a "Power V" at contact. Look for a quote in the "Art of Hitting 0.300" and you won't find it. The closest you'll get is that note to the photo where he indeed mentions the extension. But he certainly didn't advocate it and absolutely never taught it. You don't get the swing of a George Brett trying for a power V at contact for the vast majority of pitches.

Still, because of the misinterpretations over the years really due to the difficulty of the written word and an unfortunate pitch location, Lau Jr's follow on book takes special pains to clarify in a similar photo in his book that extension shouldn't be taking place during contact, but takes place after contact. That it is should take place after contact is pretty self-evident as several people have pointed out but obviously wasn't made clear enough to some in the Art of Hitting 0.300.

And Virg, you're right, Lau made about 5 posts on Mankins web site several years ago, and then left after getting a taste of what we put up with here on a daily basis. That's when he made the decision he was done with web posting for good. As far as I know, he hasn't posted since.

-JJA

And Virg, you're right, Lau made about 5 posts on Mankins web site several years ago, and then left after getting a taste of what we put up with here on a daily basis. That's when he made the decision he was done with web posting for good. As far as I know, he hasn't posted since.

-JJA[/QUOTE]
FUNNY I had dixon visit BE or maybe it was here at BF I cant recall exactly about 8 yrs ago,he was railed on immediately and told me he would never post again.

[virg]

There is a tendency (in hitting) to go overboard upon just scratching the surface after years of ignorance. It has happened around some overrated websites and it leads to the evangelism we see on the Web. Some go nuts over a mild Eureka moment and can't contain themselves.

[Chris O'Leary]

I know that Charley Lau Sr.'s ideas destroyed my swing.

Didn't you play all the way through LL?

I never made it out of grade school ball. That was due to shoulder problems more than anything, but my hitting (or lack thereof) made HS ball a non-starter.

I tried out in college (d-3), and could hit because I had forgetten everything I was taught and just did what came naturally, but my shoulder was fried and I ended up with a dead arm at the end of the first day of try-outs.

[Chris O'Leary]

Lau prefers to teach a long swing radius off the plate type swing which is why the swing focusses more on in/out adjustment rather than up/down.

the more you belly-up, the more it makes sense as Epstein recommends to look in or out and adjust up/down on fly and land with front foot open some.

The longer Lau type swing makes it easier to see and feel the sequences in the swing like the arm extension sequence and the weight shift.

he prefers this longer swing to the point of, for example, lead foot still closed when down and nearly fully extended to point of power V at contact.

It's not your fault that you don't know this, due to Lau Jr.'s not having updated his stuff in a while, but this doesn't reflect his current thiking.

Lau Sr. DID want more extension. On one page there's a picture I thi of Harmon Killabrew (sp?) taking a perfectly connected swing and making the Power L like this...



...and Lau Sr. describes it as a bad swing



Brett was senior's eventual poster boy (when he could not get aaron to fit his theory very well except for the "front foot hitting part"). he was well off the plate and turned his back to the pitcher quite a bit and landed with the front foot closed.

Brett is another MLer who doesn't appear to understand his own swing. All throughout Lau Sr.'s book Brett demonstrates things that he doesn't do in his live swing.

[PhilliesPhan22]

Brett is another MLer who doesn't appear to understand his own swing.

So I guess he made the Hall of Fame using a swing that felt natural to him.

[Chris O'Leary]

So I guess he made the Hall of Fame using a swing that felt natural to him.

Yes

The problem arises when he tries to teach people and they listen to him.

[TG Coach]

I tried out in college (d-3), and could hit because I had forgetten everything I was taught and just did what came naturally, but my shoulder was fried and I ended up with a dead arm at the end of the first day of try-outs.

The short version is you didn't make the team.

[Ursa Major]

The short version is you didn't make the team.Is there a reason you're rubbing Chris' nose in it? What is your point relevant to?

[jbooth]

Is there a reason you're rubbing Chris' nose in it? What is your point relevant to?

Seems as though he's using the old attitude that if you weren't good yourself, you can't know how it works, or how to teach.

That's not true, but it is interesting that people can use that premise selectively against some teachers. He knocks Chris' credibility because he didn't play at a high level, but then trusts what .255 lifetime hitter Lau Sr, with a .355 SLG% and a HR every 73 AB's says, versus what .344 lifetime hitter Ted Williams, with a .654 SLG% and a HR every 15 AB's says.

And, listens to Lau Jr, who never even played in the Majors.

[Chris O'Leary]

I tried out in college (d-3), and could hit because I had forgetten everything I was taught and just did what came naturally, but my shoulder was fried and I ended up with a dead arm at the end of the first day of try-outs.

The short version is you didn't make the team.

It's kind of hard to play baseball, or make the team, when your right arm is numb.

[NY16CATCHER]

Is there a reason you're rubbing Chris' nose in it? What is your point relevant to?

Although done in a less than tactful manner, the point does have some relevant concepts behind it.

There is a very wide line between therorist and instructor/coach and very few people make that distinction here. It's sad, because a lot of very intelligent instructors/coaches/players get chased out of instructional forums by absolutists, those who believe that their way, and only their way is right. And the irony of it all is that many of those absolutists have absolutely no idea of the concept of practical application of their theory. They roll out video clips, charts, graphs and a lot of smoke and mirrors to tell you how you should be doing it, when in a million years they couldn't actually do it themselves under any circumstances. And I particularly find it funny when people who are proponents of 2 totally divergent schools of thought roll out the same video clip to provide a graphic depiction of their "ideal" and then they and their supporters and their detractors get into a huge pissing contest over the whole thing and anything that might have been useful in the discussion gets buried in a whole lot of garbage.

Sadly, in what I see as an effort to cover up a whole pile of garbage with roses to make it smell better, often the discussion gets so filled with buzz words, contrived technical terms, pissing contests, etc. that any usefullness gets totally lost to the reader who really needs it most, the player who comes to a forum on coaching/instruction looking for help with their swing. About the only thing that would happen after reading about 60% of the posts on the swing in this forum is further confusion and frustration.

The reality of it all is that no absolute exists. As the expression goes "there is more than 1 way to skin a cat" and there is more than 1 way to swing a bat. Personally, for full disclosure, I am a Lau student. The swing I built using Sr.'s writings and Jr's help, together with my work and physical skills, got me through 4 years of high school varsity baseball (2 time all state honorable mention) and 4 years of DIII ball as a starter. It works for me. That being said, I played alongside kids who were just as good a hitter or a better hitter than I was that used completely different methods, and they worked for them just fine but that swing wouldn't have worked for me and vice versa.

I think this forum would be best served if it had a swing section that was divided into "schools", ie. Epstein, Lau, etc. Let the users of those styles post there to discuss their swings, work with coaches/instructors who use those theories in their teachings, fellow players, etc. No flaming or bullcrap. Instructional discussion only. If you think Lau for example is wrong, fine, but don't go shredding posters who do use that method in the forum dedicated to it.

(Even with all the baseball background that I had in my family, all of my playing experience, and all of my understanding of the game, I still question if I have the skills or credentials to coach or instruct. I can't imagine the mindset needed to have never even completed little league ball, yet still tell people who are coaching/playing the game at higher levels how they should be going about doing something.)

[Chris O'Leary]

(Even with all the baseball background that I had in my family, all of my playing experience, and all of my understanding of the game, I still question if I have the skills or credentials to coach or instruct. I can't imagine the mindset needed to have never even completed little league ball, yet still tell people who are coaching/playing the game at higher levels how they should be going about doing something.)

I didn't set out to instruct hitters. Instead, I just threw some information out there that I happened to find valuable. It turns out that it worked quite well for others and they had immediate success with it.

This includes multiple minor league and D-1 college hitters.

If you want to read some of the testimonials I have received, go here...

- http://www.chrisoleary.com/projects/Baseball/Testimonials.html

I may not have the best resume, but when I work with people they get better.

I don't know if that means I'm that good or that most people are that bad.

Also, Charley Jr. and I got to know each other because he was impressed with my work.

[ellisz]

I tried out in college (d-3), and could hit because I had forgetten everything I was taught and just did what came naturally, but my shoulder was fried and I ended up with a dead arm at the end of the first day of try-outs.

The short version is you didn't make the team.

TG's just being his usual charming, modest self. Thank God "the coach" isn't here to back him up or you wouldn't be able to cut the bravado with a knife. I'm surprised he hasn't managed to say how great his kid is yet. I guess it's still a new thread. He'll get there.

[Mark H]

NY,

Well I would explain it gets worse than that and then I would explain where I believe I see problems with a couple of your points arise.

It gets worse than that when an armchair theorist with no known students blathers on combining almost everyone's writings, though changing them in the process, to come up with a unified theory he's never apparently actually tested on real life in person students of his own.

Problems with your thoughts are, if we go with those who did it, and often at a much higher level than you, we can pick a half dozen credentialed experts who teach things that don't look anything like what they, or anyone else at a high level, actually did and of course each of the half dozen will disagree with each other so what's a dad going do then when trying to figure out what to teach Jr.

Other problem is, all of the elite hitters DO have much in common, IMO, when you study them in slow motion so...

Some great practitioners make great teachers. Some don't. I'd rather learn from someone who never did it but has produced great hitters than from a HOF who has NOT produced any great hitters. As it happens, the smartest guy I've found did it at the AAA level AND I have seen him produce great improvement in young hitters.

As to LauJr, if he's produced or helped great hitters then he's produced or helped great hitters.

[Stealth]

TG's just being his usual charming, modest self. Thank God "the coach" isn't here to back him up or you wouldn't be able to cut the bravado with a knife. I'm surprised he hasn't managed to say how great his kid is yet. I guess it's still a new thread. He'll get there.

That part made me laugh:D

[Slapper23]

NY16CaTCHER - see pissing contest example below...


It gets worse than that when an armchair theorist with no known students blathers on combining almost everyone's writings, though changing them in the process, to come up with a unified theory he's never apparently actually tested on real life in person students of his own.


When you write the post you did, it rattles nerves and egos,....hence, Mark's quote above. It does get so old.

Great post, by the way.

Mike

[mbf]

I would like to know how Charley Jr. has revised some of his thinking/teaching. I only have his book. In reading/looking at some of his pictures, it seems he advocates a hard pull with the bottom hand to the ball, so much so, that the hands seem to get too far in front of the body. If that's not what he really means, then what does he mean?

[Chris O'Leary]

I would like to know how Charley Jr. has revised some of his thinking/teaching. I only have his book. In reading/looking at some of his pictures, it seems he advocates a hard pull with the bottom hand to the ball, so much so, that the hands seem to get too far in front of the body. If that's not what he really means, then what does he mean?

Charley's working on a new book, and I don't want to give away any proprietary stuff, but I will say that he is on board with certain aspects of the idea of connection but also believes in pulling the knob. I'm not sure which he emphasizes or how he reconciles the two.

[PhilliesPhan22]

This thread got me thinking about how many great players went on to become even moderately successful major league managers. Off-hand I can think of one, Frank Robinson.

The point being that great players don't always make great teachers, and great teachers aren't necessarily great players.

Think about how many former catchers (starting and backup, Major and Minor League former player) are either managers or coaches in the Majors. Its quite a few. While they were riding the pine they were observing, analyzing , and absorbing the subtle nuances of the game.

[Mark H]

NY16CaTCHER - see pissing contest example below...



When you write the post you did, it rattles nerves and egos,....hence, Mark's quote above. It does get so old.

Great post, by the way.

Mike

Mike likes to take shots at me from time to time because he knows I don't think he's qualified to enter a pissing contest. Three notes, his mentor is the one I was referring to. He didn't notice I don't dis Lau. The quote he used AGREES with NY. An example of going off half cocked again.

[Slapper23]

Oh, Mark, don't be so darned sensitive. I wouldn't call my remarks "shots", but your posts do have a way of attracting my attention. It may be the inane way you go about attacking your usual topic - Tom. Your posts are too boring and too much advocacy of one swing guru. We know Mark, you are the great, all knowing swing master. And yes, I know you think what you do about me and that's perfectly fine. And also yes, Tom is one of my swing mentors.

Mike

[Chris O'Leary]

This thread got me thinking about how many great players went on to become even moderately successful major league managers. Off-hand I can think of one, Frank Robinson.

The point being that great players don't always make great teachers, and great teachers aren't necessarily great players.

Think about how many former catchers (starting and backup, Major and Minor League former player) are either managers or coaches in the Majors. Its quite a few. While they were riding the pine they were observing, analyzing , and absorbing the subtle nuances of the game.

A portion of MoneyBall that makes this point. That Billy Beane is interested in people who survived via accumulatin valid knowledge rather than just raw ability. The raw ability people often make bad coaches and teachers because they never had to study and really understand the game.

[PhilliesPhan22]

A portion of MoneyBall that makes this point. That Billy Beane is interested in people who survived via accumulatin valid knowledge rather than just raw ability. The raw ability people often make bad coaches and teachers because they never had to study and really understand the game.

Never read Money Ball. I guess Billy Beane and I think alike.

[JJA]

Charley doesn't even know what the word "connection" is. As he once put it in a way only Charley could, "Who the h&ll is Paul Nyman?". He doesn't read the internet, doesn't care what any "gurus" or anyone else thinks of his teachings. He recently got in an argument with Sue Enquist, ex-UCLA fastpitch head coach, about hitting instruction. He cut off her arguments, telling her that once she taught a few big leaguers that he might listen to her, but until then she wasn't qualified to talk to him about hitting. When she responded that she had won multiple national titles, his response was "What the h&ll do you expect. It's the dream of every girl to play at UCLA. Anybody could coach those teams to titles." Rightly or wrongly, that's Charley. I am very aware of exactly what he intends to put in his new book, but don't expect him to be "reconciling" with anyone. Not happening, not in this lifetime. And it isn't even necessary, not if you understand what he actually teaches. Sure, cues like "pull the knob to the ball" can be used incorrectly as Mark pointed out in the famous concrete layer video. Or, they can be used properly, like Charley Lau, Jr does.

-JJA

[THop]

Wogdoggy,

“FUNNY I had dixon visit BE or maybe it was here at BF I cant recall exactly about 8 yrs ago, he was railed on immediately and told me he would never post again”.

I think this might be the thread from Baseball Excellence that you spoke about

http://www.baseball-excellence.com/sbaseballforums/viewmessages.cfm?Forum=1&Topic=3960&keywords=jim%20dixon

[tom.guerry]

JJA-

His prior description (LAU'S LAWS) was pull the knob with the lead arm not the shoulder.

Is that still the way he describes it ?

[Chris O'Leary]

Charley doesn't even know what the word "connection" is.

Yes he does.

We spent a lot of time talking about connection and the proper timing of extension.

Charley's ideas are much more up to date than people give him credit.

[JJA]

Yes, Tom, you're right. That's still how he describes and teaches it.

[Mark H]

Charley doesn't even know what the word "connection" is. As he once put it in a way only Charley could, "Who the h&ll is Paul Nyman?". He doesn't read the internet, doesn't care what any "gurus" or anyone else thinks of his teachings. He recently got in an argument with Sue Enquist, ex-UCLA fastpitch head coach, about hitting instruction. He cut off her arguments, telling her that once she taught a few big leaguers that he might listen to her, but until then she wasn't qualified to talk to him about hitting. When she responded that she had won multiple national titles, his response was "What the h&ll do you expect. It's the dream of every girl to play at UCLA. Anybody could coach those teams to titles." Rightly or wrongly, that's Charley. I am very aware of exactly what he intends to put in his new book, but don't expect him to be "reconciling" with anyone. Not happening, not in this lifetime. And it isn't even necessary, not if you understand what he actually teaches. Sure, cues like "pull the knob to the ball" can be used incorrectly as Mark pointed out in the famous concrete layer video. Or, they can be used properly, like Charley Lau, Jr does.

-JJA

That's hilarious. Thanks for sharing the story. Couple of thoughts. One, Sue's current thoughts really are Slaught's (who IS a former big leaguer) as best I can tell. it would be interesting to get Lau's take on the RightView materials though I doubt he's seen them. Two, taking a high minor leaguer or MLB hitter and making them better is one thing. We are all trying to get to the same place but I wonder, in terms of teaching protocol, what a Lau could offer the dad of Luke Little League who's trying to learn to hit period.

Famous concrete layer video? lol I like that.

[tom.guerry]

Thanks, JJA.

Old Lau thread at Shawn's site:

http://z6.invisionfree.com/Hitting/index.php?showtopic=313

[Shake Zula]

Seems as though he's using the old attitude that if you weren't good yourself, you can't know how it works, or how to teach.

That's not true, but it is interesting that people can use that premise selectively against some teachers. He knocks Chris' credibility because he didn't play at a high level, but then trusts what .255 lifetime hitter Lau Sr, with a .355 SLG% and a HR every 73 AB's says, versus what .344 lifetime hitter Ted Williams, with a .654 SLG% and a HR every 15 AB's says.

And, listens to Lau Jr, who never even played in the Majors.

You don't need to be a star to become a great instructor/guru. People with failure tend to be great teachers because 1) successful people have their raw abilities for them to be able to use demerit-al mechanics yet still suceed and 2) people with failure has the 'fire' inside them on trying to figure out 'why didn't I make it?' Rudy Jamarillo never reached majors yet he's the hottest instructor in MLB

[jbooth]

You don't need to be a star to become a great instructor/guru. People with failure tend to be great teachers because 1) successful people have their raw abilities for them to be able to use demerit-al mechanics yet still suceed and 2) people with failure has the 'fire' inside them on trying to figure out 'why didn't I make it?' Rudy Jamarillo never reached majors yet he's the hottest instructor in MLB

I agree, and I think you missed my point.

I said people "selectively" use the premise that if you didn't play at a high level you have no credibility. What I mean is; they use that when it fits their need. Some people get bashed because they've never played at a high level, but Lau Jr, is held in high-esteem by some, yet he never did either. So, IMO it's selective.

[JJA]

Mark,

Charley actually uses RightView Pro for the internet lessons he uses with his students, though he isn't thrilled with the product. I'm sure he has never seen the instructional materials. On the other hand, he and Slaught used to be close friends so he is very familiar with what Don teaches and although he has some heartburn with some of Don's teachings, Don fares better than most instructors when it comes to Charley's criticisms.

As for young kids, his stuff actually works very well. The issue is that his book and DVD only give a glimpse of what he actually teaches, so you really have to see him in person to really get to appreciate and fully understand his teaching methods (like what he really means to pull the knob to the ball). If you expect the book and video to have all the details, you're going to be disappointed. In person, he's terrific, though if you're thinned skinned, you won't last long.

-JJA

[Mark H]

That's great but if you can't leverage yourself by training trainers your impact is limited. One man can only do so much.

[JJA]

Mark,

He does actually have a handful of "certified Lau trainers" like Jerry Cooper in Philadelphia and Steve Aguilar in Fort Lauderdale, and another guy in Kansas City, but you're right. But he doesn't care, and that's pretty much why JackB1's thread is a good title, "Why are Lau's Techniques Mostly Ignored Here". He doesn't publicize himself much, and unlike Steve, doesn't like to travel to see students. You have to come to him. It's great for him he can make a living that way, but it limits how many people have access to him, especially at $350/hour. But that's Charley, and it's also why he isn't an hitting coach for a major league team. He loves his freedom, absolutely not a 9-5 type of guy. I've actually talked to him about trying to become an Epstein, getting lots of certified trainers and holding lots of seminars across the country. But he isn't interested. Like he said, he wants to be on the diamond, teaching hitting, and that's really all he wants to do.

[Olliemets]

I am from the school of you can take something from everyone, but need to use what comes naturally and suits the Talents of the individual Player.

In looking back at my own experience, I was a decent player through HS who's limitations became more apparent as the competition got tougher (as happens with everyone). Left Hander pull hitter who while I hit home runs, doubles and walked a lot; hit more pops and ground outs as I went up the ladder. This was all in mid 70s, prior to George Brett's explosion as a hitter.

I then tried to school my son (who is now 14) differently. He bats left, throws Right as I did and I was determined to make him use the entire field early so I brought into the Lau philosophy. In retrospect that may not have been the proper approach either, but he got something out of it at the time

What I learned is that it helped him (and others) at the LL and small field Tvl Level. Our teams tended to put the ball in play and were succesful. We left our more talented hitters alone. Some players need less coaching than others.

But as another frequent poster has pointed out, it doesn't scale. On the big field this approach is less succesfull, and I've used this and many other boards to learn alternate approaches. Mankin, Epstein, Englishbey, Yeager, etc. I've found Chris's PDF files on what major league hitters actually DO as fascinating. These boys can't hit the ball out of the INF without maximizing their entire bodies in the swing.(they can't throw either until they do this).

In year 2 of big field ball this is what I've found works for my son:
The biggest concept that has been retained from the Lau teachings is the idea of No Tension, balance, relaxation and establishing rythym at the plate. Getting into a routine everytime he steps into the box.

I've found that Charlie Jr.s idea of "slamming the brakes" (from his book-section- "Trying to hit a HR") naturally forces hip rotation. It's on the edge of lunging but if it's against the front foot and not over, the other stuff falls into place. "Pulling the knob" was a good cue back then but is counterproductive now. I find the words "hands back" , "Maintain the box" and of course "Connection" are good cues for him. Finishing High, extension and Top hand release tend to happen depending on where the pitch was and if it was expected.

He's consistently in long at bats now and hits the ball hard. Mostly line drives up the middle and to left center. At 125 LBs I've reminded him that it's about baby steps. But I suspect that pulling with power will come as he matures. He's a late bloomer physically.

So while I like the Lau philosophy of tension free swing, situational hitting and preparation, I prefer the physics of the other stuff.

Some players just see the ball and hit it. Most need some help. My goal is to keep my son playing as long as he can, because he loves the game.

[Shake Zula]

I bumped this thread after thinking that I found a video that illustrates A-Rod's swing while he was under Lau's instruction

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtUcJWiH6qM&feature=related

Look at 1:27 to 1:33

[ssarge]

He does actually have a handful of "certified Lau trainers" like Jerry Cooper in Philadelphia and Steve Aguilar in Fort Lauderdale, and another guy in Kansas City, but you're right. But he doesn't care, and that's pretty much why JackB1's thread is a good title, "Why are Lau's Techniques Mostly Ignored Here". He doesn't publicize himself much, and unlike Steve, doesn't like to travel to see students. You have to come to him. It's great for him he can make a living that way, but it limits how many people have access to him, especially at $350/hour.

John:

Sounds as if Lau potentially earns a living consistent with a white-collar professional. maybe even a little better (which seems appropriate to me, BTW). How much does he work?

Best regards,

Scott

[Jake Patterson]

John:

Sounds as if Lau potentially earns a living consistent with a white-collar professional. maybe even a little better (which seems appropriate to me, BTW). How much does he work?

Best regards,

Scott

I saw Lau Jr. Twice at the World Baseball Concvention. While he and his dad did much for the game, I found others had better methods when teaching youngsters.

[JJA]

Scott,

He doesn't work that much per se. He's got several high end students that keep him making enough money (he's worked with Eric Byrnes of the Diamondbacks on and off the last few years, several other big leaguers here and there), several high level college players, several high school players, and several little leaguers. He holds his hitting school around the country 3-4 times a year typically. He also sells a surprising number of videos, not Epstein like, but a non-negligible amount of additional cash to supplement his teaching.

He's actually thinking again of entering professional baseball, talking to several teams right now. He won't be a minor league hitting instructor as he wants to be a major league instructor or roving hitting instructor for a team. I'm skeptical because he is certainly no 9-5 type guy, and he's got a huge ego which isn't probably the best trait for a hitting instructor these days. We'll see.

Jake, I agree if you listen to him, read his books or even watch his videos that you might think he's not particularly suited for little leaguers. I used to think that as well. But after watching him work with kids, I changed my opinion about him 100%. He's a superb instructor. His stuff is very well suited for youngsters. He's not for sensitive type kids as he pulls no punches, but his material really is extremely good. For people interested, I would strongly urge they see him or one of his certified instructors at least once to understand what he means. Without the personal one on one, I can understand why some would not necessarily recommend his materials.

[Jake Patterson]

I'm skeptical because he is certainly no 9-5 type guy, and he's got a huge ego which isn't probably the best trait for a hitting instructor these days.
This comes out loud and clear when he speaks... Maybe I had a hard time getting by this to see the value of his material.

[Rajun Cajun]

I've listen to Lau Jr. several times at the World Baseball Convention and other venues and I personally feel much of what he teaches is antiquated and is not supported by what we see with high speed video. He is not someone I would use when teaching youngsters.

The top hand is very active and is more dominant than you are led to believe. It is not merely "along for the ride."

[Jake Patterson]

The top hand is very active and is more dominant than you are led to believe. It is not merely "along for the ride."
Are you implying that I use "along for the ride?"