New pitching technique


#1

Y’all might find this thread interesting.


#2

Yeah, absolutely fascinating. Also redundant, since the same baloney was posted earlier at LTP:

http://www.letstalkpitching.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14548

No doubt, when this fellow was clocked at 100 mph throwing a baseball in 1985, he just smiled and said, “Baseball? Oh no no, I much prefer the bright lights and popular acclaim of professional javelin-throwing”.

Or, maybe he didn’t really throw 100 mph…don’tcha think, or don’tcha?


#3

idk i kinda feel like its the same rotating sequence but throwing object up,

show a javelin throw at 60-70 ft and see the mechanics


#4

[quote=“laflippin”]No doubt, when this fellow was clocked at 100 mph throwing a baseball in 1985, he just smiled and said, “Baseball? Oh no no, I much prefer the bright lights and popular acclaim of professional javelin-throwing”.

Or, maybe he didn’t really throw 100 mph…don’tcha think, or don’tcha?[/quote]

Actually I said “Oh no no old chap, thank you but no”

Believe what you want. As you know having just a fast arm does not a pitcher make. I could throw fast but I wasn’t too accurate and did not know how to throw / pitch the ball any other way.
I am sure I could have learned and improved my aim but how long would that have taken?
:frowning:


#5

re: “Believe what you want.”

------------Well, gee, thanks. I don’t know why anyone would be skeptical of out-of-the-blue boasts on the internet from someone who claims he was throwing 100 mph in 1985…

Mebbe you could scan some of your newspaper clippings and post those. If you’re short on scrap-book stuff, there’s always the great memory-enhancer: Photoshop.


#6

[quote=“laflippin”]re: “Believe what you want.”

------------Well, gee, thanks. I don’t know why anyone would be skeptical of out-of-the-blue boasts on the internet from someone who claims he was throwing 100 mph in 1985…

Mebbe you could scan some of your newspaper clippings and post those. If you’re short on scrap-book stuff, there’s always the great memory-enhancer: Photoshop.[/quote]

Hey I’ll give you that - I am skeptical, cynical and question everything I see or hear myself, especially on the internet.
Yeah photoshop is great isn’t it? You can make things look really real…well real-ish


#7

I bet this guy could throw a baseball 100 MPH. He can throw a 20 Oz. javelin over 300 feet.


#8

[quote=“Slewbacca”]I bet this guy could throw a baseball 100 MPH. He can throw a 20 Oz. javelin over 300 feet.

May be? Especially if he could use his really fast runup.
If only I could have thrown a javelin over 300 feet maybe you would believe me. I only managed 91.40m / 299ft10" with a 28.4 Oz javelin:
Oh if only I had caught it on film. Oh I did:


FYI: The guy in the video you posted in Andreas Thorlkson, double Olympic Champion and has a best throw of 91.59m - thats 19cm more than my best.
Also please note the weight of the javelin. It is not 20 Oz as you stated it is 28.4 Oz which is what, almost 6 times heavier than a baseball.
:slight_smile:


#9

At the risk of stating the obvious, a javelin is also a streamlined object that can be chucked at any angle that is calculated to maximize its travel distance.

Even though baseballs are decidedly not streamlined objects they can be thrown quite a bit further than 300’ if distance is the only consideration.

Mr. Roald Bradstock does have a history of javelin-throwing that is highly self-promoted on the internet, e.g., wikipedia and YouTube. However, aside from the garish self-promotional stuff there doesn’t seem to be evidence to support the assertion that he could ever throw a baseball 100 mph.

Good luck selling the baseball world on your javelin-inspired “new pitching mechanics”. If you can demonstrate your claims unequivocally, you’ll attract the kind of interest you deserve. On the other hand, if you can’t…you’ll also attract the interest you deserve.

[Hint to Roald: The internet is not the proper arena for demonstrating your claims. Your YouTube videos are edited self-promotional tools…hardly the sort of stuff any serious person could be expected to take seriously.]


#10

[quote=“laflippin”]
Mr. Roald Bradstock does have a history of javelin-throwing that is highly self-promoted on the internet, e.g., wikipedia and YouTube. However, aside from the garish self-promotional stuff there doesn’t seem to be evidence to support the assertion that he could ever throw a baseball 100 mph.
Good luck selling the baseball world on your javelin-inspired “new pitching mechanics”. If you can demonstrate your claims unequivocally, you’ll attract the kind of interest you deserve. On the other hand, if you can’t…you’ll also attract the interest you deserve.
[Hint to Roald: The internet is not the proper arena for demonstrating your claims. Your YouTube videos are edited self-promotional tools…hardly the sort of stuff any serious person could be expected to take seriously.][/quote]

I find it interesting my original post: "A New Pitching Technique? is reposted by someone else with out a question mark. My post was asking a question, not making a statement.
Rather than having a mutual discussion that we may both learn something you choose to question my motives, my claims and indeed my character.
You seem to be interpretinig the word “New” as meaning “better”. That is not what I said or mean’t. May be using the word “different” would have made you less combative.
I am 16 months shy of turning 50 and still throwing hard in a event that is notorious for destroying throwers bodies, usually being ended through surgies. Very few javelin throwers compete into their 30’s and if they do they have many scars to show for it.
Say what you will about my creditials but I am still throwing, I have never had a single surgery in my shoulder or elbow or even a minor injury. Nothing! Zilch!
On other forums I have posted they been very receptive to discussion. On one site they put together a video comparision of my standing throw next to Jim “The Rookie” Morris pitching. If was very interesting. I learned a lot. Another site compared my mechanics to Dr Marshall’s practices and theories. Again very interesting indeed.

So what do you what to do? Have a discussion or keep going down the other path? You know my name I don’t know yours so you have the upper hand I guess.


#11

Re: “Have a discussion or keep going down the other path? You know my name I don’t know yours so you have the upper hand I guess.”

-----------------I know your name because you attached it yourself to the self-promotional YouTube offerings that you linked to. The general approach to training and conditioning for pitching and the ways of optimizing pitching mechanics that I personally find compelling are taught by Tom House. You don’t really need to know my name because I am not espousing something that I thought up.

In case you are not aware, Tom pitched in MLB for 9 years, coached pitching staffs for MLB teams for more than 10 years, has written about 20 books on all aspects of baseball pitching, is widely regarded as the “father of high-speed motion analysis for pitchers”, has trained some of the most well-known names in baseball pitching, and is the current pitching coach at Univ of Southern California.

Tom himself would tell you that his is not the only successful approach to training pitchers–there are many good pitching coaches who have a verifiable history of accomplishment and success. They didn’t create themselves on the internet.

Does all this mean that your idea/approach is wrong? No, it does not.

But then again, there is also nothing to suggest that your approach has any merit.

Mike Marshall is a particularly good example of the problem you face. This guy was a Cy Young winner as a player, and he holds an earned doctorate in Exercise Physiology. Real credentials. Yet, he has abandoned the mechanics that made him successful, gone completly over the side of the boat with bombastic and unsupportable claims about his “new pitching mechanics”, and he has amassed a dismal record of public failure for not helping any of his students pitch effectively. None of that has stopped Mike from continuing to make his bombastic claims, but there are very very few baseball people who listen to him anymore…I wonder why?

I personally study Marshall’s cult because I am interested in the phenomenon of “pathological science”, or “voodoo science”. That is, how charlatans use pseudo-scientific jargon, smoke-and-mirrors, and flawed logic, and “proof by assertion” to con the public.

So, why shouldn’t you expect to be challenged? You want to boot-strap a conversation about your “new” or your “different” pitching mechanics on the internet based on what exactly?

You can do whatever you want but if you really think you’ve got something you’ll have to find some athletes who are willing to try out your ideas and adapt them to baseball pitching. Then you will have to train these people and you will actually need to demonstrate that your ideas are worthwhile vis-a-vis other approaches to pitching mechanics.

Otherwise, without tangible evidence that your ideas are something more than just half-baked daydreams, you may become just another self-made internet guru…


#12

??? I didn’t want to know your name???

[quote]
Tom himself would tell you that his is not the only successful approach to training pitchers–there are many good pitching coaches who have a verifiable history of accomplishment and success[/quote]

Any good coach is going to be open to new ideas and know that theirs is not the only approach.

Tom House said that or is that you?

Well thank you I think?

As apposed to…?

Wow! I feel better now. I thought it was just me you took issue with.

Wow again! I thought people could basically be divided into two groups: People that saw the glass half empty or people that saw the glass half full.
I never thought that someone could be upset that a glass is just half full?

Challenged yes. Absolutely. Attacked no. Based on what? How about 40 years of throwing despite all the odds: Having Spina Bifida, being short, being slow and now being old. Being a 2 time olympian multiple world record holder. And still throwing injury free. How about that for starters?

I’ll have to get back to you on that, hopefully not to long from now.
:slight_smile:

I am no guru. I don’t believe in them. I am just a old guy with a lot of experince, some ideas and some questions. You?


#13

It seems to me that there isn’t a day, or a week, or a month, that someone doesn’t come up with what he says is a new technique, and it always seems to ignite a controversy.
It looks to me like a variation of the no-windup technique that an old pitcher showed Don Larsen a number of years ago. So what’s so new about that? Many pitchers pitch without a windup. :roll: