Video

So I'm not saying they're passive, simply that they are not snapping the barrel to initiate the swing. Also, Ted was referring to the through swing, not to slit the bat.

Thanks. That means a lot coming from you.

Cpatriot, thanks for jumping in. So I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on what I'm missing.

Pre-swing motion, in my experience, when it comes naturally, is almost always a good thing. You'll see it a lot in the younger boys before they start getting strong because they need it to get started - until it's wrongly taught out of them. Modern swing instruction talks about an early load or coil, but without the fluidity or the natural building up of energy, they are in essence trying to go from zero to 100 in a split second. Good for her and keep those well intentioned, misinformed coaches away from her.

Hi Jeff. Thanks for your comment. I sense I'm missing something. Maybe I'm reading too deep into it, but is there a specific correlation between your experiences and what was talked about in the video that I'm not picking up on?

So, I think you're on the right track with aligning the ulna and the bat. I would further that and include the upper arm into the lead shoulder. Not locked and tense. Just look for those to somewhat line up. It can be a challenge to get a 9 year old to comprehend all that. Also, I tend to tread lightly in talking mechanics with a player that young. I have had good results when encouraging them to have the intent to hit it hard. They usually find a way to make the bat move faster and they often find a way to sequence their body movements better mechanically through instinct. I also ignore balance to a large degree since most physically just aren't capable of it until around 12 at the earliest. I know it's not the help you were looking for but I've had more success just making sure it's fun for them and waiting until they are physically and mentally ready for instruction.

Great swing, for sure. Just got tired of all these hitting gurus misinforming everyone, claiming he suddenly snapped the barrel towards the catcher when, in reality, his trunk rotatation comes first and pulls the barrel into the zone

Great thought. By trunk lean you're referring to deviating my spine angel yes? Tilting more to get to low pitches and straightening a bit to get to higher pitches is not something I've personally done to any large extent. It's also something I wouldn't coach out of a student. I've watched clemente, Oscar gamble, Mike Trout and plenty of others play with their spine angel to adjust. It's not something they're "getting away with." I believe there is probably not enough motion and movement in today's swing. It's very much being coached out of the game to a fault.

Yeah, not my cup of tea either. Just felt like his mechanics were something that could help a player

So you really think I don't understand the difference between, say, David Wright or Barry Bonds pawing out their lead leg but not really transferring much weight and Mike Trout or Hank Aaron actually moving weight into the hit? Have another look at my examples. I point out how jackson does not transfer a lot of weight while the others do. Stick around and learn a little something or create your own breakdown and talk your nonsense.

You're probably right. When I first saw him, I thought it was a comedy sketch. When i finally realized that he was serious I was like hell no somebody's gotta check this arrogant guy and I created this channel.

Yeah, he does. I prefer just letting the rear arm unfold more in low pitches and less on high pitches and maintaining a somewhat consistent amount of shoulder tilt (see my breakdown of julio rodriguez), but I am not dead set against tilting a bit more, like trout to get to balls down. But if you're a Schenck disciple and launch the barrel rearward as your very first move, you're committing to that tilt regardless of pitch height. I'm dumbfounded as to how very few even consider this.

I agree Bonds pre-steroids career was tracking as HOF worthy, but the steroids did way way more than keep him at that level. His production after the juice elevated him far beyond what he was capable of naturally. I mean would Bonds have it 73 HRs without steroids? And before you say that PEDs weren't even ban by MLB until 2003 that's not accurate. They were outlawed in 1991. They weren't allowed to test for them until 2003.

Hey Dan - Thanks for your contribution. If you truly want to learn, hang around. If you’re just interested in digging in and defending Schenck, the following won’t be helpful for you. Challenging me and dissent is welcome, just be ready to learn - I am. Bonds swing is great and his mechanics are great. He chooses to lean back a bit through impact which is contrary to what you see in most of the great hitters. Still a great hitter, still great mechanics. You can watch my breakdown of Bonds where I explain why he’s not doing what Schenck says he is. No snapping - none of it - he just swings around his rear leg. Maybe watch this video from 7:20 to 8:55 - It’s here where I highlight how Reggie Jackson swings around his rear leg much like Bonds did, like Big Poppy did, etc. But I chose Jackson because in my opinion he displays more of what I feel is most important in the swing. You are correct, I provided video evidence of 8 guys who exemplify what I believe is important in the swing - but as I mentioned in the video, I could’ve picked from hundreds of other elite hitters in history and to varying degrees you’d see the same thing. Lou Gehrig, Joe D, Ralph Kiner, Jimmy Fox, Hank Greenburg, Mel Ott, Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Mickey Mantle, Frank Robinson, Roberto Clemente, Joe Morgan, Albert Pujols…all HOFs who I could just as easily have used - Does any single player in the hall swing like Judge or like Schenck preaches? Does any player in the hall begin their swing by going from zero-100 immediately starting everything at once while on their rear leg? No. No. In addition to the current players I featured, Paul Goldschmidt, Matt Olsen, Corbin Carrol - it goes on. Point is I have a theory that is in direct contrast to Schencks. As best I can, in this video and in others, I point out those contrasts and make my case. What I say about Schencks philosophy has zero to do with his popularity or his success. I see flaws and contradictions in his teaching and I point them out and dispute them because it often helps my viewers become more knowledgeable. I always provide “the why.” He has the biggest voice and I chose to challenge it simply because I disagree. The sole purpose of this channel is to share the knowledge I have - it’s no charge - everyone is welcome. But if I allow Schencks nonsense to go unchecked and his loyalists to go unchecked when they are misinformed, then I’m not really helping anyone. Do I have an ego? Yeah. Do I wish I was working with Aaron Judge? For sure. Do I wish I had Schencks followers? Yup. None of these things however, really drive me - just looking to help hitters. It’s enough.

@@TheBaseballSwing There will be at least one player in the hall who swings like Judge. Judge. Richard doesn't teach a one-legged swing. He most certainly incorporates weight shift during the swing. It's just AFTER the swing starts, not before. The only way to train your body to do this is to greatly over exaggerate the motion and that's the part you are misunderstanding. I can't imagine anybody seeing Judge swing a bat and think that he's doing it wrong. Don't forget that it's not just how hard you can swing the bat. You have to be on time when the pitcher is changing speeds as well. I'm sorry you disagree but he's right.

Dan, I wish u the best. Thanks for dropping in

Many great points. Specifically, the bat moving in a straight line down to the ball like a-rod talks about. He didn't do it, nor did anyone else. However, I disagree that Schencks' methods or part of them will be adopted into a theory that will be helpful. His stuff is everywhere and either copied completely or to some extent, adopted into a coaches teachings. Schenck uses words like elite, high level, and all the greats. I don't think he's lying or trying to brain wash anyone, I think he may actually believe what he's saying. Either way, he constantly is off the mark. For instance, he talks about Barry Bonds snapping the barrel back by supination his wrist around his made up pivot point. That's not at all what's happening. Bonds barrel does not go backwards, it flattens towards the dugout behind him and because he s rotating simultaneously it appears to be headed slightly towards the catcher. Additional it's not Bonds actively roting his wrist around his forearm that moves that bat in that way...it moves in reaction to his upper body rotating being so fast while his hands are lightly gripping the bat. I could point to virtually everything he says and debunk it because not only does it fail the eye test, it is not supported by the kinetics and science of the most basic rules of athletic motion. There once was a popular instructor talking about squashing to bug. It too didn't add up and just disappeared

In my opinion, you're right to be skeptical in general, and i also feel youre on the right path with your analysis. A couple of things, I do not believe in a drop and drive approach where the rear knee sets everything in motion. With Bonds, I see a slight forward weight transfer, which starts the rear knee action. It only drives down so much because he swings around his rear leg as opposed to his center like most of the greats. To me, what he does great is after a light heel plant, he rotates his upper body fast, which is what pulls his bat barrel down and into the zone. This is what Schenck misinterprets as a snapping of the barrel. Schenck mistakenly thinks this is an intentional move when it's a reaction to Bonds front side, almost pulling the barrel into position. Schencks magic pivot point where the wrist rotates around the forearm is not something a hitter should ever be thinking about or doing in an abrupt way to start a swing post load. It totally ignores the kinetic principals of athletic movement. Things wind up and they unwind naturally. They don't always look the same but basic principals are shared in all. I think if that guides a hitters development journey, they really don't need much if any coaching. I hope you find some help in what I said.

@@TheBaseballSwing Thanks for the response. In the spirit of skepticism (more like inquisitiveness) ... how do you know that the "front shoulder working back" phenomenon is the controlled movement, as opposed to being the result of something else? <-- maybe you weren't alleging that in your video commentary, but you mentioned the motion so I thought I'd ask. And also... I have looked very closely at high-speed camera footage (which I had to come by from a source). It is indisputable that among the best hitters in baseball the back hand is supinating the bat. I've seen footage of trout, albert, miguel, arenado, and at least a dozen others. None of them weight their front foot, and then disconnect their arms from their original bat-slot load positions. Literally the only thing changing in the torso, arms, hands region is the back wrist supination. The "snap" that Rich teaches - in my honest opinion - is simply an articulated mechanism to get hitters to stop reaching out with their arms to get the bat into the zone, which is the natural way of a human swinging anything.

The wrist snap is a gimmick. I gave it a shot, because I wanted to try to squeeze more speed into my swing and it just complicated the process and screwed up my swing/timing. I went back to my old swing, and tried another approach which worked well. Keeping the top hand supinated is very important, but naturally allow the end load of the bat pull it into supination through centrifical force and gravity on the bat head. The trick is keeping it supinated through contact. Once you're on plane, you're doing a supinated punch at the ball. So outside pitch, you're kind of punching towards right. At the pitcher for down the middle, and to left on the inside (and vice versa for lefties). So you're getting the whip effect from your connetic chain draging the bat around with your front arm. Then you have two centers of rotation. One is a line going right down your head to your toes. The other is going to be the knob of your bat. In my opinion - the supinated punching motion of your top hand keeps it supinated, and finishes "cracking the whip" by snapping the barrel around that second center of gravity around the bat knob. Hope this makes sense. Hard to put into words. If you can get max whip action, on plane, barrelled, and on time... You're going to say "holy schite" to yourself.

Yeah, it's so mind-boggling at times I kinda lose it and forget 10 year-olds might be watching. Positions and the basic science of athletic movement and experience from a former players perspective is all I offer. Jamie is coming at it with a mind that is on another level and sees things that others don't - including me. Thanks for dropping in

Never said or suggested in any way that the plane of the bat is "the zone." What I'm searching hard for is how you even misunderstood that. My point is not to argue, it's to make clear that the barrel simply being in line with a pitch - barrel depth - is useless unless it's on plane with the pitch. I even went so far as to show carpenters bat in line with the incoming pitch very deep in the zone, but it was descending and could only drive the ball into the ground. This is not a gray area or something subject to interpretation. It's physics. A ball flushed on the barrel while traveling on a downward plane will go down. And the HR swing shown here is irrelevant to the points i presented. It seems to me you're searching hard for a reason to argue with me. It's time for you to decide whether you want to keep coming at me with your idealigical incoherent incorrect banter - or choose at least to understand the very basics.

I'll stop being ignorant only because you said please. For now, I'm going to politely ask you to move along. When you complete your rehab, maybe we can try this again.

@@TheBaseballSwing please stop focusing on mechanics your wasting time. And your teaching people the wront thing to improve. It doesnt matter if you look like barry bonds thats not how it works.

Good point. I could've made reference to that. I would suggest to you that given the steepness of Judges move during the tee forward drill exposes exactly the problem with Schencks theory. He can only hit the ball in that spot. He's way below the zone early and only gets the barrel be hind the ball Kate and 2 feet in front of his head foot. Thanks for I r your thoughts

It can be confusing because Schenck sometimes shows an example of a rear legged "launching of the barrel," but what your watching is merely a hitter who has coiled up/loaded onto their rear hip/leg and then used it to spring into their move forward while not even remotely launching the barrel. We watch this and say, "Wait a minute, the bat barrel hasnt launched. You could argue they have launched the swing, but the barrel has done nothing or at most, it's flattening or slotting behind them. The bottom line is that the barrel is not moving into the zone, so it's not launching. You're not missing anything. It's just him not being able to identify what's going on. Guys, like Bonds, Big Poppy and Reggie Jackson do rotate around their rear hip, but they do nothing close to what he demonstrates and preaches about launching the barrel while onto of the rear leg. Nor do they do it in an abrupt simultaneously way like he shows. Not even close.

czcams.com/video/qxpmsaV9IU0/video.htmlsi=5MOxcTjWdXGduX4m. This is where you'll see Schenck pronounce his own name as Skank. How's that for research? Usually, a misguided hitter will drop a comment, and I'm hopeful I can help them. With you, I'm afraid it would be futile. Please don't ever come back here.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion about the swing, but so am I. The difference is I'm putting my name on it, and I'm basing it on 50 years experience in the game. I'm also making my case by showing video to support it. Also, I've stated it over and over I DO NOT know schenck nor do I ever go after him personally. His swing theory is littered with flaws and that's what I address so my viewers can benefit. You have zero right to say I hate him. You also make a fool of yourself by thinking you know why I have this channel. I'm more than content with my name and how I've lived my life and FYI genius get a clue how money is made on youtube. I don't make a penny. Schenck on the other hand releases content and does a masterful job of marketing himself. Good for him. That doesn't in anyway take away from his message or my belief that just like you and I he loves the game. You support Schencks theory and think my thoughts are baseless, great. Tell me why like others have. Explain specifically where my theory of the swing is wrong and why. Otherwise, don't waste everyone's time with your analysis of me and my motivation.

@@joecolucci2219 how are you basing it on opinions when the facts are there? You describe the same thing but say it's wrong because you're trying to put it in your words just to put down his teachings. This is the toxic and unlikeable side of the baseball community. Just because it's not what you were taught, it has to be wrong. What he teaches is right, and it's the facts.

Wow, that's a lot of assumptions. Firs,t you have no idea how I was taught or how I came about my belief system on how to swing the bat. Second, everyone who has a channel is exposing their beliefs or opinion, schenck included. And finally, if you think I'm saying the same thing as Schenck, there is a major disconnect happening somewhere. Not one person has ever said that. Quite the opposite. I'm saying slot the bat and rotate forward. Schenck says snap the barrel and tilt away from the ball. Couldn't be more opposite. That's facts. I'd suggest that your misunderstanding of the swing and blind faith in Schenck is why you think my stating an opinion and stating facts when appropriate is toxic.

Thank you for the kind words.

Is it me or Schenck you are not understanding?

Yeah, it's definitely a term TM uses, but like a lot of other things he says it really amounts to nothing without the context of the plane of the bat somewhat working near the putch plane