Do you? I listen to every pro.
AROD fights back
- Thread starter mann
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
Do you? I listen to every pro.
The 1:30 mark is the point. That enables him to LET the barrel GET turned.
‘This neutral position MAKES IT SO THE BARREL CAN turn behind my back shoulder’
His depth was fixed because his sequence/balance were fixed. He was a chop down guy with no depth. Just like JD Martinez’s swing changes we were reviewing a week or so ago, Same resulting problem, same fix.One was kinetically wrong. One was sequentially wrong according to BBs words. Hands first sounds like too me. Sequence affects kinetics and kinetics affect sequence. Personally they are married in my mind. Or the sequence can create the kinetics, but the ‘intentions’ must be in the right places.
Edit:some of us have been beating this dead horse for months.
Last edited:
You can swing ‘down’ and still have swing depth. Depth to me is where you are able to start your swing (batspeed) from. Preferably at the or behind the rear shoulder. Pitch location dependent.
Swing depth has a lot of variables. But short answer: sequence which enables the kinetics which will give you ‘giddy up’ without sacrificing a thing such as control, time or adjustability.
Yup. Swing depth matters.
Do you like what BB had to say?
From a few other posts: I agree the barrel gets turnt. Either by supination or release of the top hand. The best release the top hand(radial deviation ulnar deviation)when the pitch says so(location dependent) while controlling their swing depth.(Think Mike Lowell drill) (educated hands) which in turn controls their contact point deep or more out in front. Adjustability.
Here’s 2 different release points while maintaining ‘depth’.
At the rear shoulder
Behind the rear shoulder
Best I could find right now.
Still gets turned.. it does matter where, but it gets turned. Unless you hit the ball with the knob of the bat
You're right. Turning the barrel deep is what several people have been talking about. Setting it up with a lower body running start is what Tewks was talking about in the thread from 2011 that I mentioned a few weeks ago. These are all great points, but nothing that contradicts 1-leg/rear-leg hitting. It's all part of it... FWIW, this is one of the reasons I don't care for the "names". I can understand why people want to consider this 2-legged or balanced. It's all in the way we understand the various terms. They both fit.
FYI... Years ago, members of the posse created those terms (I think...). They were meant to be descriptive. But some people took offense to the names and started throwing in terms such as "balance". One side started to misrepresent what balance meant. Then the other side started to misrepresent what 1-legged meant. Etc. Etc. Etc. If you read the early threads, there was some good discussion about why the terms were used, and what they actually meant. Then some of the participants seemed no longer interested in discussion and only wanted to argue. That is pretty much when BBD started to go south. Some of the older threads had good, open, honest discussion that offered good information. Now it is just a lot of bickering with virtually no content at all.
There’s a lot here. Very busy today. I will reply ASAP.,
This post deserves my FULL attention. I will treat it as such.
Similar threads
