Thread by @SteveEnglishbey

..."pushing" the bat. Could you explain this to me".. Yes I think I can. I'll start with this common --but erroneous-- notion:

https://twitter.com/KenCherryhomes/status/1481434221340024833

....." Since our hands, only at the turn of the barrel are even in a position to theoretically "push"....."
The hands cannot and thus do not contribute to or cause "pushing." The hands have one function and one function only: They serve to GRIP the bat. Period.

Now some may reply/argue that the hands help to "uncock" the bat ,i.e., the bat moving from lag to getting "out and around" [my phrase] and into contact. That is incorrect.

The uncocking is a function of the articulations of the WRISTS [abduction/adduction or if you prefer radial/ulnar deviation]; and [sometimes seen]subtle supination of the lead forearm.

"The bat is being pulled throughout a swing, not pushed." Well, this is really the issue at hand. Because their certainly is a distinction between "pushing" and "pulling."

I think the best way to really start understanding this distinction is via Paul Nyman's interactive physics models that he has used to analyze swinging and throwing.

These models are based on the compound pendulum models initially used to analyze golf swings. These models are essentially showing as to how angular motion is best utilized to optimally create and transfer momentum.

The basic components are:1] A large rotating mass linked to a much smaller distal mass via a rope or string. These models do indeed show the pure, so to speak, "pulling effects" [my phrase] of the large rotating mass moving the distal component.

And simply put, the fact that the distal component moves SOLELY as a result of this pulling effect, is really the essence of what Paul describes as....CONNECTION.

Now, DISTINCT from this kind of optimal pulling effects/optimal connection can be understood by looking at how Paul will manipulate his physics models via LINEAR displacements along the "rope" [which is really an arm with movement capability at the shoulder/elbow/wrist].

Meaning that in these models he will inject what would be [if it were an actual human] articulations such as lead elbow EXTENTION [in hitting/throwing arm if pitching]. In effect, articulations of the distal component [the arm linkages] ......

...INDEPENDENT of the more "pure" pulling effects [optimal connection] created by the larger mass. How do these sometimes subtle distinctions between optimal pulling effects [connection] and "going linear" [elbow extension for ex.] effect the "end point" [contact/release]?

Well, simply put .....ALOT. Both in terms of speed [bat speed and throwing velocity]. And quickness [as regards unloading a swing].

So, I would argue that all of the above yields a fair amount of "explanatory power" in explaining the pretty clear definition of and distinction between "pulling" vs. "pushing."

I would further add this. There is or can be some confusion on the part of those looking at seeing elite hitters creating some degree of elbow extension. Which they many times will create.

Quite a few see this extension action and say or think along the lines of...."I need to get my son/daughter to ACTIVELY try to extend."

What they fail to realize is that in a well connected swing via an elite hitter, and wherein the pulling effects of the trunk on the arms/bat is optimized, THIS kind of momentum transfer will CAUSE the arm extension, POST CONTACT.

In other words, any extension [linear joint action] is AN EFFECT that happens post contact. Whereas, in "disconnected" swings the elbow extension happens BEFORE contact ,ie., arms are moving independent of, thus disconnected from, the mass [trunk].

And I would further add that, from a teaching perspective, it is vital to understanding cause/effect relationships and this certainly includes understanding the distinctions between the two.

@threadreaderapp "unroll"