To Pronate or not to Pronate, Part 3


#21

…And again more conspiracy. Now ASMI is plotting against Dr. Marshall and his pitchers.

What an awesome position for Dr. Marshall and his followers. Considering that they maintain far superior knowledge than the entire baseball community.

Now they even have ASMI and Dr. Fleisig plotting and showing bias against them. WOW. I wonder where those orders came from or did Dr. Fleisig conspire against Dr. Marshall on his own. Maybe the commissioner’s office? Or…it could be a secret commission within baseball plotting against “The Marshallites” and their leader?


#22

Spoiler Alert: This is a special lesson about “Marshall Physics” versus “Real Physics”…it may not be of any interest to the general reader:

Verbatim excerpt from Marshall’s Free Book [of Nonsense] for Pitchers:

"[i] g. Maximum Falling Velocity Calculation

  1. MFV = Wt / V(AD)(SF)(CSA)
  2. MFV = 0.328 / V(0.00001)(0.7)(13.62)
  3. MFV = V(3441.7628)
  4. MFV = 58.67 ft/sec or 40 mph
 [b]Baseball’s maximum falling velocity is 40 miles per hour[/b].   All fielders should easily catch 40 mph baseballs dropped from any height from which they can see them.   If, with the 32 ft/sec 2 force of gravity continuously accelerating falling baseballs through the air molecules of atmosphere, the maximum velocity baseballs achieve is forty miles per hour, then what influence do air molecules have on pitched baseballs with release velocities of 90 miles per hour and no force continuously accelerating them?[/i]"

Ummmm…pay attention, students. When a pop-up is hit nearly straight up, maybe a 150 feet high or so, it of course must come to a stop, v = 0, at the top of its arc, before it begins accelerating back down to the ground under the influence of gravity. Goodness knows why Marshall calls this maximum attainable free-fall velocity in air the “MFV” (everybody else just calls this parameter “terminal velocity”) but, no matter…read on, please.

Didja ever catch one of those pop-ups? Did it feel like 40 mph? (Recall: 40 mph is about the speed of a pitch thrown by a typical 7 - 8 yo.)

Hmmmmm…why didn’t Marshall bother to re-check this nonsense number that he “calculated”? Surely he has caught some high pop-ups in his time?

Reasonable calculations of a baseball’s MFV, or terminal velocity, made by reasonable physicists, often yield about 75 - 80 mph. However, the assumptions in even the best of calculations are somewhat crude and can be double-checked against reality: The real, experimental answer is 95 mph! That is, an actual baseball dropped from a great height can achieve a maximum falling velocity of about 95 mph. (see Adair, “Physics of Baseball”).

Why did Marshall get 40 mph? Well…he just wantonly plugged numbers that he didn’t understand into an equation that he didn’t understand.

Why does even good theory disagree with the experimental number by 15 to 20%? Because, good theory uses some good numbers–like the mass of a baseball, the gravitational force, air density, and functional surface area of a baseball–but it also depends on some sketchy estimates that lead to a crude understanding of the drag coefficient for a real baseball.

In fact, since baseballs are not streamlined objects, their rough seams provide useful turbulence at the ball’s surface as it passes through air. Note, the result is exactly the opposite of Marshall’s “circle of friction” nonsense (yet another “Marshall Physics” story, for another time). The boundary layer turbulence caused by the seams actually reduces the drag on a baseball, as compared to a completely smooth baseball-sized sphere…so baseballs cut through the air a little faster than you might expect from a smooth baseball-sized object.


#23

And if Grandma had wheels she’d be a wagon.
Turn22 and LA Flippin, you’re both right on!


#24

I love the sound of a good fastball whizzing through the air. Then the subsequent pop of the catchers mitt.


#25

The fun continues. See #1584 of the Marshall 2013 Q&A.

Excerpt:

Sir Isaac Newton’s First Law, the Law of Inertia, says: “Unless unbalanced forces act on bodies, bodies continue in its state of rest or of uniform (straight line) motion.”

In baseball pitching, the body to which we have concern is the baseball.

During the Acceleration Phase, baseball pitchers apply unbalanced forces to the baseball.

[b]With regard to applying force to the baseball, the critical part of Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia is ‘uniform (straight line) motion.’

‘Uniform motion’ means straight line movement.

Therefore, to maximize the force that baseball pitchers apply to baseballs, baseball pitchers must apply force in straight lines toward home plate.[/b]

When baseball pitchers do not apply force to the baseball in straight lines, at every moment along the curved force application pathway, the baseball wants to move in straight lines away from the curved pathway.

Therefore, when baseball pitchers that do not apply force in straight lines toward home plate, they have to use force to return the baseball to the curved pathway.

As a result, these baseball pitchers are not able to use that wasted force to accelerate their baseballs to their genetic maximum release velocity.

What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia decreases their genetic release velocity.

This is additional clear evidence that Marshall does not understand anatomy or physics.

First, because Newton did not describe the force/acceleration relationships intrinsic to rotational motion in his Motion Principles, Marshall does not appear to believe that angular force applied to a lever-arm can generate powerful acceleration of a ball toward homeplate. Marshall forgets: The reason why the ball doesn’t fly off at a tangent to the delivery arc until it is released is, we have fingers at the end of our pitching arm that can hold the ball at the end of the lever…doh! During angular acceleration of the ball through the devil’s arc those fingers easily resist any errant ball release until the tangent line of the arc is directed right toward the pitcher’s glove. The forces exerted by a pitcher’s fingers to hold the ball in place during delivery, until its release is desirable, are completely unrelated to the angular force he must apply to the task of driving his arm/hand/ball through an arc-shaped pathway. Marshall is (plausibly) a well-meaning person who very often simply doesn’t know what he is talking about.

The quintessential human straight-line force application in ball-throwing is the arm-action during a shot-put. The maximum length of a truly straight drive line in shot-put is the about length of the arm from its shoulder to palm of the hand…about 2 1/2 ft., if you’re lucky.

How far and fast can you shot-put a baseball, using maximal force to accelerate the ball along a straight line through a distance of 2 1/2 feet…

Remember, folks, the longer the distance over which you can apply force to the ball, the greater is the acceleration and the greater is the release velocity. That’s what arcs are really good for, young Jedi…arc-shaped trajectories offer a longer opportunity for applyin’ the Force.


#26

…And the hits just keep on comin’

In what world does the good doctor Marshall live in?

If his theories were true then his pitchers using their maxline fastballs would be the hardest thrown fastballs out there. The fact is they simply are not. I believe the ASMI study proved that. Of course there were extenuating circumstances that prevented the Marshall pitchers to throw at full velocity, or so was stated earlier in this thread.

Good post La. Very informative.


#27

Turn22,

Listen to yourself. Nothing said there has anything to do with a conspiracy! It was what I said. Dr.Fleisig took correct rotational readings on a particular mechanic where the participants were then subjected to a comparison to a completely different (very poor science) mechanic. These athlets were in a state of training that no other pitchers in the world were going through but not recognized in the study. The protocol was being evaluated by Dr.Marshall and many problems with it exposed. Me, explaining this to someone who is making claims of inadequacy and at the same time not knowing the situation needed clarification. Where’s the conspiracy? Nothing like that exists and you saying it shows your understanding of the situation also.

Most people think along these lines, that if you are doing something new or ground breaking, you are wrong for trying because it is not what I am teaching and if I can I will create hardship towards you to proceed whether with words or action. Now I know there is no conspiracy as you like to say but I have seen this in action over and over and it still prevails.

Why don’t you guys all get back on the subject of Pronation vs. Supination and quit trying to poison the thread subject with your lack of focus.

I have not heard you speak yet on the actual subject.

I would like to hear JD, Dr. Flippin, think, Kyle etc. and all others opinion in detail on the actual subject, Especially our only gentleman Roger?

Is Dr.Marshalls lesson on Kinesiology of the arm action that eliminates hyper extension of the elbow make perfect sense even at our laymen experience

Dr.Marshall says pronation during the drive mechanic hinges your elbow and saves it from injury when thrown from a high Humeral vector. He says when you supinate your elbow locks out in a ballistic crash of the Humerus and Ulna! Agree/disagree/opinions? What about it think, how does that elbow actually work best?

And producing foul balls straight up then straight down at 35 MPH.

The same world that produces the same reaction in history up on discovery. You sir are one of those on the popes side of the fence.

If his theories were true then his pitchers using their maxline fastballs would be the hardest thrown fastballs out there.

Spoiler alert, They are if you produce the smallest signature with your circle of friction (axis presentation) and have only slight movement. The straight backspin horizontally and laterally placed circles of friction (no signature canceling) are the fastest at –0, Dr.Marshalls preferred 7 degree forwards axis presentation maxline fastball produces –2 or –3 MPH that move considerably, yet at the same time produce the same MPH at the middle finger upon release with both.

The actual fact is they do and I have given you plenty of examples. So while you keep saying this means you refuse to accept the actual facts.

They proved nothing but rotational numbers with no acceleration graph, very poor science.

[b]Dr. Flippin,]/b]

Could you produce the formula to first represent your speech at least Dr.Marshall did.?
Again, By the way, if we were following Court procedures, then most of what you say would be argumentative rather than probative.Dr.MM

This always means, I have no actual opinion on the subject at hand but have this uncontrollable desire to keep snottily whining about another man.
I believe Dr.Marshall is the only actual tenured professor (Kinesiology, Ex.phys and Motor skill performance) in all these discussions !

Do you have any opinion on the actual subject?

Or so? Is not this the kind of language that gets scientists in trouble as you earlier noted, If it’s good for the goose.

What is the altitude at which a ball (high threaded) has to actually attain to achieve terminal velocity at the ground at sea level.?

That feels about right, in fact it feels much less but then when weighing it against a hand bone crusher at 95, it can skew your perception a bit.!
I’ve caught thousands of pop ups and hit as many with a fungo, there not coming back down very fast, maybe 30 not having had enough time to reach terminal velocity.

Have you ever stuck your hand behind a 95 MPH ball, I have and return fall velocity is half of that mid 9’s heat. You’ll have to do better than this if you want to disparage Dr.Marshall.

So does he, He’s just trying to explain it by making it easier to understand by wording it baseball user friendly. He’s always being asked to relax the scientific terms so he some times uses words to better this request.

I think you are mixing equations and formula’s much worse than apples and oranges.

Stuck in that vacuum like Paul I see?

However, the assumptions in even the best of calculations are somewhat crude and can be double-checked against reality:

Ya, somebody get a radar gun and drop a ball off the golden gate bridge and catch its final speed at the bottom, you go for it La, you live up there don cha. Use that great camera you have from the side and we will count its velocity by frame rate also.

He actually proceeded by calks “like the mass of a baseball, the gravitational force, air density, and functional surface area of a baseball—“. He did not use the vacuum model like Nyman and others do when explaining earth bound physics.

Altitude and atmospheric conditions covered. This is where you place “air density”.

He explains this in detail for why golf balls have dimples and why baseballs cause this effect or why air wings are slick.

Bernoulli’s effect (fluid flow dynamics) where the ball moves towards positive pressure and gravity. It can be called “axis presentation” and should always be considered in any evaluations.

This explains why the Gyro ball ( straight forwards axis presentation) only moves down because of equal pressure to both sides that cancel out.

I see no evidence at all just a lot of supposition without corroboration

On the contrary my dear Flippin, he explains this in detail how when conventional pitchers start there first movements towards home (overhead acceleration graph) it is powerfully moving forwardly while also moving powerfully towards 3rd base. This is where your understanding of redirection has failed you.

Why would this side tracked explanation have anything to do with the calculation of redirection of angular momentum? doh!

Yes, while the whole time, not making as much forwards progress as it would have been straighter so the body has to use those resources to get it going in the right direction that it could have used to drive straighter. His physics are perfect here.

Ultra straw man here, If you can’t baffle um with scenarios that do not pertain, you might as well keep doing it.

Where’s the redirection math? Where is the dampening math?

Dr.Marshall has all this exactly right, it is you that is baffled here.

This again? Getting old and does not pertain.

Why must you place in the discussion a mechanic that does not resemble the mechanical model to the least?

As you can see here folks, Lee is rambling because he knows he has lost the argument and can’t coherently get out of his previous statements on record and it just keeps growing.

You can’t use a Marshall quote to support your shot put belief, they don’t match. You are like Nyman here, making an argument with two different mechanics that do not pertain.

Add in, 2 directions as seen by an overhead acceleration graph so you don’t look uneducated, when you are.

Here, lets let Dr.Marshall teach Kinesiology 104 to Mr.Nyman in response to his doomed ramblings.


#28

This is Dr.Masrshalls lesson response to Mr.Nymans many misunderstandings.

  1. Nyman on pronation Part 1

I’d be curious to your response to Nyman’s Part 1 of a 4 part series.


[b]To Pronate or Not to Pronate That Is the Question

Part 1 by PAUL NYMAN on APRIL 22, 2013

“To be, or not to be” is the famous opening phrase of a soliloquy in William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. In the soliloquy, Hamlet questions the meaning of life, and whether or not it is worthwhile to stay alive when life contains so many hardships. He comes to the conclusion that the main reason people stay alive is due to a fear of death and uncertainty at what lies beyond life.
Over the years there have been numerous attempts to quantify, qualify dissect, examine, etc, etc… the throwing of the baseball.
And it seems like almost every pitching mechanics “expert” comes up with his own discovery(s).
At SETPRO, I made a few “discoveries” that I like to hang my hat on. Scapula loading and PCRW to name two. Tom house has the towel drill and more recently “extension” velocity. Brent Pourciau sells what he calls “triple extension”. And then we have Mike Marshall’s ”theory” of pronation, and that IT’S the throwing injury’s magic bullet.
These “discoveries” are based on either improving performance or preventing injury. And of course:

  1. “The pot of gold at the end of the how to throw the baseball rainbow”, is the discovery that not only improves performance but also prevents injury.
    I’ve haven’t paid too much attention to what’s been happening the past couple of years. I was somewhat surprised to see the amount of effort by well-respected throwing/training instructors such as Ron Wolforth, Brent Pourciau and a host of instructional websites that have jumped onto the pronation bandwagon.
    But is pronation really the “be” of “to be or not to be”?
    Marshall is THE guru, preacher and evangelist of pronation. From an actual statistics point, it’s difficult to ascertain whether his pronation technique has saved arms. There’s simply no statistical data to support it.
  2. What is true is it’s reasonably well established, that his techniques have failed to produce anything close to performance that would warrant being drafted.
    So what gives? Why such an interest in pronation?
    My curiosity being “aroused” decided to do some investigating as to the “perceived” benefits of pronation.
    In the beginning:
    Mike Marshall is the “inventor” of pronation as we know it today. By inventor, I mean he is the one who has been touting the benefits of pronation for many years.
    Dr. Mike Marshall demonstrating pronation.
    This is an excerpt that appeared on Baseball Prospectus in 2002.
    Baseball Prospectus: There are plenty of pitching theories out there. Why should we believe in yours?
    Dr. Mike Marshall: Everyone has an opinion, I just state the facts as the facts are. Here are the facts: We have this epidemic of pitching injuries as a result of the traditional pitching motion. It’s destroyed thousands of arms and continues to do so. The way everyone teaches pitching is flat out wrong.
    BP: So what makes your method different?
    MM: The key is in force application. I teach pronation of the forearm and rotation of the upper arm.
    BP: What are you doing when you pronate your forearm?
    MM: You’re rotating your arm, going from palm up to palm down. The pronator teres is the most important pitching muscle. By manipulating the muscle, you learn to pronate your forearm effectively. You can never pronate your forearm too hard. You’re making your radius bone cross with your ulna, turning from palm up to palm down. That’s a perfectly natural motion.
    BP: How is this different from the way pitching’s traditionally taught?
    MM: Normally people tell you to pull your elbow across your body. As soon as you pull your elbow you can’t pronate your forearm. If you do what they tell you to do, pulling your elbow across your body or pulling the elbow down, you’re acting contrary to the natural pronation of the forearm and rotation of the upper arm. That’s how you pop your ulnar collateral ligament.
    People have this notion that the farther you move your arm behind your body, the more powerful you’re going to be. What really happens is you have to bring the ball back to your pitching arm side before you can throw to home plate. So now you’re forced to bring the arm from 1st base to 3rd base, then redirect the ball to go toward home plate. You’re straightening your arm all the way out, putting all kinds of pressure on the elbow and shoulder. And you’re taking force away. The ball wants to go in a straight line, but you end up releasing the ball in this inefficient arc. The end result is less force on the pitch and more stress on the arm.
    What I find particularly troubling (amusing?) Is Marshall’s description of throwing a baseball.
  3. Marshall is saying that the most efficient way of throwing the baseball is keep everything in a straight line.
    That rotation as Marshall describes it “now you’re forced to bring the arm from 1st base to 3rd base, then redirect the ball to go toward home plate. The ball wants to go in a straight line, but you end up releasing the ball in this inefficient arc” is from a physics perspecive a very inefficient way to throw the baseball.
    And from an injury perspective Marshall says: “You’re straightening your arm all the way out, putting all kinds of pressure on the elbow and shoulder.”
    The first question that needs to be asked and answered is does Marshall really understand the kinetics and kinematics of how a baseball is efficiently thrown?
    Does Marshall understand that throwing a baseball efficiently is all about momentum transfer and that rotation and maintaining connection to the body’s rotation is critical to achieving the most efficient way to throw the baseball?
    What is throwing the baseball efficiently?
    My definition has always been: Mechanics that allow velocity and movement with the least amount of effort and physical stress. And if one is using the least amount of effort that usually means they have the greatest control over where the balls going to go.
    Next time a closer look at how the body efficiently throws the baseball.[/b]

Dr.MM “Thank you for sending me Mr. Nyman’s commentary.

 Mr. Nyman wrote: "And then we have Mike Marshall’s ”theory” of pronation, and that IT’S the throwing injury’s magic bullet."

 When baseball pitchers pronate their pitching forearm before, during and after release, they not only prevent the bones in the back of their pitching elbow from slamming together, pronation increases the power of inwardly rotating their pitching upper arm. Therefore, pronating the pitching forearm increases release velocity and spin velocity.

 Mr. Nyman asked: "Does Marshall really understand the kinetics and kinematics of how a baseball is efficiently thrown?"

 Absolutely, but does Mr. Nyman?

 I know and understand that Kinesiology not only has a mechanical component, Kinesiology has a structural component.

 In 1971, I used high-speed film from the rear, side and overhead views to mechanically analyze my baseball pitching motion. Shortly after, Richard Nelson, another Michigan State University Energy Laboratory graduate named the mechanical component of Kinesiology, Biomechanics.

 From my biomechanical analysis of my 1971 baseball pitching motion, I learned that the only statistic of value is the Acceleration Graph. All the tables that biomechanists generate do not explain why baseball pitchers suffer pitching injuries or achieve their genetic maximum release velocity.

 To understand why baseball pitchers suffer pitching injuries or achieve their genetic maximum release velocity, we need to understand the structural component of Kinesiology. Researchers call the structural component of Kinesiology, Applied Anatomy.

 Pronation is an Applied Anatomy term. But, more importantly, Applied Anatomy explains what muscles enables baseball pitchers to pronate their pitching elbow. As I said to the Baseball Prospectus interviewer, the Pronator Teres muscle pronates the pitching forearm.

 The Pronator Teres arises from the superior ridge of the medial epicondyle of the Humerus bone of the pitching upper arm and inserts into the middle of the lateral surface of the Radius bone of the thumb side of the forearm.

 Therefore, when baseball pitchers contract their Pronator Teres muscle, they not only inwardly rotate the Radius bone toward the Ulna bone, the Pronator Teres muscle also moves the Radius bone closer to the Humerus bone of the pitching upper arm.

 By moving the Radius bone closer to the Humerus bone of the pitching upper arm, the Pronator Teres muscle flexes the pitching elbow. This action prevents the bones in the back of the pitching elbow, namely the olecranon process of the Ulna bone and the olecranon fossa of the Humerus bone, from slamming together.

 If baseball pitchers do not contract their Pronator Teres muscle before, during and after release, they will slam these bones together. As a result, baseball pitchers will calcify the hyaline cartilage in their olecranon fossa of the Humerus bone, enlarge the coronoid process of their Ulna bone, break pieces of hyaline cartilage off the olecranon fossa of the Humerus bone, which results in bone spurs growing through the openings in the hyaline cartilage.

 By contracting their Pronator Teres muscle before baseball pitchers start the Acceleration Phase of their baseball pitching motion, the Pronator Teres moves the proximal end of the Humerus bone tightly again the distal end of the Ulna bone. This action prevents any stress from affecting the Ulnar Collateral Ligament.

 This means that the Pronator Teres muscle prevents baseball pitchers from tearing the connective tissue fibers of their Ulnar Collateral Ligament.

 What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about pitching forearm pronation causes baseball pitchers to suffer severe pitching injuries.

 Mr. Nyman wrote: "Does Marshall understand that throwing a baseball efficiently is all about momentum transfer and that rotation and maintaining connection to the body’s rotation is critical to achieving the most efficient way to throw the baseball?"

 Absolutely, but does Mr. Nyman?

 Momentum transfer means that baseball pitchers sequentially contracts the muscles of their Shoulder Girdle, Shoulder Joint, Elbow Joint, Forearm Joint and so on. Some researchers call this the 'Kinetic Chain.'

 For the Acceleration Phase of the baseball pitching motion, the 'Kinetic Chain' is:
  1. In the Shoulder Girdle, the Serratus Anterior muscle moves the Scapula bone of the pitching shoulder around the pitching arm side of the body. Therefore, the Serratus Anterior muscle initiates the forward movement of the baseball pitching motion.

  2. In the Shoulder Joint, ‘traditional’ baseball pitchers use their Pectoralis Major muscle to move the pitching upper arm horizontally forward. Applied Anatomists call this shoulder joint action, ‘Horizontal Flexion.’

    Unfortunately, the inertial mass of the pitching arm plioanglosly moves the pitching upper arm behind their acromial line. This is the action that Mr. Nyman calls ‘Scapula loading.’

    This means that, because the Pectoralis Major muscle is unable to keep the pitching upper arm in front of the acromial line, ‘Scapula Loading’ destroys the front of the pitching shoulder.

    What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about shoulder joint horizontal flexion causes baseball pitchers to suffer severe pitching injuries.

    Therefore, to prevent the pitching upper arm from moving behind their acromial line, I teach my baseball pitchers to use their Pectoralis Major muscle to throw their pitching upper arm forward, upward and inward to vertically beside their head with the back of their pitching upper arm facing toward home plate.

    This action engages their Latissimus Dorsi muscle. About half-way through this action, the Humerus bone ‘locks’ with the Glenoid Fossa of the Scapula bone.

    The Latissimus Dorsi muscle not only moves the pitching upper arm straight toward home plate, it also powerfully inwardly rotates the pitching upper arm. Inwardly rotating the pitching upper arm blends perfectly with pronating the pitching forearm.

  3. In the Elbow Joint, ‘traditional’ baseball pitchers use their Brachialis muscle to plioanglosly flex the pitching elbow.

    This means that ‘traditional’ baseball pitchers generate so much force when they move their pitching arm from behind the glove arm side of their body to the pitching arm side that, to prevent the olecranon process slamming into the olecranon fossa that the Brachialis muscle strains to flex the pitching elbow. I call this injurious flaw, ‘Pitching Forearm Flyout.’

    As a result, the coronoid process of the Ulna bone to which the Brachialis muscle inserts lengthens such that these baseball pitchers are not able to fully flex their pitching elbow.

    What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about pitching elbow extension causes baseball pitchers to suffer severe pitching injuries.

    Therefore, to prevent my baseball pitchers from losing the flexion range of motion of their pitching elbow, I teach my baseball pitchers to move their pitching upper arm to vertically beside their head with their pitching forearm trailing horizontally behind.

    From this position, their Latissimus Dorsi muscle inwardly rotates their pitching upper arm, which enables my baseball pitchers to use their Triceps Brachii muscle to extend their pitching elbow.

    By using the Triceps Brachii muscle to mioanglosly extend their pitching elbow, my baseball pitchers satisfy the requirement of the ‘Kinetic Chain.’ That is, with my baseball pitching motion, every joint in the pitching arm uses a muscle that adds to the momentum generated by the previous joint.”

  4. In the Forearm Joint, I teach my baseball pitchers to pronate.

    Because I teach my baseball pitchers to use their Latissimus Dorsi muscle to inwardly rotate their pitching upper arm and their Pronator Teres muscle to pronate (inwardly rotate) their pitching forearm, my baseball pitchers are able to synchronize the inward rotation movement of their entire pitching arm.

    To throw their breaking pitches, ‘traditional’ baseball pitcher supinate (outwardly rotate) their pitching forearm. Because ‘traditional’ baseball pitchers use their Pectoralis Major muscle to horizontally flex their pitching upper arm, ‘traditional’ baseball pitchers are not able to synchronize the actions of their pitching upper arm and pitching forearm.

    What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about synchronizing the actions of the pitching upper arm and pitching forearm causes baseball pitchers to suffer severe pitching injuries.

    Mr. Nyman wrote: “My definition has always been: Mechanics that allow velocity and movement with the least amount of effort and physical stress. And if one is using the least amount of effort that usually means they have the greatest control over where the balls going to go.”

    Sir Isaac Newton’s First Law, the Law of Inertia, says: “Unless unbalanced forces act on bodies, bodies continue in its state of rest or of uniform (straight line) motion.”

    In baseball pitching, the body to which we have concern is the baseball.

    During the Acceleration Phase, baseball pitchers apply unbalanced forces to the baseball.

    With regard to applying force to the baseball, the critical part of Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia is ‘uniform (straight line) motion.’

    ‘Uniform motion’ means straight line movement.

    Therefore, to maximize the force that baseball pitchers apply to baseballs, baseball pitchers must apply force in straight lines toward home plate.

    When baseball pitchers do not apply force to the baseball in straight lines, at every moment along the curved force application pathway, the baseball wants to move in straight lines away from the curved pathway.

    Therefore, when baseball pitchers that do not apply force in straight lines toward home plate, they have to use force to return the baseball to the curved pathway.

    As a result, these baseball pitchers are not able to use that wasted force to accelerate their baseballs to their genetic maximum release velocity.

    What Mr. Nyman does not know and understand about Sir Isaac Newton’s Law of Inertia decreases their genetic release velocity.


#29

The baseball in the hand of the pitcher is a 5 oz. sphere and can be considered part of the hand until release. I do not buy into the premise that the arm is part of Newton’s first law as it applies to pitching.

As it relates to pitching the unbalanced force would be more concerning finger pressure, preset hand position, or any other forces that will cause the ball to, slide, curve, sink, or cut. The straight line direction of the arm does not apply. The arm will dictate the velocity of the ball, not necessarily movement as it applies here.


#30

I think [ __ ] was right, Turn,…this thread may have been the road-map for opening the Seventh Seal…here come the Four Horsemen of the Marshallpocalypse. At least, I think there may still be four of 'em around…


#31

:lol: Yeah you may be right. Of course I think there’s only three left.

There’s just too much “science” being claimed that I just don’t agree with. I’m trying to understand not only that but the blind devotion to the man and his theories.

I have nothing against Dr. Marshall, Yardbird, or anyone else, I just can’t get around following tenets that are at least partially wrong scientifically and further can’t find enough success in the elite game to even try and proof out those tenets.


#32

Lon:

I don’t chime in because the relevant parties (including you, most of the time) aren’t interested in what I’ve found Marshall to be correct about and what he is not correct about through trial and error as well as sEMG studies, three-dimensional modeling methods, and accelerometer readings.

It is a colossal waste of time. Unlike nearly everyone here, I’ve actually confirmed or rejected a lot of the hypotheses via first-party knowledge. Nothing is stopping anyone from reading 20+ research papers and reverse engineering the methods to build their very own biomechanics lab, or wearable computers to calculate accelerations, or invest in sEMG companies.

It may be a crazy endeavor (glad to be called that), but if you really wanted to know the answer to these questions, you could have done what I did. Not only do I get crap from Marshall, but I get it from the traditionalists for misbuilding my biomechanics lab (which was toured and stamped as legitimate by two biomechanics engineers who work in Vicon and Eagle labs) or people who don’t understand data collection.

There is literally nothing for me to gain by pitching in with the arguments here. Rick Peterson said it best: “In God we trust, all others must have data.”

And if you think I’m going to freely divulge the information, uh, no. I don’t need IRB headaches and publish counts to drive up my ego. The results of our athletes says it all.

EDIT: I mean “you” in the royal sense, as in “anyone could have done this.”


#33

Let’s Talk Physics (just a tad more).

Mike Marshall: "Using the inertia of the glove hand to pull the body forward ahead of the front foot is one of the many ways that Sir Isaac Newton tells us to apply force when throwing baseballs…"

Question: How exactly, during any type of pitching delivery, does one pull against the inertial resistance of the glove hand to move the body forward?

  1. Excerpted from Lyman Briggs, American Journal of Physics, vol 27, 1959, pp 589 - 596:

"[i]Dr. H.L Dryden kindly arranged for the measurement of the terminal velocity of a baseball, that is its maximum speed after falling from a great height to the ground. This measurement was carried out in a vertical wind tunnel at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the wind speed being adjusted until the ball justed floated in the windstream. The terminal velocity was about 140 ft/sec . The celebrated catch by Charles Street, of the Washington Ball Club, of a ball dropped from a window of the Washington Monument gave a computed velocity in vacuo [i.e., in vacuum] [i]of 179 ft/sec . The NACA measurements show that, owing to the resistance of the air, the actual speed could not have exceeded 140 ft/sec."

Note: To reach the terminal velocity, a baseball would need to free-fall through air for about 5 - 6 seconds. Assuming 140/179 x 100 = 78% of the in vacuo acceleration can be achieved in air, then .78 x 32 ft/secsec = 25 ft/secsec in air. So,a ball dropped in air starting at v = 0 would be falling at 25 ft/sec after 1 second. After 2 seconds, it would be falling at a rate of 50 ft/sec. After 3 seconds, its speed would be 75 ft/second. After 4 seconds, 100 ft/sec. After 5 seconds, 125 ft/sec (about 88 mph). After about 5 1/2 seconds of free-fall through air a baseball cannot accelerate any further and continues to free-fall at a constant velocity of about 95 mph.

Contrast that information to Marhshall’s Physics of Baseball in his Free Book [of nonsense] for Pitchers: He claims with an apparently straight face that a baseball dropped from any height, even 10, 000 feet, has a “maximum falling velocity” (Marshallese for “terminal velocity”) of 40 miles per hour…because he calculated it that way.

This kind of junk seriously lowers the overall average IQ of the entire baseball community.


#34

Instead of arguing amongst yourselves whether of not Marshall’s mechanics are right, why don’t you actually try them? I’m sorry, but from what I have heard LA Flippin is an engineer. Not a baseball player. None of this will ever be settled until it is seen by someone. Guess who can prove it to everyone? ME. I’m 90 mph just 7 months after tommy john. Not only am I 90 mph, I can throw 100 pitches a day if I wanted to. You want video of me? ask for it. You want to see me pitch? come visit me. You want me to prove I can strikeout professional hitters? sign me…Oh wait, no one has the balls to do that because they’re afraid of a 23 year old kid knowing more than they do. I pitched traditionally and I tore my labrum and UCL. Now I’m pitching like I’m 18 again with no pain… coincidence? I don’t think so. Arguments can keep happening back and forth, but the reality is that is it settling nothing. Pitchers continue to get hurt at an alarming rate, yet we still argue that these pitchers getting hurt have good mechanics. I tried House’s mechanics for a year… throwing about 50 pitches a week. Ended up with tommy john. I adopt Marshall mechanics, and I throw a 6lb iron ball as hard as I can 48 times a day and I forget what a sore arm even feels like. Arguments on this matter will never be settled unless it is proven. I’ll prove it, so long as someone is open minded enough to let somebody do something different.


#35

Blaine,
I would love to see some video of you throwing. Do you use a “full Marshall” motion, or a hybrid? Speaking for myself, I have nothing against someone using a Marshall type delivery if that’s what they feel is best for them. What I have an issue with is the way that Marshall’s followers believe that everyone else should do things exactly like they do, or else they’re fools who will ruin their arms. Personally, I’ve made use of some of Marshall’s wrist weight exercises to train deceleration, and I feel that they are a valuable training tool. I’ve done weighted ball throwing (although nothing like the iron ball stuff you guys do), and seen GREAT results (thanks Kyle Boddy!). I’m a curious type of person, and I’ve actually tried throwing with a Marshall-type motion, and personally, I didn’t feel that it worked for me. I’m probably not as talented as you, but I will say this: I’m 34, had a major shoulder surgery 8 years ago, and have thrown harder (90 mph) during the past year than ever before. I did not injure my labrum pitching, either. It was back squatting with poor technique that got me. The traditional motion works for me, some non-traditional training methods worked for me, and I wouldn’t want anyone telling me I’m a fool for throwing the way I do. There are a lot of current and former big league pitchers who were pretty successful using a traditional motion, and that includes Dr. Marshall. He was a great pitcher, but I’ve seen video of him pitching for the Dodgers, and his delivery wasn’t what he teaches now. He actually had a little of “the dreaded inverted W” in his arm action!!! Let’s not forget that, even if a guy wanted to change his mechanics completely to the Marshall model, making that kind of change to a skill as complex as pitching is a monumental task, especially at a high school or older age. I guess my point is that I wish a productive conversation could be had between Dr. Marshall and other coaches, but the Marshall camp has such a “my way of the highway” mentality, that it never goes anywhere but argument. If Dr. Marshall and his followers promoted the benefits of their training program, or promoted certain aspects of his mechanical model without demanding a complete overhaul of guys’ mechanics, maybe progress could be made. At any rate, good luck in your baseball career!


#36

I really wish I would have been in this conversation, just to debate the physics of baseball (physicist and nerd here).

All I can say is this, I believe we have a compelling argument here for natural pronation, and I´ve always done it, and I have always seen it be done. As for whose school of thought to follow, statistically the only one I care about is the one that leads to velocity, which is how you make it (or fail to make it). As seen previously we know that other schools of thought besides Dick Mills and Mike Marshall lead to harder throwing velocities. Honestly this may be short sighted, but I would give almost anything to throw hard to even have one season of proball. I love it too much to give it up and so do a lot of others in the game. Scouts are more than ever looking at higher velocities and that is what most people want. Gas gets you where you want to go, being fine tuned mechanically keeps you there (control).


#37

Dan,
Thanks for the reply. I totally and 100% agree with you. Marshall vs. traditional is basically like listening to Democrats vs. Republicans. I disagree with the fact that Marshall bashes everything and every idea that someone else has. I think if they are willing to work with people by making subtle changes rather than a whole transformation of mechanics, then the movement would be one day successful. However, it is not making any progress at all because both sides continue to argue which leads to nothing being proven. I pitch only out of the stretch and use a hybrid method of pitching. Buying into Marshall’s motion and doing it everyday has taught me some important things that I figured out by myself. I have trained 60 days straight now, and during those days, I have tinkered with things and made small or large changes to my mechanics for the ultimate goal of getting up to a driveline height and keeping the humerus locked into place with the elbow above shoulder height which allows for horizontal bounce. By doing something everyday, you slowly learn what works for you and what to tell yourself. I don’t like to call myself a Marshall guy as much as I would like to call myself a Marshall enthusiast. I have found a method that has worked for me. For example, I find that a longer step down the mound gives me more velocity where Marshall wants his guys to step short. Ultimately my main goal is to get to driveline height, keep it there all the way through the delivery and finish tall. How I do that is completely up to me to figure out. I believe if more people had your view on the topic, headway would be made.


#38

Blaine, it sounds like you have the intelligence to come up with you own ideas, and the work ethic to kep grinding away at it. Good for you on both. The political reference you made is one I’ve already thought of. Demanding ideological purity, whether politicially, religiously, or apparently even kinesiologically(!) doesn’t usually help things, from my experience. I’d love to see some video of you pitching. A hybridization of Marshall style mechanics has been used at the major league level with success. That’s what Jeff Sparks used when he was in the show. If anyone here remembers Rudy Seanez, I’d say he was kind of in that group, too. He was a guy that trained some with Dr. Marshall, and had a long career as a MLB relief pitcher.


#39

Blaine please post a video of your mechanics. I am truly interested in seeing the Marshall mechanics in action throwing 90.


#40

The idea that pronation is natural is missing the forest for the trees. Black widow spiders are natural too, as are volcanoes. That’s how “pronation is natural” sounds to me.