Thread by @SteveEnglishbey

Let me add here as to the dubiousness of the concept of "riding the back leg" the fact that I have been talking about "cues vs. reality" for over 15 yrs.

The quote of "cues vs. reality" comes from Paul Nyman around 2001. That's about when I first ran across his website. He caught my attention with 2 articles. One was entitled: "Momentum is the most misunderstood thing in all of sports." And: "Cues vs. Reality."

In which he argued that the cues that many instructors use do NOT really describe what hitters/pitchers are ACTUALLY doing, i.e., the cues do NOT describe the actual "underlying realities" that actually create high level movement.

This latter idea was consistent with a list that I had started to develop prior to my finding Setpro wherein I started to try to distinguish cues from exercise science concepts I was familiar with.

Concepts like, stretch-shortening processes, proximal to distal kinetic chain linkages, momentum/momentum transfer process, postural efficiency, etc., etc.

At that time I began to realize that it is THESE concepts from exercise science that REALLY explained what hitters/pitchers are ACTUALLY doing.

Conversely the typical cues I hear, eg., keep your weight back, take the hands to the ball, stay inside the ball, swing down, balance point [pitching] had almost ZERO "explanatory power" [my phrase].

This realization of the difference between cues and reality started to happen yrs. ago. BUT. These cues continue to this day. And I put "ride the back leg" as one of the newer cues that really explains very little.

But I think the most prominent new cue as regards hitting is that of ....."the launch angle."

My initial response to this term was: " Well well, it's good to know that at least SOME of you guys FINALLY understand that hitters do NOT swing DOWN."

But. From this newfound [for some] understanding, then the obvious question becomes: "How does one actually create movement that results in creating a good launch angle?"

THIS question is NOT easily understood/defined. I say this based on numerous considerations. One empirical experience. A few yrs. back I worked with a select team [14 to 18 yr. olds]. I asked about 80 players: "Have you heard of this idea of a launch angle?"

They all said yes. BUT. When I asked them to SHOW me as to exactly HOW to create the specific kinds of movements that actually would yield a good launch angle they FAILED miserably [from my perspective].

So, the bottom line is this [from my perspective]: The emphasis on sabermatrics and quantitative analysis is NOT really all that helpful in answering THE fundamental question.

Which is: How does one go about developing high level movement. And how does one go about [as a teacher] optimizing the teaching/learning process?

Or to say it in a more ribald manner [looking from the player's mindset]: "Ok, I see all your graphs and shit...but how the fuck do I get my body to do what these fucking graphs are showing that I am supposed to do better ??!!"

@threadreaderapp unroll