Why Exactly Is The Inverted W So Important?


#1

Paul (and Chin and CADad),

If the Inverted W is so necessary to velocity, then why is it that so many successful, hard throwers don’t make it?

I’m talking about great, hard-throwing pitchers like…

  • Roger Clemens
  • Bob Gibson
  • Sandy Koufax
  • Roy Oswalt
  • Tom Seaver

Why is the Inverted W superior to the Horizontal W?

Could it be that the truth is the Inverted W is not in fact so important? That the Horizontal W is just fine?

Could it be that you are destroying pitchers’ arms for absolutely no good reason?


#2

Here’s an image sequence of Roy Oswalt throwing a 95 MPH fastball.

There’s certainly no Inverted W here, and only a modest Horizonal W (in frames 31 and 32).

Roy Oswalt, not Billy Wagner or Joel Zumaya, is the guy that young pitchers should be studying and emulating.

Guys like him are certainly the ones that I am focused on signing.


#3

If the Inverted W is so necessary to velocity, then why is it that so many successful, hard throwers don’t make it?

Never said it was, this is something that you have tried to pass off to everyone in the form of “the sky is falling” you will throw your arm off.

And not that long ago you were told that very same thing by someone who has taken the time to do REAL research:

[quote]10-06-2006, 11:21 AM
JJA
Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 129

Chris,

I think you would find Rotational Throwing for Numbies extremely interesting since it appears you don’t have it. Nyman finally agreed to let me download a copy, and I must say his information is really, really good. The guy may be a pain in the a**, but RTFN is extremely interesting with the most details on the throwing process I have seen anywhere.

As jojab was hinting, although Nyman believes that the inverted W is probably the most efficient throwing style, he readily admits there are many top pitchers who don’t use it. That’s covered in quite a bit of depth in RTFN.

Since the loading of the scaps occurs before the ball is thrown, it cannot be the result of velocity. He’s got some good clips in RTFN that illustrate players who use their scaps, and those who don’t. Again, I found it extremely informative and given your interest in pitching, I think you would also find it so.

-JJA [/quote]

To which you responded:

[quote]10-06-2006, 12:32 PM
Chris O’Leary
Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 644

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJA
As jojab was hinting, although Nyman believes that the inverted W is probably the most efficient throwing style, he readily admits there are many top pitchers who don’t use it. That’s covered in quite a bit of depth in RTFN.

My concern with the inverted W is that it may be TOO efficient; that it allows you to exceed the limits of the body. That may be why you get both the high velocities and the shoulder problems (e.g. Billy Wagner and I suspect Joel Zumaya).

The same thing may be true for Mark Prior.

He may be “perfect” from the standpoint of mechanical efficiency (e.g. that’s the best way to build a pitching machine), but he might do things the the human body simply can’t handle.

To last a long time in the big leagues, you may have to throw differently than Wagner and Prior do.


Chris O’Leary[/quote]

So you were told several months ago that the inverted W was about throwing efficiency and NOT maximizing velocity. but again you really don’t understand what throwing efficiency is. Why? I can only surmise because you simply refuse to open your eyes and do some real research.

I found another post of yours (eteamz) particular interest:

[quote]Nickname: Chris O’Leary
Posts: 933
Member Since: 11/14/05
View Profile
Send Private Message Send Message Posted: 11/15/2005 11:23am
Views: 280
Replies: 0 Re: Dr. Mike Marshall

Others have said elsewhere and I agree that a lot of the problem is organized baseball (with “organized” being the operative word).

I grew up much as you did. However, there is a major difference between the baseball (and Indian Ball) that I/we played in the lot
next to my house and the baseball that many kids play today. For one thing, we usually pitched to our own guys, and as a result were
more concerned with serving one up than getting it by them. We wanted to throw the ball fast enough that they could hit it hard but not so fast as to throw it by them.

As I search my memory, I can only recall one game of baseball (but admittedly multiple games of wiffle ball) in which we pitched
against the opposing team.

Also, having said all of that I still managed to permanently damage my elbow and shoulder by always throwing a deep sidearm. Based on the symptoms I have, I messed up my rotator cuff and may in fact have torn my labrum.

Now I have to throw with a completely mechanically correct 3/4 delivery (preceded by lots of warm-up time) or my arm starts to hurt
and eventually goes dead.[/quote]

I can understand your belief (need) to focus on injury ( your personal experiences shape your belief system). What I cannot excuse is your overzealous ego which substitutes personal fabrication for lack of knowledge.

My experiences were somewhat different. In high school I pitched and was the second-best pitcher on my team. The guy who was better than I was threw a lot harder and was about 6 inches shorter, and for the life of me I could never figure out why. I’m sure that has had something to do with my “take” on throwing a baseball.

And last but not least I have said a number of times that I feel that a slinging arm action probably has greater velocity potential than the inverted W. But that slingers typically do not have good breaking balls (curveballs) nor do they have exceptional fastball movement as compared to inverted W or flat W. throwers. All of which is part of my definition of throwing efficiency, i.e. the best combination of speed, movement and location. I refrain from using the word velocity, velocity is a vector quantity, when applied to throwing a baseball implies both speed and location.

Again, you need to do a better job researching/homework before you start taking apart someone else’s opinions. :twisted:


#4

[quote=“coachxj”]And last but not least I have said a number of times that I feel that a slinging arm action probably has greater velocity potential than the inverted W. But that slingers typically do not have good breaking balls (curveballs) nor do they have exceptional fastball movement as compared to inverted W or flat W. throwers. All of which is part of my definition of throwing efficiency, i.e. the best combination of speed, movement and location. I refrain from using the word velocity, velocity is a vector quantity, when applied to throwing a baseball implies both speed and location.
[/quote]

XJ,

I agree with some of your points and disagree with others.

Look at Juan Marichal’s arm action. I assume this is what you mean by slinging. Are you aware that he threw a curve, slider, screwball, and blinding fastball? His breaking and reverse-breaking pitches were exceptional. (And using this arm action the screwball is no harder on the arm than any of the other pitches.)

And he had control.
“But his (Marichal’s) control is a bigger thing. He can throw all day within a two-inch space, in, out, up or down. I’ve never seen anyone as good as that.”
— Hank Aaron

In the clips at the bottom of this forum look at how early he turns the ball over in the back and look at the length of his driveline compared to Prior. When Prior brings the ball up close to the head it maximizes the distance his forearm bounces backward. You don’t see this with Marichal; his arm path minimizes the bounce as the elbow drives forward. With Marichal the ball continues to accelerate more or less along the arc, with Prior it doesn’t. If you looked at high speed film of Prior you would actually see a time just before acceleration where the ball, traveling downward and backward, has NEGATIVE acceleration. This differentiation explains a lot about durability if you understand how stress is applied differently to the UCL and front of the shoulder using these two examples.

Coach45


#5

The inverted W - It obviously isn’t necessary for velocity. It may help, I don’t know. Does it hurt arms in any way other than allowing someone to throw faster? I don’t know.

Is trying to scare people off of doing it based on nothing more than a hunch unethical? Yep.

Do motivational speakers expect to accomplish anything, or are they just doing it to make money, i.e. are they unethical? Some are, some aren’t. Guess which category I believe you fall into.

This thread follows your typical pattern. First you make up a statement and attribute it to someone who never said it. Then you argue with that statement to try and discredit them and make yourself look good. Unethical? Yes.


#6

[quote=“coachxj”]If the Inverted W is so necessary to velocity, then why is it that so many successful, hard throwers don’t make it?

Never said it was, this is something that you have tried to pass off to everyone in the form of “the sky is falling” you will throw your arm off.[/quote]

Then why did you recently say this…

I can point to literally hundreds of players who have benefited significantly using the exact same methods (inverted W, scapula loading, pelvic loading, etc.) that you THINK are a problem or what you THINK causes problems.

You’re contradicting yourself.


#7

If you repeat the big lie often enough people will start to believe it. Keep trying.

Saying that people have benefitted from something and saying that it is necessary are two different things.


#8

[quote=“CADad”]The inverted W - It obviously isn’t necessary for velocity. It may help, I don’t know. Does it hurt arms in any way other than allowing someone to throw faster? I don’t know.

Is trying to scare people off of doing it based on nothing more than a hunch unethical? Yep.[/quote]

First, I am trying to persuade people that it’s not necessary because it’s not what Oswalt, Ryan, Seaver, and others do. If the Inverted W was so necessary, then nobody would be successful without doing it. That’s not the case.

Second, if you think that by encouraging people to emulate Oswalt, Ryan, and Seaver is harming them, then so be it. But I disagree (as do the facts). I think most people would be thrilled to have the careers of Oswalt, Ryan, and Seaver.

Third, what I think is unethical is advocating a mechanical style without researching the injury implications of it. I have spent a significant amount of time researching this and have found a very strong correlation between making the Inverted W and experiencing shoulder problems down the road (and it’s well more than 50%).


#9

How have they benefitted from it?

Is suffering a series of serious, and plainly unnecessary, shoulder injuries a benefit?


#10

There you go again twisting what other people have said. When did I ever say that encouraging people to emulate Oswalt, et al is wrong? I didn’t. Once again your tactics sicken me.

As far as your 50% correlation show me the data, then show me where you’ve tested your predictions against future actions.


#11

I assume the benefit that coachxj was talking about was a better fastball. Why do you keep trying to twist things and add emotional arguments? It is a repeating pattern with you.

You are trying to win an argument and you seem to be willing to go to any lengths to do so or at least appear to do so in the eyes of those who don’t have much background information to draw on.

Now if we all want to draw on past experiences to illustrate things here’s an example.

A couple years ago with the help of couple other people I posted clips of my son throwing on coachxj’s site. People jumped on the bandwagon to tell me that he didn’t have an inverted w, etc. etc. Coachxj came back and said in essence that his arm action was fine, it was similar to Oswalt’s and although there were other things that could use change his arm action wasn’t one of them.

Does that sound like someone who is saying that the inverted W is necessary?

BTW, M is easier than inverted W. :wink:


#12

Chris,

I have found some interesting pictures of Jesse Orosco who just happens to hold the all time record for games pitched and played for 25 years professionally.

Here’s a link to a website chronicling his entire career. It states that he spent his first time on the DL in 2000 with an elbow injury. That was his 22nd professional season.

The pictures on the site clearly show that he was an elbows above the shoulders, Inverted W (M) guy.

http://z.lee28.tripod.com/therest/id30.html


#13

I am not on anyones side, but I tried all kind of mechanics myself, and when I tried using inverted W, my shoulder and elbow started to hurt after only a few pitches. My body just dosent accept it, maybe someones else does.


#14

He’s what Chris would classify as the extreme version also(Zumaya, Bonderman, Wagner).


#15

[quote=“palo20”]I have found some interesting pictures of Jesse Orosco who just happens to hold the all time record for games pitched and played for 25 years professionally.

Here’s a link to a website chronicling his entire career. It states that he spent his first time on the DL in 2000 with an elbow injury. That was his 22nd professional season.

The pictures on the site clearly show that he was an elbows above the shoulders, Inverted W (M) guy.

http://z.lee28.tripod.com/therest/id30.html[/quote]

Thanks for looking into this.

It’s interesting, but I don’t think it directly contradicts what I’ve been saying.

First, I never said that this was bad for 100% of people.

Second, if you look at his stats, you will see that Orosco never pitched more than 110 innings in a season, and rarely more than 50 innings in the second half of his career.

I think it reinforces what I have said before; that the Inverted W is incompatible with being a starter (e.g. 200+ innings per year guy). Instead, as with Billy Wagner, I think guys who make the inverted W are better suited to a reliever or closer role.

It will be interested to see what happens to Joel Zumaya or Aaron Heilman if they are moved into the starting rotation.


#16

Obviously Orosco is a bit different because he was a lefty specialist for most of his career. Any time a reliever goes over 100 innings it’s a pretty durable season. This doesn’t happen much any more, if at all.

I still don’t think starting is that much more stressful than relieving. Look at Orosco’s games. He didn’t pitch a lot of innings, but he had to throw every day. His games pitched still don’t come close to indicating the number of games he had to get hot and didn’t get into the game.


#17

This is just a theory, but I think some of the difference is that starters are more likely to pitch when fatigued, which I believe may be harder on the body.

I think that explains why some guys can make it as 1 or 2 inning relievers but not make it as long relievers or starters.


#18

As I stated in another post, some guys make it as relievers and not as starters because of their stuff. Starters need 3 good pitches while relievers only need 2 to work with (except Rivera). Some guys just don’t have the stuff to get through a lineup 2 or 3 times, but they can come in and go all out with their two pitches for an inning or two. That’s another reason I think relieving is just as tough as starting. There is no pacing, no feeling out process. You have to come in with your best right away, and you have to come with your best every time out. That’s why a lot of guys throw harder out of the pen.


#19

Nikae,
Wise choice. Keep making your own decisions based on what works best for you. No need to be on anyone’s side.


#20

[quote=“Chris O’Leary”][quote=“palo20”]I have found some interesting pictures of Jesse Orosco who just happens to hold the all time record for games pitched and played for 25 years professionally.

Here’s a link to a website chronicling his entire career. It states that he spent his first time on the DL in 2000 with an elbow injury. That was his 22nd professional season.

The pictures on the site clearly show that he was an elbows above the shoulders, Inverted W (M) guy.

http://z.lee28.tripod.com/therest/id30.html[/quote]

Thanks for looking into this.

It’s interesting, but I don’t think it directly contradicts what I’ve been saying. YEAH right!!! Its great to see a person who cant see straight ahead backpeddle like a clown on unicycle. If your going to say that you have not told everybody who has ever asked about this that it is bad than you are not only a “uneducated selfserving guru” you are also a fricking LIAR to boot.

First, I never said that this was bad for 100% of people.

You have advised 100% of the people NOT to do this!!! OVER and OVER again

Second, if you look at his stats, you will see that Orosco never pitched more than 110 innings in a season, and rarely more than 50 innings in the second half of his career.

I think it reinforces what I have said before; that the Inverted W is incompatible with being a starter (e.g. 200+ innings per year guy). Instead, as with Billy Wagner, I think guys who make the inverted W are better suited to a reliever or closer role.

You are a joke!!! now wheres that 200degree exterbnal rotation pitcher ???

It will be interested to see what happens to Joel Zumaya or Aaron Heilman if they are moved into the starting rotation.[/quote] Your the “forecaster” of all pitching why dont you tell us. OH your busy right now backpeddling!!! What a joke you are CHRIS OLEARY