- May 3, 2014
- 2,149
- 83
The barrel gets put in motion via the hands/forearms imparting force on the handle. People may see the "torso switch" move before the barrel, but the hands are doing the triggering.
Swing adjustments
- Thread starter clemenslee1
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
The barrel gets put in motion via the hands/forearms imparting force on the handle. People may see the "torso switch" move before the barrel, but the hands are doing the triggering.
FiveFrameSwing
Banned
The arms/hands are responding to the circular energy created by the torso.
The hands are not the trigger. Over at another site there is a guy who wishes to keep the focus on the hands, but even he acknowledges that the actual hand usage trails behind the hips/torso action ... so he invented a term "intent of the hands on the handle". So for him, the trigger is "intent of the hands on the handle", which he believes has the hips/torso actively working, which in turn has the forearms/hands actively working. Sort of an end-around IMO. The fact is, the hands/forearm-action that we care about is responding to the torso-engine ... and to suggest that the hands trigger an event in-front of its usage becomes an issue when promoting timing.
- Jun 8, 2016
- 16,118
- 113
Yay for hitting discussions...no way to prove one way or the other who is right so I declare both of you correct!!
FiveFrameSwing
Banned
Yay for hitting discussions...no way to prove one way or the other who is right so I declare both of you correct!!
Pattar, the hitting sequence needs to include elements that allow a hitter to time the ball.
You "time the pitcher" so that your 'move out' is occurring at, or a smidgen before, the pithcer's release.
As the ball is traveling, you are "timing the ball". That is, you are "reading the pitch" and getting prepared to launch your swing.
What do you have a hitter use to trigger their launching of the swing? You can pick the hands, but the reality is that the torso-engine needs to be in process before the hands begin to work. I see this often with young developing hitters ... they are 'timing the pitch' with their 'hands' and they are late. When I get these same hitters 'timing the pitch' with their torso, they are 'on time'.
Now, as an 'end around', someone came up with the concept of "intent of the hands on the barrel", and they recommend using that as a 'trigger'. If "intent of the hands on the handle" works for you, then that's awesome. Go with it. For me, the torso-engine reacts to my "reading of the pitch". I don't need to add "intent of the hands on the handle" to a hitter's sequence.
One thing you may wish to take away from that discussion is that we both agreed that actual hand/forearm usage was not the trigger. I speculate, that reality is what prompted the notion of "intent of the hands on the handle" to spring up ... i.e., a need to remain hand-centric when faced with data that the hands don't lead the process.
Last edited:
I would like to hear more about the bold. I believe that "Turning The Barrel" is part of a hitters loading pattern which allows time for the torso to get a substantial load. During this time the torso is pulling against the resistance of the turning barrel. Once the hands get to the transition point (throwing of the barrel forward IOW) the torso is released. So I view it as a simultaneous go but the hands are the trigger even though I feel that the torso is probably slightly ahead of the hands actually taking action. The body/torso supporting the hands objective. I am having a hard time understanding why you would want to have to focus on firing two engines when one could be passive.
FiveFrameSwing
Banned
Think about it a bit more. You acknowledge that the torso leads the hands, yet you believe the hands triggered the event. How can the hands, which haven't acted yet, have the torso reacting to it? It's the other way around, the torso action leads ... as you acknowledge, and the hands/forearms are responding/reacting to that. Given that, it makes much more sense for your torso to be the trigger, and not the hands.
Regarding an engine being passive ... no ... the two engines being discussed are independent and both have active components to them. You need the two engines synchronized ... and hence why this discussion is important.
This ^^^ is the difference between the 2 sequences that everyone argues is what is seen/done at the elite pro level. Whether the shift(power) comes before or after the hands. Logical thinking would seem to lean towards the core going first(shift THEN swing).I understand why the other pattern is fondly peddled, it’s easier to learn/teach which gives a hitter/student/instructor a sense of accomplishment. But the model comes up short as the pitching gets better IME. Reason being, offspeed pitches will get the best of the ‘shift IS the swing’ model(See Aaron Judge).
The ‘shift’ has never really been explained all these years so people gravitate to whatever can work ‘NOW’. I get it. But ‘shift is the swing’ is incomplete and has a ceiling. Timing is an issue most of the time as well...
When the hands are the trigger, commitment is earlier in the sequence which leads to timing issues... picture ‘all in’(hands are trigger)at launch, from ‘behind’.. now picture the core setting the angle and also putting the front foot down in balance with the hands still ‘back’(haven’t committed yet), you are much deeper into your sequence ... this = more time to read a pitch or offspeed... both models work... but the latter is what the HOF pros and great pros do.
To each his own. I was referring to Drodds post.
The ‘shift’ has never really been explained all these years so people gravitate to whatever can work ‘NOW’. I get it. But ‘shift is the swing’ is incomplete and has a ceiling. Timing is an issue most of the time as well...
When the hands are the trigger, commitment is earlier in the sequence which leads to timing issues... picture ‘all in’(hands are trigger)at launch, from ‘behind’.. now picture the core setting the angle and also putting the front foot down in balance with the hands still ‘back’(haven’t committed yet), you are much deeper into your sequence ... this = more time to read a pitch or offspeed... both models work... but the latter is what the HOF pros and great pros do.
To each his own. I was referring to Drodds post.
Like the other guy states to support intent of the hands.... would the torso have twitched if JR had zero intentions to use his hands? I feel that I see a lot of takes where the torso never gets fired because they never made it to that transition point with the hands, they aborted during the turning of the barrel no??
