Uppercut Swing

[Mark H]

I agree that the efficient transfer of energy is a critical part of the rotational swing. I would argue that the best way for a hitter to do this is for them to be loose and not be constrained by overthinking the process.

Can't think your way through a good swing. Can't change a bad swing without thinking. It's a process.

Which is why I think Ted had it right. 1) The hips lead the hands, 2) Swing level to the ball, 3) Keep your hands inside the ball.

Certainly agree the pelvis leads. Swing level to the ball? Sort of. Never hack down through it but matching plane isn't going to happen moving between a high rise ball and a 12-6 nasty down break. Swing plane needs to match shoulder rotation plane as much as possible while the pitcher tries to screw you up. And of course, you want the ball to be going up slightly as it leaves the bat. To the extent possible, being closer to the pitch path with the swing plane is good but not the leading variable IMO. What does hands inside the ball mean to you? To me it means a late uncocking of the wrists commonly called whip. I've seen some other definitions though.

I believe once the heel drops and the hips trigger, instincts play a much bigger role in the swing than a lot of people care to admit.

No argument from me there.

 

[tom.guerry]

Quote:
"I suggest it's more important for each segment to link up with the next segment and transfer it's energy at the moment of highest rotational velocity. The number one constraint on hitters is of course time. There is never enough time."


This is another area of broad agreement. This principle was clearly defined by Nyman years ago and is described well in his ebooks. His latest ebook in particular emphasizes the importance of torquing the bat handle to fire the bathead BEFORE the torso gets to max momentum as this gives as quick a swing as possible without top batspeed suffering much.

In more detail, the question is how do you move the segments so they stay in order with efficiant speed gains.

The hips need to be supported by a negative and positive move while staying cocked until GO. coked means there is coil without slack and the ability to shift the base of the spine forward at "GO".

Hands need to load up and in back and start uncocking the bat as the body coils by hands stayiong back as front leg and hips turn open.

At GO, the hips and bathead fire while the hands stay in/back forearm stays verticle/angle in back elbow does not widen.

The forearms twist and the scaps tilt while the back scap continues pinching as the bat head fires.

This finishes the last quick coil of the torso which then reverses and starts driving the handpath forward via scaps clamped to upper torso.

So this gives control over firing the bathead just before/as the torso gets to max momentum.

Next, the hands get away from the back shoulder as the back forearm lowers and the handle is turned to overcme the inertia of the handpath rapidly accelerating. If you look at video from open side view and put little dots on the top hand at each frame, this is when you see the dots get further apart from frame to frame.

Then the bathead fires out via self feeding acceleration as the lead wrist unhinges and the handpath slows for the last couple of frames to contact (30 frame persecond resolution).

So that is one way to think about what has to hapepn when with each segment so you get the whip/summation/addition that can be measured on motionanalysis.

Further details on the arm action sequence/synch for loading (similar to overhand throw and Hardy's 2 plane golf) and arm action sequence for "release" (not similar to throwing but similar to golf, see especially Kelley's TGM, The Golf machine) are also important.


What is described above fits well with the Williams/Epstein approach (Williams- cock hips, cock hands, hips lead, slight upswing to contact with unbroken top hand wrist. Epstein body torque/wind rubberband/drop and tilt/adjust up/down.weathervane) and with mankins explanation of handle torque and in/out radius asdjustment.

 

[Wellphyt]

Matching the swing plane is instinctive. If the pitch is down then the lead elbow works up, if the pitch is up then the lead elbow flattens out. Or, if you prefer; if the pitch is down then the shoulders have more tilt and if the pitch is up then the shoulders are more level. Same thing said two different ways.

Epstein uses the term weathervaning; to describe how the lead elbow works in relation to the on-coming pitch, but he doesn't "teach" weathervaning. He teaches the general concept of the lead elbow working up or down and believes that If the general concept/technique is correctly communicated by the instructor and executed by the hitter, "weathervaning" becomes an involuntary response to the incoming pitch.

Put another way, once the swing is launched the hitters eye hand coordination takes over and the bat barrel finds the ball; hopefully within the parameters of the correct blueprint.

As far as matching plane to high rise and nasty 12-6 down curves I would say no technique in the world is going to allow a hitter to cover both if they are using the see-the-ball-hit-the-ball plate coverage method.

 

[Mark H]

Matching the swing plane is instinctive.

If you are saying adjusting for different pitch locations is instinctive, ok. I would say doing it well and doing it efficiently is instinctive for good hitters.

If the pitch is down then the lead elbow works up, if the pitch is up then the lead elbow flattens out. Or, if you prefer; if the pitch is down then the shoulders have more tilt and if the pitch is up then the shoulders are more level. Same thing said two different ways.

If you are saying the greater torso tilt over the plate results in the lead elbow working up in relation to the ground, ok. Analysis 1-8,

Epstein uses the term weathervaning; to describe how the lead elbow works in relation to the on-coming pitch, but he doesn't "teach" weathervaning. He teaches the general concept of the lead elbow working up or down and believes that If the general concept/technique is correctly communicated by the instructor and executed by the hitter, "weathervaning" becomes an involuntary response to the incoming pitch.

He doesn't teach the tilt over the plate you see in 1-8 in the link above.

 

[Wellphyt]

He doesn't teach the tilt over the plate you see in 1-8 in the link above.

No he doesn't teach a hitter to "tilt" over the plate. He teaches the concept of using the lead elbow as a radar detector.

My advice for people reading this is to go stand in front of a mirror. Get in your batting stance and look into the mirror as if you were facing the pitcher. Without rotating your upper torso, position your front elbow level with the ground at shoulder height while keeping the back elbow down against your rib cage. Now rotate your upper body. There should be little to no tilt.

Now do the same thing except this time point your front elbow up while keeping the back elbow against your rib cage. Now rotate. As you rotate your body, you should be noticably tilted similar to the photos Mark mentioned in 1-8.

It's impossible to work the front elbow up while keeping the back elbow against the rib cage wihout tilting the body.

Epstein believes this is a non-voluntary (instinctive)movement that the hitter makes to the on-coming pitch and is not something that needs to be taught. Based on first hand experience with my daughter, as well as doing these movements myself, I would have to agree.

You teach the basic blueprint of keeping the "box" and when the swing is launched the hitter's eye hand coordination figures out how to find the ball, including (as Slaught says) in some cases releasing the angles of the elbows and wrists.

It sure sounds like some of these hitting gurus are teaching movements that the body is going to instinctively do anyways; and then taking credit for teaching it. If so, I give them credit because it is very clever marketing.

I'm getting the same tilting pattern with my DD by just teaching her to keep the 'box' and letting her know that it's ok and natural to let her lead elbow work up and down to find the ball.

If I try to teach her to consciously "tilt" using references to shoulder angle and such, then all I've done is given her something else to think about and added one more layer of confusion. Plus I have coached and taught enough to know that there is a very real possibility that if I teach "tilt" the hitter is going to be predisposed to tilt even on pitches that don't require tilting. I don't want to mess with a movement that the body naturally performs correctly.

I really do appreciate all this back and forth discussion because it has really helped me better understand the different approaches the various gurus use to teach hitting.

 

[Mark H]

It has not been my impression that was his goal and I haven't seen that in his materials or his hitters, but if so, and it works, good.

 

[tom.guerry]

Hit Dr asked;

"Are the hips a source of power or is it the muscles of the Abs, Lats and Arms connecting to whip the bat through the zone? "

How the body sequence/forces work and how momentum is transfomed/transferred is controversial and complex, BUT there is good agreement on the swing requiring a well sequenced kinetic link with summation/addition.

So it is not only most of the muscles of the body using the bones as a structure for leverage, but also a well coordinated action that shows the segments of the body accelerating in the right sequence with the right "speed gains"/addition/summation (and well timed and lined up contact) that provides "power".

This can be readily tested with motionanalysis, with one available method, "kinematics" which measures the angular momentum of each link regardless of the forces/torques/etc which produce the desired summation.

For explanation of kinematics, see:


http://perfectgolfswingreview.net/KinLinkvsKinSeq.pdf

For example of softball application by Zig Zigler (and some good info on prevarication as a bonus) see:

YouTube - Motion DNA and Jennie Finch with Pro Softball Players

For zigs description see:

Bat Speed -- Baseball Hitting Forum

ZIG:

"In our report, the kinematic sequence is measured by evaluating the rotational velocites of the pelvis, torso, arms and bat. This is the ideal order at which each of these segments must reach their maximum rotational velocity. In the sequence there is a maximum velocity for each segment achieved with an appropropriate amount of speed gain from one segment to the next.

"In the ideal swing of an elite hitter, pelvis reaches a maximum rotational velocity of approximately 575 degrees of rotation per second. Transfers energy to the upper body as up approximately 300 degrees of speed gain takes increase the torso rotational speed to approximately 875 degrees of rotation per second.

"At this point if the velocities continue to increase at at least the same rate plus a multiplier of of 1.5x (equalling a speed gain of 450 degrees per second), the energy from the arms should allow the arms to peak at a rotational velocity of over 1325 degrees per second.

"Next because the arms and bat have the benefit of uncoiliing or releasing with the help of the rest of the body, the bat could reach a maximum speed of more than twice that of the arms or simply a multiplier of four times the speed gain of the pelvis to upper body. This peaks the bat at a rotational velocity of potentially over 2600 degrees of rotation per second"

 

[Wellphyt]

I think I'm finally starting to understand the different approaches of Epstein and SE. I had an epiphany working with a player yesterday. I was working with her on Epstein's torque drill and I was having trouble getting her to do it correctly. I finally figured out that she was just rotating around her axis and not tilting her shoulders. She was basically working in just one plane.

So that got me thinking of the one plane golf swing video that Tom posted, and then it was off to SE's website to study the video clip of him swinging. Then I compared SE's swing to Ted Williams' and the differences became pretty clear.

IMO SE's swing looks more like the one plane golf swing described in the video clips that Tom provided and not that of Ted Williams.

For those who are familar with SE, how much emphasis does he place on the separation of the lower and upper half? The reason I ask is because I don't really see the "stretch" that I see with many ML hitters. I also don't see the bathead getting level (palm-up/palm-down) as the rear elbow is tucked in. SE seems to be turning everything on one plane.

Teaching with Epstein's approach requires the instructor to get the hitter to be moving in two different planes as they tuck in the back elbow. One plane is the rotation around the torso and the other plane is a simultaneous tilting of the shoulders to get the bathead level. This is the Ted Williams' swing pattern.

I would say that if a person is looking for a swing pattern like TW then Epstein is your guy. If hitters are looking for a different approach from TW then SE might be your guy.

I'm putting my money on TW as I believe he was the greatest hitter of all time. To bad he wasn't still alive. It would be fun to see him and SE debate over which is the better swing pattern.

 

[skeptic]

If you are a tool and a proxy for someone who can't fight his own battles because he is universally reviled, ridiculed and basically banned from posting, it is probably hard to think in the big picture.

Even MENTIONING someone like Englishbey in comparison to Ted Williams serves only to validate his importance. About like saying John Doe wouldn't be quite as good of a president as Lincoln.

Which I am guessing is not the intent.

But then if you run an entire web site where the "other guy" is mentioned in EVERY post, where no conversation can be advanced without dwelling on him, and where no positive ideas are EVER advanced unless they are first compared to what Englishbey puts forward - as if that is the barometer for everything hitting - this is probably to be expected.

My sense is that Englishbey knows about as much about marketing as his antagonists know about teaching kids to hit. Namely nothing.

But swear to God, if he was a marketing GENIUS, he still couldn't have INVENTED a bunch of guys more useful to his cause. Including you, wellphyt. If Englishbey cares enough to bother to read your post, and if he isn't subsequently giddy with gratitude and laughter, I'd be stunned.

I was working with her on Epstein's torque drill and I was having trouble getting her to do it correctly.

You'll REALLY have trouble getting her to do it correctly when she faces elite Club or college pitching - which is why NO players who look like an example of the torque drill reach these levels. Seriously, and this is a forum and subject where I know what I am talking about. You see it quite a bit in 12s and 14s. And basically never beyond that.

For those who are familar with SE, how much emphasis does he place on the separation of the lower and upper half? The reason I ask is because I don't really see the "stretch" that I see with many ML hitters. I also don't see the bathead getting level (palm-up/palm-down) as the rear elbow is tucked in. SE seems to be turning everything on one plane.

If this is a well-intentioned question (which I VERY seriously doubt) call Englishbey and ask him yourself. If there is an easier guy to get ahold of in all of the hitting universe, I'd be surprised. Why would you even make a pretense of asking a third party to describe it? Call the source.

And oh, by the way:

You noticed he only had one hand on the bat in the clip you are referencing, right? Think that might have had ANYTHING to do with how his "hands got flat?"

If hitters are looking for a different approach from TW then SE might be your guy.

This could possibly be the most disinegenuous, bulls*** sentence I have ever read about ANYTHING, ANYwhere.

Well done, wellphyt.

 

[Mark H]

I think I'm finally starting to understand the different approaches of Epstein and SE. I had an epiphany working with a player yesterday. I was working with her on Epstein's torque drill and I was having trouble getting her to do it correctly. I finally figured out that she was just rotating around her axis and not tilting her shoulders. She was basically working in just one plane.

So that got me thinking of the one plane golf swing video that Tom posted, and then it was off to SE's website to study the video clip of him swinging. Then I compared SE's swing to Ted Williams' and the differences became pretty clear.

IMO SE's swing looks more like the one plane golf swing described in the video clips that Tom provided and not that of Ted Williams.

For those who are familar with SE, how much emphasis does he place on the separation of the lower and upper half? The reason I ask is because I don't really see the "stretch" that I see with many ML hitters. I also don't see the bathead getting level (palm-up/palm-down) as the rear elbow is tucked in. SE seems to be turning everything on one plane.

Teaching with Epstein's approach requires the instructor to get the hitter to be moving in two different planes as they tuck in the back elbow. One plane is the rotation around the torso and the other plane is a simultaneous tilting of the shoulders to get the bathead level. This is the Ted Williams' swing pattern.

I would say that if a person is looking for a swing pattern like TW then Epstein is your guy. If hitters are looking for a different approach from TW then SE might be your guy.

I'm putting my money on TW as I believe he was the greatest hitter of all time. To bad he wasn't still alive. It would be fun to see him and SE debate over which is the better swing pattern.

The swing on his front page was a one handed swing he did off the tee when a student asked him how far he could hit it one handed. Not to be confused with his "game swing" which carried him as far as AAA nor to be confused with a swing he would use were he a young man in pro baseball today. As to the subject you broach, there is an excellent thread on the subject right now on baseball fever led by Boardmember and JBooth for those interested. A clip on such is in post #448 of the "Early Barrel Movement-Where" thread.