Natural Hitting

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Jun 17, 2009
15,105
0
Portland, OR
One legged swing in my view is the one promoted by some with the idea that the front leg floats or stays unweighted and hitter "snaps" the rear hip which is the axis of the swing. I believe if there is lateral motion of the mass (torso), which there is in all swings, the weight is shifting.

Do others view the one-legged theory in this way?

I don't.
 
Jun 17, 2009
15,105
0
Portland, OR
Apr 20, 2018
4,581
113
SoCal
Also on a side note .... Dixon makes a difference between hips and pelvis chassis. Hips are the ball and socket joint. Not saying I understand it or defend it.

All I got out of his website was that there is power in the torso. If a hitter can control and understand the role of the torso then the rest will come together. It is sorta like BR teaching with the rebel rack. The core moves both laterally and rotationally. There is a flex, if you will, in the torso. The muscles connecting to the torso help and assist the core muscles. But in his teaching, the core muscles lead the connecting muscles. I found it interesting.
 
Last edited:
Apr 20, 2018
4,581
113
SoCal
So the rectus abdominis (trunk flexors), erector spinae (back extensors),internal and external obliques,obliques and one side of rectus abdominis (right or left handed) and erector spinae, transverse abdominis and of course the multifidus would be in control of the swing and other supporting muscle would follow their lead.
 
Apr 11, 2015
877
63
I believe I see where you are coming from MB.It is what caught my eye initially and why I wanted to know if the poster understood that 'the hips' were included in Dixon's definition of the torso. Bottom line for me, is what is Sean Dixon (not Jim Dixon, who had much more correct IMO) trying to say here ... and so I give him the benefit of the doubt and stretch for a meaning ... and about all I can come up with is that he is suggesting that the start of the swing is not simply about hip action.
Yes, after re-reading a couple of the posts I see that that's what was being said (more on that later), but when I saw the accompanying image...
13340d1539745611-natural-hitting-clip_image004.jpg

...I misread as it was defining the separation at the belt line of the shorts, and not that the bottom of the (unnecessary) shorts was what he was calling/including as the bottom of the "torso/core". My mistake.

But really, that doesn't changes matters, or the kinetic correctness of how one moves, is able to move, or should move when swinging a bat.

Unfortunately I believe that Dixon (whichever one) got caught up in the Dr. Gracovetsky "spine engine" stuff that Miyahira brought to the golf world, that made its way into the baseball/softball swing discussions that really is more fallacy than fact according to most outside of Serge, Kelvin, and those who bought into it....
Serge Gracovetsky is not a spinal biomechanist, or a medical professional, but he was a nuclear physicist who became interested in this topic. His "spine engine" ideas have not been widely endorsed by biomechanists and medical professionals who specialize in the field of spinal biomechanics, but he has acquired a limited following among alternative medicine practitioners who believe in the validity of his "spine engine" and "fascia theories" [3].
Now while I don't/won't dispute that we use are spine in almost all physical and/or athletic movements...but to believe that it is the prime, main, or initial power source for many/most of them, and especially in swinging a bat, is one heck of a stretch (pun intended...lol) IMO.

While there's no disputing that this person is in essence "walking" w/o legs....

...and is doing so with the necessary, exaggerated movements of the "torso" to accomplish it, I'm pretty sure that those of us fortunate enough to have legs don't require those same amplified kinetic movements of the "torso" to accomplish the same, and with a more productive outcome I might add (distance, and speed traveled) simply because of the differences in the anatomical make up.

IOWs, if I/we were teaching a hitter w/o legs, then yes, I would absolutely say that we'd have to incorporate much more "spine engine" in to somehow become the primary "engine" that we'd have to use in order to help the hitter become better and/or successful. But since I've yet to have a hitter with this kind of unfortunate disability come to me for instruction, I'm of the belief that I/we should use different, proper, and the most efficient kinesiological movements for the hitters we're working with, and all of the physical (and athletic) attributes they bring to us...with the "spine engine" being well down on the list as far as I'm concerned.

JMO...OMMV,
MB
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,468
Members
21,443
Latest member
sstop28
Top