AROD fights back

[_MIA_]

Keyword: skills.

They both can be worked at and improved over time. Saying ‘good players make bad coaches’ is a wreckless blanket statement.

I believe his statement was " Most great players don't make good coaches" which I think in general is true because most PEOPLE, regardless of whether they were great,good or lousy at the task they are trying to teach, are not good teachers/instructors without proper training/experience. As a newly graduated PhD I knew the material that I was trying to teach like the back of my hand but understanding how to teach it to people who think differently than I do took some time..and still evades me at times. Once in a while I will say to myself, "How can they not see/understand that..it is right in front of them". But the fact of the matter is they cannot, just like with my DD and feeling different things in the swing. How can she not feel that she is doing XYZ but she cannot and me saying to her she should is not helpful.

I have no doubt that, with time and the proper motivation, AROD could probably turn into a good hitting instructor.

 

[Work=wins]

I believe his statement was " Most great players don't make good coaches" which I think in general is true because most PEOPLE, regardless of whether they were great,good or lousy at the task they are trying to teach, are not good teachers/instructors without proper training/experience. As a newly graduated PhD I knew the material that I was trying to teach like the back of my hand but understanding how to teach it to people who think differently than I do took some time..and still evades me at times. Once in a while I will say to myself, "How can they not see/understand that..it is right in front of them". But the fact of the matter is they cannot, just like with my DD and feeling different things in the swing. How can she not feel that she is doing XYZ but she cannot and me saying to her she should is not helpful.

I have no doubt that, with time and the proper motivation, AROD could probably turn into a good hitting instructor.

I might have jumped the gun. My bad if I did. But my point was exactly yours. ‘Proper motivation’ is why the previous statement was made imo. Nice post Pattar.

 

[FP26]

As far as 1 legged hitting or rear legged hitting. The descriptions and demos shown(SBs or TMs) all seem to have a player on the backside to long(riding the rear leg and off balance aka uphill) therefore are not a ‘match’. Hence my hesitation with the term ‘one or rear legged’ hitting. Most of the SB/TM demos I have seen have been to demonstrate a particular principle, not the entire swing. If the intent was to swing exactly like their demos, hitters would not be very successful. I could say the same about the Pujols and Arod demos. Their demos are demonstrating a particular principle and clearly do not match what they do in real life. It takes "critical thinking" (I believe that is the term you like to use...) to determine the true intention of the Pujols/Arod demos. I could say the same thing about the SB/TM demos. By adding some "critical thinking", we can better understand what they mean. Some have chosen to better understand what SB/TM mean, and that is their choice. Some have chosen not to understand it better. That is their choice as well. To each their own...

As far as ‘balance’ in the swing. We all know it’s dynamic. No argument here...

But the ‘hitting position’ (when COM drops aka shifts then the swing happens)we all see is a balanced position and is found in the MLB pattern. I have yet to have seen this in any ‘one’ legged or ‘rear’ legged swings per SB or TM. So different descriptions are needed. 2 legged maybe or 50/50. Most pro instructors like the latter. Go figure. We will disagree here. I have seen some of SB's students exhibit the characteristics you have listed. While I don't follow any of TM's students, I have seen hitters that have been trained with his principles exhibit those characteristics as well. Brooke (Crankermo's daughter has an excellent swing, IMO).

Either way. These terms seem to have been taken out of context according to you, but it’s what we SEE being touted as correct. If you expect all of us to go back and read those threads so we can use the terms to your liking. Probably not gonna happen. Probably you should just change your ‘terms’.Or your understanding of how they are being used today. What I see is this... You (and maybe a few others) have a certain interpretation of what these words mean. We (me and several others) have tried to explain repeatedly what the words truly mean, but you choose to ignore us. That's fine. But why should any of us change our usage just to satisfy you? That's not likely to happen either. Honestly, if we are going to adapt to mainstream thinking, we should both stop talking about any of this stuff. Instead we should both talk about Launch Angle and Exit Velocity. It seems that's all many people care about right now anyway.

I wouldn’t get caught up in the terms and how there used. I would get caught up in what is being touted as right and wrong. As well as what matches pro swings and their video and cues. Just saying. Jmo. Yep. I agree completely with this. I am very comfortable with my beliefs concerning the subject. And I have not seen any evidence to tell me otherwise.

You can believe a guru ‘knows’ if you like. The video says TM and SB don’t know( I don’t mind J Stone though, he is a pro guy now).There players don’t match. They are just like you and I. They just decided to try to make a living at it.

Personally, most of this, in my mind is about getting clientele and $$$. They all claim to have a ‘secret sauce’. Or something ‘new’. Hence ‘their’ terms. But don’t match. No argument here...

I use ‘terms’ that fit what is being described. WOW. WHAT A CONCEPT?! I’m selling nothing. Yep. I do too...

Why would anyone want to use terms that don’t fit the description of what is happening? Maybe to lure? Second guess? Build curiousity? Sell a membership? Many reasons I can think of. The journey for ‘truth’ turned into the journey for money. IME. Interpretation is a funny thing. When I first started my coaching journey, I purchased two books concerning hitting. It didn't take me long to realize both books were garbage. In my opinion, someone should hunt down every copy that is in print, and burn them. I moved on to other sources. Eventually I started talking to people that following 1-legged and 2-legged hitting and I asked questions. I learned that both sides were misrepresenting each other. But I was willing to dig deeper and determine what the words truly meant. The words I use now make sense to me and work for my hitters. As long as the words you use make sense to you and work for your hitters, that is all that matters. Ultimately that is what this is all about. Honestly, I wish your daughter and your other hitters the best of luck and the most possible success.

So, with all this being said, one legged to me is what TM shows through his students. Shift is the swing is the ‘one legged’ of today as is termed as such. They way it was used 8 years ago has no bearing of how it is understood now. The way it was used 8 years ago has a bearing on how I understand it. If someone wishes to know the truth, they can investigate. Or they can choose not too. Again, it is their choice.

I feel the same way with how TM bastardized TTB. It was a directional loading cue until TM changed it to a swing launch cue. I just work around the 2 meanings now. One ‘loads’ the barrel one ‘unloads’ the barrel. I will ask what someone means when they use TTB.

In order to simplify my response, I have imbedded my notes within your response...

 

[Work=wins]

In order to simplify my response, I have imbedded my notes within your response...

Do you agree that 2 legs are needed in the swing? From the very beginning of the sequence?

I really do. If you do. 1 legged is not necessary.

Burning those terrible hitting books had me


I will not comment on Brooke’s swing. I will just say I think ‘it let her down’. I really don’t wish to speak of it anymore. I don’t want to bash her or her Dad AT ALL.

If you could point me to where you thought the meaning of 1 leg is correct. I would love to read it.

These ‘Gurus’ can use whatever terms they wish as long as it looks like a match or close. But I just don’t see it. The uphill on the back leg isn’t what HOfs do. They get to the middle and swing. They don’t ride a back leg. Both legs are active in there search for the ‘hitting position’. No dangle or reach etc. They keep the back leg connected to the ground via the heel until they release the backside. It truly is a balanced action during a stressful phase of the swing. This makes or breaks an amateurs swing over the long haul imo.

Do you subscribe to the tilting of the hip line ‘uphill’ while moving forward? That’s 1 legged in the physical sense for sure. Right? That’s what I think 1 legged means. The term 1 legged fits there right?

Had a kid tryout yesterday. Freshman on 18s. Balanced all day. Hit tremendously. Could hit any pitch throw to her.

The TTB differences? Could you please agree or disagree with what was posted. I think I nailed it .

Thanks for the response FP.

 

[Rolling Hard]

"
I have no doubt that, with time and the proper motivation, AROD could probably turn into a good hitting instructor.

Maybe some high definition slo-mo video might help too!

 

[FP26]

Do you agree that 2 legs are needed in the swing? From the very beginning of the sequence? Both legs are used. The difference is in the manner and extent that they are used. IMO, 1-legged is not meant to be literal. Allow me to ask you a question in response. Is it possible for a hitter to use 2 legs incorrectly? In such a way that the use of the front leg is detrimental to their swing? I really do...

I really do. If you do. 1 legged is not necessary. That's fine... I just look at it as a way of preventing too much use of the front leg. I have seen hitters that were too "rear legged" and some that were too "front legged".

Burning those terrible hitting books had me


I will not comment on Brooke’s swing. I will just say I think ‘it let her down’. I really don’t wish to speak of it anymore. I don’t want to bash her or her Dad AT ALL. I'm good with that...

If you could point me to where you thought the meaning of 1 leg is correct. I would love to read it. I have posted my interpretation of 1-leg many times. And have used a video of Josh Donaldson that I created to show my thoughts. It is just a way of preventing too much weight from moving towards the pitcher too soon. Keep some weight back. Some people use the phrase "forward yet back". That's fine. "Forward yet back" is synonymous with 1-legged, IMO. I realize you don't agree.

These ‘Gurus’ can use whatever terms they wish as long as it looks like a match or close. But I just don’t see it. The uphill on the back leg isn’t what HOfs do. They get to the middle and swing. They don’t ride a back leg. Both legs are active in there search for the ‘hitting position’. No dangle or reach etc. They keep the back leg connected to the ground via the heel until they release the backside. It truly is a balanced action during a stressful phase of the swing. This makes or breaks an amateurs swing over the long haul imo. Bold above is a "bluedog" thing. Do you subscribe to his definition of this? I view it as the pelvis is moving towards the pitcher in a controlled fashion during the moveout, but stops moving forward at swing launch. That's my interpretation of it anyway. And I am fine with that thought. If you have a different definition of this, please reply. "Ride the rear leg" is how the hitter gets "to the middle". This is another phrase that has been misunderstood and misrepresented over the years.

Do you subscribe to the tilting of the hip line ‘uphill’ while moving forward? That’s 1 legged in the physical sense for sure. Right? That’s what I think 1 legged means. The term 1 legged fits there right? I disagree. I do not want the hip line "uphill". As stated above, while I believe a person can overuse the front leg, I also believe a person can overuse the rear leg. In many cases, an uphill hip line is a sign of an issue, IMO. That said, there is a style component to this as well, based on degree and height of the hitter's leg kick. If that is your understanding of 1-legged, I can understand why you don't like it. My understanding of 1-legged is much different.

Had a kid tryout yesterday. Freshman on 18s. Balanced all day. Hit tremendously. Could hit any pitch throw to her.

The TTB differences? Could you please agree or disagree with what was posted. I think I nailed it . IMO you are missing a step. It's not just the old "bop the catcher in the head" thing that people like to point out. Combine that step with the laser drill. The moves have to be blended together.

Thanks for the response FP.

I have imbedded my replies again....

 

[FP26]

Work=Wins. FWIW I would suggest taking a look at julray's recent thread. Specifically look at the posts from bobbyb and Richk. IMO they are both excellent posts and do a great job of expressing my thoughts on the difference between 1-legged and 2-legged. They actually explained it better then I possibly could.

 

[lhowser]

Do we all agree that if we asked an 11-year-old to literally duplicate AROD's demonstrated arm path and movement (which he is asking you to do on the video) the players swing would look nothing like the swings we see that result in hard drives to the outfield?

 

[FP26]

Do we all agree that if we asked an 11-year-old to literally duplicate AROD's demonstrated arm path and movement (which he is asking you to do on the video) the players swing would look nothing like the swings we see that result in hard drives to the outfield?

I agree.

 

[Work=wins]

I have imbedded my replies again....

Yes of course a hitter can get too front legged.

I agree that the rear leg needs to stay ‘loaded’ until the swing is launched. No doubt about it.

But in the meanwhile the front leg has performed its task of creating the frontside ‘buffer’ and leveraged position as well as engaged the front oblique to pull the torso so the swing can be launched from the middle. I see this in pro swings all the time. It’s the ‘secret sauce’ ONLY if you can get it to happen in sequence. OR NATURALLY. No active rotation.SB would love this.


Inside

Change up

Front view
Notice the oblique turn while the rib cage stays ‘back’. Sequenced. Kinetic. Nothing is forced.
Too me that’s using 2 legs correctly. If the sequence is right, there really is no need to speak of the legs JMO. That’s kinda why I call BS when I hear about the legs. Get the engine right and the legs will support and react to what the body wants it to do.

For the 10 years TM has been touting ‘bop’ he just recently as maybe 2 years ago incorporated ‘laser’ so there’s that. I’ve had said many times he has revised so many times along the way. Fine and dandy BUT claiming elite level since day 1. Not. Remember when he added tilt to support the barrel to get rid of the stalled back elbow?


Getting to the ‘middle’ for me is a feel thing and video thing. COM Turning forward before the swing is launched is an absolute imo. While the back leg is still loaded. That’s the sign that the core is pulling while the hands are free and independent. Not along for the ride. It is the adjustablity factor. I don’t see this with SBs or TMs students. The COM comes forward all together with the hands. That is the ‘the swing is in the shift’ mantra. From a technical viewpoint. I might not understand it fully. But I think I do.

I feel like there isn’t a need to speak of a shift either if the sequence is right. As with the legs. Let me know if I have misrepresented anything.