Should I or Shouldn't I? (Change his swing) [Archive]

Bryton

06-25-2008, 06:57 PM

Ok everyone. Here is the dilemma I am in with my son. And I guess it's not really a dilemma. I have been doing a lot of reading on here about rotational hitting, and that is the new style of hitting. First let me give you a little run down about my son. He is playing 12U travel. He just turned 13. He didn't start playing baseball till he was 11. This is his second year of travel ball. He is a really good hitter. He is currenlty hitting .493 in about 30 games with over 75 at bats. He had a 12 game hitting streak, and has hit safely in 17 of his last 18 games. I think of the 30 or so games he has only not had a hit in about 5. He has hit home runs, triples, doubles, etc.... He has only struck out 5 times so far. He has 23 walks, his on base percentage is well over .619, and his slugging % is .740 (I only know all this because I found a website that computes it all for you). Anyway, you can see where I'm going with this. So, again, I have done a lot of research lately on this rotational hitting and looked at a lot of videos, and see the difference with the tilt, and the drag of the back foot, and how the angle of the bat is different. Anyway, I am really afraid to change his swing at all with how well he has been hitting. I'm not saying he has a great swing by know means. I couldn't tell if he does or not, but he gets the job done none the less. I trust his coaches and they say his swing looks pretty good and he makes really good contact on a consistant basis. They believe in not striding so much, and they do kinda teach squishing the bug. I don't pretend to be a coach or hitting instructor, so please take a look at his swing and tell me if you think after the season I should look to change his swing to the rotational style. I know this was a long post, but I really appreciate all the expertise I can get on this. Please feel free to critique his swing. Thats the only way I can make him an even better hitter then he is now. Thanks.

P.S. Please take a look at his swing and let me know what you see. What corrections should I make? Should I look to change him to rotational hitting? Don't mind my little comment lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cOli10nQ4

Baseball gLove

06-25-2008, 07:42 PM

rotational is not new. He looks good to me. I saw a game clip in your other videos. If that was him, he needs to let the ball get deeper (closer) to him. He slowed down his swing because he was early. Keep hands inside and on top of the ball. I tell my kids short to it, long through it.

Jake Patterson

06-25-2008, 07:46 PM

Ok everyone. Here is the dilemma I am in with my son. And I guess it's not really a dilemma. I have been doing a lot of reading on here about rotational hitting, and that is the new style of hitting. Rotational hitting is not new. It's been around the game forever. We talk about it more as our understanding of the swing through high speed film and applying kinesiological principles gets better.

First let me give you a little run down about my son. He is playing 12U travel. He just turned 13. He didn't start playing baseball till he was 11. This is his second year of travel ball. He is a really good hitter. He is currently hitting .493 in about 30 games with over 75 at bats. He had a 12 game hitting streak, and has hit safely in 17 of his last 18 games. I think of the 30 or so games he has only not had a hit in about 5. He has hit home runs, triples, doubles, etc.... He has only struck out 5 times so far. He has 23 walks, his on base percentage is well over .619, and his slugging % is .740 (I only know all this because I found a website that computes it all for you). Anyway, you can see where I'm going with this. So, again, I have done a lot of research lately on this rotational hitting and looked at a lot of videos, and see the difference with the tilt, and the drag of the back foot, and how the angle of the bat is different. Anyway, I am really afraid to change his swing at all with how well he has been hitting. I'm not saying he has a great swing by know means. I couldn't tell if he does or not, but he gets the job done none the less. I trust his coaches and they say his swing looks pretty good and he makes really good contact on a consistent basis. They believe in not striding so much, and they do kinda teach squishing the bug. I don't pretend to be a coach or hitting instructor, so please take a look at his swing and tell me if you think after the season I should look to change his swing to the rotational style. I know this was a long post, but I really appreciate all the expertise I can get on this. Please feel free to critique his swing. That's the only way I can make him an even better hitter then he is now. Thanks.If you search here at BBF you will find that many here agree success at one level does not always translate into success at the next. I would also offer that many dads and coaches are fooled by early success and do not take into account the differences between field sizes, bat types, and pitching capabilities. Many are flabbergasted when Jr. who hit .750 at 12 can't hit the proverbial broad side of the barn when they hit school ball. Teaching him proper mechanics at the expense of short-term numbers is the right thing to do if he hopes to play to HS and beyond.

P.S. Please take a look at his swing and let me know what you see. What corrections should I make? Should I look to change him to rotational hitting? Don't mind my little comment lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cOli10nQ4I see many of the same things we often talk about here when discussing the transitional hitters. Weight back, squish the bug, flat swing, etc., etc. His swing overall is very good for his age - his numbers support that. If you want him to be successful in HS+ however, I would suggest Steve's material if you and he are serious about making the transition. IMHO he will not have the same success at the next level if he does not change.

Bryton

06-25-2008, 07:56 PM

Jake, I agree with everything you are saying. I am not blinded by his current numbers. And I was looking for what you said about him not having the same success at the next level. That is why I am seeking the advice now. I have already started him with the drop 3 bat, and just want to give him the best opportunity to succeed. I have no problem with honesty and constructive criticism of my son.
So Jake, what changes should I look to make to his swing? I have no idea on what or how to make those changes. I have no idea what to look for or what I am looking for. I am just a dad looking to try and make my son the best baseball player he wants to be. Should I wait until after the season to institute these changes? I need help with what changes I need to make? Please tell me what I need to do, or point me in the right direction please. Thanks for you comment. I appreciate it.

P.S, what is Steve's material and where do I find it?

DerekD

06-25-2008, 08:12 PM

P.S, what is Steve's material and where do I find it?

Steve Englishbey

This is the Steve he's talking about. I was you a couple of months ago. I bought Steve's materials about a month ago and will start with my son after the season. Good luck.

Bryton

06-25-2008, 08:35 PM

What materials of his did you buy? where do I get his material? Does it break the swing down from steps to incorporate to your hitter so that you yourself understand how to translate it to your hitter.

TG Coach

06-25-2008, 08:44 PM

Your son looks like a fairly good size kid for a 12U player. He's also an older 12U player. In past years he would already be 13U. Some of his success may be due to his size and strength on the smaller field. If this is the case it's important for him to optimize his skills along the way. Otherwise other kids will catch up when they become bigger and stronger. Many younger age travel coaches don't look at the player's future. They don't want to mess with what works for the team now. Don't allow the coaches to let you fall into this trap.

Bryton

06-25-2008, 08:50 PM

Yeah, he's not real tall for his age 5'2 and weighs 121. His home field is not on a smaller softball diamond that most teams play on. We play on a actuall all dirt size high school diamond. He hit's the ball pretty solid, but like the "traditional" swing, he does hit a lot of ground balls, as to where with the "rotational" swing, you try to hit it over the infield. My only problem, is I have no idea how to teach this swing to him except for maybe looking at video. But I am looking for something that is going to break down the "rotational" swing for me to show him and teach it to him. If anyone has or can point me in that direction, I would greatly appreciate it. I am looking for the material needed to work on this swing.

Swing Coach

06-25-2008, 10:02 PM

Bryton,

I admire your interest in your son's hitting, especially since he is so successful right now. He is good...but is he good enough? I have analyzed hundreds of high school, college and minor league swings and he will have to make adjustments to be as successful when he reaches college. In summer ball and hs ball, he will get by with his nice relaxation, balance and hip rotation...all three great pieces to his swing. But if you notice in the clip that he hits a lot of wiffels on the ground and when a low ball comes in, he misses it. I bet you would agree that most of his outs are ground balls and that he has trouble in games with knee-high pitching. Right now, I am guessing he gets enough balls mid-up in the zone to blast. He has a really nice swing...but, he will have to learn how to get his bat to match the plane of the pitch much earlier. And the only way you do this is to keep reading and look for good drills. Teach him how to turn that back knee and drop the right shoulder to get the barrel on plane. The main Epstein (numbers or torque??) drill teaches this. He will start with the bat against his back shoulder pointing down, lean back and swing up through the ball. This is the middle part of a swing and once he has that down...he can move his hands to a normal position and his feet to a stride to balance and then an explosive rotation. With proper instruction, it would not take him long to learn this. If you have a mini dv tape of his game swings, you can send it to me and I will look it over and analyze it with mlb swings. PM me if you want this type of help

Bryton

06-25-2008, 10:25 PM

Yes I have noticed that he does hit a lot of ground balls, and yes those are his primary outs, which leads me to the rotational hitting, which from everything I have seen and read and researched, is supposed to take the infield out play as much as possible. But I am here and there trying to figure out what is going to be best for my son, and this is where I am running into issues I guess. Everyone has an opinion, and how as a dad am I supposed to know which one to take and run with for my son. I guess in the end, only I can figure that out, but I have to go with what appears to be very successful at the next level, and after looking at a lot of video of MLB players, it appears that they seem to have a rotational type swing. But then again. Who am I but a dad lol. Again, I just need to figure out what is going to help him get to where he wants to go, because his dream is to go to the University of Texas to play ball. Whether he has the talent or ability to make it, I don't know, but I need to do everything I can to help him try and reach his dreams. Thanks for everyones help.

Ursa Major

06-25-2008, 11:42 PM

This is an excellent core swing for this age level. The suggestions I would have are really around the edges -- more of a pre-load, a little more tilt, not straightening the front leg so soon, etc -- but it's hard to say because he's not using a real bat. And, has been noted, we haven't seen him try to hit lower pitches.

While I wouldn't try to make significant changes during the season if he's hitting as well as you say, I think that you can tinker with some issues without hurting him one whit because it can only help increase his power and get the bathead into the strike zone more quickly.

Steve's materials are available at Englishbey Hitting. Given where he is and your knowledgeability and desire to learn, I think his DVDs would be a good match.

Chris O'Leary

06-26-2008, 08:10 AM

P.S. Please take a look at his swing and let me know what you see. What corrections should I make? Should I look to change him to rotational hitting? Don't mind my little comment lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cOli10nQ4

I think his swing is solid, and mostly consistent with the major league pattern.

P.S. Be careful with rapid fire drills (which the video is on the edge of). I have seen them encourage top-down, arm-y swings. I want my guys to to take fewer, better-prepared swings rather than a ton of poor, top-down swings.

Bryton

06-26-2008, 08:13 AM

Thanks Ursa, I appreciate yours and everyone elses. Comments.

We are heading to Cooperstown tomorrow for the 12 year old tournament there, and I am going to try and get a lot of game video of him, and when I get back, I will post it and let you guys analyze it for me lol. Thanks again, Sam

Bryton

06-26-2008, 08:15 AM

Yeah Chris, I agree. The coaches are just trying to get swings in with all the boys before the games. They also do live pitching to them after the soft toss drill too. But I totally understand where you are coming from with that. That's why him and I work hard on our own with them drills to make sure his swing is the best that we can get it, and god knows I'm not a coach, so I'm just going with the flow.

Rufus67

06-26-2008, 09:02 AM

Bryton
My only caution to you is to be careful with the "just a dad" comment. I think I'm in the same boat as you are (not much baseball playing experience, not much coaching experience) yet we want to give our kids the best instruction and information available. Your son is already more successful at the plate than mine is (11 years old) which was part of my motivation to helping him learn to swing correctly (along with his desire to hit better). You are perfectly capable of learning what you need to know and helping to instruct your son on how to hit rotationally. The guys here have given you a good resource with Steve Englishbey, while I went with Mike Epstein (trust me, you can search on either name and get loads spirited debate on the pros/cons of both).

The important thing isn't that you want to help your son hit like Albert Pujols. That's great, and fun to see happen, but it's better that you're doing something together with your son and working toward a goal. The best part about is with the proven techniques taught by Steve or Mike you'll see results as well. After you've done some research and instructing you'll find that you know more about hitting than the majority of coaches currently out there.

Enjoy the time together and realize that, even if you're not an expert like the regular posters here, you can learn and instruct the fundamentals of a rotational swing. The guys here are great and will help you with whatever question you may have regarding the instruction process.

Bryton

06-26-2008, 09:46 AM

Rufus, I totally agree with what your saying about the dad thing. I was a pretty good baseball player in my younger days. The difference between today and yester year was, the the instruction I got was pretty slim and none. What I accomplished at the plate and in the field, was all my own doing. I know the game pretty well, but not the real intricacies of the swing. I know I can teach him, I'm not worried about that, I'm just trying to figure out what best to teach him, and that is where Im at a cross roads I guess. But we will figure it out together and with the help of the people on this forum which I greatly appreciate. Thanks to everyone. Sam

By the way, my son's name is "Bryton" which I use for the screen name. lol.

hiddengem

06-26-2008, 01:07 PM

If you want him to be successful in HS+ however, I would suggest Steve's material if you and he are serious about making the transition. IMHO he will not have the same success at the next level if he does not change.

Common Jake..I think you can give a better effort than that.

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 01:09 PM

Common Jake..I think you can give a better effort than that.Effort? In what respect?

callyjr

06-26-2008, 01:15 PM

Effort? In what respect?

meaning Steves material is not worknig at the next level. How about instead of endorsing a guru we just share drill ideas and offer help that way.

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 01:35 PM

meaning Steve's material is not working at the next level. How about instead of endorsing a guru we just share drill ideas and offer help that way.Cally, you and I have discussed this before and I have made it very clear to youth coaches coming here and those dads trying to help their sons get to the next level. I believe if coaches start with PCR and build from there hitters can be successful in HS. I feel the material Steve teaches and the drills Steve use are especially helpful to coaches trying to teach younger hitters. I feel all - Mankin, Yeager, Epstein, Williams, Dixon, etc. have a great deal to give, but Steve provides a learning model that allows allows coaches to view his material and then load their success on his site for reasonable comments from those who teach hitting. Others provide the same service, I have looked at them all...

After a bunch of years coaching school ball I wished I had a nickle for every dad who was dismayed with their son's performance at the school level and who cannot understand why their son's small field swing using high performance bats doesn't directly translate to success at 60/90. Those of us who have been around for awhile have heard this story over and over again. For the reason stated in above posts I feel this young man may be heading for the same disappointment. If you disagree, so be it, Recommend to Bryton what you feel would help.

Lastly, I do not consider what HG does for a living as "the next level" when trying to help dad's of 12/13 y/o's. It would be presumptuous of most of us to think we could help HG at his craft at his level.

callyjr

06-26-2008, 01:42 PM

Cally, you and I have discussed this before and I have made it very clear to youth coaches coming here and those dads trying to help their sons get to the next level. I believe if coaches start with PCR and build from there hitters can be successful in HS. I feel the material Steve teaches and the drills Steve use are especially helpful to coaches trying to teach younger hitters. I feel all - Mankin, Yeager, Epstein, Williams, Dixon, etc. have a great deal to give, but Steve provides a learning model that allows allows coaches to view his material and then load their success on his site for reasonable comments from those who teach hitting. Others provide the same service, I have looked at them all...

After a bunch of years coaching school ball I wished I had a nickle for every dad who was dismayed with their son's performance at the school level and who cannot understand why their son's small field swing using high performance bats doesn't directly translate to success at 60/90. Those of us who have been around for awhile have heard this story over and over again. For the reason stated in above posts I feel this young man may be heading for the same disappointment. If you disagree so be it. Recommend to Bryton what you feel would help.

Lastly, I do not consider what HG does for a living as "the next level" when trying to help dad's of 12/13 y/o's. It would be presumptuous of most of us to think we could help HG at his craft at his level.

Thats not me talking Jake, its a pro saying it, he just didn't finish the sentence out of respect for you. I have the same respect, just simply wishing we could all just make suggestions without a guru attached to them. that away there is no need to discuss the gurus and then we simply continue to get better as a forum.

Cally

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 02:43 PM

Thats not me talking Jake, its a pro saying it, he just didn't finish the sentence out of respect for you. I have the same respect, just simply wishing we could all just make suggestions without a guru attached to them. that away there is no need to discuss the gurus and then we simply continue to get better as a forum.

Cally
I don't disagree...

The problem we have in baseball is there is no clear understanding or definition of the terms we use to explain techniques, especially here where our ability to demonstrate is limited. Using a standard of sorts is the best way to communicate. When we speak of Marshall's pitching technique for instance, there is an accepted understanding of his techniques as their is a point of reference when we talk about Doc and his methods. Recommending a hitting instructor is no different.

Also, If you were to look at the swing as if we were starting from scratch with no knowledge of where to begin, I feel many of the current guru's teach basically the same concepts, with minor adjustments based on what they perceive to be happening, or needs to be happening at the highest levels. If you accept this (and I understand and accept that many don't) then it really becomes a matter of the mode in which we teach (or learn) and not the material. After exploring various modes I only recommend what seems to work best for me and for those I have advised in the past. I have never had anyone come back to me and said my advice wrt an overall hitting direction was wrong. They may be out there, if so, I have not heard from any.

I avoid the detail of many hitting discussions because many of the discussions become more about who knows more versus who can provide the help requested by those at the field struggling. We can bore the new coaches with our vast knowledge of the Major League pattern swing or set them on a path toward success, one that can help them help their players.

Giving them a direction that can truly help versus the minutia that only confuses seems to be what works best for those I teach. Just my very humble opinion.

phantom

06-26-2008, 04:40 PM

i'd really like to hear the basics of a good swing for the next level.

i dont think i'd be bored.

thanks

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 04:44 PM

i'd really like to hear the basics of a good swing for the next level.

i dont think i'd be bored.

thanksThis is where we get into trouble... What is your definition of the next level? It seems to be different for everyone here.

If you are really interested in the minutia search BBF ... there are thousands of posts that discuss the details.

phantom

06-26-2008, 04:54 PM

In your opinion, do you think the mlb swing can be taught to a 12 year old? If it can, then there wont be any next level. He can just use that same swing as he gets older.

If it can't, then the search for the perfect swing continues.

I've yet to see anyone put down in basic terms and in stages from 1 to whenever, what takes place in mlb swing.

Thats my wish.

phantom

06-26-2008, 04:56 PM

If we ever establish the perfect swing, all the dads and coaches can come in here and compare their kid's swing to it.

But the journey is....can we find it?

LAball

06-26-2008, 05:00 PM

What is your definition of the next level? It seems to be different for everyone here.

My definition is: To be able to adjust the bat/swing AFTER the bat has started its path to the ball.

phantom

06-26-2008, 05:07 PM

My definition is: To be able to adjust the bat/swing AFTER the bat has started its path to the ball.

wow!..that's tough to do. I dont think even the mlb guys can do that. you think?

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 05:52 PM

A reasonable request...

My take:

In your opinion, do you think the mlb swing can be taught to a 12 year old? If it can, then there wont be any next level. He can just use that same swing as he gets older. I do not believe a MLB swing can be taught to or learned by a youngster. Players, especially boys do not obtain full motor skill ability until they are 17-22 (?) and are incapable of physically doing what the pros do. And this does not even consider the genetic differences between most pro players and the average person.

If it can't, then the search for the perfect swing continues.
Yes it does. Like golf there is always something in the swing to improve. The player's body, the environment in which he plays, his muscle memory, the equipment he uses, the level and skill of his competition, his coaches, etc... all changes making the perfect swing difficult to obtain and even more difficult to keep. I've played golf since I was 10. My handicaps have moved from 6-16 and changes each season. I could hit the ball much further when I was 20 than when I was 50, I was a better golfer at 33 than when I was 23 and with that said I shot a 74 yesterday, my best round in a very long time. The point is the quest for the perfect swing is a journey not an event.

I've yet to see anyone put down in basic terms and in stages from 1 to whenever, what takes place in mlb swing. That's my wish. There are instructors who recognize this and are working hard at establishing methods to accommodate this.

Jake Patterson

06-26-2008, 05:54 PM

My definition is: To be able to adjust the bat/swing AFTER the bat has started its path to the ball.Again... at what level? Against what kind of pitching?

phantom

06-26-2008, 07:01 PM

My definition is: To be able to adjust the bat/swing AFTER the bat has started its path to the ball.

in my opinion, once the path has started to the ball, the only thing a batter can do is try and stop it. ie. check swing. i dont think mlb dudes can change the direction of the bat, once the bat has be launched towards the ball.

if there's an mlb guy that can do this? i'd like to see it.

Mark H

06-26-2008, 10:00 PM

Go Cardinals

06-26-2008, 10:12 PM

in my opinion, once the path has started to the ball, the only thing a batter can do is try and stop it. ie. check swing. i dont think mlb dudes can change the direction of the bat, once the bat has be launched towards the ball.

if there's an mlb guy that can do this? i'd like to see it.

most mlb hitters do

Mark H

06-26-2008, 10:54 PM

Please. It happens in about a tenth and half of a second.

Ursa Major

06-27-2008, 12:16 AM

Phantom said: In your opinion, do you think the mlb swing can be taught to a 12 year old? If it can, then there wont be any next level. He can just use that same swing as he gets older.

If it can't, then the search for the perfect swing continues..... I'd really like to hear the basics of a good swing for the next level.Phantom, with all due respect, your approach is like saying that you can sit me down and have me watch Yo Yo Ma, and expect me to play the cello like he does after a few viewings. (And Yo Yo doesn't have a hard object being thrown at him at 90 miles an hour, and his cello is always in the same place relative to his body.)

Taking a great swing like, say, Pujols -- I think it would be interesting to have someone take his swing in slow motion and count up the number of discrete muscle movements that can be identified during his swing. I'd guess the number to be about 200 (and that assumes that he'd be filmed wearing nothing but a jockstrap, because most of the key muscles are hidden under his uniform. And, of course, he's got thigh muscles that allow him to generate power to all those muscles from a position that would cause most of us to cramp up in. So, lesser mortals have to make compromises based on the limitations of their musculature.

So, teaching at the outset is altered by forcing the teacher to determine which Pujols swing features (assuming they can all be seen) should be jettisoned to make the particular hitter's swing manageable. And, of course, this assumes that the kid has the dedication, muscle sense, and coordination to emulate what you ask him to do. And that he doesn't fall into old habits, seeing as how much of hitting (like, e.g., staying connected) is counterintuitive.

So, it isn't that "the search for the perfect swing continues", as you put it, but the search for the perfect set of cues and teaching methods continues.

Jake, congrats on shooting 74. I think the last time I broke 75, the motor on the windmill was broken so I didn't have to worry about hitting its whirling blades as I rolled my ball underneath it. :)

phantom

06-27-2008, 12:44 PM

So, it isn't that "the search for the perfect swing continues", as you put it, but the search for the perfect set of cues and teaching methods continues.

yes!!....you are correct....its not the perfect swing.....its' being able to teach the perfect swing that I'm looking for. Thanks for clarifying that......
now lets get going!!! :applaud:

LAball

06-27-2008, 03:22 PM

If you cant adjust, you cant hit a good late breaking ball.

phantom

06-27-2008, 03:59 PM

If you cant adjust, you cant hit a good late breaking ball.

but what if the bat has already started its path to the ball? how can someone change the direction of their swing, once the head of the bat is on it's way.

All you can do is stop. ie check swing.:think:

I do believe that if only the "hands" have started their path to the ball, a batter can adjust their swing to a late breaking curve, but once the head of the bat is going, the only adjustment is to stop. Not up or down.

hiddengem

06-27-2008, 11:33 PM

Lately he said Richard Schenk, a pool hall owning internet bully with goofy ideas helped him.
Why all the extra pool hall, goofy stuff? Does that not make him worthy of helping anybody? We've discussed a few things, yes.

Now Englishbey is bad and Yeager is the latest greatest

Folks new around here, please consider this source. Mark doesn't know me, and surely doesn't know who I think is the latest greatest. He tends to beat around the bush when pressed for answers and just sends people off to Steve's site to buy material, and gets excited when sales go up. I never said Yeager is the latest greatest. I simply said I went to work with him and felt he had some great material. He doesn't bombard you with biomechanics lingo that you have to sift through for hours to figure out what he's talking about(although he could do that if you'd like). He's easy to understand which I think would be great for a inexperienced dad trying to help his kid out. To my knowledge he is in the process of starting up a forum specific to his stuff which should be helpful for those interetested in learning more about him.

I suggest he should now stick with Yeager, or stick with someone, and stay the course.

By all means if something or someone is working for you stay the course...But I certainly hope that folks would just drink the koolaid and go through the process with blinders on, something I smell quite often on these internet sites. Do your homework, and be careful. You can ruin your son just as easy as you can help him.

Drill

06-28-2008, 01:21 AM

I would like to see the hip turning more on the ball or better a better turn below the knees to get a full turn, it looks like he is getting a full turn with his hips but his foot work seem flat on his rear foot. (Yes i realize the drill you are doing will cause that, rapid fire will cause that)

The old belly button to the pitcher, swing thought the ball doing tee work. Watch and see if he is keeping his weight on his heels. Remind him of where his weight is supposed to be, athletic position weight on inside ball of his feet. Than a smooth weight shift. Just do some lower body shift with him, slo motion and work your way up faster and smooth. Than it timing with the upper body. TEE WORK

IMHO,

drill

LAball

06-29-2008, 04:24 AM

Again... at what level? Against what kind of pitching?

I'd say adjustable hitting is needed at mid level college ball. But im guess as I never got past HS ball :shhh:

LAball

06-29-2008, 04:25 AM

but what if the bat has already started its path to the ball? how can someone change the direction of their swing, once the head of the bat is on it's way.

All you can do is stop. ie check swing.:think:

I do believe that if only the "hands" have started their path to the ball, a batter can adjust their swing to a late breaking curve, but once the head of the bat is going, the only adjustment is to stop. Not up or down.

Hips start the momentum going and the hands are used as adjustment.

dannyboy

06-29-2008, 07:16 AM

1. … there is no clear understanding or definition of the terms we use to explain techniques…

2. …it really becomes a matter of the mode in which we teach (or learn) and not the material.

3. … many of the discussions become more about who knows more versus who can provide the help requested...

Jake,

These are your quotes.

They are, believe it or not, in my opinion, very profound statements. I actually again, believe it or not, agree with you. And good for you, for ID’ing the problems.
But, before you get all warm and fuzzy about me –

You also said –

About #1 –
…especially here where our ability to demonstrate is limited.

About #2 -
…I only recommend what seems to work best for me…

About #3 –
I avoid the detail of many hitting discussions...

And is, in my opinion, pretty close to a total cop. Identifying the problem/s without adequate solutions. I don’t agree with avoiding detail. And harboring a feeling that BBF’s ability to demonstrate is limited, is defeatism in spades. In fact, I feel the exact opposite. BBF has unique opportunity to demonstrate. It (in my opinion, along with many baseball discussion forums) just hasn’t been tapped properly.
Recommending only what seems best for you, - I don’t feel is the answer. You continually endorse a method and an instructor that we, in my opinion, cannot fully explore - because exploring detail about their modes, on this site, is contra to their business wishes.

You said, “Giving them (new coaches) a direction that can truly help versus the minutia that only confuses seems to be what works best for those I teach.”
Minutia, is not always, and does not have to be confusing. Providing a direction and also providing detail works best for others. Simply recommending a method or an instructor, is not in and of itself, in my opinion, wrong. It’s just incomplete – HERE. It just should not continually be the only solution for all who visit this site. It, in my opinion, defeats what should be the very purpose of this site.

Ursa Major

06-29-2008, 09:48 AM

Danny, I think you're the one taking the defeatist attitude about what Jake has said. I respond here not to "defend" Jake -- though he's too much of a gentleman to feel that he has to "defend" himself -- but rather to provide some thoughts that I think will help you get the most out of this site and hitting instruction generally.

Here's what you asset to be a cop-out by Jake, and my responding thoughts:

"… there is no clear understanding or definition of the terms we use to explain techniques… …especially here where our ability to demonstrate is limited.""

Where's the cop-out? Over the several years I've been involved with BBF, I've seen many battles among people where it ultimately comes down to differing terms describing a virtually identical motion.

"…I only recommend what seems to work best for me…"

Jake's himself is a relatively cautious guy and a very, very experienced coach and published author. Why would he pontificate on issues, techniques, cues and drills that he's never tried, like so many people do? It's not like he says that something he hasn't tried is bad. It would be like panning a movie you hadn't seen? He lets those who have seen the movie do the recommending. Again, why is that a cop out?

"I avoid the detail of many hitting discussions..."

I don't purport to speak for him, but why should he add to the noise level of a discussion on detailed techniques? Remember, he's the moderator and not obliged to move the discussion in a particular direction.

You go on to say: "Recommending only what seems best for you, - I don’t feel is the answer. You continually endorse a method and an instructor that we, in my opinion, cannot fully explore - because exploring detail about their modes, on this site, is contra to their business wishes. Simply recommending a method or an instructor, is not in and of itself, in my opinion, wrong. It’s just incomplete – HERE."

You've got a couple of issues intertwined here: You feel Jake shouldn't endorse or recommend just one guru, but criticize him for not laying out in detail the guru's instructional techniques is not as helpful as it should be -- as it's "incomplete." Again, going to my movie analogy, it sounds as if you're saying it's improper to recommend Get Smart over Love Guru, but, if you're going to do so, you ought to post a whole bootleg YouTube video of the movie for us all. But, you'll also find that many knowledgeable people here will take someone's hitting clip and turn it into an animation with "circles and arrows" (thank you, Arlo Guthrie!) explaining exactly where the perceived technique issues are for that hitter; it's hard to improve on that!

First, I don't think Jake endorses anyone. If you're speaking of his favorable comments about, say, Steve Englishbey, there's no question that SE has brought an incredible amount of insight on hitting to this Board and in his DVD's and on his site (and I don't know how much Jake has seen either). But, if you go back over Jake's posts over the years, he has said a zillion times to people who want recommendations on hitting instructors, "Go back over the threads that debate these hitting issues and competing instructors and make up your own mind." As I note below, his point is to look at what people say and describe and make up your own mind which one or more instructional ideas will work best for you. (Ursa Major Tip #1: The best minds here steal ideas from many different people.)

Second, Jake recognizes that several of these instructors make a living providing hitting (or pitching) instruction and it's unfair and improper to pass along detailed instructional tips that they've developed and mastered in their own work. Again, taking Englishbey as an example, Steve's offered countless pages of detailed hitting thoughts and guidance on physiology and kinesiology for free here; if you were to collect and collate all his posting here over the years, you'd have a very valuable course on hitting instruction available to you; I can't think of anyone (other than maybe Jack Mankin) who's come even close to providing so much information on public sites. But I've learned from many others here where the line properly should be drawn as to seeking or disseminating further detailed instructional drills or cues, so as not to pirate their intellectual property. That's not capitulating to someone's business model, but rather avoiding unfair (if not necessarily illegal) acts. Heck, I know of one hitting site which is (or maybe was -- it may be dead now) largely nothing be re-hashed Englishbey drills!

But, what we do learn here (a) will get 90 percent of hitters the information they need to get at least half way toward where they need to be to compete at the level they're at, and (b) guides us to which hitting instructor's approaches are most likely to help get us the rest of the way. For that, you can lay out your money to one or more of them.

And here's where my own modest but free "lesson" about the utility of this site for your own ability to teach others comes in. Take it for what it's worth or ignore it. Good coaching is a matter of incorporating a number of good ideas, cues and drills into your own mindset and "bag of tools" for explaining hitting to others (presumably mostly young hitters). You never know which turn of phrase will "turn the light bulb" on for you, or turn that bulb on for a hitter. As Jim Booth told me in one of my favorite pieces of coaching advice, "I've got 30 different ways of describing the same motion because you never know which one will click with a kid."

So, there's no such thing as one complete system of hitting that this site can or should be expected to impart to a coach or parent or hitter. Heck, a six-DVD instructional video system won't be able to do that. For most of us, even if we master the kinetic links to a Pujols swing, it doesn't do squat when you take your ten-year-old onto the field and he insists upon dropping the bathead or stepping in the bucket. It's about being a teacher and offering hints or, maybe as an alternative, knowing it's time to take a break to go out and get ice cream because the kid's just not in the right place to learn today.

So, rather than lamenting that the Baseball Fever glass is half empty, go back and realize that it's actually 90 percent full.

dannyboy

06-29-2008, 11:04 AM

Where's the cop-out?

BBF’s ability to demonstrate a clear understanding or definition of the terms we use to explain techniques is not limited. It just hasn’t been used properly.

All matter of modes need to be discussed, not simply what works for one individual.

Avoiding detail is sticking your head in the sand.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have seen analysis here on BBF of dry swings, tee swings, toss swings, and cage swings. What could possibly hoped to be gained? In fact, most are so enamored with how to swing their very best swing mechanically, that they have forsaken how to hit.
And that is the biggest problem with discussion forums such as this, - being more concerned with swinging than hitting.
Being grossly disproportionate time wise, with the “mechanics” of the swing as compared to “other” factors that tremendously influence, and most of all, shape a hitter.

The swing is NOT simple (for brevity purposes please, when I refer to “swing” it should be considered that I mean only a swing taken in actual competition).
Oh yea, it’s nice to say that it is, or to think that it is, or if you are teaching the swing – to keep the teachings as simple as possible, but the swing is really not about saying or thinking. Perhaps it is more about teaching, but it is most about learning, - and learning, especially physical learning, is very complex and very individualistic.
All motor programs are not equal.
It is my opinion that most coaches (hitting instructors) waste far too much time, or should I say a disproportionate amount, on mechanics. They think that by telling a student, or physically demonstrating to a student, or by devising a system of motor training movements, or by inventing and using training contraptions, that THEY can MAKE a student swing the way THEY want them to.
Stop right here if you disagree (which I think most do) and let’s reflect a little.

Verbal Instruction
How many different instructional hitting books, dvds, websites, etc., are on the market? Each bigger and better than the other. Each with their own philosophy, or permutation of some already existing philosophy. What can be said of all the divergent views? Can they all be right? No, of course not “…only mine…”. The question for the student now is not “What do I need to know?”, rather, “Who do I listen to?” And is it really the student asking the questions, or is it the student’s father? More importantly, who is making the decisions? And then on top of all this, is the translation of verbal theory (whichever one) into physical reality.

Physical Demonstration
If you show a student (physically show him), then success is dependent on theory chosen, physical interpretation, and the physical prowess of the teacher. Could an instructor reliably replicate Bonds? (if that is the theory chosen). Then, could some who could replicate accurately (or even Bonds himself) physically communicate what it is that he wishes the student to achieve? Two instructors could view the same swing and have two different critiques. Right now, get up from your chair and try and replicate the swing of some baseball hero of yours. Better yet, demonstrate the imitation to someone (who would have the possibility of knowing) and ask them to guess. How long do you think it would take you to replicate the swing of someone I picked, and be able to use it successfully in a game?

Training Movements
Place the barrel of the bat (touching) between the deltoid and tricep, and just turn and let it out.
Place a broomstick over your shoulders and just turn and hit the ball placed on the tee.
Place a soccer ball between your elbows and swing, trying to maintain the box.
Whatever, etc.
The question is whether, whatever these training movements are supposed to accomplish, they actually carry over into a game.
Do any of these movement drills teach a student “how to”:
1. Process visual information
2. Time the start of the swing
3. Time the swing itself
4. Achieve spatial accuracy
5. Hit the ball hard
Do these demonstrated and practiced motor movements have the ability to produce the wide variety of swings necessary to cover a strike zone of a pitch pitched with varying speed, location, and movement ( a swing is NOT repeatable unless the pitch is)?

Training Inventions
Have you ever seen a candid video of a professional using any training aid other than a tee?

Did you ever ask yourself the question, “ Why do I visit, read, post?”
Is it because I wish to discover the best model for swinging a bat?
To understand the physics (and/or geometry) of the swing?
To debate the mechanics of the swing?
Or
To learn how to help our sons/daughters/players best hit the damn ball in baseball games?

Someone learning to swing must (through trial and error) figure out what is optimum for themselves. Unfortunately the optimum years for the optimal procedural task learning of swinging a bat is at age 12 or 13. Can someone at that age really know what is best for them? Can they be influenced by adults? Or do they rely on adults for guidance? And if they are instructed incorrectly can they determine that what their body is telling them is wrong? Do they have enough worldly experience and knowledge to tell the difference between good and bad instruction as it applies to them? And finally, are they prepared to take this instruction to war in real competition? Does their instruction incorporate the reality of competition?

Models. Boy have we got models.
There’s the:
Weight at the End of the Rope model.
The Double Pendulum model.
The THT, BHT model.
The Crack the Whip, Baby !!! model.
The Stretch the Rubber Band model.
PCR
Et cetera.

An excerpt from “The Physics of Baseball” (Second Edition) by Robert K. Adair.

Chapter1: Models and Their Limitations.

“If the model is well chosen so as to represent the salient points of the real system adequately, conclusions derived from an analysis of the model can apply to the system to a useful degree.”

The key word in that sentence is “real”.

Continuing:

“Conversely, conclusions - although drawn in a logically impeccable manner from premises defined precisely by the model - may not apply to the system because the model is a poor map of the system.”

The key words here being, “may not apply”.

Chapter 5: Batting the Ball (A Model of Batting)

“There are many ways of batting the ball successfully through swinging at it so that precision of placement of the batted ball rather than extreme velocity is important.”

Adair then goes on to site examples: the drag bunt, hit-and-run, hits to the opposite field, and conversely swings in which the batter is fooled by the pitcher.

“In the following discussion, we do not consider the imperfect swings - perhaps a majority in the game - but only the full swing made with maximum effort”

Perhaps a majority???
Imperfect swings occur 2 out of 3 times in a successful batter, and the last time I looked 2 out of 3 is a majority.

Adair is considering “only the full swing made with maximum effort” for his model. Discounting drag bunts, Texas leaguers, and beat out infield grounders, Dr Adair’s model would conservatively account for a swing that occurs (in reality) 1 out of every 4 tries.

Please reread Adair’s opening sentence to Chapter 1, and ask yourself - does Adair’s model of batting truly “…represent the salient points of the real system…”?
How can it, if it ignores 75% of the system?

And what is the real system?
It is comprised of a batter, a bat, a pitcher, and a ball.
Each part of the system is equally critical for it to be real.
The above “models” that I earlier cited, include only the mechanics of the swing. Not the real system -- a batter with bat attempting to hit a ball thrown by a pitcher trying to make the batter fail.
Do you get it? These models are only for optimal swings. Not real system. And everybody’s system is individually unique.

And Adair admits…
Last line from Chapter One:

“…of all the ways to learn to throw and bat a ball better, an academic study of the mechanics of the actions must be the least useful.”

It is my wish that this site would/could become a more useful vehicle to help us help players learn to bat a ball better (in competition).

As DMac said:

“I think that many of the things that are emphasized on many boards are not important to the hitter, only to the guys discussing it.”

And I say again:
The biggest problem with discussion forums such as this, - is being more concerned with swinging than hitting.

tom.guerry

06-29-2008, 11:53 AM

danny-

I think a key model for understanding how to teach thw swing, as opposed to predicitng results of collision/batspeed parameters/etc is Hardy's finding in golf where his separating out two basic models for how the body works can be applied very directly to how you swin and what the result is.

either you have a single plane action and swing the arms with the shoulders in the shoulder turn plane OR you swing the arms in one plane and synch this with the BODY (not shoulders) turning back and forth.

this is an extremely valuable/high level filter to apply in understanding and teaching the swing (or hit).

dannyboy

06-29-2008, 12:06 PM

Tom,

I think I may have asked you this before.

To illustrate a point about mechanics.

Did you ever see a golf professional in a professional tournament, swing at and miss the golf ball?
Did you ever see Bonds swing at and miss a baseball in a professional baseball game?

Swinging vs. Hitting

Jake Patterson

06-29-2008, 12:29 PM

Dan,
I will attempt to address the key issues one at a time...

BBF’s ability to demonstrate a clear understanding or definition of the terms we use to explain techniques is not limited. It just hasn’t been used properly. I feel this is incorrect. Because the environment under which we exchange information (distance learning environment) is so dynamic, definitions will inevitably change, especially as we get new members and new dads.

All matter of modes need to be discussed, not simply what works for one individual.
I have no issue with discussing any method when the discussion leads to learning.

Further clarifying "Simply what works for one individual" for the new forumers. To be clear the one individual is me and I offer this advice after reviewing hundreds of hitting books and DVD's, attending dozens of camps and conventions, becoming a clinician myself, coaching for 25 years, and attending numerous MLB spring training sessions and speaking with professional hitting coaches AND MOST IMPORTANT after working with hundreds of kids. MY OPINION is simply that my opinion and it comes after a long journey. If you see it different so be it.

Avoiding detail is sticking your head in the sand.
Again, I disagree. There are so many examples of where details needs to be doled out carefully as the student learns. We would not teach advanced algebra to a child who barely knows how to add. Nor should we offer discussion on the intricacies of spinal perpendicularity to beginning dads trying to figure out basic posture. Many of the dads who post clips here for help are NOT at an advanced stage of learning/teaching and to load them with meaningless detail can be counter productive. I wish I could share the PM's I get from frustrated dads who do not post because of the diatribes their requests receive.

You call it sticking your head in the sand - I call it learning at a reasonable pace.

And that is the biggest problem with discussion forums such as this, - being more concerned with swinging than hitting. Again, I disagree. I would offer that your experience with teaching youngsters is much different than my experience as I find the opposite to be true. I find too many dads and youth coaches too concerned with batting averages (hitting) versus teaching proper swing mechanics. We see this at the school level all the time when Jr. (a LL all-star) can't hit the proverbial barn because his LL coach was more than happy to leave his high-drop-bat, slap-hitting, throw-your-hands-out swing alone. What works at the small field does not always translate directly to the big field. So I would have to disagree and say when it comes to young hitters swing mechanics takes precedent over performance.

All motor programs are not equal.
Exactly- and this is the reason why we teach some skills through demonstration and repetition. To have a meaningful discussion about this forumers needs to have an in depth understanding of closed, open, discrete, serial and continuous motor skills, which brings me back to my point above... going down this road only serves to confuse many. To those who want to learn I would suggest Gentiles' work or Paul Nyman's material.

Verbal Instruction
How many different instructional hitting books, dvds, websites, etc., are on the market? Each bigger and better than the other. Each with their own philosophy, or permutation of some already existing philosophy. What can be said of all the divergent views? Can they all be right? No, of course not “…only mine…”. The question for the student now is not “What do I need to know?”, rather, “Who do I listen to?” And is it really the student asking the questions, or is it the student’s father? More importantly, who is making the decisions? And then on top of all this, is the translation of verbal theory (whichever one) into physical reality. On this we agree and again I would have to refer what I stated above. There is a plethora of information available and after my long journey I try to steer dads away from bad information and toward good information based on my 25 year journey. If they choose to listen to someone more experienced - again I say- so be it.

Physical Demonstration
If you show a student (physically show him), then success is dependent on theory chosen, physical interpretation, and the physical prowess of the teacher. Could an instructor reliably replicate Bonds? (if that is the theory chosen). Then, could some who could replicate accurately (or even Bonds himself) physically communicate what it is that he wishes the student to achieve? Two instructors could view the same swing and have two different critiques. Right now, get up from your chair and try and replicate the swing of some baseball hero of yours. Better yet, demonstrate the imitation to someone (who would have the possibility of knowing) and ask them to guess. How long do you think it would take you to replicate the swing of someone I picked, and be able to use it successfully in a game? Not certain what you mean here, but when I teach and demonstrate I am unable (as are most coaches in their 50's and 60's) to "replicate" a MLB swing. My body just does not allow it. This is not to say I cannot demonstrate aspects of the swing accurately.

Training Movements
The question is whether, whatever these training movements are supposed to accomplish, they actually carry over into a game.
They create muscle memory and help the student gain an understanding of the motor skills necessary to be successful. They are not used to replace a ball in motion.

Training Inventions
Have you ever seen a candid video of a professional using any training aid other than a tee? Yes, go to spring training.

Did you ever ask yourself the question, “ Why do I visit, read, post?”
Is it because I wish to discover the best model for swinging a bat?
To understand the physics (and/or geometry) of the swing?
To debate the mechanics of the swing?
Or
To learn how to help our sons/daughters/players best hit the damn ball in baseball games?
I know this is a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it from my perspective... Many of us who post here have children who are grown and gone (we've already lived through what many here have only begun) and we are here as coaches/instructors strictly to learn andteach.

Someone learning to swing must (through trial and error) figure out what is optimum for themselves. Unfortunately the optimum years for the optimal procedural task learning of swinging a bat is at age 12 or 13.
I would offer it is younger than 12 or 13.
Can someone at that age really know what is best for them?
No
Can they be influenced by adults?
Yes
Or do they rely on adults for guidance? And if they are instructed incorrectly can they determine that what their body is telling them is wrong? Do they have enough worldly experience and knowledge to tell the difference between good and bad instruction as it applies to them? And finally, are they prepared to take this instruction to war in real competition? Does their instruction incorporate the reality of competition?
Most prepubescent and pubescent children do not have an understanding of the changes their bodies are going through never mind interpreting its signals. Children this age MUST rely on instructions from adults. Would we expect a child to sit at a piano and just "figure it out?"

“If the model is well chosen so as to represent the salient points of the real system adequately, conclusions derived from an analysis of the model can apply to the system to a useful degree.”
Agree

“There are many ways of batting the ball successfully through swinging at it so that precision of placement of the batted ball rather than extreme velocity is important.”
I would offer that both are important.

As DMac said:
“I think that many of the things that are emphasized on many boards are not important to the hitter, only to the guys discussing it.”
Agree. this IS why I avoid much of the detailed discussions.

Jake Patterson

06-29-2008, 12:31 PM

Tom,

I think I may have asked you this before.

To illustrate a point about mechanics.

Did you ever see a golf professional in a professional tournament, swing at and miss the golf ball?
Swinging vs. Hitting
Bad analogy because the golf ball is stationary.

dannyboy

06-29-2008, 02:08 PM

Jake,

Post #48 was a very good reply. Thanks.
The question now becomes what can we further do about it to help new players and coaches?
My point is that BBF has tremendous potential, and most of the potential (with regards to hitting) is untapped.

Post #49 - I think you missed the point.

Jake Patterson

06-29-2008, 03:47 PM

My point is that BBF has tremendous potential, and most of the potential (with regards to hitting) is untapped.

The potential is the reason why I came here as moderator. Before accepting the job Baseball 101 was an unmoderated slug fest where the priority seemed to be forumers demonstrating their knowledge (or lack thereof). Since then we have become the third largest forum on the largest baseball site in the world. If you look at the first page of topics (including the stickied threads) you will see that we have had approximately 70,000 hits. At the request of forumers (through PM's and Emails) I have sent new coaches and dads about 200 pieces of information.

Because of what we do new coaches and dads find guys like Steve Englishbey, Mike Epstein, Mark Hanson, Jim Booth, Jack Mankin, Paul Nyman, Bill Peterson, Dave Weaver, Jon Doyle, BoardMember, Ursa and a whole host of other instructors. We have turned dozens of dads onto Ted Williams' and Jom Dixon's book, the World Baseball Convention, the catching clinics Dave conducts. While we may not agree with everything every instructor teaches there is a great deal of learning taking place, even if its what not to do or where to begin.

The model may not be perfect, but I think its the best distance learning model going. Here's a paper I wrote and presented at the Northeast Little League Coaches' Clinic:
45595

I apologize in advance for any mistakes it may be an old version.

JJA

06-29-2008, 04:11 PM

And I would add that there is certainly no reason "hitting" can't be discussed here. There is certainly no policy against it. Open a new thread and go at it.

dannyboy

06-29-2008, 05:35 PM

... there is certainly no reason "hitting" can't be discussed here. There is certainly no policy against it. Open a new thread and go at it.

JJA,

You are correct, there is no policy against it. But Im afraid that a new thread discussing the mental game, pitch recognition, strike zone judgement, testing and training reaction speed, or timing by dannyboy would, in all likelyhood, quickly go by the wayside.
Hard to overcome the appeal of offering one's analysis of a visual BP swing.

No, a roots discussion would need the support of the website and at the very least at least some help from it's moderator.

I have some ideas, but quite frankly, don't have the necessary time (I am now going back to work soon after an injury) nor video capability to pull it off alone.

I personally think it would be a pleasant break from the constant bickering over which guru is the best and the droning analysis of bat drag, disconnection, separation and the mechanical soup du jour.

Jake Patterson

06-29-2008, 06:00 PM

I agree with John and would recommend starting another thread. This thread is "Should I or Shouldn't I change his swing?

If you feel a discussion on "hitting" would be worthwhile I would be happy to moderate.
Jake

Mark H

06-29-2008, 10:23 PM

Why all the extra pool hall, goofy stuff? Does that not make him worthy of helping anybody? We've discussed a few things, yes. .

I find it simply stunning that anyone pays attention to him at all.

Folks new around here, please consider this source. Mark doesn't know me, and surely doesn't know who I think is the latest greatest. He tends to beat around the bush when pressed for answers and just sends people off to Steve's site to buy material, and gets excited when sales go up. I never said Yeager is the latest greatest. I simply said I went to work with him and felt he had some great material. He doesn't bombard you with biomechanics lingo that you have to sift through for hours to figure out what he's talking about(although he could do that if you'd like). He's easy to understand which I think would be great for a inexperienced dad trying to help his kid out. To my knowledge he is in the process of starting up a forum specific to his stuff which should be helpful for those interetested in learning more about him

....By all means if something or someone is working for you stay the course....

Point is, you spent a few hours with Steve and then had glowing things to say. Then you said Richard helped you. Wow! Now you have spent a little time with Yeager and have said great things about that and not so great about Steve. I suggest you pick someone to stick with rather than pulling out the sample spoon at Baskin Robbins for a taste of each. Everyone says you need to drop a frame to get where you need to be. I doubt flavor of the month last ice cream tasted is wonderful is going to get it done.

Mark H

06-29-2008, 10:36 PM

JJA,

You are correct, there is no policy against it. But Im afraid that a new thread discussing the mental game, pitch recognition, strike zone judgement, testing and training reaction speed, or timing by dannyboy would, in all likelyhood, quickly go by the wayside.
Hard to overcome the appeal of offering one's analysis of a visual BP swing.

No, a roots discussion would need the support of the website and at the very least at least some help from it's moderator.

I have some ideas, but quite frankly, don't have the necessary time (I am now going back to work soon after an injury) nor video capability to pull it off alone.

I personally think it would be a pleasant break from the constant bickering over which guru is the best and the droning analysis of bat drag, disconnection, separation and the mechanical soup du jour.

I would be happy to participate in a thread on the other aspects of hitting besides mechanics though I think mechanics are foundational.

dannyboy

06-30-2008, 05:55 AM

Jake Patterson

06-30-2008, 08:42 AM

Mark,
Good.
But...
Do you think that you could take part in one thread (one thread, mind you) ,started by me, without using the words Steve or Englishbey, Mike or Epstein, Paul or Nyman, Jim or Dixon, Jack or Mankin, PCR or PCR? (I forget the other letter)?
Do you think that you could provide detail about your ideas, or explain your methodology, or provide your definition of “maintain the box” when you include such terms in your post, rather than just sending someone off to references you provide?
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1228526&postcount=4
For just one thread mind you.

Do you think that you could give up being a smart-a**, for just one thread?
http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1213487&postcount=43
You have given me some ideas, Mark.

Dan,
The real problem becomes, how do we have a discussion without us pulling from our individual knowledge base? Items like "maintaining the box" have been discussed a great deal and when Mark or others use this term I have a very clear understanding of what it is he means.

Some of us have been discussing these items literally for years. You have 352 posts here Mark nearly 3000, me nearly 5000. As this is a Discussion and not a scientific paper (white paper) one has to search for the details of the discussion, all which exists on BBF.

I know how you feel and I understand what it is you want to accomplish, I felt the same way when I began my path of serious learning, what I found though was discussing the basics in terms of what others have found or further explains is not all that bad. What I did was ask the question, "How do mean?" I usually received the information I needed.
Hope this helps...

wrstdude

06-30-2008, 10:45 AM

I find it simply stunning that anyone pays attention to him at all.

Point is, you spent a few hours with Steve and then had glowing things to say. Then you said Richard helped you. Wow! Now you have spent a little time with Yeager and have said great things about that and not so great about Steve. I suggest you pick someone to stick with rather than pulling out the sample spoon at Baskin Robbins for a taste of each. Everyone says you need to drop a frame to get where you need to be. I doubt flavor of the month last ice cream tasted is wonderful is going to get it done.

Heaven forbid someone tries to find the best available option himself/herself...Do you not do any research/test drive any vehicles before you buy one?

You're advocating that he go ahead and buy the first car he sees even if it's a Ford Festiva (image inserted for those not aware)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg/800px-1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg

This is a horrible philosophy unless you're a used car salesman...

HG, finding value in each of the teachers, shines a spotlight on yours and many others shortcomings as learners.

wogdoggy

06-30-2008, 11:52 AM

Heaven forbid someone tries to find the best available option himself/herself...Do you not do any research/test drive any vehicles before you buy one?

You're advocating that he go ahead and buy the first car he sees even if it's a Ford Festiva (image inserted for those not aware)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg/800px-1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg

This is a horrible philosophy unless you're a used car salesman...

HG, finding value in each of the teachers, shines a spotlight on yours and many others shortcomings as learners.

with gas prices these days that festiva looks like a cheap way to get to third base..lol..:dance

dannyboy

06-30-2008, 12:11 PM

Jake,

I appreciate your sincere effort to enlighten me (I honestly do), but I just do not understand what you are saying. Can you please try again?

Plain and simple. In my face type. Matter of factly.

Thanks.

Mark H

06-30-2008, 01:34 PM

Mark,

Good.

But...

Do you think that you could take part in one thread (one thread, mind you) ,started by me, without using the words Steve or Englishbey, Mike or Epstein, Paul or Nyman, Jim or Dixon, Jack or Mankin, PCR or PCR? (I forget the other letter)?

Do you think that you could provide detail about your ideas, or explain your methodology, or provide your definition of “maintain the box” when you include such terms in your post, rather than just sending someone off to references you provide?

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1228526&postcount=4

For just one thread mind you.

Do you think that you could give up being a smart-a**, for just one thread?

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1213487&postcount=43

You have given me some ideas, Mark.

Well I'm glad I've given you some ideas and thanks for the positive encouragement you have offered. Dang it, I've already been a smart @$$ in the first sentence Ray. ;) Seriously, starting from the top of your post. W is the other letter. No I don't think I could discuss mechanics without discussing the contributions of those who have come before. Thing is, that doesn't really come into play if we discuss hitting rather than mechanics as you suggested we do and I expressed interest in. As far as discussing mechanics without sending someone off to references. I'm not here to participate in a hitting discussion and debate. I'm here to send parents and young hitters away from bad information and toward good information as I see it. I've offered that as my mission statement for many years even back when Epstein was the one I sent people to.

Mark H

06-30-2008, 01:36 PM

Heaven forbid someone tries to find the best available option himself/herself...Do you not do any research/test drive any vehicles before you buy one?

You're advocating that he go ahead and buy the first car he sees even if it's a Ford Festiva (image inserted for those not aware)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg/800px-1st_Ford_Festiva.jpg

This is a horrible philosophy unless you're a used car salesman...

HG, finding value in each of the teachers, shines a spotlight on yours and many others shortcomings as learners.

You are missing a lot of background on this particular case which is likely what has caused you to completely misinterpret me.

Jake Patterson

06-30-2008, 02:04 PM

dannyboy

06-30-2008, 02:56 PM

Mark,

<No I don't think I could discuss mechanics without discussing the contributions of those who have come before.>
Not even refrain in just one single thread?
Not all. Just one lousy thread?
Why could you not, in just one stinkin’ thread?

Contributions to hitting mechanics, for the most part, of those who have come before, are highly subjective. This is the biggest reason for your constant bickering with Tom, Richard, etc. The single biggest reason for threads to become sidetracked, moronic, mud slinging, my dad is better than your dad, efforts in utter ridiculous grown man futility. Yeeeecccchhhhh!

<Thing is, that doesn't really come into play if we discuss hitting rather than mechanics as you suggested we do…>
Quote it? I suggested no such thing.
Mechanics are a necessary part of hitting. Mechanics should not be prohibited from discussion. Just not prioritized the way they are in every thread here.
Example: Pitch count (say two strike approach) would affect mechanics in the following ways……etc.
Or
Pitcher fastball sets up the change, which has the following affect…etc. , on the following mechanics….etc.

<As far as discussing mechanics without sending someone off to references. I'm not here to participate in a hitting discussion and debate.>

You have never participated in a hitting discussion here?
You have never participated in a hitting debate here?
Would you like me to post instances or would you prefer the poly?

< I'm here to send parents and young hitters away from bad information and toward good information as I see it. I've offered that as my mission statement for many years even back when Epstein was the one I sent people to.>
“…as I see it.”
Those are the key words aren’t they?
Let’s see, - you don’t want to discuss hitting, - you just want people to listen to those you recommend?

And you can’t make any exception? Not even for one lousy, stinkin’ thread?

dannyboy

06-30-2008, 03:00 PM

Jake,

I don't share your view. I think a clean discussion of factors affecting hitting in addition to mechanics is very important for this board.
I ask you again and with sincerity, - please?

Hard Liner

06-30-2008, 03:23 PM

I'm here to send parents and young hitters away from bad information and toward good information as I see it. I've offered that as my mission statement for many years even back when Epstein was the one I sent people to.

Can't argue with that. I just hope your mission hasn't expanded to running off high level hitters who many of us feel fortunate to have access to.

Mark H

06-30-2008, 03:26 PM

Mark,

Not even refrain in just one single thread?
Not all. Just one lousy thread?
Why could you not, in just one stinkin’ thread??

Ray, your goals are not mine. I'm not here to pontificate.

Contributions to hitting mechanics, for the most part, of those who have come before, are highly subjective. This is the biggest reason for your constant bickering with Tom, Richard, etc. The single biggest reason for threads to become sidetracked, moronic, mud slinging, my dad is better than your dad, efforts in utter ridiculous grown man futility. Yeeeecccchhhhh!?

Quote it? I suggested no such thing.
Mechanics are a necessary part of hitting. Mechanics should not be prohibited from discussion. Just not prioritized the way they are in every thread here.
Example: Pitch count (say two strike approach) would affect mechanics in the following ways……etc.
Or
Pitcher fastball sets up the change, which has the following affect…etc. , on the following mechanics….etc.?

My impression was, you wanted people to talk about all the other aspects of hitting besides mechanics. No matter. If someone wants to discuss that, cool.

You have never participated in a hitting discussion here??
You have never participated in a hitting debate here?
Would you like me to post instances or would you prefer the poly??

Straw man arguments.
“…as I see it.”
Those are the key words aren’t they?
Let’s see, - you don’t want to discuss hitting, - you just want people to listen to those you recommend?

And you can’t make any exception?

I don't see the need. If I want to say something myself, I'll say it. If I want to reference a guru, I will. Why does a conversation with you often make me feel like I walked into a bunch of cobwebs?

Mark H

06-30-2008, 03:28 PM

Can't argue with that. I just hope your mission hasn't expanded to running off high level hitters who many of us feel fortunate to have access to.

David's a big boy. I don't think you need to worry about someone who is persistent enough to survive in baseball this long.

Hard Liner

06-30-2008, 04:56 PM

David's a big boy.

Bigger than most, I'd wager, but you miss the point. Running off was a poor descriptor. More like being made to wonder if time could be better spent outside the sandbox.

Mark H

06-30-2008, 07:15 PM

Bigger than most, I'd wager, but you miss the point. Running off was a poor descriptor. More like being made to wonder if time could be better spent outside the sandbox.

Noted.

.

Jake Patterson

06-30-2008, 07:19 PM

Jake,

I don't share your view. I think a clean discussion of factors affecting hitting in addition to mechanics is very important for this board.
I ask you again and with sincerity, - please?And with all sincerity, please feel free to start one listing your thoughts. I would be happy to moderate.

PS: Start a "mechanics only" thread and I will take down any and all reference to any instructors or gurus. Let's see how it goes. Start with some of your thoughts and we will build from there.

dannyboy

06-30-2008, 08:46 PM

Jake,

I could kiss you.

I can't believe it.
Thank you.

Pardon me, but was over at a friends house and indulged in too much Chimay.
Pinch me . Are you gonna really give it a go?

As Rick said to Louis, ""Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."

I believe I must work out some video gigs with Sean. I will let you know. I WILL get back.

hiddengem

06-30-2008, 10:37 PM

I find it simply stunning that anyone pays attention to him at all.

Simply because you don't like him and Steve hates him. Whatever.

I suggest you pick someone to stick with rather than pulling out the sample spoon at Baskin Robbins for a taste of each.
So I should stick with someone even if the information is bad? Should I just stick with the crappy tasting ice cream even if it tastes, crappy?

Everyone says you need to drop a frame to get where you need to be.
Thats it huh?..just drop a frame and I'll find the pot of gold....oh how I wish you could come live in my shoes for a day.

I doubt flavor of the month last ice cream tasted is wonderful is going to get it done.
I doubt you have even the slightest clue what it takes to "get it done" at the level I play at...which is the second highest level in the WORLD!

wrstdude

07-01-2008, 06:24 AM

You are missing a lot of background on this particular case which is likely what has caused you to completely misinterpret me.

And you are missing the fact that "background" doesn't matter to people who are truly in search of the best information and are trying to attain a goal; which has caused you to completely misinterpret anyone who ventures outside your virtual reality you like to call PCR.

Mark H

07-01-2008, 07:31 AM

And you are missing the fact that "background" doesn't matter to people who are truly in search of the best information and are trying to attain a goal; which has caused you to completely misinterpret anyone who ventures outside your virtual reality you like to call PCR.

No, not at all. I'm saying you walked in on the conversation way late and don't know what the subject really is in this particular case.

Mark H

07-01-2008, 07:43 AM

Simply because you don't like him and Steve hates him. Whatever. !

Well actually I'd say Richard hates Steve and I'd say the fact he's not welcome in most places on the web puts my opinion of Richard in the majority but no matter.

So I should stick with someone even if the information is bad? Should I just stick with the crappy tasting ice cream even if it tastes, crappy?!

No not at all. You should carefully, and quickly considering your age, decide what you are going to do and go after that hard. Some of this and then some of that is fine for a youngster. For awhile. Correct me if I'm wrong but you have limited time in which to reach your goals.

.
Thats it huh?..just drop a frame and I'll find the pot of gold....oh how I wish you could come live in my shoes for a day.!

I didn't say that would do the trick. I said the consensus seems to be you need to lose a frame as at least one of the preconditions for reaching the success you desire and which we would all like to see you achieve. I believe Dmac had a point when he counted frames of the hitters he scouted.

I doubt you have even the slightest clue what it takes to "get it done" at the level I play at...which is the second highest level in the WORLD!

Slightest clue seems a little strong but I claim nothing in that area except I know you are running low on time, I believe how quick a hitter's swing is has an enormous impact on their success and I know adding new things from this instructor and then that instructor takes some of that time you don't have much of. I'm not suggesting Englishbey, Yeager or anyone in particular. I'm saying maybe you should be pick one road and run it. You have little time for backtracking to the last fork and trying the other road. I do wish you well in the journey and hope we find you playing in the majors as long as you want.

hiddengem

07-01-2008, 12:20 PM

No not at all. You should carefully, and quickly considering your age, decide what you are going to do and go after that hard. Some of this and then some of that is fine for a youngster. For awhile. Correct me if I'm wrong but you have limited time in which to reach your goals.

Its just hard to talk to you Mark, when you really don't have any type of understanding of what it takes to be successful at the level I play. My window closed as a prospect long ago Mark, If you understood the game you would know that. I'm at a point now, where I need to be in the right place at the right time. It has just as much to do with luck as it does with my performance. I understand that, and I ENJOY the process of getting better and learning new things. Whether that gets me back to the big leagues or not, god only knows.

I didn't say that would do the trick. I said the consensus seems to be you need to lose a frame as at least one of the preconditions for reaching the success you desire and which we would all like to see you achieve. I believe Dmac had a point when he counted frames of the hitters he scouted.

Right, and I had many conversations with DMAC, in person. I know how DMAC felt about me. Remember he actually scouted me "IN PERSON" and watched this little scrony kid(comparitvely speaking) hit a few balls pretty darn well. You're just taking what steve said, and rewriting it.

Slightest clue seems a little strong but I claim nothing in that area except I know you are running low on time

Low on time for what Mark?

I'm not suggesting Englishbey, Yeager or anyone in particular. I'm saying maybe you should be pick one road and run it. You have little time for backtracking to the last fork and trying the other road. I do wish you well in the journey and hope we find you playing in the majors as long as you want.

But its different for Tiger? The guy is worth hundreds of millions of dollars yet he changed swing coaches? Why not just pick one road and run with it Tiger? Who cares if your coach sucks and your game goes to crap.

Hargrave

07-01-2008, 12:48 PM

I do not believe a MLB swing can be taught to or learned by a youngster.

This is a great statement.

Only one quibble. It can be learned through trial and error by exceptionally talented young athletes. It cannot be taught to youngsters - or anyone.

None of baseball's reflex skills can be "taught" in the way many people think of teaching. Hitting, pitching, fielding hot shots - they can't be taught. They are more dependent on athletic ability, innate skill, genetics, whatever you want to call it.

The best amateur coaches - head coaches, the ones with the great won/loss records - don't bother trying to teach the MLB swing. They recruit for it. If they don't have nine of them, they live with it.

The best coaches do spend a lot of time working on team aspects of defense and baserunning.

The industry that has developed around youth baseball and fastpitch instruction is based on the false premise that young players should mortgage their current futures in the vague hope of long-term development into a elite players. The business model is to keep pupils in a perpetual state of swing development, with achievement of the MLB line drive swing always just around the corner.

It is somewhat laughable to hear parents attribute a "breakout year" (a foolish term to use with pre-teen athletes) to some instructor or method. Players at that age improve for millions of reasons. Coordination improves. Strength develops. Growth. Maturity. Whatever.

Little of it has to do with swing instruction. Swing instruction is harmful to most youth players.

Jake Patterson

07-01-2008, 01:05 PM

This is a great statement.

Only one quibble. It can be learned through trial and error by exceptionally talented young athletes.
We would have to define young. If you mean 13-16 then I would disagree as I do not feel the average player this age has the physiological, emotional, or mental tools needed to compete or learn at the very highest level. A good analogy may be schooling - there are only a very, very few who have the mental capacity to graduate from college at 15 or 16. Same in baseball although the physical aspect, in my mind makes it even more difficult than the example I gave above.

Short military sidebar... There's a reason why special forces tend to be older guys.

FiveFrameSwing

07-02-2008, 12:22 AM

Cally, you and I have discussed this before and I have made it very clear to youth coaches coming here and those dads trying to help their sons get to the next level. I believe if coaches start with PCR and build from there hitters can be successful in HS. I feel the material Steve teaches and the drills Steve use are especially helpful to coaches trying to teach younger hitters. I feel all - Mankin, Yeager, Epstein, Williams, Dixon, etc. have a great deal to give, but Steve provides a learning model that allows allows coaches to view his material and then load their success on his site for reasonable comments from those who teach hitting. Others provide the same service, I have looked at them all...

Jake, I mean no disrespect, but as the hitting instructor for our area's local high school my experience is completely different. It may be that I failed to correctly understand Steve's material, and while that may be partially my fault, it may also be partially the fault in the way that Steve presents his material ... but in any regard, my attempts to teach what he was promoting did not work well. On the other hand, I had immediate success with Chris Yeager's material and found his drills simple to understand and promote swings that worked well at the HS level. In one season of using Chris Yeager's hitting drills the Varsity team went from finishing at the bottom of their conference to finishing at the top of the conference and finally making it to play-offs. For us, it was the difference between "night" and "day".

FiveFrameSwing

07-02-2008, 12:26 AM

You have little time for backtracking to the last fork and trying the other road. I do wish you well in the journey and hope we find you playing in the majors as long as you want.

We all have limited time.

One approach might be to select an instructor with a proven track record of producing the product one is after.

Mark H

07-02-2008, 06:14 AM

But its different for Tiger? The guy is worth hundreds of millions of dollars yet he changed swing coaches? Why not just pick one road and run with it Tiger? Who cares if your coach sucks and your game goes to crap.

Yes it's different for Tiger for a couple of reasons. One is he doesn't have your time window. Hope you get the luck and the swing you want at the same time and asap. If any of my thoughts were applicable, great. If not, there is a money back guarantee.

Mark H

07-02-2008, 06:17 AM

This is a great statement.

Only one quibble. It can be learned through trial and error by exceptionally talented young athletes. It cannot be taught to youngsters - or anyone.

None of baseball's reflex skills can be "taught" in the way many people think of teaching. Hitting, pitching, fielding hot shots - they can't be taught. They are more dependent on athletic ability, innate skill, genetics, whatever you want to call it.

The best amateur coaches - head coaches, the ones with the great won/loss records - don't bother trying to teach the MLB swing. They recruit for it. If they don't have nine of them, they live with it.

The best coaches do spend a lot of time working on team aspects of defense and baserunning.

The industry that has developed around youth baseball and fastpitch instruction is based on the false premise that young players should mortgage their current futures in the vague hope of long-term development into a elite players. The business model is to keep pupils in a perpetual state of swing development, with achievement of the MLB line drive swing always just around the corner.

It is somewhat laughable to hear parents attribute a "breakout year" (a foolish term to use with pre-teen athletes) to some instructor or method. Players at that age improve for millions of reasons. Coordination improves. Strength develops. Growth. Maturity. Whatever.

Little of it has to do with swing instruction. Swing instruction is harmful to most youth players.

There is at least one very interesting thread of it's own in the subject matter of this post.

Mark H

07-02-2008, 06:21 AM

We all have limited time.

One approach might be to select an instructor with a proven track record of producing the product one is after.

Well, certainly that's one thing to consider. OTOH, there are gurus and instructors out there teaching things VERY different from Yeager and or Englishbey who can legitimately claim having worked with ML hitters so clearly you and I can't use only that test.

Swing Coach

07-02-2008, 07:10 AM

FiveFrameSwing

07-02-2008, 08:06 AM

Folks new around here, please consider this source. Mark doesn't know me, and surely doesn't know who I think is the latest greatest. He tends to beat around the bush when pressed for answers and just sends people off to Steve's site to buy material, and gets excited when sales go up. I never said Yeager is the latest greatest. I simply said I went to work with him and felt he had some great material. He doesn't bombard you with biomechanics lingo that you have to sift through for hours to figure out what he's talking about(although he could do that if you'd like). He's easy to understand which I think would be great for a inexperienced dad trying to help his kid out. To my knowledge he is in the process of starting up a forum specific to his stuff which should be helpful for those interetested in learning more about him.

I also have found Chris Yeager's material easy to understand.

I would be interested in learning of a forum specific to his material.

Jake Patterson

07-02-2008, 08:29 AM

Jake, I mean no disrespect, but as the hitting instructor for our area's local high school my experience is completely different. It may be that I failed to correctly understand Steve's material, and while that may be partially my fault, it may also be partially the fault in the way that Steve presents his material ... but in any regard, my attempts to teach what he was promoting did not work well. On the other hand, I had immediate success with Chris Yeager's material and found his drills simple to understand and promote swings that worked well at the HS level. In one season of using Chris Yeager's hitting drills the Varsity team went from finishing at the bottom of their conference to finishing at the top of the conference and finally making it to play-offs. For us, it was the difference between "night" and "day".
No disrespect taken... maybe this will help.... The one thing we (we- being higher level coaches who have spent some time searching) share is the need to find a systematic pattern that allows us as coaches to teach and our players to learn. I would offer that there are several gurus that have methods that can achieve the same goal. If we can agree on that then it becomes a matter of delivery and what works fo us as individuals.

Sammy

07-02-2008, 09:13 AM

As a dad, I was in a very similar situation as you with my son 3 years ago when he was 12. He had always hit pretty well, but I KNEW he could hit the ball HARDER than he did. I just didn't know how to teach him.

I see a LOT of kids swinging very similar to your son. Most of my son's team mates swing that way - still at the 15u level! On a little league field it produces hot grounders that usually find a gap, or flies that drop in the outfield gaps - or occasional 200' homeruns.

Fast forward to high school - 90' bases, 375'+ fences. My son's friends with those swings now produce easy infield grounders, fielded by a double-clutching ss, who makes an easy throw to 1st. Those little league outfield flies become pop flies that barely reach the grass lip in the outfield. Easy outs.

What I did - and what I recommend to anyone: Invest in one of the hitting DVD programs - I chose Englishbey. You obviously have a digital camcorder and computer. I also bought RightView Pro, but that's not a necessity if you know what you're looking for in the swing. The advantage is that with RightView Pro, you get a lot of MLB players pre-loaded so you can compare your son side-by-side with the best hitters in the world.

Start shooting video of his swing - in games, soft toss, off a tee, etc. Get different angles - side view, pitcher view, catcher view, etc. Now you have the ability to watch him frame-by-frame and slow motion. You can see EXACTLY what he is doing.

I had my son (starting at 12) do his own self analysis. He would compare his video to various MLB players, and try to emulate. I refrained from telling him HOW to do it - he had to get the kinesiological "feel" and figure that out for himself. He also watched and studied the Englishbey material. On his high school freshman team, he was the ONLY ONE who understood things like balance in the stance, scapula loading, connection, etc. - all the stuff that good hitters do. Rarely do you see a kid his age actually load, stride and attack the ball with authority.

By investing in one of these programs, your son will learn to have a negative move, a load, and a forward shift into a stride with good timing, a connected swing - and he'll finish without rolling his wrists. Within 2 months you'll notice a BIG difference in how hard he hits. If he wants to hit like a major leaguer, he needs to start swinging like one.

Good luck - keep it fun!
Another "Dad"

LClifton

07-02-2008, 09:27 AM

randy

07-02-2008, 11:08 AM

I don't post very often, but I read here everyday, because it's so much more entertaining than anything on tv. Let's see if I have this correct: listen to a bunch of guys who only promote this guru or that guru(whoever their leader du jour is)to get people to buy his dvd's as the ONLY way to get the "MLB swing": or, I can listen to someone like HG talk about hitting. No offense intended, but I will take HG everytime, b/c he has no agenda, he isn't trying to sell anything or force his beliefs down anyone's throat. There are others I would trust, b/c I see them present their own beliefs in logical, well-thought posts that don't attack others.

What is "the MLB swing", anyway? Seems like I see a lot of variances when I watch games or look at clips.

We ALL have limited time-"yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, we only have today".

Kevin G

07-02-2008, 11:23 AM

I do not believe a MLB swing can be taught to or learned by a youngster.

This is true in so far as it is tried around here. Trying to get kids to pass through the same positions as the pros are seen to do. And don't forget quick quick quicker. The problem is that you're exactly right in that they don't have the physical tools to do those things.

They are however able to learn and do the singular thing that every MLB hitter does the same. That is control the geometry of the releasing bat head at contact and through bat/ball separation. That's just a fancy way of saying that they've learned how to hit it hard... when they hit it. They learned that a swing that gets to the ball often but powers though the ball seldom is of no use. It's way more important than being quick or short to the ball or separation or loading or stride or what the box is doing. All those things come AFTER and necessarily develop to achieve the stated goal. All those good things are routinely thrown away into a poor off plane release and pivoting knob through contact.... all because the intent is to be able to adjust into contact.

It's really a simple concept and can indeed be taught. I believe it's the most important thing to do. I see almost no posted youth swings here that comply.
It's really about having the right intent. The best thing about it is that we can work on it for years while we allow the body to mature.

The wrong intent as far as how a youth hitter approaches contact is the root cause of bat drag, for example, and I could say more if anyone is interested.

Hargrave

07-02-2008, 11:31 AM

Most youth players under age 14, 90 percent or better, don't care about bat drag, separation, rotation or anything other than competing with their friends, being on the field, perhaps trying to win.

They all say they want to be great players, but deep down, most know they don't have what it takes, or don't want to do what it takes

At least 75 percent will never play baseball again after age 15.

This is the big leagues for most of them. The average youth team has a few dozen hours of practice time per season. It seems unprofitable to spend any of it on individual batting mechanics.

Who does care about bat drag, separation, etc.? Parents, paid instructors and older men who want to do something that they think warrants being referred to as "coach."

Sammy

07-02-2008, 11:58 AM

The reason the MLB guys are where they are is not because of the differences between them, but rather the similarities. Obviously every swing is not a carbon copy, as is not every pitch. But the traits that separate them from everyone else is pretty obvious in video.

Hargrave - I completely agree with your statistics - especially as it relates to baseball. However, if I would have had that attitude with my daughter, she wouldn't have achieved her DI softball scholarship. I will add that a boy with the athletic and physical attributes to play in the Bigs will never make it there if he doesn't dream big - or have someone to give him guidance.

hiddengem

07-02-2008, 12:03 PM

Yes it's different for Tiger for a couple of reasons. One is he doesn't have your time window.

Exactly!..He has far more time than I guy like me to overcome a coach dishing out bad information.

Hard Liner

07-02-2008, 02:00 PM

This is a great statement.

Only one quibble. It can be learned through trial and error by exceptionally talented young athletes. It cannot be taught to youngsters - or anyone.

None of baseball's reflex skills can be "taught" in the way many people think of teaching. Hitting, pitching, fielding hot shots - they can't be taught. They are more dependent on athletic ability, innate skill, genetics, whatever you want to call it.

The best amateur coaches - head coaches, the ones with the great won/loss records - don't bother trying to teach the MLB swing. They recruit for it. If they don't have nine of them, they live with it.

The best coaches do spend a lot of time working on team aspects of defense and baserunning.

The industry that has developed around youth baseball and fastpitch instruction is based on the false premise that young players should mortgage their current futures in the vague hope of long-term development into a elite players. The business model is to keep pupils in a perpetual state of swing development, with achievement of the MLB line drive swing always just around the corner.

It is somewhat laughable to hear parents attribute a "breakout year" (a foolish term to use with pre-teen athletes) to some instructor or method. Players at that age improve for millions of reasons. Coordination improves. Strength develops. Growth. Maturity. Whatever.

Little of it has to do with swing instruction. Swing instruction is harmful to most youth players.

Outstanding post.

I've suspected for a while now that the content of your post contains much truth, even the last sentence. I can't know for sure, but those are the assumptions I'm mostly operating under for now and the foreseeable future.

Mark H

07-02-2008, 05:04 PM

Mark H

07-02-2008, 05:31 PM

Yes Hard Liner it is a great post. Even where I would quibble it offers great jumping off points for discussion. If Jake wants to take Hargraves' post to another thread this post would certainly carry the weight of another thread.

This is a great statement.

[QUOTE=Hargrave;1232344]Only one quibble. It can be learned through trial and error by exceptionally talented young athletes. It cannot be taught to youngsters - or anyone..

In the sense that all learning is trial and error and all instruction can do is hope to shorten that process, I agree wholeheartedly.

None of baseball's reflex skills can be "taught" in the way many people think of teaching. Hitting, pitching, fielding hot shots - they can't be taught. They are more dependent on athletic ability, innate skill, genetics, whatever you want to call it..

With reference to my point above I still agree with your point that much of it is what they are born with BUT...I have seen too many kids show too much improvement too often to say these things can't be taught. Goal I'd say is helping them achieve their potential.

The best amateur coaches - head coaches, the ones with the great won/loss records - don't bother trying to teach the MLB swing. They recruit for it. If they don't have nine of them, they live with it.

The best coaches do spend a lot of time working on team aspects of defense and baserunning..

Certainly. That's what I've seen. I've also seen team coaches screw up kids who were hitting well by trying to adjust something they didn't think "looked" right. So yeah, I've seen the same thing you are saying here.

The industry that has developed around youth baseball and fastpitch instruction is based on the false premise that young players should mortgage their current futures in the vague hope of long-term development into a elite players. .

Yeah, that IS a lot of it. The goal really should be set goals, work at getting better, enjoy the process and the positive results. If that carries you to success at whatever level you enjoy the game, great.

The business model is to keep pupils in a perpetual state of swing development, with achievement of the MLB line drive swing always just around the corner..

I know that's the impression I get down at the local batting cage. My goal with a hitter, and I wouldn't tolerate less in a guru, is to get the hitter to the point where they are their own instructor.

It is somewhat laughable to hear parents attribute a "breakout year" (a foolish term to use with pre-teen athletes) to some instructor or method. Players at that age improve for millions of reasons. Coordination improves. Strength develops. Growth. Maturity. Whatever..

Yes, which is why an instructor really can't take credit nor get blame unless he or we know the hitter has been working in a steady systematic way at the precepts of the instructor AND we see in the hitter's swing that they are in fact doing it like the instructor wants them to and differently from what they used to do. The maturity and growth gifts we old men don't get anymore are surely HUGE factors in all of this.

Little of it has to do with swing instruction. Swing instruction is harmful to most youth players.

No doubt your two last sentences are right more often than they are wrong in the world of youth baseball and softball.

Mark H

07-02-2008, 05:34 PM

heinrich

07-09-2008, 12:26 AM

Bottom line problem with this site is that there are too many "experts' who think the hitting world revolves around them on this site. They post too much, talk too long in their posts, often say the same thing over and over. They are a "hitting legend in their own minds". And they have NO interest in learning more because they know it all.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but this is pretty funny coming from a guy who surveyed the possible screen names and settled on "Swing Coach."

One example is Hidden Gem. Hidden Gem should not have to defend himself.

This is a silly statement. If Hidden Gem claims that "Steve's stuff" doesn't work at the next level (I assume the reference is to Steve Englishbey's material), then of course he should have to defend himself. All you have to do is listen to the drivel from most of the "experts" offering swing analysis on ESPN and other broadcasts to realize that being a pro or expro doesn't mean you understand much about the biomechanics and physiology of a MLB swing. So if he's going to publicly state or imply that it doesn't work, then he's going to have to do more than whip out his pro card and wave around his years of experience at the minor league level.

No. But he always spent his time posting on hitting mechanics that came from his experience. . . .

First, his experience at a pro level doesn't not by itself mean much. Has he mastered "Steve's stuff" to a degree that his experience is a reliable test of that material? If not, then what can his "experience" tell us about whether it works at "the next level"?

I think Mark H. suggested that HG just dabbled in it for a short time. If that's the case, then his pro experience doesn't mean much (on that subject at least). I'm not sure why you think it is so meaningful.

. . . know-it-alls who have no experience playing ball at a high level and who do not instruct kids on a regular basis. Very unfortunate.

Again, playing ball at a high level doesn't mean you understand much about how you got there. It just means that some people will listen to you even though you don't know much.

I assume the know-it-all you're refering to is Mark H. I've seen some of the higher level hitters that Mark works with on a regular basis and I've talked with him a couple times, and I assure you he doesn't know it all. Nor does he claim to. Nor does he even act like he does.

So his lack of high-level playing experience is irrelevant, he does instruct kids on a regular basis, and he is not a know-it-all. He's actually a pretty humble guy. You're wrong three times in one sentence.

Even if lclifton is right about it being well said, the entire post is very misleading.

Bryton

07-09-2008, 10:01 AM

Wow, I go to Cooperstown with my son, and come back to a very interesting finish to my post. I must be honest. I have no idea on what to do with my son right now as far as his swing. I am as confused as I have ever been and I feel like a complete idiot. I'm not afraid to admit I have no idea how to go about teaching my son to swing correctly, nor do I understand all the lingo and verbology involved either. Hell when I was a kid, I went up to the plate and swung the bat with pretty good success, and not one time do I remember ever being taught the correct way to hit. Now with that being said, I am also not nieve enough to know that, to help my son try and attain his goals and dreams, we can not just sit back and let him go at it, and just see how it all falls. My son has goals and dreams. VERY big, and probably unattainable, but as a parent I would be doing him a diservice if I didn't atleast give him the best opportunity to achieve them.

So here I am more confused then ever with my just turned 13 year old son (and have no idea on what direction I should go with him), who is hitting like a mad man in travel ball right now, but again, I know for him to be more successful at the next level for him (IE: High School), I will have to make adjustments to his swing. I just don't know what to do. I think what SAMMY wrote was the best thing of all the 4 pages I just sat and read. I didn't even realize till this morning that my thread had went the direction it did.

I keep hearing Englishbey and I have been over there, and he actually responed to one of my post, and I'm not the smartest person on this planet, but also not the dumbest, and lord knows I had a hard time understanding what he was trying to say. Probably the biggest reason is that I am just not up to date with all the technology and lingo, and also because my son just started playing baseball at 11.

So I guess I just need to go in a direction I feel best suited for my son and hope it works out. I really appeciate everyone on this forum. I think it is a great site, and I look forward to getting more use out of it in the future. Thanks.

Mark H

07-09-2008, 10:15 AM

Who does care about bat drag, separation, etc.? Parents, paid instructors and older men who want to do something that they think warrants being referred to as "coach."

Add to that list, kids who can't hit good pitching and want to keep playing. As I've said many times, if they are hitting as well as they want to at the highest level they aspire to, let'em hit.

hiddengem

07-09-2008, 04:53 PM

This is a silly statement. If Hidden Gem claims that "Steve's stuff" doesn't work at the next level (I assume the reference is to Steve Englishbey's material), then of course he should have to defend himself.

I don't have to do a dang thing.

So if he's going to publicly state or imply that it doesn't work, then he's going to have to do more than whip out his pro card and wave around his years of experience at the minor league level.

Who died and made you the forum lawyer? Show me where I implied something doesn't work and whipped out my pro card to prove it? And don't think I didn't notice your little immature dig about my experience at the minor league level. But by all means, if you putting me down makes you feel better about yourself, have at it.

I take from your comments that you have years of experience and success playing at a high level, and if thats true, congrats! I'm just a regular guy looking for the best information and I happen to have played a long time at a high level. Oh and by the way..I'm not the only player that has played at a high level, tried Steve's stuff with full effort only to realize that it didn't work. I know others that gave it a much longer go at it than I.

First, his experience at a pro level doesn't not by itself mean much. Has he mastered "Steve's stuff" to a degree that his experience is a reliable test of that material? If not, then what can his "experience" tell us about whether it works at "the next level"?

Why couldn't it be that I figured out very early in the process that his stuff wasn't going to work? Why do I have to "master" his stuff in order to figure that out?

Listen, I hope Steve produces a ton of high level (Baseball) hitters. Prove me wrong, I could really care less. I'm concerned about my career and my career only. It just wasn't going to work for me and I had to make a decision.

I think Mark H. suggested that HG just dabbled in it for a short time. If that's the case, then his pro experience doesn't mean much (on that subject at least). I'm not sure why you think it is so meaningful.

You OBVIOUSLY have a problem with me having experience at the pro level. You've mentioned it numerous times in this tired post. Why the animosity? Maybe Jealousy?

Again, playing ball at a high level doesn't mean you understand much about how you got there. It just means that some people will listen to you even though you don't know much.

Nobody has to listen to a word I say, but I'd like to think that with all I've done in this game and all that I've accomplished over the past 24yrs that I have some sort of clue about it.

Stealth

07-09-2008, 05:11 PM

I listen to every word HG posts. Very good information IMHO.

Swing Coach

07-09-2008, 07:05 PM

I also listen to all of what HG has to say...for the simple reason that I want to learn as much as there is to learn. I want to be a sponge....and then be able to spit out what I don't like and keep what I like. Too many folks on this forum would rather be like a brick, listening and learning from nobody except thy self.

Jake Patterson

07-09-2008, 07:13 PM

Too many folks on this forum would rather be like a brick, listening and learning from nobody except thy self.I would suggest that this is incorrect.

Swing Coach

07-09-2008, 09:23 PM

Okay, I stand corrected....."A few folks on this forum talk too much and would rather be like a brick, listening and learning from nobody except thy self."

heinrich

07-09-2008, 10:13 PM

I don't have to do a dang thing.

Who are you arguing with? First, I didn't say you had to do anything. I said you should have to. Should, as in reasonably and morally obligated. Second, I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the guy (Swing Coach) who said you shouldn't have to defend yourself. It was a silly statement. And then LClifton comes out with his "Hail fellow, well said." Horse hockey. You trash somebody's stuff in a public forum and any reasonable and fair person would say you have an obligation to defend your statements. If Swing Coach (or you or LClifton or anybody else) can't see that, then it says a lot about how reasonable and fair you are.

Who died and made you the forum lawyer? Show me where I implied something doesn't work and whipped out my pro card to prove it?

You've said several times that Steve Englishbey's stuff doesn't work at your level. You repeat it in your post below. And "whipping out your pro card" was just a figure of speech. I did not mean to imply that you had a laminated card identifying you as a professional baseball player. And I did not mean to imply that you literally whipped it out of your secret hiding place as proof of anything. But you do tend to contemptuously dismiss those who "just don't have any type of understanding of what it takes to be successful at the level you play." And others sure seem to be awed by it.

Oh and by the way..I'm not the only player that has played at a high level, tried Steve's stuff with full effort only to realize that it didn't work. I know others that gave it a much longer go at it than I.

Yeah, yeah. And I know several who think it is the real deal. And I know a bunch of hitters at lower levels who gave it full effort and it didn't work for them either. So what? Your vague references to vaporous, elusive witnesses is even sillier than appealing to your own experience. How many times did they work with Englishbey? What part of his instruction were they trying out? How well were they implementing it? Were they doing it right?

Why couldn't it be that I figured out very early in the process that his stuff wasn't going to work? Why do I have to "master" his stuff in order to figure that out?

Tried and found wanting, or tried and found difficult? I think I said you would need to "master it to a degree that your experience is a reliable test of that material." Did you do it right? How many times did you work with him? I don't know the answers to these questions. But how can you figure out very early in the process if you didn't integrate his instruction into your own swing sufficiently to give it a true test? Fundamental muscle memory issues are not fixed overnight. If you gave up "very early in the process," I don't think your experience with it is very credible as a test to its effectiveness at your level. If others do just because you "happen to have played a long time at a high level," then that's their problem. I'm just pointing out that it's silly.

I'm concerned about my career and my career only. It just wasn't going to work for me and I had to make a decision.

This is fairly disingenuous. If you were only concerned about your career and your career only, you wouldn't be announcing that Mr. Englishbey's material doesn't work at high levels. And again, how do you know it wasn't going to work for you? Sounds to me like you found it difficult to change, felt pressure to succeed quickly, got to listening to the other pros who talk about hitting in terms different from Englishbey, lost confidence it it and are now trying to justify your decision by trashing it as ineffective. If not, then tell us your experience with it? What part of it did you try? Were you doing it right? Did you do it well enough and stick with it long to give it a fair and reliable test?

You OBVIOUSLY have a problem with me having experience at the pro level. You've mentioned it numerous times in this tired post. Why the animosity? Maybe Jealousy?

It can't be obvious if it ain't so. Think what you want, but I have no problem with you being at the pro level. I mentioned it several times only because it is your only claim to credibility. Animosity? Well, if there is any, I think I've explained it pretty well. And jealous? Nice try, boy. You've achieved nothing that I have cause to be jealous of. But it is telling that you consider yourself as having achieved something I might be jealous of.

Nobody has to listen to a word I say, but I'd like to think that with all I've done in this game and all that I've accomplished over the past 24yrs that I have some sort of clue about it.

I'll listen to what you say. I enjoy hearing some of your stories and anecdotes. I'm confident you have some sort of clue about the game. Nobody said or implied otherwise. But other pros have had more experience in the game than you and know less about the intricacies of the swing than you. So don't take it so personal.

Stealth

07-09-2008, 10:24 PM

heinrich, 5 posts at BBF and you have alot to say...............

Curious as to how long you have been following this.

Jake Patterson

07-10-2008, 08:02 AM

But other pros have had more experience in the game than you and know less about the intricacies of the swing than you. So don't take it so personal.
While I agree with the intent of this statement, I disagree with its implication. HG has demonstrated a considerable desire and understanding of the swing and is pursuing what might work for him. I do not feel he has said EH does not work, I believe he has stated it has not worked for him.

hiddengem

07-10-2008, 09:24 AM

Who are you arguing with? First, I didn't say you had to do anything. I said you should have to. Should, as in reasonably and morally obligated. Second, I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the guy (Swing Coach) who said you shouldn't have to defend yourself. It was a silly statement. And then LClifton comes out with his "Hail fellow, well said." Horse hockey. You trash somebody's stuff in a public forum and any reasonable and fair person would say you have an obligation to defend your statements.

Don't come in here and run your mouth about me(or anybody else) to somebody else and expect that they just sit there and wear it.

If Swing Coach (or you or LClifton or anybody else) can't see that, then it says a lot about how reasonable and fair you are

I did see that, and thats why I explained, but I sure as heck didn't have to.

You've said several times that Steve Englishbey's stuff doesn't work "FOR ME" at your level.

Get it right.

And "whipping out your pro card" was just a figure of speech. I did not mean to imply that you had a laminated card identifying you as a professional baseball player.

Oh really? thanks for clarifying that.

But you do tend to contemptuously dismiss those who "just don't have any type of understanding of what it takes to be successful at the level you play."

You tell me almighty one, how can MarkH have any idea what it takes to be a successful baseball player at the level I play at? How? He has no experience doing anything even remotely close to it. He has(to my understanding) a successful softball playing daughter.

Yeah, yeah. And I know several who think it is the real deal.

Wonderful, Who are they? I've asked Steve personally to share any players that either him or Nyman "will take credit for" that are playing pro ball, and having success using their stuff. I've never had a response.

Your vague references to vaporous, elusive witnesses is even sillier than appealing to your own experience. How many times did they work with Englishbey? What part of his instruction were they trying out? How well were they implementing it? Were they doing it right?

If they chose to speak up after reading this, then thats their choice. I don't make it for them.

Tried and found wanting, or tried and found difficult? I think I said you would need to "master it to a degree that your experience is a reliable test of that material."

Maybe your right, folks I stand corrected. It is entirely possible that I didn't master Steve's stuff to a degree that I was a reliable test. But I felt early on with much of the stuff I was doing with him, that it wasn't going to be for me. By all means, work with him as long as you want, master it and decide for youself. But unless you are playing against the best, I guess you won't know how it will hold up.

But how can you figure out very early in the process if you didn't integrate his instruction into your own swing sufficiently to give it a true test?

Trust me, I tried. But like you said, how would you know the answers to these questions.

Fundamental muscle memory issues are not fixed overnight. If you gave up "very early in the process," I don't think your experience with it is very credible as a test to its effectiveness at your level.

Great maybe you're right. To my knowledge I'm the only player with my level of experience that has shared an experience with it. If Steve was smart he would be pointing out the players he's working with at my level that are using his stuff and having success with it.

If others do just because you "happen to have played a long time at a high level," then that's their problem. I'm just pointing out that it's silly.

Again, the true test is whether something works against the best. If somebody out there competing against the best has a different story, I would hope for Steve's sake they would speak up.

This is fairly disingenuous. If you were only concerned about your career and your career only, you wouldn't be announcing that Mr. Englishbey's material doesn't work at high levels.

Again, get it right. I said it doesn't work for me at my level.

And again, how do you know it wasn't going to work for you? Sounds to me like you found it difficult to change

So your suggesting I just drink the Koolaid and shutup? Just drink it dammit, this will work, trust me.
That isn't even close to how I personally operate.

, felt pressure to succeed quickly, got to listening to the other pros who talk about hitting in terms different from Englishbey, lost confidence it it and are now trying to justify your decision by trashing it as ineffective.

Listen, I had very successful ALL-Star Caliber seasons on both sides of the ball long before I worked with steve. I was, like any player, looking to get better. I or anybody at my level isn't going to stand around for very long just failing and not do anything about it. I had a pretty rough year that year and am lucky to still be playing.

What part of it did you try? Were you doing it right? Did you do it well enough and stick with it long to give it a fair and reliable test?
I don't really remember, Steve could probably better answer that question. I think he mentioned I didn't connect well.

It can't be obvious if it ain't so. Think what you want, but I have no problem with you being at the pro level. I mentioned it several times only because it is your only claim to credibility.

You're right, thats all I have, over 3300 ab's at the professional level and close to a 1000 hits. Thats my credibility. Does it mean I know it all? Hardly, why do you think i continually try to get better and learn more?

You've achieved nothing that I have cause to be jealous of. But it is telling that you consider yourself as having achieved something I might be jealous of.

Wonderful..good to know you aren't the Jealous type..we wouldn't want that to get in the way of a good discussion.

I'll listen to what you say. I enjoy hearing some of your stories and anecdotes. I'm confident you have some sort of clue about the game. Nobody said or implied otherwise. But other pros have had more experience in the game than you and know less about the intricacies of the swing than you. So don't take it so personal.

Well don't come in here and throw indirect mud on me and expect that I don't take notice.

callyjr

07-10-2008, 10:29 AM

While I agree with the intent of this statement, I disagree with its implication. HG has demonstrated a considerable desire and understanding of the swing and is pursuing what might work for him. I do not feel he has said EH does not work, I believe he has stated it has not worked for him.

I believe he said he knows other High level players that it didn't work for as well. I believe He feels it doesn't work fore the hi-level player which is what I have been saying all this time, show me someone that has been successful with his products at the higher level and then we can continue to endorse his products.

wogdoggy

07-10-2008, 10:31 AM

Slapper23

07-10-2008, 12:20 PM

Woggy...

:highfive:

Mike

callyjr

07-10-2008, 01:41 PM

or maybe you didnt do it right or maybe you just dont get it?

i think most these guys got "it" and decided against it.:rofl:

not sure if your being sarcastic or not here? I would agree with this"i think most these guys got "it" and decided against it"

heinrich

07-10-2008, 02:02 PM

Don't come in here and run your mouth about me(or anybody else) to somebody else and expect that they just sit there and wear it.

Didn't expect you to just sit there and wear it. You said you didn't have to do anything, and I simply pointed out that I was replying to Swing Coach who said you "shouldn't have to defend yourself."

I did see that, and thats why I explained, but I sure as heck didn't have to.

No, you didn't explain why you claim Englishbey's stuff could not possibly work for you. Nor did you explain what part of Englishbey's stuff didn't work for you. In fact, you're pretty hazy about that. You don't really remember. But you're sure it didn't work for you. Just take your word for it.

You tell me almighty one, how can MarkH have any idea what it takes to be a successful baseball player at the level I play at? How?

Video doesn't lie. He mentioned something about dropping a frame. Of course he doesn't know everything it takes to be successful at your level (I can't find where he made that claim). What he said is that you need to drop a frame in your swing. Surely he doesn't need professional experience to see that. And yet you still felt compelled to dimiss him as some clown who is out of his league talking with the likes of someone "at your level."

Wonderful, Who are they?

My point exactly. If you want to appeal to the testimony of others to make your case, then at least be fair enough to provide specific facts. If you cannot provide the facts or choose not to, then leave your other guys out of the discussion.

Maybe your right, folks I stand corrected. It is entirely possible that I didn't master Steve's stuff to a degree that I was a reliable test. But I felt early on with much of the stuff I was doing with him, that it wasn't going to be for me. By all means, work with him as long as you want, master it and decide for youself. But unless you are playing against the best, I guess you won't know how it will hold up.[

There you go again. "Unless you're playing against the best . . ."

Who you're playing against is irrelevant to the point I was making: First, you admit that maybe I'm right, that maybe you didn't really do what Englishbey told you to do well enough to test it (you can't even remember what you were working on), and yet you claim it couldn't have worked for you.

Trust me, I tried.

Tried and found it wanting, or tried and found it difficult? What did you try? What did Englisbey suggest that you do? Why didn't it work for you? How long did you work with him? If you can't answer these questions, then why should I trust you on this particular point? Why should anyone? Simply because you tried something or other against the best?

Great maybe you're right. To my knowledge I'm the only player with my level of experience that has shared an experience with it.

Again you admit that I'm right that perhaps your experience with Englishbey was not very credible to test its effectiveness, and yet you continue to assert that it was not effective for you.

Again, the true test is whether something works against the best.

You keep saying this. But who's denying it? Not me. Because it is irrelevant to what I'm asking you: I'm asking what specifically did you test against the best, were you actually doing what Englishbey told you to do, and how long did you do it? You can't even remember what specifically you tested or what he told you to do ("I think he mentioned I didn't connect very well"), so how can you say it didn't work for you?

I know, I know. Trust you.

Again, get it right. I said it doesn't work for me at my level.

I did get it right. CallyJr interpreted you as saying that "Steve's material is not working at the next level." You said nothing to correct his interpretation of what you posted. Then when challenged, you appeal to other elusive witnesses who tried it even longer than you, and it didn't work for them either.

But it doesn't matter. You can't even explain why it didn't work for you.

So your suggesting I just drink the Koolaid and shutup? Just drink it dammit, this will work, trust me.

Yeah, yeah, hilarious. Except that you and your gallery are completely missing my point. I am not suggesting you do anything. I am not endorsing Mr. Englishbey's materials. Some of them look pretty good, but I am not advocating that you adopt them. The only thing I am suggesting you do is admit that you don't really know whether it would have worked for you if you had done more to make it work. But I suppose even that is too much to ask. Trust you. You play against the best and that means you can make capricious pulic pronouncements with no explanation necessary.

ME: What part of it did you try? Were you doing it right? Did you do it well enough and stick with it long enough to give it a fair and reliable test?

YOU: I don't really remember, Steve could probably better answer that question. I think he mentioned I didn't connect well.[

Again, if you can't remember these things, then how do you know it wouldn't have worked for you?

Yesterday, Mr. Englishbey noticed my post and PMed me a few details that might refresh your memory.

He said you met with him for 3 hours one occasion and 2 hours on another.
He said you had a problem with hip slide and consistantly connecting the bat to your rotation.
He said these two inefficiencies were adding time to your swing.
He said that he couldn't really prescibe a course of remediation (I'm paraphrasing him), but that you needed to figure out for yourself how to overcome these inefficiencies.
He suggested a couple of drills that you might try to better "connect the knob to your shoulder rotation."
You sent him no clips of yourself working on any of this, so he had no idea whether you were doing what you needed to do.

Now we can be specific. What part of this just wouldn't work for you? Based on this thorough test against the best in the game, you publically assure us that Mr. Engishbey's stuff wouldn't work for you. You could tell early on. Trust you. What specifically wouldn't work? Based on this thorough test, others in this thread are claiming that Mr. Englishbey's instructional system doesn't work, especially at higher levels of competition. What part of Mr. Englishbey's instructional system as a whole did you try and found it wouldn't work for you?

And for the record, I regret referring to you as "boy." I realize it sounded bad, but I really didn't mean it disrespectfully. I call my sons "boy." As I told Jake, you're young enough and I'm old enough to be your father, but it was inappropriate. Please accept my apologies for that.

dannyboy

07-10-2008, 04:39 PM

Bryton:
“So here I am more confused then ever with my just turned 13 year old son…”

And then 18 posts (including this one) that I don’t think would qualify to answer, "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?"

Feel for ya, buddy.

wogdoggy

07-10-2008, 04:48 PM

Didn't expect you to just sit there and wear it. You said you didn't have to do anything, and I simply pointed out that I was replying to Swing Coach who said you "shouldn't have to defend yourself."

No, you didn't explain why you claim Englishbey's stuff could not possibly work for you. Nor did you explain what part of Englishbey's stuff didn't work for you. In fact, you're pretty hazy about that. You don't really remember. But you're sure it didn't work for you. Just take your word for it.

Video doesn't lie. He mentioned something about dropping a frame. Of course he doesn't know everything it takes to be successful at your level (I can't find where he made that claim). What he said is that you need to drop a frame in your swing. Surely he doesn't need professional experience to see that. And yet you still felt compelled to dimiss him as some clown who is out of his league talking with the likes of someone "at your level."

My point exactly. If you want to appeal to the testimony of others to make your case, then at least be fair enough to provide specific facts. If you cannot provide the facts or choose not to, then leave your other guys out of the discussion.

There you go again. "Unless you're playing against the best . . ."

Who you're playing against is irrelevant to the point I was making: First, you admit that maybe I'm right, that maybe you didn't really do what Englishbey told you to do well enough to test it (you can't even remember what you were working on), and yet you claim it couldn't have worked for you.

Tried and found it wanting, or tried and found it difficult? What did you try? What did Englisbey suggest that you do? Why didn't it work for you? How long did you work with him? If you can't answer these questions, then why should I trust you on this particular point? Why should anyone? Simply because you tried something or other against the best?

Again you admit that I'm right that perhaps your experience with Englishbey was not very credible to test its effectiveness, and yet you continue to assert that it was not effective for you.

You keep saying this. But who's denying it? Not me. Because it is irrelevant to what I'm asking you: I'm asking what specifically did you test against the best, were you actually doing what Englishbey told you to do, and how long did you do it? You can't even remember what specifically you tested or what he told you to do ("I think he mentioned I didn't connect very well"), so how can you say it didn't work for you?

I know, I know. Trust you.

I did get it right. CallyJr interpreted you as saying that "Steve's material is not working at the next level." You said nothing to correct his interpretation of what you posted. Then when challenged, you appeal to other elusive witnesses who tried it even longer than you, and it didn't work for them either.

But it doesn't matter. You can't even explain why it didn't work for you.

Yeah, yeah, hilarious. Except that you and your gallery are completely missing my point. I am not suggesting you do anything. I am not endorsing Mr. Englishbey's materials. Some of them look pretty good, but I am not advocating that you adopt them. The only thing I am suggesting you do is admit that you don't really know whether it would have worked for you if you had done more to make it work. But I suppose even that is too much to ask. Trust you. You play against the best and that means you can make capricious pulic pronouncements with no explanation necessary.

Again, if you can't remember these things, then how do you know it wouldn't have worked for you?

Yesterday, Mr. Englishbey noticed my post and PMed me a few details that might refresh your memory.

He said you met with him for 3 hours one occasion and 2 hours on another.
He said you had a problem with hip slide and consistantly connecting the bat to your rotation.
He said these two inefficiencies were adding time to your swing.
He said that he couldn't really prescibe a course of remediation (I'm paraphrasing him), but that you needed to figure out for yourself how to overcome these inefficiencies.
He suggested a couple of drills that you might try to better "connect the knob to your shoulder rotation."
You sent him no clips of yourself working on any of this, so he had no idea whether you were doing what you needed to do.

Now we can be specific. What part of this just wouldn't work for you? Based on this thorough test against the best in the game, you publically assure us that Mr. Engishbey's stuff wouldn't work for you. You could tell early on. Trust you. What specifically wouldn't work? Based on this thorough test, others in this thread are claiming that Mr. Englishbey's instructional system doesn't work, especially at higher levels of competition. What part of Mr. Englishbey's instructional system as a whole did you try and found it wouldn't work for you?

And for the record, I regret referring to you as "boy." I realize it sounded bad, but I really didn't mean it disrespectfully. I call my sons "boy." As I told Jake, you're young enough and I'm old enough to be your father, but it was inappropriate. Please accept my apologies for that.

sounds like your attached at his hip for cryin out loud..you didnt do it right, you didnt try it long enough you dont understand,,blah blah blah same BS over and over,,it doesnt take rocket science to know you have to KEEP your hands in the swing YOU HAVE to TEACH hands in a swing and for sure,,and YOU GOTTA create X factor ..Its a whole different theory, different concept..there are PLENTY of people that post here that dont buy into it..plenty

Jake Patterson

07-10-2008, 06:37 PM

I believe he said he knows other High level players that it didn't work for as well. I guess you would have to ask Steve who specifically among the professional ranks he worked with. It is my understanding HG spent a few hours with Steve and I am uncertain who the other pros are. If it doesn't work move on...

Jake Patterson

07-10-2008, 09:03 PM

Gentlemen,
Several threads have gone astray. I am not going to modify those posts that do not address the issue at hand, I will simply eliminate them. Please stay on topic.

hiddengem

07-11-2008, 12:39 AM

No, you didn't explain why you claim Englishbey's stuff could not possibly work for you.
Said over and over..just hold on to the bat and turn.
Never mentioned anything about creating a stretch.
Said that everything happened from the middle of your body.
Never mentioned anything about ground forces and the necessary push from the backside into the front side.
Never mentioned how important the top/hand arm is
I felt like I was hitting with dead hands.
Mentioned that the front shoulder/scap pullback was largly responsible for bringing the bat into the zone.

I could probably think of other things, but all of those things really didn't sit with me.

Video doesn't lie. He mentioned something about dropping a frame. Of course he doesn't know everything it takes to be successful at your level (I can't find where he made that claim). What he said is that you need to drop a frame in your swing. Surely he doesn't need professional experience to see that. And yet you still felt compelled to dimiss him as some clown who is out of his league talking with the likes of someone "at your level."

Right, and by me dropping a stinking frame in my swing is suddently going to turn me into a Major League baseball player. There is so much more that goes into being successful all around player than having a perfect mechanical swing.

My point exactly. If you want to appeal to the testimony of others to make your case, then at least be fair enough to provide specific facts. If you cannot provide the facts or choose not to, then leave your other guys out of the discussion.

Don't worry he'll post soon.

Again you admit that I'm right that perhaps your experience with Englishbey was not very credible to test its effectiveness, and yet you continue to assert that it was not effective for you.

Yep your'e exactly right, for certain people, the amount of time I spent with him on his material isn't enough for me to be credible. Thats fine..tell me to go sh-- in my hat.

I'm asking what specifically did you test against the best, were you actually doing what Englishbey told you to do, and how long did you do it?

I tried to hold on to the bat and turn...tilt over and turn..adjust to 93mph moving fastballs by tilting or untilting my spine. Dont' worry about the hands. Just turn like heck from the middle. I did it until I was hovering around .200 and talked to him one day, and he said shelf it.

I did get it right. CallyJr interpreted you as saying that "Steve's material is not working at the next level." You said nothing to correct his interpretation of what you posted. Then when challenged, you appeal to other elusive witnesses who tried it even longer than you, and it didn't work for them either.

Oh I'm sorry, do I need to go correct him for you?

The only thing I am suggesting you do is admit that you don't really know whether it would have worked for you if you had done more to make it work. But I suppose even that is too much to ask. Trust you. You play against the best and that means you can make capricious pulic pronouncements with no explanation necessary.

If anybody can make a quick assesment of material, I think it would be somebody that has a large amount of experience playing against the best competition. And when they are consistently getting it handed to them, that something might not work.

Now we can be specific. What part of this just wouldn't work for you? Based on this thorough test against the best in the game, you publically assure us that Mr. Engishbey's stuff wouldn't work for you. You could tell early on. Trust you. What specifically wouldn't work? Based on this thorough test, others in this thread are claiming that Mr. Englishbey's instructional system doesn't work, especially at higher levels of competition. What part of Mr. Englishbey's instructional system as a whole did you try and found it wouldn't work for you?
see above
And for the record, I regret referring to you as "boy." I realize it sounded bad, but I really didn't mean it disrespectfully. I call my sons "boy." As I told Jake, you're young enough and I'm old enough to be your father, but it was inappropriate. Please accept my apologies for that.

Accepted..my son is 4..he's a boy.

Mark H

07-11-2008, 08:47 AM

Right, and by me dropping a stinking frame in my swing is suddently going to turn me into a Major League baseball player..

Point of order. No one ever said this. The frame you apparently need to drop would be a necessary but not sufficient condition per the discussion on here-right or wrong as that discussion may in fact be.

There is so much more that goes into being successful all around player than having a perfect mechanical swing..

I believe no one ever said differently.

Yep your'e exactly right, for certain people, the amount of time I spent with him on his material isn't enough for me to be credible. Thats fine..tell me to go sh-- in my hat.

Now that right there is funny. I'm going to find a place to use that phrase one of these days.

hiddengem

07-11-2008, 08:58 AM

Now that right there is funny. I'm going to find a place to use that phrase one of these days.

One of my favorites.

heinrich

07-11-2008, 10:31 AM

Oh I'm sorry, do I need to go correct him for you?

Not especially for me. For yourself and for everybody reading on this forum. If someone misrepresented my position, I would be setting things aright in a hurry. If you had done that, we almost certainly wouldn't be having this discussion.

Like Mark H, I very much admired the "sh*t in the hat" comment myself. Unlike him, I'm doubt I'll seek out an opportunity to use it.

I'd like to make a couple other comments, but I've no time now and I'm going to be out of pocket for a couple of days.

Cheers

Mark H

07-11-2008, 06:13 PM

Like Mark H, I very much admired the "sh*t in the hat" comment myself. Unlike him, I'm doubt I'll seek out an opportunity to use it.
Cheers

Well I don't plan to make it my after dinner toast but once in awhile, at the right time and place, I'm thinking it would be hilarious.

hiddengem

07-11-2008, 10:03 PM

I believe he said he knows other High level players that it didn't work for as well. I believe He feels it doesn't work fore the hi-level player which is what I have been saying all this time, show me someone that has been successful with his products at the higher level and then we can continue to endorse his products.

Just to set the record straight..SE's stuff isn't for me. But having said that, there will never be proof that SE's stuff doesn't work unless there is proof that it does. And its my personal opinion that it has to hold up against the best, so hopefully he can get some more high level baseball players to to give it a try, so that you can hopefully find a credible source, which apparantly I'm not.

heinrich

07-12-2008, 05:07 PM

Well I don't plan to make it my after dinner toast . . .

Now that's funny.

For me anyway.

heinrich

07-12-2008, 06:40 PM

Said over and over..just hold on to the bat and turn.
Never mentioned anything about creating a stretch.
Said that everything happened from the middle of your body.
Never mentioned anything about ground forces and the necessary push from the backside into the front side.
Never mentioned how important the top/hand arm is
I felt like I was hitting with dead hands.
Mentioned that the front shoulder/scap pullback was largly responsible for bringing the bat into the zone.

I could probably think of other things, but all of those things really didn't sit with me.

I intend this to be my last post (on this topic at least). I can understand what you’re saying here. I don’t necessarily agree with your reasoning, but that never was my point. I’m not interested in long discussions of the various hitting mechanics theories and dogma. In fact, if the statements above had been your initial response, I wouldn’t have had anything to say.

If you had just said from the beginning that Englishbey emphasized things that "didn’t sit with you" and failed to emphasize things that you thought important, then I would have had no argument. That’s a lot different from claiming that you tried his stuff and it wouldn’t work for you against the best in the game.

I think Jim LeFevre had a good point when he said that the hardest job of a MLB hitting coach is to figure out what way of saying things will resonate with a pro hitter. He said that he often had the experience of knowing exactly what a hitter was doing wrong, but unless he could somehow say it in a way that fit into the hitter’s own way of thinking and feeling about his swing, what he said ending up being rejected. This is consistent with my experience as well - at all levels of coaching (and I've played and coached at relatively high levels - but I consider this to be irrelevant whether my views are valid or not.)

Expressions like “Just hold onto the bat and turn,” “Everything happening from the middle of your body,” focusing on the front “shoulder/scap” are almost certainly not ways of talking that would resonate with and gain the confidence of professional players. They may be his ways of capturing what he feels to be essential elements of the swing, especially those elements that players at lower levels need to overcome their swing inefficiencies, but I can see how they would not fit well into your “grid” or that of most ball players at your level.

The same is true of the things he didn’t mention or focus on that you (and others at your level) felt he should have. You considered them important even before you worked with him. If he didn’t talk about them - or even dismissed them, then that in itself (according to LeFevre) is enough doom the enterprise regardless of whether he was right or wrong.

I don’t know whether these ("just hold onto the bat and turn", etc.) were things he said to you during the time he was working with you personally on the specific “inefficiencies” he identified in your swing or whether they were (are) merely the things he repeatedly says and emphasizes on his website and in these kinds of forums. According to his PM, he claims he really didn’t have that much advice for you at that point in the season and that there was no opportunity for him to follow up. As you said yourself, you couldn’t really remember what he said in the limited time he worked with you.

As to whether his “stuff” (if properly applied with follow up and feedback over sufficient time) will work at the professional levels – for you or for anybody else – I guess time will tell.

new2thesport

07-12-2008, 11:23 PM

I intend this to be my last post (on this topic at least). I can understand what you’re saying here. I don’t necessarily agree with your reasoning, but that never was my point. I’m not interested in long discussions of the various hitting mechanics theories and dogma. In fact, if the statements above had been your initial response, I wouldn’t have had anything to say.

If you had just said from the beginning that Englishbey emphasized things that "didn’t sit with you" and failed to emphasize things that you thought important, then I would have had no argument. That’s a lot different from claiming that you tried his stuff and it wouldn’t work for you against the best in the game.

I think Jim LeFevre had a good point when he said that the hardest job of a MLB hitting coach is to figure out what way of saying things will resonate with a pro hitter. He said that he often had the experience of knowing exactly what a hitter was doing wrong, but unless he could somehow say it in a way that fit into the hitter’s own way of thinking and feeling about his swing, what he said ending up being rejected. This is consistent with my experience as well - at all levels of coaching (and I've played and coached at relatively high levels - but I consider this to be irrelevant whether my views are valid or not.)

Expressions like “Just hold onto the bat and turn,” “Everything happening from the middle of your body,” focusing on the front “shoulder/scap” are almost certainly not ways of talking that would resonate with and gain the confidence of professional players. They may be his ways of capturing what he feels to be essential elements of the swing, especially those elements that players at lower levels need to overcome their swing inefficiencies, but I can see how they would not fit well into your “grid” or that of most ball players at your level.

The same is true of the things he didn’t mention or focus on that you (and others at your level) felt he should have. You considered them important even before you worked with him. If he didn’t talk about them - or even dismissed them, then that in itself (according to LeFevre) is enough doom the enterprise regardless of whether he was right or wrong.

I don’t know whether these ("just hold onto the bat and turn", etc.) were things he said to you during the time he was working with you personally on the specific “inefficiencies” he identified in your swing or whether they were (are) merely the things he repeatedly says and emphasizes on his website and in these kinds of forums. According to his PM, he claims he really didn’t have that much advice for you at that point in the season and that there was no opportunity for him to follow up. As you said yourself, you couldn’t really remember what he said in the limited time he worked with you.

As to whether his “stuff” (if properly applied with follow up and feedback over sufficient time) will work at the professional levels – for you or for anybody else – I guess time will tell.

Heinrich,

I read all of your posts here and all that you do is try to pick on Hiddengem because he said,[insert anything about steve englishbey that is not praise or worship].
I am not a coach and I have never played the game of baseball but I sure knew what hiddengem was saying about steve englishbey. It came across loud and clear that steve englishbey's techniques did not work for him(singular).
What techniques or how long doesnt really matter now does it?

If someone showed me "the rubber guard" that eddie bravo invented and tried to instruct me on the techniques "New York and Chill Dog", it wouldnt matter if he taught me for many months or just a few hours, I know it would not work for me! Why? because it is not suited for my body. You need to be super flexible in order to apply it or even master it.

"the rubber guard" is not used by the 99% of the elite fighters. That doesnt mean it doesnt work or is not applicable.
It has its advantages and disadvantages. eddie bravo is a great instructor and just because his style doesnt suit me or anyone that I train with, it doesnt mean that his style sucks and that I am degrading him because I dont think his style will work for me.

I think you are getting too emotional about hiddengem's opinions and statements. Not even Steve Englishbey himself was as emotional as you. (Yes he was here! I read every word he posted with Hiddengem)

To be honest, when I first came here, I read for hours and hours on end in this web forum. I was searching for answers to questions I didnt even have. I read other peoples questions and read the answers from knowledgeable posters. I thus asked my own questions and I got answers and was pointed to directions. The first recommendation I got was for Steve Englishbey. I went to his website and I read in other forums about him.
Many posters here have very high positive remarks about Steve. What sucks is when I read posts like yours trying to belittle a professional baseball player because he said steve's system doesnt work for him.
Steve doesnt need people like you. His work speaks volumes him. I thought of Steve as a great instructor.
Now you put a sour note in Steve Englisbey's name especially when you are basically "calling out" a professional baseball player because of his opinion of what doesnt work for him.

Steve Englishbey

07-13-2008, 02:53 AM

...........at least for some of us .

Possibly not for the author of this quote:

" Does his work speak volumes, or does he just speak volumes . . . did you happen to read this voluminous post and get anything from it??"

There have been countless mischaracterizations of the terms like "the box" ,or "maintain the box",or "hold onto the damn bat and turn",or "hands along for the ride" , etc., et al. Terms that either originate at Setpro ,and /or my website .

[And I would add that there are numerous reasons as to why these terms are mischaracterized and maligned. Some of it is due to simply a lack of knowledge as to the info that comes from my site and Paul Nymans site. Some of it due to other and less savory reasons .]

So ,as I will do from time to time here ,I will simply take some time to explain ---in some detail obviously --- what these terms and concepts ACTUALLY mean .And how they are ACTUALLY used.

JUST LIKE YOU DID ,in your "defence " of what you thought were mischaracterizations of Dave Hudgens and what he knows and teaches .

I have very little doubt as to the fact that you ,Mudvine ,have no REAL interest as regards the accuracy with which my info and the setpro information is disseminated here and elsewhwere.

Why would you ?

You came to this website as a very pronounced "Dave Hudgens" guy.

And ,as such , why would you have any real interest in whether or not my info or Paul Nyman's info is accurately portrayed here.

On the other hand ,you DID seem to take an interest to what Chris O'leary and Mark H said about what YOU considered to be "mischaracterizations" of Dave Hudgens and what he knows and teaches.

See ,for example , your comments here :

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=76828&page=3

Meaning of course that ones interest in the truth and accuracy typically extends only towards "their ox."

Finally ,as regards the above "voluminous " comment.

Indeed ,I can be pretty verbose ,no doubt.

On the other hand,I CAN be pretty pithy and to the point .

Like these comments I made to Heinrich :

"Yesterday, Mr. Englishbey noticed my post and PMed me a few details that might refresh your memory.

He said you met with him for 3 hours one occasion and 2 hours on another.
He said you had a problem with hip slide and consistantly connecting the bat to your rotation.
He said these two inefficiencies were adding time to your swing.
He said that he couldn't really prescribe a course of remediation (I'm paraphrasing him), but that you needed to figure out for yourself how to overcome these inefficiencies.
He suggested a couple of drills that you might try to better "connect the knob to your shoulder rotation."
You sent him no clips of yourself working on any of this, so he had no idea whether you were doing what you needed to do."

And the irony is,of course ,that these briefs comments are revealing in that they point to the fact that at least half this thread should not even exist .

Meaning really that there was "never any there there."

steve

JNJ

07-13-2008, 05:29 AM

Does his work speak volumes, or does he just speak volumes . . . did you happen to read this voluminous post (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=1244408&postcount=16) and get anything from it?? :dismay: :yawn:

Yes, I read it carefully and it answered a lot of questions for me. His style isn't that great, but the information was very helpful. Thanks for providing the link.

mudvnine

07-13-2008, 09:12 AM

I have very little doubt as to the fact that you ,Mudvine ,have no REAL interest as regards the accuracy with which my info and the setpro information is disseminated here and elsewhwere.

Why would you ?

You came to this website as a very pronounced "Dave Hudgens" guy.

And ,as such , why would you have any real interest in whether or not my info or Paul Nyman's info is accurately portrayed here.

I came to this website to learn, share, and discuss baseball and in doing so was able to find some excellent work that I have put into my teachings. In fact I am such a "pronounced "Dave Hudgens" guy" as you point out that I purchased Dr. Chris Yeager's DVDs that have closed some holes that I felt Dave could not.

Mark, I really think you should look into Dr. Yeager; although I originally learned and use many of the teachings of Hudgens, with my hitters becoming very successful; I did experience a few gaps here and there and Dr. Yeager closed them for me, as well as made me at least rethink some other things that I hadn't previously thought needed change, but I'm still in the investigation, learning, decision phase. It's is nothing against your current instructor/advisor, I know he is well respected by many, just another perspective at a complex set of physical tasks.

Too bad your disciples are so dyed in the wool that they comment or maybe "parrot" things trying to mimimize Dr. Yeager's work without ever taking the time to read it.

I do plan to read Yeager but I view his comments above as incorrect.

I at least took the time to read (and read, and read) your post and thought you made a couple of points, but your repetitiveness, not thoroughness was frightening and unnecessary. At least now I better understand where many of the other posters who say your stuff is "just not for them" are coming from.

However, thanks at your attempt to clarify "the box",
Mud

Mark H

07-14-2008, 08:19 AM

I think Jim LeFevre had a good point when he said that the hardest job of a MLB hitting coach is to figure out what way of saying things will resonate with a pro hitter. He said that he often had the experience of knowing exactly what a hitter was doing wrong, but unless he could somehow say it in a way that fit into the hitter’s own way of thinking and feeling about his swing, what he said ending up being rejected. This is consistent with my experience as well - at all levels of coaching (and I've played and coached at relatively high levels - but I consider this to be irrelevant whether my views are valid or not.)

Expressions like “Just hold onto the bat and turn,” “Everything happening from the middle of your body,” focusing on the front “shoulder/scap” are almost certainly not ways of talking that would resonate with and gain the confidence of professional players. They may be his ways of capturing what he feels to be essential elements of the swing, especially those elements that players at lower levels need to overcome their swing inefficiencies, but I can see how they would not fit well into your “grid” or that of most ball players at your level.

The same is true of the things he didn’t mention or focus on that you (and others at your level) felt he should have. You considered them important even before you worked with him. If he didn’t talk about them - or even dismissed them, then that in itself (according to LeFevre) is enough doom the enterprise regardless of whether he was right or wrong.

I don’t know whether these ("just hold onto the bat and turn", etc.) were things he said to you during the time he was working with you personally on the specific “inefficiencies” he identified in your swing or whether they were (are) merely the things he repeatedly says and emphasizes on his website and in these kinds of forums. According to his PM, he claims he really didn’t have that much advice for you at that point in the season and that there was no opportunity for him to follow up. As you said yourself, you couldn’t really remember what he said in the limited time he worked with you.

As to whether his “stuff” (if properly applied with follow up and feedback over sufficient time) will work at the professional levels – for you or for anybody else – I guess time will tell.

Whoever you think is right about swing mechanics, the above is a VERY good essay on teaching.