Swing adjustments

DRDRODD said:

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??

Click to expand...

FiveFrameSwing said:

There should be 'intent' to 'barrel up' on a ball when you step in the batter's box. That's the objective ... plain and simple.

Let's see the JR swing you are speaking of.

Click to expand...

rdbass said:

Off speed and better pitching will get the better of this type of hitter.

Click to expand...

rdbass said:

The swing is one continues load...no unloading.
The only difference in these swing is the hitter on the right decided to GO. The Brain was the 'trigger' .

Click to expand...

Work=wins said:

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.

Click to expand...

There is a lot of action taking place for the batter on the left.

Click to expand...

rdbass said:

Same 'action' on both swings other than hitter on the right decided to GO. 'Launched' the swing.

Click to expand...

DRDRODD said:

What?? who is talking about shift? Now you are saying that the core firing is weight shift??

Click to expand...

Work=wins said:

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.

Click to expand...

Work=wins said:

When the core(COM) rotates there is a shift in weight. It is the main power source in a good swing.

Click to expand...