Form Perfect Models in Thought…

Here are some fundamental questions to ponder when embarking on a true evaluation of proper hitting technique:

What is the relationship of the direction and flight-angle of the ball thrown by the pitcher with respect to the angle of the swinging bat and the force it exerts in the opposite direction?

1.  Unless a pitcher bends over, and down below a critical horizontal plane, and tosses the ball on a deliberately upward trajectory, every thrown pitch (100% of the time) is travelling in a descending line (or arc). It has been proven that even a Nolan Ryan fastball moves in a downward trajectory. Gravity and the fact that the pitcher is standing about a foot above the plane of the batter and Home Plate are the two primary reasons.

2. Is it logical to develop, and/or teach-learn, the body – mechanics that facilitate a swinging bat to move downward to strike at a downward-moving ball? This would seem, at the least, counter-productive for effective “Bats-man-ship.” “Back-spin,” will be more effectively produced by a bat whose solid and direct contact is at a point just below the center of the ball.

3. Does not every “Speed-Gun” register the fastest speed of a pitch at the point closest to the pitcher’s release of the ball? Hitting a baseball most effectively is determined by fractions of inches. Lunging forward to hit a ball 2 or 3 feet in front of home plate places the batter closer to the ball’s faster speed.

4. Does not the better hitter benefit significantly by keeping his head stationary as the

body rotates through the swing?

Lunging out at the ball in front of the plate has a tendency to distort the batter’s perception of the ball because the lunge creates excessive movement of the head, which houses the visual mechanism.

5. Does the strength of the swing come from the stride, forward lunge of the body, and extension of the arms? Or does it come from the rapid and controlled rotary transfer of weight that occurs after the front foot plants and the front knee begins straightening to help force the front hip backwards to allow the back hip to move quickly forward, with a                      bent back knee?

These actions lead the upper body into an orderly series of movements that precipitate a power surge directing the bat into the ball. The front knee straightens, and the back bent-knee rotates forward and downward on a pivoting back foot (specifically the outside of Big toe). The front shoulder shrugs upward and back, and accentuates the downward and forward action of the back shoulder. The lowered back shoulder facilitates a natural flattening of the bat, as it begins its approach to the striking area. Both arms await their duties in a semi-relaxed manner.

Before the body-weight transfer begins, as the ball is leaving the pitcher’s hand, the body starts to “gather”(brace itself). The front shoulder turns inwardly (just under the side of the chin), the knees stabilize, and the hands move slightly beyond the breadth of the back shoulder as the front arm begins to straighten. The entire body anxiously awaits the precise instant to “attack” the ball as it enters the “Zone.”

The “gathering” occurs at a slow, steady pace, to facilitate momentum for the quickest possible response at the moment of “weight-transfer.” At that moment, when the shoulder shrugs, the hands and bat are slanting in order to quickly level the bat to the plane of the ball and provide substantial range for making contact. The turning body provides a centrifugal force to allow the front arm enough momentum to easily snap to extension, as the bent back arm is starting its drive to fully extend itself and its “palmated” hand (palm up) through the contact-point.

At the “snap” of the front elbow, the medial side of its upper arm is flush against its corresponding breast, as contact is made with the ball. This assures that the power transfer from bat to ball is occurring within the confines of the main power source, the body. If the contact is made with front arm separated from the body, the power will be diffused. It should be obvious that the arm(s), acting independently from the body, has a diminished capacity for supplying power.

After contact is made, and both arms have extended with the bat’s impact through the ball on a slightly ascending plane, the proper follow-through is facilitated by the hands “rolling over” as the arms pull back to the body by the continued flow of the shoulders.

The back shoulder’s gradual, forward ascent reaches a parallel level to the front, and the arms  settle in a bent position with hands slightly above the shoulders (ala Tiger Woods). The batter could release his top hand from the bat after the follow-through, like a Mark McGwire, Barry Bonds, or Albert Puljos (bat high).

If a batter’s follow-through ends with his 2 arms and hands below his shoulders, at his waist, this could mean that he is rolling his back shoulder over too quickly, as sometimes results in solidly hit grounders, bouncing balls, or looping line-drives. The “follow-through” does not create the flight pattern of the ball, but merely accentuates the trajectory, if the ball has been correctly contacted by the swing of the bat.

…And Look at Them Continually…

Consistency of batting effectiveness (efficiency in striking a baseball) has never been more highly demonstrated than by Barry Bonds, in the 2001season, as well as in 2002, 2003, and 2004. Throughout his Major League career, accolades were heaped upon him for what seemed like a remarkable consistency for slugging the ball better than anyone else, at least in the 1990s. No one besides Mark McGwire (in 1998) positioned himself more majestically at the plate than Barry Bonds in 2001 (almost as well in 2002, 2003, and 2004). Except for an extra 25-30 pounds of muscle weight, Barry looked as he always had, confident and supremely equipped to handle any type of ball the pitcher could throw.

The “Art” of hitting a baseball certainly could be defined in the context of describing the ideal hitter– “He is one whose bat most consistently contacts the ball in a manner that facilitates a straight and ascending “line-drive.”(To hit the ball in any other manner would be to miss-hit it.)

…Or you’ll never carve them out in Grand and Noble Accomplishments!

No one in Baseball had a more scientifically correct style for hitting a baseball than Barry Bonds. His extra power, during his last 7 years, catapulted him to a higher level than had been previously thought possible. When he wasn’t quite so strong, the balls he hit were careening off the walls instead of sailing over the fences. Is there anyone else smart enough to figure out how to duplicate his technique? (And, if Baseball wanted to retain optimal fan interest, it would have behooved the Commissioner’s office to enact a rule that would have prevented any pitcher from intentionally “walking” a batter on 4 straight pitches. If they did, Barry Bonds would most likely have hit 100 Home Runs in a single season.)

Models of Excellence!

“Mortals must change their ideals in order to improve their Models!”

“Conceptions of mortal erring thought must give way to the ideal of all that is perfect and eternal.” Current Big-League batting concepts must be at least partially erroneous if they can only provide a maximum efficiency rating of less than 40%. There must be some visionary with insight to detect the hidden source of pronounced batting proficiency as well as the foresight to determine a naturally productive benefit to those aspirants to progress who might adapt to a suitable facilitation of such an astute and pragmatic revelation.

Certainly there must be something beyond the mortal hopelessness of impractical “trial and error” that can secure a confident approach to supplanting the traditional sense of human imperfection that deters the average ballplayer from ascribing to anything other than a mediocre standard of “Batting Excellence.”

Ted Williams was the last player to surpass the semi-permeable barrier of .400. To his uncommon credit, he applied a rarefied mental and physical confluence of energy that enacted a more scientific approach to the mechanism of hitting a baseball. However, with the advent of technological advancement, the modern baseball enthusiast has at his disposal an array of devices that should certainly enhance the skills of the contemporary batter (as well as other positioned ballplayers).

But no one has yet surpassed Ted Williams’ last effort of conformity to the highest current standard for batting success. Even with what can be scientifically construed as an imperfect application of principle, Ted Williams succeeded beyond the apprehension of his contemporaries, as well as those who would currently seek to supersede his efforts.

Unfortunately, the baseball world has regressed instead of progressed in its attempt to exact a semblance of the Ted Williams mystique for batting a baseball. Only one player seems to “hold a candle” to a higher proficiency level of excellent hitting. He is/was Barry Bonds! The remarkable fact that no one knows how he did what he did gives testimony to the chaotic state of affairs that the industry of baseball seems to be experiencing today. (Since he is now gone from the Baseball arena, much speculation has denounced his prowess as that due to his “chemically”- enhanced physicality.)

However, I submit that Barry Bonds as well as Ted Williams are the batters whom all prospective “high achievers” should emulate in order to attain a facsimile of credible “Excellence.” Although Mr. Williams was nearly perfect in his understanding and application of the principles governing the absolute definition of batting prominence, he was not altogether unflawed in his actual approach to an impeccable demonstration.

The closest exponent of the perfect batting technique was Barry Bonds, who, in obvious ways, superseded the brilliance that Ted Williams embodied. The only thing difficult to decipher is whether or not he was conscious of his pre-eminent status as a pure extrapolation of principle, or was he subject to faltering, due to lack of understanding?

Barry Bonds was capable of hitting 100 home runs and batting .400 or more, because he was closer to flawless technique than anyone who has ever played the game. His strength (even with the stigma of steroid controversy) was incontestable, his athletic ability was indisputable, his timing was nearly impeccable, and his stance, approach to the ball, and fluid mechanics were incomparable. In the few areas in which Ted Williams appeared lacking, Mr. Bonds was pronouncedly adept (especially in his adaptability to strike at the low outside pitch, and hitting the ball with power to the opposite field).

What was it that Barry Bonds did consistently right, that most, if not all, other batters only do sporadically? The answer is 5 separate things. They are the following:

1. He established a strong low center of gravity while waiting for the ball.
2. He eliminated excessive movement of his head and eyes.
3. He waited patiently for the ball to get to him while he quietly lowered his hands to begin an unobtrusive rhythm of his arms.
4. When the ball got to his hitting zone, 4 things happened  simultaneously:
   1. The front foot planted quickly and firmly—front leg straightened
   2. Front shoulder shrugged upwardly, while back shoulder and elbow drove downward (hands, while staying behind back shoulder, presented a flat bat as the body was turning to address the pitched ball).
   3. Back bent knee drove forward and down, as hips turned rapidly
   4. The shoulders followed the hips in rapid succession with arms extending through the contact of the ball.
5. From contact, through the straightening of arms, through the follow through, the shoulders were continuously flowing, until they (shoulders) had changed position (back to front and vice-versa).

You might think that most batters do those things listed. Well, many may think, or wish, that they do, but because they do not fully understand the purpose of each, their commitment to applying them is less than wholehearted.

To be continued: “Form Perfect Models in Thought…”

Batting Deficiency: Main Cause for Less Fun in Baseball

By

John Paciorek

It is no secret in the Big Leagues – unless you are a pitcher or the “slickest” of fielders with a rifle-arm and “speed-a-foot,” your chances of making it to the “Show” and staying there are “slim and None” if you can’t HIT! But most batters who had been signed to play professional Baseball had been thought of by their parents and “home-town” fans as decent hitters at one time or another.

Ted Williams exclaimed it first, but probably many before him realized the fact, and, assuredly, every athlete who has been privileged to experience the physical, mental, and emotional tension associated with swinging a baseball bat under game conditions can verify, “Hitting a baseball effectively is the most difficult thing to do in all of sports.” 

Many people, men, women, boys, and girls love to swing a baseball bat at a baseball (softball). It seems a pretty fair accomplishment—mentally sizing up the speed of that spherical object floating in a relatively straight path toward a designated area for the “batter” to physically strike with a long narrow cylindrical piece of wood or aluminum. It’s really fun! The skill involved is not just physical; the mental aspect includes the quick discernment of time, space, and geometric calculations, (and much more intense at the Big-League level). That’s why baseball (softball) games at family picnics and other recreational environments are such crowd-pleasing activities. And if no one gets hurt, it’s even more enjoyable!

For those who get involved at a more intricate level, like Little League, the game speeds up a little bit. The batter doesn’t seem to have as much control, as when dad or mom was pitching the ball. But the game is still fun; you just have to take it a little more seriously, more figuring and adjusting to more variables. And when your bat makes “good contact” the exhilaration is more intense and meaningful, even though your hard hit grounder goes through the shortstop’s legs for a base hit.

When you make it to Little League Majors, the pressure can almost seem too daunting. Everyone is bigger and stronger. You start asking yourself, “how am I going to maintain my .850 average? Then reality sets in, and more adjustments (physically, mentally, and emotionally) have been made, and you feel pretty grateful to sustain a modest .530 batting average. The .320 drop is attributable to the “curve ball”!

As a thirteen year-old, in Pony League, you’re now playing on a field where the bases are 23 feet farther, and the pitching rubber is 54 feet from home plate, instead of 45. Mental and physical adjustments have to be made! The pitching distance is farther; but the pitcher is bigger and stronger; and the ball is thrown faster, and it “hurts” a lot worse. (Remember, this is where your most imaginative 14 year-old pitcher starts to work on his “split-finger,” and assortment of other pitches, for which he no doubt will throw his arm out and diminish all chances of making the High School team, and the “Bigs.”) Therefore, an emotional adjustment is in order—“do I really want to play Pony League, or High School Ball?”

With a year of “Pony” under your belt, you’ve made the necessary adjustments. You’re bigger, stronger, and back in dominating form! New standards have been acquiesced, and your .400 plus batting average is a given. Your size and physical ability give you overwhelming confidence, and the High School coaches reinforce your attitude with constant pandering. Watch, stride, and swing—that’s all you had to do, and pretty good contact with the ball gives you a hit 2 times in every 5 at- bats, every once in a while, a towering home-run. Hitting a baseball doesn’t seem that difficult! Sure, every once in a while, in tournament play, one or two pitchers seem to be overpowering! Should you make adjustments just for them? (You have not yet learned about the Big Fish in the Big Pond syndrome.)

High School provides a whole new experience for the “naïve” hitter. Until now, most instructors of the “art” of hitting have been parents, who didn’t claim to be infallible artisans of the craft but only slightly more than incompetent advisors whose lack of expertise couldn’t do much harm to a blossoming prodigy. Where the Little League coach pampered the players, because his son, daughter and neighbors’ kids were on the team, and didn’t want to risk offending anyone, along with the rule that everyone had to play, the Public High School coach had no such reservations to inhibit his personal, somewhat tyrannical resolve to develop the potential of the players for his team. If you didn’t produce on your own recognizance, you’d better follow his specialized techniques, or risk “riding the pine” for the “duration” of your High School career, while lapsing into baseball oblivion.

During those High School years, the baseball player begins to realize that hitting a baseball consistently well must be the most difficult task in all of sports. Once this realization becomes prominent in the minds of the most determined hitters, an inexplicable desire to challenge the inescapable assumption that mere mortals are incapable of surpassing the pre-determined range of superlative achievement for batting excellence! To ever hit .400 again, on the Major League level, seems impossible, and preposterous to think it could be done on a consistent basis.

After High School, those individuals who go into the college ranks or professional Minor League baseball quickly discover that mere physical enhancement will not entitle players to climb the ladder of developmental success. Even with the greatest of physical attributes, the acts of seeing, striding, and swinging the bat do not always procure the most beneficent effects. Thoughtful consideration of a good many aspects of the entire batting regimen must be understood and applied conscientiously, in order for maximum proficiency to be demonstrated.

The question has been, and might always persist, what is the proper regimen for establishing a technique that will procure the consistent, maximum effect while hitting a baseball? Many have theorized about the prospect, but only a handful have established credibility through their practical applications and thoughtfully spoken and written delineation. But, of these, the closest to extracting a complete and understandable facsimile of truth has been Mr. Ted Williams, who happened to be the last Major League player to bat .400 over the course of an entire season. Unfortunately, those who attempted to understand and follow his astute analysis of hitting perfection, misconstrued his intent, and misguided countless devotees into a darkened abyss of probable incompetence.

Aristotle pointed out, in his Nicomachean Ethics, that, in order to begin a study of anything that would lead to the highest understanding and demonstration of its universal verity, one must “behold” an example of a closest facsimile to the ideal estate, study its admirable characteristics, and extrapolate from its obvious functional proficiency a common entity by which a generic standard could be discerned, duplicated, and possibly expanded upon. Excellence in any field of human endeavor is achievable to anyone willing to devote a “heart and soul” effort toward mastering the definable concomitants to successful enterprise.

Major League batters are at the pinnacle of their vocational pursuits. Yet, within their own ranks can be found distinguishable differences in individual mastery of skills and technique. The batters who would become excellent performers are they who would follow the example of the “martial artist,” by adapting to his study and application of fundamental movement principles. However, the alternative to taking martial arts classes would be to find someone in their own profession, who is renowned as a masterful exponent of their own respective art of batting. In other words, “mark the perfect man, and behold the upright.”

“Upright” does not refer to body-position while performing tasks. The more upright the body, the higher is the center of gravity. That’s not good in most sports situations. A low center of gravity is always preferred for short, quick, and strong movements of the body in all sports activities. Upright, in the biblical context, refers to intelligent, principled thoughtfulness that always precedes masterful behavior or action.

Barry Bonds and Ted Williams are the batters whom all prospective “high achievers” should emulate in order to attain a facsimile of credible “Excellence” and bring the fun back into their respective “hitting-game.”

To be continued: Models of Excellence!

The Prospect of Winning

By

John F. Paciorek

Is there ever any fun in any endeavor that presents no prospect for winning? Fun and profitability can be found only in the patient, subsequent, sequential learning and properly proficient application of the skills (physical, mental, and psychological) that are entailed in the ultimate prospect of WINNING! Everyone can be a “winner” according to the extent to which he diligently ascribes to the preceding statement.

A notable historic Persian Poet, by the name of Rumi implies that, in all of life’s competitive encounters, there is a viable alternative to the traditional conclusion that someone wins while another loses. From this we can assume that no one really wins unless everyone wins.

The greatest motivational tool to learning and teaching is to have fun. The teacher has fun by seeing his students have fun. He vicariously puts himself in their place and visualizes how he might have enjoyed that same experience when he was of their age. The student(s) have fun by first giving the teacher the benefit of not doubting his intent to increase their knowledge and understanding about the subject in order to allow them the opportunity to improve their proficiency in applying themselves to the lesson pertaining to their own prospect for winning an improved status in Life itself.

With all my youngest students, I generally ask if they are ready to have FUN.  Their hearty reply is always the first indication they are ready to accept my instruction and commence on a joyful journey of fun by way of enhanced application of learning. My older students already know from past experience that they are going to have fun, but don’t always accept willingly the prelude to their version of fun in the form of preliminary exercise and warm-ups. They want immediate access to the more “meaty” subject matter. Some perform the “ritual” vigorously, with the apparent understanding of its ultimate benefit to those wanting to be the best they can be. Others half-heartily go “through the motions”, perhaps thinking they are preserving energy to perform more adeptly at the later stages of the lesson. But as long as each student has a smile on his/her face, I know learning in varying degrees is taking place. And each, to his own degree of substantive learning, is a winner, to that degree.

In Sports, either during an innocuous game in P.E. and recess, or vigorous inter-scholastic competition, the primary purpose for which each player is participating is to WIN! But winning, to most participants, is the act of being victorious over an opposing team or individual. But those who have studied the “game” know that true “winning” is the natural consequence of “right thinking and acting” while in pursuance of objective after objective in route to achieving a pre-determined goal. In Golf, a commentator may say, Tiger just “hit a winner”; in Basketball, Koby’s 30 foot fade-away jumper is “a winner”, but neither shot might have won the match or game. Even on a professional level it is easy to see how the sudden and temporary  elation of one moment of competition can be filled with ecstatic joy. The simple appreciation of a single moment of glory can make everyone a winner, even if his team lost the game. After the game you don’t have to ruminate in despair or dissatisfaction, but rather remember and dwell on the moments that you and your teammates (as well as the opposing players) performed at the best of their abilities. The ultimate goal may not have been achieved this time, but in its pursuance, lots of fun and exciting moments of opportunity presented themselves to remind you and your teammates of what could happen “next time”.

Some coaches attempt to motivate their players (students) to win at just about any cost. They would have them intimidate their opposition, with physical force if necessary. And they may even inadvertently intimidate their own players with the intent to “harden them” to the point of insensitivity toward anyone who would oppose their own collective purpose of winning. It would be difficult to detect in this scenario any sense of joy that most parents would hope to see their children experience. The best coach is always one who emphasizes all the fundamental components that the game entails and an attitude (mental and emotional) that inspires all of his players to do the best they can do each moment of every practice while performing the essential skills he has introduced to them for the purpose of eventually gaining a proficiency to their highest level of competency. His objective is not to instill in his players the idea to “be better than everyone else”, but rather to “be the best he or she can be” – only to “be better today than you were yesterday”. How much better is totally up to each individual. If everyone reaches that simple objective each day, he certainly can consider him/herself a WINNER.

As “there is no way to happiness, happiness is the way”, so, there is no precedence to Happiness but by “Having Fun”. Having fun is discerned at the first sign of accomplishment, and is reinforced in subsequent steps of learning. The joy of “self-accomplishment” intrinsically inculcates into the minds of fledgling youth the notion that living life to the fullest is FUN! But of course, supervision and propriety are necessary forays with which to learn the natural sequence to all constructive enterprise.

If the teaching – learning experience occurs in subsequent steps, sequential development is their natural consequence, and joyful expectation of progress eventuates in the ecstatic revelation that his/her patience has indeed paid off as the entire journey culminates in a “fun-filled” adventure.

Coming Soon:

The Ultimate Baseball Learning Experience – Batting and Throwing Correctly.

Fun: The Way to Baseball Happiness!

By

John F. Paciorek

How can I have fun playing baseball if I am 5 years old and have never before played the game? I have never caught, thrown, or batted a baseball.  This scenario might be considered a “stage 1” category of developmental (kindergarten level) inquiry. A 5 year old who would ask such a question must have seen the game being played by children his age (or perhaps older) who appeared to be having fun. He must have noticed the children hitting, catching, and throwing a round ball while running to and from various positions on a diamond shaped field with fence around the perimeter. IF he had not someone to show or teach him the simple fundamentals of playing the game, perhaps his imagination was cultivated enough to allow him to pretend that he too could perform the actions that he saw being displayed on that field or park, in the privacy of his own mind. As his body was becoming more capable of mimicking the actions of throwing, catching, and batting imaginary objects in and from the “air” while running bases and chasing balls from fictitious projections of his mind, he might have elicited from himself a readiness to experience the real thing if and when the opportunity presented itself.

I can only imagine what may have become of this erstwhile baseball prospect, but I saw firsthand how my 3 year-old brother initiated his baseball career. I was a senior on my High School baseball team in the early 1960s. All my relatives and sometimes professional baseball scouts would come out to see me show off my particular talents. Our team often played its games on Sandlot fields with 3 other adjacent fields back to back to back. Sometimes all fields were being used at the same time. Other times, only one field was in use.

It became common occurrence that while my game was proceeding on field one, my little brother would look forward to watching my game for a while. Then after moments of gaining inspiration and enthusiasm, he would run off to field two, directly behind mine. And there he would stay for 7 to 9 innings mimicking all the action he saw displayed on field one. Pretending to pitch the ball, then hitting the pretend ball, then run the (real) 90 foot bases, sliding into 2^nd, 3^rd, and home bases. He would usually continue this exuberant activity for my entire game. And it wouldn’t be uncommon to observe the people in “our” stands looking over the guard railing onto the adjacent field watching the antics of a remarkable young baseball prospect in the initial stages of his long baseball career.

To be continued, later this week.

Baseball in its Purist Form:

Individual, Collective, Universal Appeal

Ken Burn’s Baseball emphasizes the indigenous character and homespun heritage of our country’s National Pastime. By implication it can be inferred that the innovative and endearing qualities of America can transform a world willing to incorporate the essence of those qualities into an enduring fabric for their own mental and physical environments.

The Game of Baseball is the ultimate in sports activity! To all participants, players or fans, its unique simplicity conveys a human drama, and then reveals and resolves the complexities that would elicit trauma from life’s uncertain circumstances. Nine players take to the field with intent to defend what is considered their “turf” against the encroachment of others. They spend as little time as possible in defense of this nebulous expanse of territory, for, after a successful defensive stratagem, an opposing team of nine players gets an equal opportunity to defend what then becomes its territorial possession. And the game goes on for an indefinite period of time, normally expressed in terms accepted as “nine innings”.

“Could mere human contrivance order such preciseness, from the tri-hedral dimensions of the field of play, to the definitive specifications and range of intricate function for the designated participants?” – Socrates

A unique feature of the rules of engagement is the civility with which all participants are expected to conduct themselves, with respect to the range of their designated positions and the thoughtful concern for the well being of their opponents. A flagrant disrespect for either could instigate an immediate expulsion from the theater of play.

It would be difficult to exalt any particular field position above another, in rank or prestige, for it is incumbent upon each to perform equitably as various game circumstances present themselves. However, the prominence extolled to the “Pitcher” is unavoidable because he initiates and sustains the rhythm of play by his action of throwing the “ball” (baseball). The quality of the pitcher’s performance is determined by how well he is able to prevent the opposing player(s) from initiating action that would allow his (their) team to successfully encroach within the borders of pre-designated areas of defensive territory. The extent to which each “foil” to the pitcher is successful in fulfilling his goal will invariably determine which team wins the game.

In Baseball the singular concepts of individual and collective (team) excellence are intertwined masterfully. And the team that embodies such synergistic essence and complies with the highest standard of personal and collective excellence produces a “Championship” quality.

The high-quality pitcher is he who is adept at either preventing the “batter” (opposing player) from hitting the ball, or whose pitches prevent the batter from hitting the ball well. But, if the ball is hit, the pitcher expects his teammates to perform optimally when applying their fielding skills. Preventing the batter from permeating the invisible “shield” of defense and presenting his own offensive position on the “base-paths” is the mutual goal of the pitcher and his defensive team.

The first line in the “offensive” continuum is for a batter to get on the “base-paths,” either by hitting the ball, being struck by a pitched ball, or receiving a “base-on-balls”(4 errant pitches to the batter). Once the batter attains position on one the three bases (first, second, or third base), he becomes a “base-runner”, and another of his teammates becomes the batter. The new batter’s objective is to help advance or score the runner(s) from the base(s) of which he has taken possession.

Now, here is where one of the many variable and ingenious characteristics of the “Game” comes prominently into play. So many options for strategic deployment present themselves, from the thoughtfully reckless to the intuitively cautious — to gamble on whim or to hope in a pattern of consistency. And only the one that works gives credibility to the “brain and brawn” that accentuates “team-play”.

The proficiency of each player on offense and on defense will determine his individual worth. And the excellence towards which he strives for himself and his team will endear him to his mates and adoring fans. As each player accomplishes his own mastery, the team itself should be beneficiary to the product of a collectively successful enterprise. And each player should also become beneficiary to the collective worth of the team.

Baseball’s enduring attributes, to all levels of civilized society, are those which foster relevance to equal opportunity for the individual, and a sense of genuine contribution to a collective effort. These afford respect that cannot be diminished by an insignificant standard to a presumably less significant status. Every player in a line-up bats, and every position is held equally accountable for mental and physical errors. The standard is the same for all players! What can be a more fair way of evaluating performance? Is there any other arena of “Sports” that epitomizes the “American Dream” more than that displayed on Baseball’s level-field-of-play?

Why is Baseball an American institution? And how can it harmonize the World to the rhythm of its synchronistic appeal? The genius of Baseball is in its ability to promote individual excellence while cultivating the collective aspiration to a noble goal. This dual purpose can only be applauded for enhancing the prospect of continuous, enthusiastic hope by all participants, both active and vicarious.

Within the context of its everyday regimen, Baseball is first a one-on-one confrontation (Batter vs. Pitcher) like Boxing (normally without pugilistic intent and public vilification). This defines a separate but prominent dimension of the overall game. But every individual player is innately humbled by an awareness that his own vain and tenacious effort for personal glory pales in comparison to the satisfaction of attaining the triumphal exhilaration of a “Team” victory. When the team wins, against an overwhelming performance of an opposing pitcher, the “prickly” sensation of a batter’s hitless night somehow doesn’t seem so abrasive. And conversely, the magnificent individual effort of one man (pitcher, in this instance) gives no solace to the individual or his team if the greater goal of victory was not forthcoming.

In Baseball, the adage, “one for all, and all for one” rings true in the hearts and minds of these “9 Musketeers”, with their collectively idealistic sense of purpose. In Football, Basketball, Soccer, and Hockey not everyone is under the spotlight and given his equal opportunity to reflect even a glimmer of those majestic heights of glory that all players in Baseball are afforded. In football, the “linemen” hardly ever touch the ball; in soccer, the goalie and fullbacks never score; in hockey the same is true for goalie, and defensemen barely score; and in basketball, the small man is virtually non-existent. What other sport besides Baseball involves so many individuals in a collective endeavor, all having an equal opportunity to be exalted to the full range of glory, playing positions where equality of skill can not be differentiated for maximum results, where size never has to be a preponderant factor, and (potentially) where remuneration for services should never alienate players or create team dissension?

Baseball’s glorious competition triumphantly celebrates the athletic prowess of at least 18 stellar performers. And the drama enigmatically exemplifies the nation’s struggle as a free-spirited and ebullient exponent of a workable “democratic” society. Baseball is truly America’s national pastime. It not only epitomizes the “new-wave” national standard for American “equality for all”, but characterizes the highest sentiment for democratic reform throughout the world. Except for what could be considered brief lapses in moral consciousness (early segregationist issues, and its latter insidious bout with steroid controversy), the level playing field of Baseball has remained virtually intact, and its pristine elements are continually being unfolded. (Even the latest “Steroid Controversy” that has stirred up a hornet’s nest will ultimately subside, and the game will resume, but with a renewed sense of moral legitimacy.)

Many people, men, women, boys, and girls love to swing a baseball bat at a baseball (softball). It seems a pretty fair accomplishment—mentally sizing up the speed of that spherical object floating in a relatively straight path toward a designated area for the “batter” to physically strike with a long narrow cylindrical piece of wood or aluminum. It’s really fun! The skill involved is not just physical; the mental aspect includes the quick discernment of time, space, and geometric calculations, (and much more intense at the Big-League level). That’s why baseball (softball) games at family picnics, and other recreational environments, are such crowd-pleasing activities. And if no one gets hurt, it’s even more enjoyable!

For those who get involved at a more intricate level, like Little League and above, the game speeds up. The batter doesn’t seem to have as much control, as when dad or mom was pitching the ball. But the game is still fun; you just have to take it a little more seriously, more figuring and adjusting to more variables. And when your bat makes “good contact” the exhilaration is more intense and meaningful.

But as Ted Williams exclaimed, and probably many before him realized, and assuredly, every athlete who has been privileged to experience the physical, mental, and emotional tension associated with swinging a baseball bat under official game conditions can verify, “Hitting a baseball effectively is the most difficult thing to do in all of sports”. And even after many a would-be “big-leaguer” realizes he/she doesn’t have the fortitude (or opportunity) to climb the ladder to the pinnacle of baseball success, there remains in his/her heart a respect and appreciation for those who do persist. For, those who eventually do make it to the higher and highest levels have the empathy and undying support of all who wish they could be there too.

There are myriad challenges a batter has to surmount while encountering the diminutive, ballistic (and frequently volatile), compressed, spherical projectile at the highest level of play. Most dispassionate and well-rounded athletes would agree that making solid and forceful contact with a bat to a pitched ball takes extraordinary, nearly uncanny, skill. An extreme exponent of supreme athleticism, like Michael Jordan, had to curtail a personal quest for “carry-over” Sports glory, because he found the demands for “Batting” proficiency too daunting even for his premier sports status. One would have to query over what uncommon virtues characterize the “legitimate” Master of the Art of hitting a baseball. (The dilemma afforded by steroid use has purportedly usurped the crown of legitimacy from even those most venerable practitioners of the “art”.)

Hockey or Soccer will never become America’s sport, because neither originated in America. Soccer’s disproportionate propensity toward foot-eye coordination, although addressing good carry-over value for other sports, will never replace the allurement of Americans for premier hand and finger dexterity. And the question that thoughtful practitioners of peace might ask of those nations where soccer is most popular, “what is it about a culture that a sporting event can invoke such partisan disdain that players, spectators, and officials find their lives to be in jeopardy under circumstances that elicit an unfavorable conclusion to a contest?”  And the overly “brutish” antics in Hockey have forever tarnished the sophistication of elegance and beauty that inherently characterize the movement of skates on ice. Stick-handling, passing and “shooting the puck”, and fast skating would be enough to endear the minds and hearts of most American spectators to a competitive sport that didn’t include the requisite debauchery of reckless body-checking and unmitigated violent confrontation with sticks and fists (weapons of war).

As the world has fast become a theatrical stage for public sentiment to display both outrageous and benevolent characterizations of humanity, a universal demand for the highest possible standard of excellence should be embodied by those who would be model-heroes for aspiring youth. Bickering over the trivialities concerning absurd compensatory packaging and equating successful performance levels to artificially inflating one’s artistic potential are two areas where public scrutiny will exhibit least toleration, even toward heroes. Once Baseball has cleaned up its Act on Steroid Controversy, and engages itself with its ever-expanding dilemma involving inequitable player compensation, then the certainty of its utopian appeal will be more in evidence. Until then, Baseball is still America’s endearing National Pastime.

In my Book, Plato and Socrates: Baseball’s Wisest Fans, the two enigmatic ancient Greek philosophers ponder the many elements that make Baseball their favorite Pastime, but also thoughtfully point out ways in which it could be even better. The following is the final chapter of the Book.

Chapter 12

The Deed is Done!

“Socrates, what is your perspective on the prospect of resolving the apparent conflicts which seem to have prevailed since Baseball’s inception? Beneath the evolution of its undisturbed periphery, deep questions of impropriety have gone virtually undetected, or unacknowledged, by a complacent ‘unexamined’ mentality!”

Socrates pauses to consider Plato’s question and exclamation, then remarks, “There does not seem to be an adequate sense of ‘teamwork,’ the very essence marking the intricate design of the ‘Activity’ itself, between all parties involved in the network of organizational integration.” To which, Plato responds with lamentable refrain, “If mankind could get by without ‘teamwork,’ very few would concede an actual desire to depend upon others for any part of their livelihood or existence. Independence and individuality seem inherently at odds with the concepts of mutual acceptance of and tolerance for one another’s human pre-dispositions.”

Socrates tempers Plato’s lamentation with, “However, the climb of civilization out of the miry depths of chaos into its current state of universal integration was predicated on man’s ability to function as co-inhabitants and world-wide ‘team players’.”

“Certainly those individuals who participate in team sports are considered prime prospects for espousing the concept of working together for a common good,” affirms Plato. “Teamwork in sports can be construed as a strategy by which team members try to unify their individual efforts to promote a higher and collective goal of winning a particular prize that all players must share,” he confirms.

Socrates adds that, “The real essence of teamwork is a factor of compatibility from which an apparent challenging situation may gain a solution through cooperative endeavor. Compatibility is a substantive alliance between two or more distinct entities to promote harmony. Cooperation is the only feasible means to procure and establish an effective sense of Teamwork! Uncooperative participants are incompatible with the high goal of achieving a unified sense of teamwork. Inability to cooperate with high moral and ethical standards and practices would jeopardize the foundational structure of the ‘Team’.”

“It seems you’ve remembered one of the main tenets of my major written works,” Plato accepts as flattery. “As certainly as universal harmony would be an aspiring goal of world-wide teamwork, so it could be instigated by the examples set at any of the simple and modest levels of current athletic competition by the participants whose minds are set for such an ambitious endeavor,” he eloquently completed.

So, the newly formed co-op for ‘conflict resolution’ begins another search, a tangent to the other but destined eventually to coincide with the original. “Let us be creative and think about what it would take to establish a team of such remarkably cooperative individuals that the spirit of love, camaraderie, and success, would no doubt permeate the entire environment and eliminate any hostile element of personal or communal dissent,” encourages Socrates.

Plato responds, as would any enthusiastic student, to an intriguing enterprise, “Let’s see! What would it take to begin such a revolutionary entrepreneurial venture? Would it not first take the philanthropic concern of an enterprising executive(s) (owners) whose love of the game supersedes the traditional ‘bottom-line’ mentality of most ‘Entertainment Czars’?”

Socrates mentally recalls the recent acquisition of a prominent Team in Los Angeles with just those very promising credentials, as he interjects, “This unusual breed of ‘Benevolent Benefactor’ (reflective of your own Philosopher King, or statesmen), would he not have to be a multi-billionaire whose livelihood didn’t depend upon receipts garnered at the turnstiles?” “Or, he’d have to be a person of enormous faith in the other-worldly, intangible concept of ‘… what blesses one, blesses all, and vice-versa,’ as posited by our beloved metaphysical colleague, M.B.E.,” proposed Plato, without an iota of cynicism!

“His investment would be based completely on the sound and unwavering belief that ‘Good’ is the source and emanation of an honorable and worthwhile endeavor– the ‘seed within itself’,” as Plato recalled of a scripture. “His intent would have to embody the thinking of our nineteenth century visionary whose every project enlisted the contemplation of her original textbook words, ‘… right motives give pinions to thought and strength and freedom to speech and action’,” insisted Socrates.

“So these prospective ‘Men-of-Vision’ might first want to set their sights on providing to ‘the community’ a team of ballplayers that works its ‘Magic’ with exemplary character and athletic abilities that would instill pride and comfort, on and off the ball field, into the hearts and minds of its adoring fans,” Plato envisioned aloud.

“Secondly, the General Managerial position, Field Manager, Farm-Director, and other administrative assistants would have to incorporate the astute personnel-profiling tools that would enlist only those individuals whose aims and goals were compatible with those of the administrative web (not hierarchy), and whose athletic talents warranted their being part of the big-league ‘Team’,” Socrates continued after hopeful reverie.

“Thirdly,” promoted Plato, “since selfishness, greed, and flagrant unseemly behavior on and off the field are counter-productive to meritorious service and community well being, ball-players should be drafted, chosen, or solicited first on the basis of their character, then on athletic ability.” “Would not this standard almost seem too radical for contemporary agencies for scouting talent,” queries Socrates? “However, character-building credentials could easily translate to skill development, if the instructional aspect of the Organization is under the supervision of an administrator with impeccable understanding of the mechanical principles applicable to the ‘game,’ like our JFP, or another of such qualifications”, reminds Plato. “Is there anyone else with such a credential,” asks Socrates, incredulously?

“So! Since optimal physical skills would not be essential at first, and strong moral and ethical character would be a ‘must,’ the rationale for this revolutionary presumption is that, since (righteous) thought precedes (controlled) action, technique for superlative functioning is easier taught to one with a sound and principled work ethic,” Plato paraphrases JFP.

“It would seem that Team Unity in a professional sports Organization must incorporate a mutually caring and considerate relationship between the players and the assistant-administrative personnel, and the executive administrators, not unlike the supportive sentiments in the Republic, and Laws, as proposed by a renowned contemporary of my own,” quips Socrates admiringly at his flushing protégé!

Plato, graciously accepting his patron’s acclamations, submits, “Each entity has at least an indirect influence on the success and well-being of the others. However the executive branch of the Organization wishes to handle the varying accommodations, acknowledgment of this subtle fact must always be under consideration, namely, ‘You are only as strong as your weakest link’.”

Socrates then makes a casual biblical reference to a man named Paul whose certain epistles confirm that not a single part of the body should be taken for granted, abused, or in anyway not cared for as the rest, even those commonly considered inferior or less honorable. One verse, states, “…if the foot shall say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? The head cannot say of the feet, I have no need of thee.” “The man is well acclaimed and note-worthy in all his discourses,’ assures Plato!

Plato continues, “The Web of organizational tactics, discipline, and dissimulation should start from the center where the executive offices feed outwardly in concentric order to those who carry out essential duties according to their respective positions within the network. The ball-players hold the most enviable position at the peripheral end of the web, where most attention is paid by outside observers. The glamour aspect of professional sports is augmented by the high-profile notoriety of prominent personalities and the extreme celebrity status of ‘star’ performers.”

Socrates quickly asserts, “Although an individual’s monetary worth should be commensurate to the actual relative value he provides to the team, no one should be paid such an exorbitant amount so as to create an unnecessary dissention among personnel of slightly inferior ability. One player does not a team make.” To which Plato postfixes, “And, with regard to the wisdom elicited by the rhetoric of JFP, I conclude, ‘once it is established that the secret of success (even in Baseball) is not predicated on the predisposed, abundant abilities of the so-called ‘natural-ballplayer,’ but in learned and assimilated techniques taught to those receptive and humble minds willing to expand current horizons, public scrutiny will no longer have to cater to the egotistical whims of selfish non-compliant players, and ego-centric lives of arrogant ‘glory-hounds’.”

And in summation, Socrates dispenses an anecdotal resolution to this depiction of a great ideal gone awry. “Begin again, at the beginning! But, this time, start the entire venture by following an absolute Principle, and derive the blessed benevolence, spoken of with profound succinctness, by our distinguished metaphysician, when she reflected this divinely inspired thought, ‘to begin rightly, is to end rightly’.”

The End

Post Script: Ecclesiastes: 9: 14 – 16

“A good hitter is not merely one who makes solid contact with the ball. But rather, he is a batter whose body mechanics facilitate the action of the swinging bat to contact and continue through the ball at an angle that provides for a straight (non-hooking or slicing) and ascending line-drive. The ‘Art’ of hitting a baseball could certainly be defined in the context of describing the ideal hitter—‘He is one whose bat most consistently contacts and drives through the ball in a manner that facilitates a straight and ascending ‘line-drive.’(To hit the ball in any other manner would be to miss-hit it.)”

The preceding paragraph is an excerpt from my Book, The Principle of Baseball, and All There is to Know about Hitting. I have written many essays on the “Art” and “Science” of hitting a baseball, many of which are included in my book, previously mentioned. The following is an excerpt from my essay, “The Scientific-Artistry of Hitting a Baseball:

“Is the act of hitting a baseball efficiently an “Art’ or a ‘Science’, neither, or both? Those who demonstrate a high degree of talent in any of the various art forms could easily be described as ‘artists’. There is adequate evidence to indicate that many or most good artists (of which Batters are included) have a ‘natural’ propensity toward the artisanship in which they are engaged. But their optimal level of proficiency is most often derived from the degree to which they accumulate enhanced understanding by means of scientific examination of all aspects of their chosen profession. Therefore, hitting a baseball most effectively would have to be construed as both an ‘Art and a Science’.

In professional Baseball, to be the best hitter you can be, you must apply science to your natural artistry or you will never achieve mastery over the elements that have superimposed a phenomenal limitation upon your highest expectations. Those outstanding physical athletes who make it to the ‘Show’, but eventually find themselves languishing  in mediocrity, are typically the very prospects who could become stellar bats-men if they would engage a scientific-examination conducive to complementing their artistic predisposition. And they, who are performing at the prevailing ‘high’ standard of Major-League batting proficiency, could be setting new and higher criteria, if a more pronounced attentiveness to scientific inquiry were investigated for their optimal development.”

Matt Kemp has reached a point in his semi-illustrious career where intelligent pitchers have seen him enough to know his “margins for error” and can successfully circumvent his “natural-artistic” strong-points to wreak havoc on his phenomenal exhibition. Although he is still physically and mentally capable of demonstrating his sporadic prowess, he must now make certain adaptations of which neither he nor his “instructional-gurus” seem to be aware or willing to apply.

Prior to  his 2011 “banner-year” his somewhat high stance, and off-balance approach to the pitched ball (due largely to his tall stance and exaggerated “high-hands and bat”)garnered for him no high merits except that of enormous potential for his occasional display of power, and speed of foot. Then, for some inexplicable reason, he lowered his stance to a surer foundation and refrained from taking a noticeable stride. The results of this simple change is what afforded him better balance, and a much better perspective and visual acuity for hitting the ball more consistently, and especially for refraining himself from swinging at the low, outside sliders that customarily struck him out. His only critical “margin for error” remained to be his high hands and bat, as well as the position of the front plant foot (especially now, since he just had surgery on it).

When a batter, who has found success for moderate amount of time, and then suffers the effects of an unfathomable “slump”, he is most often at a loss for a rational explanation for that which he is now experiencing. The most common reason is that the pitcher(s) has discerned in the batter’s technical mechanism a flaw that somehow precludes highest mechanical proficiency. Because he is not hitting as well as he did, and as well as he thinks he should, such batter will consciously or unconsciously make subtle changes that may end up merely exaccerbating his current situation while doing nothing to regain his former high status.

Matt Kemp has the good fortune of being under the tutelege of both Mark McGwire and Don Mattingly, and it may be for that reason that he has made somewhat of a come-back this past year, and would have made greater strides had it not been for his untimely stints on the Disabled List. Although he has lowered his stance, and tries to keep from striding, the two most debilitating aspects of his stance and approach to the pitched ball are his high hands and bat and his closed front foot.

Both Mattingly and McGwire maintained a low, powerful, well-balanced stance, but with their hands and bat just below the shoulders. In such a position there is hardly ever the temptation to swing at a pitch above the strike-zone, while being in perfect line to hit the high strike effectively. In Kemp’s “high-bat” position, he is instinctively ready to pull down  to get to the strike zone, and will almost always miss the high strike by going under it. And lately he has developed the uncommon tendency of swinging in a “Horse-Shoe” fashion (down-under-up). Even when he makes good contact with the ball, his bat has the tendency to roll onto the ball, producing a hard bouncing ball, or (even when he hits a home-run) a looping line-drive. Most often he either strikes out or sends a towering fly-ball to the deepest part of the outfield. All this is due to his “high-hands and bat”.

Other ball-players (even on his team) who have a high bat and are hitting somewhat effectively do so because they bring the bat to the “proper” hitting position as or before they stride.

Although Hanley Ramirez has a few “margins for error” in his stance and stride, at least his approach to the ball gets the bat ready to make better direct contact. But, of course, with his high leg-kick, he is vulnerable to varying circumstances.

Now that Matt Kemp has established a low, well-balanced, and powerful-looking stance, and seems to have the intention of not striding, he needs only make 3 minor adjustments:

1. Lower his hands and bat to a legitimate starting position. 

2. Point his front foot 45 degrees to the pitcher (Joe D’and Ted Williams) and be balanced from beginning to end of swing, and without fear of dislocating knee and ankle.

3. Just press down onto the front foot (without any stride or foot readjustment) as he is driving his back knee and hips forward (like Barry Bonds).

Upon being “born again” in 2011, I noticed that Matt refrained from striding, or moving his front foot. It was a far cry from his previous year. In 2011 he seemed to have rid himself of his penchant for swinging recklessly at low, outside sliders. In his new stable stance, he was able to see the ball most clearly because his head and eyes didn’t move with a stride. His approach to the ball was of MVP quality. Then, his only foible was his high-hands and bat, but because he had everything else working for him, he didn’t suffer greatly. Now, I have noticed that although he maintains a low, stable stance, he has the tendency to “pull” his front foot slightly to the left. It is probably an unconscious effort to accommodate the “bad” position of the front foot pointing at home-plate, to allow him to open up faster to the inside pitch (but making him vulnerable to the outside pitch). Whether he realizes it or not, every batter (Ryan Howard, Harold Baines, etc.) who points his foot toward home-plate (or farther), and tries to apply pressure-power to the front leg, will inadvertently feel extreme strain to the ligaments and tendons of the ankle and knee joints. Most batters who make a practice of pointing the front foot to home-plate usually abruptly displace the front cleat from the ground as they  power through their swings. In that ultra-closed position, it is impossible to maximize the hip-action without almost certainly dislocating the ankle or knee. The solution is simply to do what Joe DiMaggio, Ted Williams, and other great hitters have done, and are doing — point the front foot 45 degrees toward the pitcher. Matt might want to think seriously about that, just having had surgery on his left ankle.

I feel another COME-BACK on its way. I hope Matt and all Dodger fans will see it together.

Albert Pujols: The Rise. – The Fall! – The Resurgence?

Tony LaRussa, one of Baseball greatest managers, had the good fortune of being the “skipper” of the St. Louis Cardinals at times when the team included two of the Game’s outstanding hitters. And it is fair to say that these players, Mark McGwire and Albert Pujols, had the good fortune of being managed by LaRussa.

McGwire was just finishing a long and illustrious career accredited with being known as one of History’s most prodigious sluggers. His legendary “tape-measure” home-runs” were initially lauded, but eventually disdained because of the implication that “steroid” use was a contributing factor in his uncommon and mythical feats of strength. Mostly gone unnoticed, after the “steroid-era” had been contested and virtually diminished from Baseball vernacular, was the fact that, from his inception into the Major Leagues, his tall, lean, and trim body, which bore no trace of the insidious trappings that Steroids ultimately produced, Mark was reputed as a power hitting “student-of-the-game”. It was his “Mechanical advantage” and his natural strength and ability that produced an abundance of home-runs in his formative “big-league” career. (He hit 49 Home Runs in his Rookie Year.)

At the beginning, as well as at the end of his career, McGwire’s hallmark of stability and power lay in the position he took when he addressed the pitcher while in the batters’ box. He was a big and powerful man, but found no encumbrance while assuming a low, crouching stance.  In fact it was this “stance” which afforded him the maximum of stability and strength which were the most contributable factors in his powerful swing, before and after steroid-accusations. It had been purported that his vision was less than the normal “20/20”, so to his credit, he eliminated that particular margin of error with his stance. Poor vision and at least a “minimum” stride were his two main foibles, which ultimately contributed to any batting dysfunction. His body’s altered structure seems to indicate steroid use; but if true, it’s too bad. He didn’t need it! His strength was at the top of the charts already.

Albert Pujols had the good fortune and pleasure to play with Mark McGwire and for Tony LaRussa – he must have learned from both. Pujols is one of the strongest men in baseball, so he must realize that he doesn’t need any extra strength to be a consistent home-run hitter, or a .300 hitter. Whether he copied McGwire’s low stance, or found it himself is a credit to his good judgment. The other aspect of good-judgment on his part is his determination not-to- stride. For the first ten years of his Major-League career, these two characteristics of his batting regimen established him as arguably the best hitter in baseball. But it simply demonstrates how essential these two aspects are to uncommon batting proficiency.

Two characteristics of Pujols’ batting style have become detrimental to his ultimate proficiency as a hitter that will forever place him below Barry Bonds as the “greatest-hitter” in baseball history. The fact that he holds his hands and bat high, while his arms are inordinately stretched out away from his body produce two distinguishable margins for error that will only exacerbate any slight ineffectiveness he may have previously experienced in his past-younger days.

He apparently hasn’t recognized why he is a perennial leader in hitting into double-plays, even though he has consistently demonstrated magnificent hand-bat-eye coordination. In 2012, with the Angels, no one seemed to be able to help him understand why he was hitting so many bouncing balls for easy outs, to establish a batting average of sub-.200 in more than 100 at-bats. But it was in the 2011 season that started to show those detrimental effects and their imposing “doom”.

“Poor-Albert” was the best hitter in the “post-Bonds” era, and can regain that status, but not if he continues his present batting regimen, even if his patronizing commentators continue to predict that he will find his old self. The pitchers had been keeping the ball low, and with his bat high, had forced him to chop down and hit mostly ground balls, or bouncing balls, or pop-ups when the bat slices the front part of the ball. His first 2012 home-run was not that of a powerful Pujols swing, but rather a testament to his natural strength, barely making it over the left-field fence, on a pitcher’s breaking-ball mistake.

In his low stance Pujols should be able to hit the low pitch easily (as Barry Bonds did). Barry did not swing down on a low pitch, with the hope that his bat would strike it just right so as to slice the front end exactly right and get the required back-spin to carry the ball the distance for a home-run. He, as well as hitters like Ted Williams, realized that the bat had to come from behind and slightly below the pitched ball that was always descending into the strike-zone in order to hit it with maximum effectiveness at an angle close to 180 degrees.

Pujols’ slump is not due to some things that he is doing new and differently, but rather what he has been doing all along, but not thought of as detrimental to his over-all technique. The things being mentioned at this time are simply considered as margins of error that, if eliminated, will diminish or eliminate current mechanical flaws that impede proficiency.

1. The low stance is requisite, but the slight bouncing of the body by the movement of knees moves the head and eyes and creates degrees of visual dysfunction.
2. The “no-stride” is required to keep head and eyes at maximum stillness and secure ultimate visual acuity. But avoid locking the front foot into a position where the toes are almost pointing backward (Like Ryan Howard and Harold Baines). This is not necessary to keep the front side from “opening up” early. The negative effect occurs when the swing begins and the front leg is supposed to straighten as the backside is turning forward. The front knee cannot hold that position and the imminent sense of knee and ankle displacement abruptly jerks the body out of its smooth rhythm. (Harold Baines can attribute his knee problems to this uncompromising technique. And perhaps Ryan Howard, at times of batting deficiency.) All that is needed is for the front foot to plant itself firmly into the ground (at a 45 degree angle to the pitcher) to begin the swing. It doesn’t need to twist and plant.
3. The problem with Albert holding his hands and bat high while having his arms extended away from his body is basically 2-fold:
   1. Even with Albert’s powerful shoulders, any extra weight extended away from the body will slow down the functionality of the body’s power source during the swing. Even more weight is added with the way he holds his bat in a horizontal position parallel to the ground.
   2. The hands and bat, if kept at that ultra-high position as the body begins turning into the swing, will have no choice but to swing downward at downward moving ball, even low in the strike-zone. The effect after contact is usually a ground or bouncing ball.
   3. It has not been noticed by this observer that Albert has been hitting the ball effectively to the opposite field, especially on pitches away. Perhaps balance is a problem. His stance may need to be widened slightly.

It is difficult for this observer to understand how a superb hitter, as Albert is, cannot detect what his problem is, and its remedy. He may very well feel that “no matter what, I’m going with what got me here, even if it kills me”. Well, I hope he has “9” lives, and the Angels have “Infinite Patience”. But there is an easier way — “adjust and adapt” with the help of an Absolute Principle.

Note: Before Albert started slumping, he held his bat more perpendicular to the ground while addressing the pitcher in his stance, rather than now, as the bat is completely parallel to the ground.

Can Albert regain his former batting prowess by  himself, or will he need some help?