Trouble with looping
- Thread starter softball_rules5
- Start date
Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch
Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.
for plane matching high heater, the axis gets more upright than for low/dropping location , upper spine/head moving more forward toward pitcher relative to lower spine as a result of more level shoulders which takes the axis and weight more forward. shoulders are more level when recognizing high heater because back shoulder stays up as lead shoulder then goes up with drop and tilt/GO.
the axis should never lean back to catcher with reverse pivot the way Oleary interprets (wrongly) Epstein.
the axis always needs to get at least a little more upright to get off backside.
the shoulders are slaved to how high the arms lift the hands. educated hands are setting the delivery path of the barrel.
the axis and weight always flow forward, less for low/offspeed which means the axis is leaned back more for low ball and bat starts swinging out earlier as opposed to high ball where hands stay in longer and body turns more before bat comes out.
last time I talked to Coach Lotief he agreed with this.
maybe something got lost in the translation.
the axis should never lean back to catcher with reverse pivot the way Oleary interprets (wrongly) Epstein.
the axis always needs to get at least a little more upright to get off backside.
the shoulders are slaved to how high the arms lift the hands. educated hands are setting the delivery path of the barrel.
the axis and weight always flow forward, less for low/offspeed which means the axis is leaned back more for low ball and bat starts swinging out earlier as opposed to high ball where hands stay in longer and body turns more before bat comes out.
last time I talked to Coach Lotief he agreed with this.
maybe something got lost in the translation.
- Oct 12, 2009
- 1,460
- 0
Epstein is very clear...
"Tilting rearward is a product of the HINGING OF THE REAR KNEE...THE MORE THE KNEE HINGES THE MORE THE TILT...My subjective cue for this is DROP (the heel) AND TILT (rearward)."
The emphasis is Epstein's and the quote comes from Ask Mike 36...
Last edited by a moderator:
When Epsetin says "rearward tilt" this does not mean you get this type/angle of tilt by leaning the upper body back, that would be reverse pivoting, not striding to balance, or nor retaining dynamic balance, getting stuck on the back side. actual study and use of the system makes this pretty clear.
not to all, but no one's perfect
this ia analgous to the discussion we had about Slaught's side arm throw cue. if you can throw you can hit. as Howard explained, this cue holds up well as long as you understand the motions and do no overinterpret the cue to the point of dumping the barrel.
not to all, but no one's perfect
this ia analgous to the discussion we had about Slaught's side arm throw cue. if you can throw you can hit. as Howard explained, this cue holds up well as long as you understand the motions and do no overinterpret the cue to the point of dumping the barrel.
Last edited by a moderator:
My understanding is that sarge promotes a method of adjucting up/down by bend at waist which is a PCR method that is different from the high level swing that resembles overhand throw.
Epstein is describing an entirely different on the fly up/down adjustment method that is in the high level pattern where throw resembles swing. Esptein understands that the weight goes forward until "drop and tilt" which is when the axis stabilizes. His approach starts with creating body torque/separation (torque drill). Then he teaches how to adjust up/down on fly which sets the right degree of axis tilt/rearward lean as seen from open/oppo batter's box view.
He never recommends reverse pivoting or letting the head go back wards ( head will occasionally go back near contact as reaction in some swings, but this is a different/late/reactive thing) as a way of setting rearward tilt of spine.
sarge can clarify what he did when he tried Epstein and how he nw thinks of up/down adjustment.
With regard to Coach Lotief, he is an excellent hitting coach and as with most excellent coaches he finds many useful things from many sources including slaught and epstein and Mankin and even H-I. he may even use some PCR stuff, although I know he thinks of up/down adjustment along these Epstein lines and does NOT believe you adjust up/down by bend at waist.
Coach Lotief is a very approachable guy who loves to talk hitting and will be at the Garman classic next week. I am sure he would welcome discussion from any intrepid "forumers in good standing" who are there.
Epstein is describing an entirely different on the fly up/down adjustment method that is in the high level pattern where throw resembles swing. Esptein understands that the weight goes forward until "drop and tilt" which is when the axis stabilizes. His approach starts with creating body torque/separation (torque drill). Then he teaches how to adjust up/down on fly which sets the right degree of axis tilt/rearward lean as seen from open/oppo batter's box view.
He never recommends reverse pivoting or letting the head go back wards ( head will occasionally go back near contact as reaction in some swings, but this is a different/late/reactive thing) as a way of setting rearward tilt of spine.
sarge can clarify what he did when he tried Epstein and how he nw thinks of up/down adjustment.
With regard to Coach Lotief, he is an excellent hitting coach and as with most excellent coaches he finds many useful things from many sources including slaught and epstein and Mankin and even H-I. he may even use some PCR stuff, although I know he thinks of up/down adjustment along these Epstein lines and does NOT believe you adjust up/down by bend at waist.
Coach Lotief is a very approachable guy who loves to talk hitting and will be at the Garman classic next week. I am sure he would welcome discussion from any intrepid "forumers in good standing" who are there.
It does NOT make it clear to the VAST majority of the 75,000 or so people who have purchased Epstein tapes. The pictures in his book, the video examples he use on his products, many of the clips on his site show an EXTREME amount of tilt towards the catcher. And show weight clearly on the sole of the back foot in MOST cases. THAT is something one seldom sees in elite hitters. Almost always, they are up on the toes of their rear foot.
Epstein chose the examples, I think it is reasonable to conclude that he supports the positions of the hitters in the examples.
Consequently, the above two statements are completely incongruous.
But again, none of that matters. Here's the point: The onus is on the purveyor of mass market videos to well communicate his intended concepts. It is NOT on the purchasers.
NO one reading the statement of Epstein above (the first quote) AT FACE VALUE would conclude other than the obvious. When you sell close to 75,000 tapes, the knowledge level of people receiving the material is not high. They are going to accept the standard English meaning of standard English words. And should. And frankly, I think Epstein intended them too, when he wrote that statement. If he has modified or provided subsequent clarification, great. Again, growth is good. But the material is out there in his tapes, and it says what the quote above says.
Epstein has long been praised because his material helps young or inexperienced hitters begin to use their hips / core. And because it gets them swinging upwards / on plane with the pitch. These were especially important concepts to communicate to softball hitters 5-10 years ago when many of the game's luminaries and almost all coaches / instructors were advocating differently. That is a big kudos to Epstein, for sure.
But Epstein has also historically been criticized (by many) because his hitters have a propensity to keep their weight on the rear foot. As applied without a serious filter or by studying material BEYOND his tapes (especially the "Do We See What We Really Teach?" tapes), this IS what is going to happen. I know, I tried his material for a long time with many hitters before I really started studying hitting. The results were predictable.
His material has gotten a little better with the On Target series. Which again is laudable; I'm glad he is growing.
But you CAN NOT use the rear knee as a hinge to set body tilt unless there is significant weight on the knee. If there is no weight on it, the hinge does nothing. And if there is weight on the rear knee WHEN the tilt is set, it is not ever going to get forward. Try it - it is virtually impossible to do. That obviously means that the hitter is likely - absent SERIOUS instruction from someone far more litireate than typical for purchasers of mass market tapes - to become trapped on the back side. And in my observation, this is common to MOST Epstein hitters still.
I know of a couple of colleges (one school is in the Big10) that are pretty influenced by Epstein, and you could pick their hitters out a mile away. And in this reference, I am NOT referring to ULL as one of the schools. Coach Lotief studies everyone, then builds his own system. He HAS studied Epstein's material. And everyone elses as well. But he is his own guy, and has built very effective hitting principles and instruction using many influences, plus his own instincts. And he is very good, and that is a great approach. For a FT college coach with an analytical mind (he previously worked as an attorney). NOT for softball dad.
Mike and Jake Epstein are great guys. Much of their material has merit. But taken in the aggregate, I don't think it leads to the result most of us are looking for, unless the material is heavily interpreted and filtered by someone who really knows what they are doing. And has a LOT of experience ACTUALLY WORKING WITH HITTERS. Now, this is only my opinion, and I respect many will disagree with it. But it IS a pretty experienced opinion.
I have a great deal of respect for people on this - and other - sites who are actually working with hitters. Even if it is only one (daughter). Whatever is the catalyst / source material for that, great. If it gets the kid to the desired level - presumably playing in college, hopefully with a scholarship, then it was a successful approach. My belief is that is the highest level to which someone can REASOBALY aspire with a fairly high liklihood of success. Anyone making it there has done well. Really well, and I tip my hat.
That said, reconciling the two quotes above and finding that reasonable is NOT likely to be successful.
Same point. If it works for Howard, great. The average person - which Howard definitely is NOT - hears "skip a rock," and does something pretty radical. Like skip a rock. Which is NOT a movement which can be overlaid onto the swing in the time frames which make it analgous to the movement of skipping a rock. IMO, it is a HORRIBLE cue, when taken at face value. As I believe it WILL BE by the vast majority of people hearing it. Said people NOT being instructors with years of experience actually working with hitters. And a world of knowledge which helps them interpret.
It is like "squishing the bug." SURE I know what a high-level hitter who alludes to it probably means.
But I also can walk onto ANY LL field or clinic in America and see how the cue is interpreted. By thousands of kids grinding the bottom of their rear foot into the ground. Twisting that rear sole for all they are worth, trying to pound that spider into oblivion. An action DECIDEDLY unlike anything performed by any elite hitter.
It is QUITE obvious how most people interpret the cue.
"Words mean things", to quote George Will, himself a pretty good baseball guy. And to the vast majority of people, words assume their dictionary or idiomatic meaning. Expecting the non-schooled person to interpret the cue at anything other than face value is unrealistic.
Last edited by a moderator:
There are parts of that staement that are ALMOST accurate. Better than typical from this source. Although, his conclusion is erroneous.
All elite hitters launch with a tilting of the upper body towards the plate. And study of video (from the pitcher angle) shows that this tilt is variable based on pitch location. I can't imagine anyone denying this.
A pretty small amount of variance is all that is required. As little as 5-10 degrees of additional tilt can make a huge difference for a low or outside pitch. Not a huge stress point for me, because most hitters begin to do it automatically and sub-consciously once proper posture is established as a staple of the load.
But the proper movement is NOT a "bend at the waist." As Tom knows. Or should know. I assume most will recognize this as a pejorative reference on his part. Tilting and bending are separate concepts. Easy to demonstrate, hard to explain in the written word. Those who lift weights will get an idea by visualizing the posture for a dead lift, rather than for a squat.
What I did was build hitters who looked liked the examples in Epstein's book ad videos at EVRY STEP OF THE SWING. As I demonstrated at Baseball Fever and other sites with comparative video. They were identical, and no one looking at the videos disagreed with this. Including Tom, though he opined I didn't understand the Epstein material, even as my hitters identically matched the positions of the hitters used in Epstein's material. At every stage in the swing.
One of the examples I used was my daughter. Ironically, hitting a HR on TV in a locally televided high school game. FRAME-BY-FRAME, her psoiitions were identical to the female hitter in Epstein's material.
Great result.
But a poor swing, which began to show it's deficiencies as we reached real pitching (Gold ball, where she began to play as a freshman). The pitching in California Gold ball being a quantum leap above typical HS pitching. It is far more representative of college pitching, and in many cases IS college pitching. I soon realized we were in trouble. Fortunately, we were able to get her corrected over the next 4 years, and she is doing OK in college. In my judgment, she is NOT the hitter she could have been if we had begun the current approach several years earlier. I'm awfully proud of what she has accomplished though, especially given her modest athletic abilities (poor gene pool on the father's side - lol). But mainly because of her extremely hard work, she has had a measure of success in D-I. Others of the many hitters I worked with in the same time frame began to hit a ceiling, and stopped improving. Now, it is unfair to lay all of that at the feet of Epstein's material, or even on me as an instructor. Those were contributory factors, but obviously, there were many other factors as well. But in reality, mis-steps are part of the learning curve for instructors, and it's how they learn and get better. Ultimately, the experienc gained is hugely valuable to the instructor's students. This concept is why good instructors are a very worthwhile investment. And in corallary, why (IMO) no one should listen to ANYONE talk about hitting unless the person actually works with hitters.
But the material and the instructor are definitely factors. The inexperienced instructor leans heavily on the material, and obviously interprets it at face value. An improvement in my mind to the commentator with NO actual experience working with hittgers, but still obviously a limitation. Knowing what I do today, and having personally worked with dozens of hitters now playing in college, were I staring over, I would seek an alternative other than Epstein's material as a starting point.
That said, I DO believe that any reasonable strategy violently executed has some chance for success. The more reasonable the strategy, the better the chance for success. I would not necessarily warn people off of Epstein. I just happen to have had more success with other approaches. And I don't say that casually. I worked VERY HARD with Epstein's material. And with a LOT of hitters. Most improved rapidly, which can't be marginalized. They seemed to stop improving as pitching got really good, though, and I think it would be wrong to marginalize that either.
Last edited:
