O'Leary, Cshilt,Wellphyt,FiveFrameSwing, other hitting "experts"

[RichK]

Wellphyt,
Is this the one you're looking for?

Watching this swing is kind of hypnotizing, so sweet.

One question re: his stride foot. I've been trying to get our girls to land on a 45 degree angle to help their hip drive. He definitely lands 45 but then rolls over on it, interesting.....Is that typical?

Any advice or guidance on how to keep that front foot from blocking things up yet staying balanced/comfortable/powerful? Tks.

 

[FiveFrameSwing]

RichK .... you didn't ask me, but one of my pet peeve's is seeing an instructor place objectives on the lower body mechanics that turn out to limit, restrict, or dictate inferior upper body mechanics ... and IMO, that is an area an instructor is dealing with when they dictate that a hitter land with the front foot planting at 45-degrees.

Don't get me wrong .... I agree that having a hitter arrive at “front foot strike”, at a 45-degree angle, is fine. I’m good with that “result”. I’m not so good with that “objective” … yet I do believe in that “result”.

IMO, that angle should be dictated by the swing … that is, the swing should plant the heel. Many advocate that heel plant should be dictated by the “shift”. Yeager often tells his hitters to let the “shift” take their front foot down. Not a bad objective IMO.

The swing/shift should dictate the heel planting. And while the hitter will still arrive at 45-degrees, what I've seen happen when an instructor gives a kid an objective to land at 45-degrees, more often than not, has them leaking, or interfering with a good swing sequence.

I have seen some instructors give a hitter an objective of arriving at toe-touch with their foot “square” to the pitcher … knowing that the force of the swing would have the foot arriving in heel plant at roughly 45-degrees.

Just an opinion mind you. Might seem like I’m making something out of nothing … but I am sincere. IMO, this particular area of the swing that you are mentioning, should be an area where an instructor ‘first’ allows the lower body to support the actions of the upper body … and only places a lower body objective if the need arises.

I’ll leave you with this example of the swing you are admiring ….

Here Hamilton is arriving at touch-touch with his foot roughly square to the pitcher.

Here Hamilton is arriving at heel-plant with the foot roughly at 45-degrees to the pitcher.

Yes, the swing is ground up, but IMO, this is an area where you first look at a hitter top-down … where you first attempt to learn how the lower body supports the task of the upper body.

 

[RichK]

FFS, I appreciate the response...actually, I just went through the same process with understanding the action of the rear foot, I should have learned from that: ie, while you certainly don't want to encourage squish the bug, you don't teach what happens with the rear foot in and of itself "as an objective," as you say, rather it's a function of proper hip action and the proper lower body will happen if the swing is a good one.

I think I have that right anyway, and I think the lesson is the same. TKS.

 

[Wellphyt]

. Toe touch with front foot open approximately 45 degrees. The start of separation. Front leg slightly flexed for balance.

Can you define toe touch and why it is important?

I view toe touch as a position that hitters pass through. If you subscribe to the belief that dopping the front heel triggers the hips, then it's important for the front foot to land with the heel a couple of inches off the ground. When I experiment and land flat footed, I feel a delay in my hips and it throws off my sync. Perhaps a better way to describe the action of the front foot is to say that it needs to land with the heel 1 to 2 inches off the ground.

17. Bat-head parallel to ground in beginning phase, but quickly begins working below hands as swing progresses toward contact. Hands palm up -palm down at contact. Bat is on pitch plane at contact

So the top and bottom hands palms are parallel to the ground? What's the significance?

I do not view the palm-up/palm-down position as being necessarily level to the ground. If you subscribe to the belief that the wrist need to approach contact unbroken, then the hands need to be in a strong position to release the barrel into the ball. Think in terms of how you use a hammer or an axe and the relationship between the handle of a hammer/axe, your wrist, palms and your forearm. I know Howard is big on the hammer analogy and I believe Candrea is as well.

18. Hitter "on" or "behind" axis. (Dependent on pitch location: less on high pitches; more on low pitches.) No lunging.

Do you recommend taking a stride to the ball?

I teach using a short stride of about 4". However I view the stride as a stylistic choice. Regardless of which style a hitter chooses, IMO it's important for the hitter to regain their balance point at swing launch. The term staying behind the axis refers to Dynamic Balance where the hitter basically maintains their weight over their rear thigh throughout the swing.

19. Eyes level and head slightly down to straight ahead. (Not watching the ball hit the bat.)

Why do you not want to watch the bat hit the ball. Would you not be more accurate at POC?

We had this discussion a while back and there where several clips posted showing that hitters don't turn their head backwards to track the ball. As I recall there were some close up clips showing how hitter's eyes look out in front of where contact is made. When I hear coaches and parents at the cages tell kids to watch the ball hit the bat, I cringe. I have coached several kids who have been taught to do this and the result is that they drop their head and look down at the ground at contact. If a player literally has their head down watching the ball hit the bat it's impossible for them to complete their swing. How many times have you heard a coach tell a hitter to "stop dropping their head"? On the one hand we tell kids to "watch the ball hit the bat", and then on the other hand we tell them to "not drop their head" at contact or during the following through. I use the cue "watch the ball". I never use the cue "watch the ball hit the bat".

Epstein mentions a study that was done which measured the drop dead zone for a hitter when it comes to making an adjustment to a pitch. The study concluded that it was impossible for the body to make a physical adjustment to a pitch once it got to within 10 feet of the batter. The term "watch the ball hit the bat" gives the impression that somehow a batter is capable of making physical adjustments with the body in order to align the the barrel to the ball all the way up until the point of contact. IMO, it doesn't work that way because of time contraints

 

[Wellphyt]

RichK .... you didn't ask me, but one of my pet peeve's is seeing an instructor place objectives on the lower body mechanics that turn out to limit, restrict, or dictate inferior upper body mechanics ... and IMO, that is an area an instructor is dealing with when they dictate that a hitter land with the front foot planting at 45-degrees.

Don't get me wrong .... I agree that having a hitter arrive at “front foot strike”, at a 45-degree angle, is fine. I’m good with that “result”. I’m not so good with that “objective” … yet I do believe in that “result”.

IMO, that angle should be dictated by the swing … that is, the swing should plant the heel. Many advocate that heel plant should be dictated by the “shift”. Yeager often tells his hitters to let the “shift” take their front foot down. Not a bad objective IMO.

The swing/shift should dictate the heel planting. And while the hitter will still arrive at 45-degrees, what I've seen happen when an instructor gives a kid an objective to land at 45-degrees, more often than not, has them leaking, or interfering with a good swing sequence.

I have seen some instructors give a hitter an objective of arriving at toe-touch with their foot “square” to the pitcher … knowing that the force of the swing would have the foot arriving in heel plant at roughly 45-degrees.

Just an opinion mind you. Might seem like I’m making something out of nothing … but I am sincere. IMO, this particular area of the swing that you are mentioning, should be an area where an instructor ‘first’ allows the lower body to support the actions of the upper body … and only places a lower body objective if the need arises.

I’ll leave you with this example of the swing you are admiring ….

Here Hamilton is arriving at touch-touch with his foot roughly square to the pitcher.

Here Hamilton is arriving at heel-plant with the foot roughly at 45-degrees to the pitcher.

Yes, the swing is ground up, but IMO, this is an area where you first look at a hitter top-down … where you first attempt to learn how the lower body supports the task of the upper body.

FFS, I really like this post. IMO there is a lot of good information here that could be used to further this discussion. I especially like your point about Hamlton's front foot being square to the pitcher just prior to toe touch.

 

[Shawn]

Thanks for posting toe touch, likewise the hips and shoulder are closed at that point as well. The foot at this point is closer to the plate then it's starting point in the stance.

I recorded 2 Home run derbies recently and the common thing as seen in most BP swings is what people call a dead/quiet front side.

 

[FiveFrameSwing]

FFS, I really like this post. IMO there is a lot of good information here that could be used to further this discussion. I especially like your point about Hamlton's front foot being square to the pitcher just prior to toe touch.

To be honest, SB pounded thoughts like this into my head over the years. SB knows very well that the swing is "bottom-up", but in many instances his approach to "teaching" is "top-down". I've personally tested and verified many of his ideas and have found them to be effective. This particular topic, IMO, happens to be one of those areas where a top-down approach to "teaching" can work well.

Here's something I've done with several kids now.

I begin by having the kids loosen up. At least that's what I tell them .... go grab your gloves, a ball, pair up, and play a game of catch. During the game of catch I'll pause them and ask them questions. I'll ask them about particular feelings/sensations in their bodies, and if they notice them, ... then I have them return to their game of catch to pay attention to those feelings & sensations. An example may be the feeling of the lower body 'load' or 'gather'.

Eventually I pause them and get to this question ... "during your last section of throws, tell me about your stride"? They all look at me like I'm nuts. I'll continue ... "Tell me how far out you were striding" ... and again, I get the blank stares. I'll continue .... asking questions about their stride. The point being, that I've yet to get a single hitter to ever tell me that they were paying attention to any portion of their stride .... and this during a session when they are learning to pay attention to their body and "listen" to what is happening "under the hood". The point being, that as SB puts it ... that from a perspective of teaching, that certain areas can, or should, be viewed as having the lower body support the role of the upper body ... at least from a first perspective, until problem areas are uncovered that warrant a true fix/modification with the lower body. Again, this is from a "teaching" perspective ... and it is well understood that the swing is "bottom-up", yet there is a belief by some that in terms of "teaching", that a "top-down" approach can have benefits.

Back to the stride .... before I send them back for another short session of catch, I like to have them understand that while I want them to continue to allow the stride to be used to support their lower body, and not force a particular stride, that I want them to pay attention to how it is synchronized with their upper body. I want them to capture and feel the synchronization. I want them to feel the load/gather/coil (which we will have already reviewed) ... and then the 'stride' being synchronized with with their 'stretch' (i.e., as their hands go back to what we'll refer to in a swing as the 'launch'). In other words ... I want them to capture the 'sequence' of Coil-Stretch and the 'synchronization' of the upper & lower body ... and not place restrictions on the lower body until it becomes clear that they are needed.

The upper body and lower body are tightly coupled. Often changes in one, result in changes in the other. Restrictions on the lower body, even slight, can and do impact the upper body ... IMO anyway.

Yes, the swing is ground-up ... but there are areas that can be taught effectively from a top-down perspective, ... and of course, there are areas that can best be taught bottom-up. For example, in terms of teaching "The Move" ... IMO, you'd be hard pressed to teach this from anything but a "bottom-up" approach ... or at-least I take a bottom-up approach to teaching it.

Just a perspective really ....

 

[Cannonball]

FFS, you know I'm an opponente of "feel" because no two hitters/individuals "feel" the same thing. I do like your explaination of what you do when discussing "feel." In the manner presented, "feel" between any two individuals won't be the same BUT each person certainly understands their "feel."

 

[FiveFrameSwing]

CB ... I'm not so sure we are disagreeing. How I feel something, and how someone I work with feels something, can be different ... and I'm okay with that and have learned to actually expect it. If that is what you are saying, then yes, I agree with you. If I were to use "my words" alone with a student, and describe just "my feel", then it would take a awful long time to get the points-of-emphasis transferred to a hitter. What is needed is a "translation" process ... read on.

The idea is to work with a hitter in a way that helps them capture the feel ("their feel") of the areas in the swing (or throw) that are important to capture. The idea is for the hitter to feel the actions "under the hood" when they get things correct .... ... which is where we come in ... we know, or we should know, when a hitter has demonstrated the correct action we wish them to capture. It's about providing the hitter with quick, and correct, feedback. Allowing them to run a series of mini-experiments, as they attempt to 'translate' the instructors 'feel' and 'words' in terms of their own 'feel' and 'words'.

To add to what you said ... after a hitter has mastered a particular point-of-emphasis, I perform a re-cap, and as I politely listen to them I chuckle (not out loud, but to myself) ... because as the hitter describes to me what "they feel" as their "actions under the hood", I can relate to what they are saying, but I often view it as a "translation" of what I said ... ... ... but it is now "their words" and "their feel".

So believe I understand what you are saying ... and I agree.

IMO, hitters, especially female hitters, are very "feel" based .... or maybe it's just the way I approach working with female hitters.

Good point CB.

 

[Cannonball]

FFS, what you described is exactly what I did today. I was asked to work with a lady that has an hand action not unlike a demo by someone we know. The problem is the barrel dumping is so drastic that she can not get on plane. When I first started with her today, she looked at me like I was crazy. Maybe so. However, via the converstation and asking her to explain what she was doing, she made great progress. The icing on the cake was that when we finished, she said she "finally gets it." Nothing can be better than pointing out a flaw, trying to help correct it, and then, the player understanding the flaw and fix. JMHO!