I recently received a msg asking about a recent tweet as regards the back leg flexion action. An action, I argued CAN help facilitate ["free up" as I sometimes say] the hip rotation.
As regards the action of the back leg ,both are similar in that both show a good deal of knee flexion AS the lead heel starts to go into foot plant.
Now, the questions sent were: "..do we rotate around the femur? And do we actively force the knee down to support the move or is it a result of the rotation? "
As regards rotation "around the femur" I would say that yes, the muscle actions occurring within the pelvic girdle are the main components causing hip rotation.
The next question: "Do we force the knee down or is it a result of rotation?" This is a very good question--especially from a teaching standpoint.
I will say this: The hip rotation CAN create a "pulling effect" [my term] on the back knee --such that it causes a "passive" reaction [knee flexion]. BUT.
Having said this, I will also say that the back knee flexion CAN be a somewhat "active" torque [and this can be combined with a subtle adduction torque of the hip to knee segment [Bonds looks like he does this I think]
Based on both empirical and physiological considerations, relatively subtle flexion/ adduction torques in the back leg region CAN work synergistically, to help the back hip region rotate.
Note here that in neither ex. is the back leg/foot INTERNALLY rotating, i.e., "squishing the bug." THAT kind of action will NOT CAUSE or help facilitate actual pelvic girdle muscle action [hip rotation].
Nor will back knee flexion or back leg adduction---IN AND OF ITSELF --CAUSE torques in the pelvic girdle region [hip action in the transverse plane].
So, all of the above is really consistent with my argument that the legs ---in the context of elite level hitters---do not CAUSE hip rotation. But they can [and do] create muscle actions [either passively or more actively] that help facilitate rotation.
As I have argued for yrs. good hitters know how to create movement that facilitates good hip rotation.
As I have argued, the legs do not CAUSE good hip rotation. But they can help or hinder hip rotation.
Imagine if you as a parent brought your daughter to me to help her learn how to swing the bat better.
Then later you learn that as a predicate to this expectation, I spent several hours with her mandating that she watch a Netflix "documentary"[sic] on America's historic racism.
And further I then demanded that in order for me to allow her to hit with me I insisted that, in no manner, could she question the quality/accuracy/fairness etc., of the documentary. What would you think of me as a teacher of hitting?
Would you deem this as an acceptable part of the exchange of your money for my expertise----in the context of a teacher of hitting?
Recently, I have seen assertions that MLB strike out/low average is simply a function of ....trying to swing more "up". I don't think so. Simply put, MLB hitters are there because they conform to the "building code" standard as set forth by Paul Nyman some yrs. back [pcr/pcrw].
Simply put, according to this standard, they know how to create very good posture, connection, rotation, such that they are able to hit high level pitching.
So, what really best explains the high strikeout/low average combination.
Regardless as to whether one loathes or idolizes Trump, I am hard pressed to see how this chart displays a positive trend for citizens of the U.S.
As one NYT writer/author wrote about some yrs. back, those countries who do not make things cannot then innovate to any real degree ,i.e., you have to make things in order to then improve [innovate] upon those things. Bottom line:
A phrase that I have seen about hitting over the yrs. is along the lines of things like: The hitter needs to be more athletic, or, you are taking the athleticism out of the hitter.
One operative principle I have utilized over the yrs. for many such assertions is that of ......
...questioning the premise. In the case of the phrase "you're taking away the hitter's athleticism" it amounts to asking: "Define athleticism."
Here's one dictionary version: "the physical qualities that are characteristic of athletes, such as strength, fitness, and agility."
But this definition, similar to the above "taking away athleticism" is equally vague in that ALL athletes have SOME degree of, "strength, fitness, agility."
And one more thing for tonight [before I return to my bunker to read a bunch of shit!]; Not too long ago, someone blocked me ---apparently as a result of me simply pointing out that I thought their description/analysis of a hitter was flawed.
In no manner [I don't think] could my argument be construed as any kind of personal attack. Simply put, I disagreed with their interpretation and tried explain this based on my understanding of movement [based on 20 yrs. of practical and technical info].
Rather than trying to engage me he simply blocked me. Those who know me know that I am someone who is well practiced in the art of engaging all kinds of views on things. MY operative view is: