Thread: Rotational Hitting

hit dr-

I have not seen them debate recently.

My opinion is that Slaught and Epstein are BOTH right and describing largely the same swing pattern.

Slaught focusses on the similarity to overhand throw which is a VERY powerful way to teach the high level MLB type swing. Arm action is king in organizing/controlling the body and is very similar to the overhand throw up to a point. if you can throw you can hit.

Epstein gets good results in spite of less (but still has some) arm action emphasis. To make Epstein work, it helps to be able to swing in and recognize the MLB pattern yourself.

To comminucate HOW this works remotely over the internet with only words and clips is more difficult, but not entirely impossible.

There is a unique sequence of arm/body action for the high level pattern in MLB and it involves torquing the handle of the bat (best understood by mankin) and lateral tilt (not turn, but tilt/resistance/"bypass" of the shoulder ROTATION - if shoulders actively rotate independent of torso uncoiling, then load is suboptimally "rushed") best understood by Epstein.

So all 3 of these authorites can gte good results in terms of accelerating learning of the high level MLB pattern because they get enough right and little enough wrong, even though individually, their method is more partial than comprehensive.

It works for Mankin because he emphasizes handle torque (active/starting early/persisting throughout swing).

It works for Epstein because he adds shoulder tilt as the key to the middle of the swing ("drop and tilt") while otherwise using Williams overall description (cock hips, cock hands, hips lead, slight upswing, top handwrist unbroken at contact) and while controlling connection (Mankin "chp") by bat on deltoid.

It works for slaught because he knows the MLB pattern inside and out (so does Epstein) and he focusses on the right arm action.

let me know what you find incompatible about what you hear from Epstein vs Slaught, and I will se if I can "reconcile" the perceived incompatibility.

The Nyman/PCR/W apporaches ARE incompatible with the MLB pattern because by definition the shoulders are rotated actively to turn the bat in the shoulder plane which (lack of upper body "resistance" which requires shoulder bypass/lateral tilt AND early handle torque) prevents keeping hands back and prevents quick bat acceleration and late trajectory adjustment as compared to the MLB pattern.

Dear TryIN2GetItRight,

Thanks for taking the 2 hours to read this thread and awaking the sleeping giant with your post. We will all now be coming back here for endless hours on end just to check up on the latest input.

You are correct in saying that I am satisfied with the results that my daughter has gotten from going to the Epstein hitting camp. In fact I've just scheduled an Epstein clinic for her school team which I coach, that will take place in September. And am in the process of scheduling one for her travel team to take place later in the Fall.

I'll post the results of both teams efforts in the near future.

Best Regards,

Pops

Points of order. Slaught and Epstein take great exception to any notion what they do is similar. Tom has reason for personal bias against Nyman and he apparently doesn't teach anyone in person on any regular basis. As always, compare everything anyone, including Epstein, Slaught, Nyman, Englishbey, Tom, me, the guy next door or anyone else, says about hitting to slow motion video of the best in the world.

Siggy's Hitting Clips - ImageEvent

Mark -

I would recommend we just stick to purveying information as the engineers describe it.

What specific incompatibilities do you see between Epstein and Slaught ?

Originally Posted by tom.guerry

Mark -

I would recommend we just stick to purveying information as the engineers describe it.

While the video test is important I think it's also relevant to understand the source.

Mark -

At BBF you stated:

"I would submit that what Epstein teaches can in no way be reconciled with what either Englishbey, Slaught or Yeager teach for starters. Then there's Hudgens and Lau and so on. Are the differences exxagerated due to language and point of view? Probably, but there are definite differences IMO."


This differs significantly from my position, well supported by the golf info, that Epstein and Slaught and Yeager and Hudgens and both Laus are all teaching the same 2 plane/MLB pattern and as such can be reconciled and fit together compatibly.

On the other hand, Nyman and Englishbey are both describing the hugely different single plane/"PCR/W" pattern. Their differences with each other can be reconciled betwen them, but not with the MLB pattern approaches above.

Two very separate/incompatible patterns,MLB vs PCRW, which for the most part should not be mixed.

So again, let's discuss any specific incompatibilities you perceive within either group if you are interested.

Originally Posted by tom.guerry

Mark -

At BBF you stated:

"I would submit that what Epstein teaches can in no way be reconciled with what either Englishbey, Slaught or Yeager teach for starters. Then there's Hudgens and Lau and so on. Are the differences exxagerated due to language and point of view? Probably, but there are definite differences IMO."


This differs significantly from my position,... .

Well now that's funny anywhere. Go ahead and answer me on BBF.

Just found this site. Seems lke a good one, and an interesting thread.

No, you probably didn't see me unless you were in Athens for the 2004 Olympics. Just wondering about if you played bc it much different between watching video and actually doing it... no offense.

Posey:

If memory serves, there are only two players from the 2004 team that did not play in either 2000 or 2008 (or both). Are you Clark, or Giordano?

And I ask not out of some absurd desire to out you (not that there is anything to criticize with a world class player, anyway), but because I'd like to comment on your swing (I have clips of either player).

The comments will NOT be criticism of mechanics - NO ONE's swing is perfect, and yours was obviously plenty good. However, it is fair to say that the clips of either player reveal that she doesn't actually DO what you say YOU are doing.

Meaning that you are presenting cues, which as Mark has pointed out could mean a lot of things, and God bless the instructor who finds one which works on any given day with any given kid.

However, there are two things to remember with cues:

1) You are for the most part arguing (on this thread) with guys who are discussing REALITY of movement in the swing, and you are instead presenting cues which cause the reality. For YOU. Two separate discussions, and that is why you are somewhat disconnecting (pun intended).

2) Cues are feel-based. And what a world-class player feels is dramatically different than what the typical kid feels. Perhaps hard to understand - it is as natural to you as how to think. And I understand it is hard to grasp that others don't think as you do - to carry on the example. It is so innate to each of us that we assume others approach it the same way. Not true with thinking, though, and not with athletic movement, either. Kids who are typical athletes need to first learn to move like elite (the .999) athletes. This is hard, but can be accomplished, or at least approximated, before there is any chance of them feeling the same thing. Or any meaningful chance of the same cues working.



As for Candrea - all the Principals in this converstion know him, and like him. They have seen his hitting beliefs change DRAMATICAllY over the years. And 5 years ago, the people who were defending his instruction - as you are now - were EVERY BIT as didactic as are you. And of course, they were wrong, because he absolutly changed his beliefs, and there is some indication he is continuing to do so. Which isn't all bad - a sign of growth. But if you draw a line in the sand as an absolute of his instruction, you're probably going to have to recant at some point.


Finally, some of the Principals you are slamming in this dialog have shown remarkable restraint. While none of them have played on a National team, one poster on whom you've been particularly hard has put 60+ kids into college on scholarships, and has seen at least one of his kids graduate ONTO the National team (someone you no doubt know). Another poster you have been pretty rough on was himself a world-class athete (though not in baseball) and has worked with hitters from several colleges, including at least one team which was in OKC for the WCWS this past year. A lot of the board is made up of dads trying to learn. But there is some real experience and expertise here too, and I think you should respect it a little. Even if you disagree.


And you REALLY need to understand that the average person here - who may have worked with some elite athletes - typically does not, and instead works with athletes who are more modestly gifted. And God bless THEM (instructors AND girls), too, they are the backbone of the game. But I feel that you need to respect that the frame of reference for these instructors is the reality of swing movement, not cues. And that the cues they DO use are NOT geared to world-class athletes. In fact, they tend to be very individual to the hitter and her particular pathology. Certainly, the cues world class athletes use often don't work with typical athletes (the 99.9%). But other cues do - just not universally.


When YOU - or Mendoza, or any world class hitter says "this is what I think about," that has a certain value. And people do listen. But you really need to consider that they are listening even while watching. "OK, that's wha she tells herself to get her body to do that" is a point of interest. But what yur body is actually doing is compelling. It is fine for you to say - for example - that rotating the hips is completely natural, and doesn;t need to be emphasized. I'm glad that's true - for YOU. Lots of other girls out there whose hips don't open at ALL, and their swing sucks, and it DOES need to be a point of emphasis.

Thanks for listening - best of luck in your continuing career.

skeptic -

That was a very nice and well thought out post.

Another thing that can be worthwhile to stress is learning a number of skills and how they relate.

For example, it is highly desirable to learn overhand throw and swinging together. They have lots of similarities as well as differences which create a perpsective from which to learn by comparing and contrasting.

Similarly, learning and understanding the golf swing can be VERY helpful.

The recent emphasis by Hardy in golf on how the body organizes a high level swing into 1 or 2 plane patterns is extremely useful information for teaching and learning and can be applied to hitting and throwing as well.

The swing Mark likes is a "single plane" swing where the shoulders turn actively to swing the arms/club bat in the shoulder plane.

The MLB pattern I prefer is a 2 plane golf swing pattern where the shoulders tilt to assist the arms in swinging the club/bat in a different/resisting plane from the hips which blends to create a controlled stretch and fire of the torso on the fly to create a lengthy matching contact zone.

Within a given pattern, feel cues are very similar. Across/between patterns they are often VERY different/incompatible.

Improved consistency in a swing comes from learning a pattern in as pure a form as possible, eliminating incompatible pieces (redusing how out of position you are - the more out of position features you use, the harder it is to execute the swing well).

A key example of this from golf is this description of the classic 2 plane golf swing which is very similar to the MLB type hitting pattern:

Golf Swing Magic: An Abridged Version of Joe Dante's Four Magic Moves to Winning Golf

see in particular with regard to shoulder/scap action:

The Golf Downswing: The most critical move in the golf swing...

Note: shoulder TURN is a killer flaw in this pattern. There instead needs to be a lateral tilt or "rocking" of the shoulders to "resist" better and avoid throwing the club out over the top and rushing/interrupting the stretch and fire load of the torso between the upper and lower body.

See especially:

Golf Downswing: Third Magic Move


"The whole downward action is initiated by the lateral movement of the hips to the left.

"Since at the top we are in a tightly coiled position, this hip action causes the shoulders to rock to the right and turn.

"The rocking action, with the left shoulder coming up and the right going down, is what moves the arms and the club.

"If the right shoulder comes down (rocks slightly) as it begins to turn, it brings the upper right arm against the right side and the swing starts down on an inside line.

"It is when the shoulders turn, throwing the right shoulder high and out toward the ball, that the golf swing goes outside. Keeping the head back helps the slight rocking action which brings the right shoulder down."

----------

This is why cues like "swing down" and "keep the shoulder in there" and "don't fly open" and "shift the weight", etc DO apply to the MLB pattern, and they are VERY different feel cues from a swing that uses shoulder TURN to turn the arms bat.

Mixing patterns/mixing incompatible cues greatly interferes with learning.