Study Proves Long Toss Decreases Velocity?

Same this post and wanted to know what ya’ll think… I already made a comment on there about it, and we will see the response.
Study Proves Long Toss Decreases Velocity
http://www.■■■■■■■■■■■.net/study-proves-max-distance-long-toss-decreases-pitching-velocity/

Just read the article. Sorry but it sounds like another Brent infomercial to discredit Jaeger and sell his own 3x products.

Nothing he wrote in the article proved that long toss decreased velocity either.

I personally like long toss and would never tell one of my guys they couldn’t, however, this winter we had our best results with our pro guys and never threw a ball further than 90 ft.

2 of our guys hit 100 & 101 without the use of overload/underload baseballs and without the use of long toss.

It changed my outlook on long toss and solidified the importance of intent, momentum, tempo and rhythm.

Lantz,
If you don’t mind me asking, how did your outlook on long toss change?

Yeah Brent is sort of a walking commercial…which is why Steven made him leave…He sounds like Dick Mills to me…“oh look” “I differentiate by using SCIENCE”… :frowning: :? :x :puking: "and if YOU don’t USE MY SCIENCE WELLLLL…you’re X or Y or some form of malignant Z :shock:

Even Jeager doesn’t use long toss as the main element of his programs.

People just have to get over this drill hate…if you don’t like it…fine…I’m certain as a quality coach you’ll find another way of doing whatever drill you happen to hate…just spare me…good coaches use it, have success and don’t maim and cripple anyone…get over yerselves daggone it.

[quote=“Turn 22”]Lantz,
If you don’t mind me asking, how did your outlook on long toss change?[/quote]

It didn’t really. I like LT because it creates a competitive environment, encourages kids to throw, etc… However, the same can be done in compressed throws at shorter distances.

I think some people may misconstrue LT for velocity gains and miss the primary aspect, the intent to throw it harder and further.

Gotcha.
I’ve never done scientific research on LT. I know my son and a couple of other guys I work with use LT regularly. According to their prospective, pulling down from LT makes their arms feel better when throwing from 60’. All said they feel stronger and are able to throw harder with more intent longer periods of time following a LT session.

These guys throw LT as far as they feel comfortable going out, and no limits or certain number of reps on the LT. They do LT strictly on how their bodies feel.

I don’t think there is one certain drill or activity that’s going to work the same for everyone. Players need to find what works best for them. As coaches and parents we can guide them, but ultimately it’s their body and only they know what works for them.

Too Long Toss or Not Too Long Toss That Is the Question… 8)

As soon as I saw the ridiculous title I knew it was either Mills or Brent, since it has nothing to do with the actual data in the study but rather some conclusions that do not follow from evidence - which is an accurate description of what 99.9% of people have to say about pitching training anyway.

That’s what I thought. I should have known better than to even bother arguing with him.

CS don’t fel bad, I couldn’t help it either. I actually told him it was an infomercial. Guess I should learn some tact.

Just glanced through his article. And it seems like his main argument is that you throw slower at 300ft.

Well, who cares? You don’t pitch from that distance and even an outfielder will probably never throw it that far 99.9% of the time.

[quote=“jimster”]Just glanced through his article. And it seems like his main argument is that you throw slower at 300ft.

Well, who cares? You don’t pitch from that distance and even an outfielder will probably never throw it that far 99.9% of the time.[/quote]
The question is, slower than what? He isn’t measuring velocity as a quantifiable value at each distance, so he could be right, if you are comparing 300 ft which is roughly 89 mph (depending on altitude) to a guy throwing 97 mph cheddar off the mound.

Yes, 100 times yes.

My biggest beef with LT is that people think it’s “work.” No it’s not. LT is playing catch. After you LT, you DO YOUR ACTUAL WORK.

EDIT:

I wrote an article with an actual scientific look behind long toss with no flashy conclusions:

Sadly that might be why it’s not as popular.

I was going to remain silent, but the piling on of Brent (and Mills) is really getting out of hand. Particularly in light of the fact that he, apparently can not come on to the site to defend his point of view. I am not going to try to defend him, as he can do that on his own. But I would like to point out a few observations of MY own about the “debate“.

1- Please stop the nonsense that a criticism of Alan Jaegar’s program or Extreme Long Toss (ELT) is “hate” or “drill hate“. People have valid opinions about the safety, effectiveness, and claims being made about ELT. It is not “hate”, so stop waving the bloody shirt whenever someone has issues with ELT or a study takes issue with the practice.

2- To my knowledge there has been only one study done of ELT, and it was not favorable and came with caveats regarding the practice, which have been posted here. Please stop the disinformation campaign about the study.

3- All of the self proclaimed pitching experts in this thread should stop trying to interpret and translate what the ASMI study means or says. I can do that on my own, and I do not need to be spoon feed a lot of BS by the pro ELT forces. I can read what the study says, I do not need someone to tell me what it means.

4- To those self proclaimed pitching experts who want to take shots at the ASMI study, have concerns about the study construction, and want to re-interpret the conclusions, here is a suggestion. Publish your criticisms of it in a serious manner in a scientific journal. Take the researchers on in a professional manner. Blogging your opinions with little or no evidence or substance does not constitute a valid “peer review”. Its not very persuasive and quite lame.

5- To those same self proclaimed pitching experts, here’s another suggestion-Fund your own independent study and lets see the conclusions. That’s what usually happens in most professions. Don’t take cheap shots at people who have more background, experience, and credentials than you could ever hope to have in this particular area. Come up with another independent study and let the chips fall where they may.

6- From his articles Brent (like many people) actually use and advocate LT. He does not use and advocate the ELT program as advocated by Jaegar. He advocates “power throws” inside the distances recommended by ASMI. It seems he and Lantz are on the same page with this idea.

7- Please stop with all the pro AJ nonsense. If I was interested in advice on Eastern philosophy or Yoga I’d be all ears, but I find his “evidence” for the benefits of ELT to be thoroughly underwhelming and reminiscent of Ron Popeil and the Pocket Fisherman. No science, just a bunch of lame Eastern mumbo jumbo about “freeing the arm” and other lame catch phrases. And some of you want to criticize Brent for being a “walking commercial”??? Let’s pull up a few AJ Youtube clips and critique them while we are at it.

8- Here’s a line from the Driveline article:

“Through no fault of his own, Alan Jaeger has created a group of people who think long toss is the end-all be-all of training programs, and the media tends to run with this idea.”

No offense, I have to LOL at that comment. Because I could pull up a dozen articles or Youtube clips of AJ touting arm strength, arm health, and velocity. He is quite a salesman! At the end of one Youtube clip, they break out the radar guns and talk velocity. Hmmmm. It does seem he thinks his program is all that. AJ is probably a better marketer than Brent, which is a compliment.

9- Brent is a “walking commercial“. Yes, he probably is, but its an interesting comment considering that he only seems to post or blog on his own site now a days. And even more interesting considering the number of “pitching experts” in this thread who are selling their own velocity programs and products. With links to their own sites, programs, and products, which then tout their own sites, programs, and products. Pot meet kettle!!! Brent is certainly aggressive with his marketing, and claims, but at least he does it on his own site and on his own dime.

Hypocrisy is in no short order with some folks around here, but lets try to be a little fair and consistent. Since I have taken on a few sacred cows, I’ll brace for a few anticipated ad hominem attacks, which will have little or nothing to do with the conversation at hand.
:smiley:

There’s only one problem in your ridiculous screed: Jaeger’s program does work as he claims. If you would have paid attention to the article I posted, you would have understood the scientific basis for it.

And I find it funny about “funding my own independent study.” You know I am the only pitching coach who built his own biomechanics lab to replicate the ASMI studies and continue on kinematic and kinetic research, right? You can see my 7 high-speed cameras, control object, and custom-build software if you’re ever in the Seattle area.

If you understood anything about the cronyism of biomechanics/kinesiology research, you’d understand why your other points about peer reviewed work are ridiculous. Ask biomechanics researchers outside of ASMI’s tight-knit group; there are many of them. Much of the important work is closed-source at this point, done by MLB teams (or contractors for them) using their own equipment.

You have a massive information asymmetry.

Checking out of this thread.

[quote=“kyleb”]There’s only one problem in your ridiculous screed: Jaeger’s program does work as he claims. If you would have paid attention to the article I posted, you would have understood the scientific basis for it.

And I find it funny about “funding my own independent study.” You know I am the only pitching coach who built his own biomechanics lab to replicate the ASMI studies and continue on kinematic and kinetic research, right? You can see my 7 high-speed cameras, control object, and custom-build software if you’re ever in the Seattle area.[/quote]

You could apply the term “ridiculous” to your claim that your article is “scientific”. Interesting opinion, but that is all it was. And you may want to save your smug and smarky comments for someone else. I don’t play that. AJ claims have been “proven”? Maybe you can post those links to that study.

Right at the point where the “haters” Mills, Brent et al, stop saying that coaches/trainers that do use it are in some way “bad” or deficient…I have no problem with criticism, questions…study…what I have a problem with and won’t turn away from is those folks saying some other coach isn’t a “good” coach or “doesn’t use science” or care about developing players…so you can just get over it…or join with me and try to stop demonization of hard working, successful caring coaches.

All ASMI said was be careful we don’t have conclusive evidence. So what “dis-information” was put out there?

[quote]Please stop with all the pro AJ nonsense. If I was interested in advice on Eastern philosophy or Yoga I’d be all ears, but I find his “evidence” for the benefits of ELT to be thoroughly underwhelming and reminiscent of Ron Popeil and the Pocket Fisherman. No science, just a bunch of lame Eastern mumbo jumbo about “freeing the arm” and other lame catch phrases. And some of you want to criticize Brent for being a “walking commercial”??? Let’s pull up a few AJ Youtube clips and critique them while we are at it.
[/quote]

No I said he was asked to leave this site because the owner thought he was a walking commercial who did not contribute…and PLEASE…like your agenda ain’t showing all over…

How about did it all over the net until owners got sick of his constant selling with no other input on their site…and now he’s down to his site.

But in truth I’ve talked and discussed a bunch of stuff with Brent, he is a nice enough person, not at all un-baseball smart…

Though I live in Fl. I was lucky enough to be able to make it by Kyles place last Dec. it is a very impressive facility…and they train for baseball there.

[quote=“kyleb”]If you understood anything about the cronyism of biomechanics/kinesiology research, you’d understand why your other points about peer reviewed work are ridiculous. Ask biomechanics researchers outside of ASMI’s tight-knit group; there are many of them. Much of the important work is closed-source at this point, done by MLB teams (or contractors for them) using their own equipment. You have a massive information asymmetry.

Checking out of this thread.[/quote]

Ah, so now you want to smear highly respected researchers and their profession? Thats pretty “ridiculous” and beneath serious discussion. Instead, of being a complete toolbox and assailing other people’s reputation and integrity, I would suggest you bring something more convincing to the table. Like a point, proof, or evidence. There is and has been many opportunities to construct and complete additional studies on the issue by many groups, organizations, and individuals.

Right at the point where the “haters” Mills, Brent et al, stop saying that coaches/trainers that do use it are in some way “bad” or deficient…I have no problem with criticism, questions…study…what I have a problem with and won’t turn away from is those folks saying some other coach isn’t a “good” coach or “doesn’t use science” or care about developing players…so you can just get over it…or join with me and try to stop demonization of hard working, successful caring coaches.

I agree with you here. I would prefer if people used the term “misinformed”, when they disagree with an approach. But, lets also concede there is a bleep load of personal attacks at mills, brent, and Dr MM that is also unwarranted and often encouraged.

All ASMI said was be careful we don’t have conclusive evidence. So what “dis-information” was put out there?

The disinformation is when ELT proponents presume to tell people “what the study really means is…”, or “what Dr Andrews really meant to say…”. The study speaks for itself and people can read it and the abstract.

No I said he was asked to leave this site because the owner thought he was a walking commercial who did not contribute…and PLEASE…like your agenda ain’t showing all over…

I don’t know the whole history from years ago. But lets be honest. The other pitching experts here, seem to be doing the same thing. Links to their own sites, programs, products, and articles.
As far as an “agenda”, what is that about? I figured KyleB would be the first with the personal attacks, as there is a certain smarkiness to his comments. I don’t have any agenda and that comment is beneath you. I am a father and coach who cares about his son and his development. Its why I am on this site. And I read articles by Kyle, Nyman, House, MM, Lantz, Mills, and others. He uses many of Brents principles and program. But, I could care less if people follow 3X or not. I am not about winning converts.

How about did it all over the net until owners got sick of his constant selling with no other input on their site…and now he’s down to his site.?

Again, I dont know or care about the history or his relationship with other sites. But it seems everybody else is doing the same thing. But it is somewhat unfair to allow cheapshots about him and then not let him answer those comments. Better to simply disallow conversation on both sides of the equation or allow it from both sides.

But in truth I’ve talked and discussed a bunch of stuff with Brent, he is a nice enough person, not at all un-baseball smart…

agreed.

Though I live in Fl. I was lucky enough to be able to make it by Kyles place last Dec. it is a very impressive facility…and they train for baseball there.

I would love to visit, but I dont think I’ll be getting an invite. And I do like Kyles contribution, comments, and approach. We probably have more in common than he thinks. I just think that sometimes he can come across…nah, I’ll leave it alone.