The 4 basic pitches we teach to youth players are taught entirely of off the understanding and control of axis direction. When pitchers understand where to place the leading “circle of friction” they then can throw their fastballs with out the loss of any finger pressure on the ball. This means that they have both fingers applying pressure evenly thru their driveline. The traditional way of adding or lessening of one fingers pressure does not help kids or instructors understand axis and circle of friction response. When they understand axis concepts thoroughly they then can throw their ball arm side tailing fastball (wrist Ulna flexed) with 4 seam rotations (more bite) then move the circle of friction forward more to attain the Sinker, these two pitches are virtually the same with a little more axis change. The same effect happens with the glove arm side tailing fastball (Cutter) thrown 4 seams (wrist Radial flexed) with even finger pressure and just turn the circle of friction forward more and you have the Slider. I ask that my clients stick with the 4 basic pitches, 2 fastballs, pronated curve and screwball. In the past by the time my kids turn 16 they have the axis figured out so well that they go ahead on their own and throw the next two pitches, Slider and Sinker. This fall because this scenario just keeps happening I’m going to just teach them the other two pitches. This gives them 6 pitches all with command. It’s quit easy for all of them because they are trained using motor skill tools that teach them these easy concepts.

I have witnessed over and over that when a pitchers learns the screwball they immediately get desired movement on all of their ball arm side tailing pitches.

There is one huge problem with this system, that is when they get to different pitching coaches (old school) they will only call 1,2 or 3 of them, this is a problem with every coach and is playing out even worse with the current all-star tournaments. I have one 12 year old who is proficient with all six of these pitches and was fortunate enough to have a regular season coach let him call his own pitches that allowed him to use all the pitches and he developed them all evenly during competition but when he got to his X-high level playing all-star coach he would only let him throw his Cutter and pronated curve and this kids ball arm side game is very good. Since he did not understand his mechanics he tried to change them also, this after the kid shut out this managers regular season team with all of his pitches and full mechanics.

quote:

The 4 basic pitches we teach to youth players are taught entirely of off the understanding and control of axis direction. When pitchers understand where to place the leading “circle of friction” they then can throw their fastballs with out the loss of any finger pressure on the ball. This means that they have both fingers applying pressure evenly thru their driveline.

Could you please explain this in simple terms that a 12 year old (or in my case a 49 year old) can translate into a practical pitching application. The terminology is outside of the baseball norm and needs to be communicated with a little more clarity for it to be accepted more widely. If I spoke the above to a twelve year old, or my 22 year old, he would look at me like I was a monkey marrying a doorknob.

I know that Greg Maddux was a magician with a baseball. When I watch baseball at higher levels, most guys use 2-4 pitches. There are truly very few effective change ups in the big leagues. Very few guys are using more than 2 or occasionally three pitches. I think you would be surprised how many guys are not comfortable even throwing 2 and 4 seam fastballs. Rather they pick one and perfect it. I will agree that 12 year olds with movement will be effective. At higher levels, you better be good at what you throw or you will not be there long.

I wish you luck in your crusade to change the way baseball men think. I do find that talking above their heads usually doesn't have much success. We be stoopid and need it simplified.

One of the reasons that Napolean was a successful General is that he prided himself on making his orders so clear that even the lowliest private could understand.

Bighit15,

“Could you please explain this in simple terms that a 12 year old (or in my case a 49 year old) can translate into a practical pitching application. The terminology is outside of the baseball norm and needs to be communicated with a little more clarity for it to be accepted more widely. If I spoke the above to a twelve year old, or my 22 year old, he would look at me like I was a monkey marrying a doorknob.”

I had a 12 year old three weeks ago tell me he aced a Bone test because he knew all of the bones in the arm and shoulder, he can name most of the ligaments and muscles also, plus tell anybody including current high level players how all of the major arm injuries are caused just from talking about the physiology. These kids are actually little knowledge sponges if you challenge them and don’t hold them back.

Yes, I have no trouble explaining this to even 8 year olds and they all understand it with time and added pitches explained the same way! I have a tool I use to do it. The tool is a ball with a rod stuck thru and thru with router bearings at each end and a bat handle posting the rod for a better handle (bearings not required). This tool I call a Ball Axis indicator. When you spin the ball on the indicator it shows the kids how the ball travels through the air as I explain to them what ball axis is, they then relate.
The ball axis is the line that runs through the ball opposite the spin direction. At each end of the axis there is the area of the ball that forms a tite circle we call the “Circle of friction”.There is the leading circle of friction (more +, - atmospheric pressure) and the tailing circle of friction (less +, - a p). If you throw a fastball that has direct horizontal side to side axis the ball will have go straight with some lift to it. If you turn the balls forward circle of friction slightly to either side whether the axis is horizontal or with some upward axis direction the ball, will tail away from the side the circle of friction is on. This is done by bending you wrist slightly or a lot to one side or the other, this is called Ulna flexion and Radial flexion. Ulna being towards the ball arm side (movement that way also) and Radial towards the glove arm side (movement then that way).

“. I think you would be surprised how many guys are not comfortable even throwing 2 and 4 seam fastballs.”

I agree and with this system all of those discomforts go away because the 4 seam fastball grips for this 2 way movement are similar and thrown with finger symmetry not separate pressures.

“I wish you luck in your crusade to change the way baseball men think.”

Thanx, it is an uphill battle with “old schoolers” but when they see this in action some of them pick up on it.

“ I do find that talking above their heads usually doesn't have much success.”

Agreed, I find that if I explain the whole thing first in direct terms then the kids learn the correct terminology then as we go I break it down in simpler terms until I find out how each kid reacts and then adjust. I have found that the kids understand this stuff and the ingrained old schoolers fight it. I find that if the parents have no baseball background at all the kids learn much faster and so do the parents.

quote:

I have a tool I use to do it. The tool is a ball with a rod stuck thru and thru with router bearings at each end and a bat handle posting the rod for a better handle (bearings not required). This tool I call a Ball Axis indicator.

John Bagonzi, who published detailed descriptions of the spin axes of a wide variety of pitch types in his book, "The Act of Pitching", also describes the tool you appear to think you invented.

And, Bagonzi is at least honorable enough to credit its invention to Johnny Sain. He calls it "The Sain Spinner", and its described use is nothing more or less than to demonstrate spin characterisics of basic pitch types.

I'm curious to know, Yardbird, under what exact circumstances was your 12 yo required to take "a Bone test" so that you could then generate this heart-warming anecdote?

There is no question that LL-aged kids are fully capable of memorizing long lists of names of the bones, muscles, and tendons, used in throwing a baseball.

But, such lists do not "fill up the sponge" and neither do they teach a kid how to use his body to pitch a baseball, per se.

So, Yardbird, your little sponges are then primed to learn your interpretations of Mike Marshall's pitching mechanics and they are further given to understand that anything that you label as 'traditional mechanics' will merely destroy their arms.

What a fun voodoo cult!

Just as a bit of calibration for this discussion, I'd say that Dr. James Andrews and Dr. Glenn Fleisig are both fully competent with the proper names and physiological uses of the muscles, tendons, and bones used in throwing. And, they are widely published authors of peer-reviewed research studies on the kinesiology of pitchiong motion and many other related subjects. Never mind that Marshall's baloney is crack-pot voodoo science--that is, "made up" rather than "experimentally verified"--Mike Marshall calls Dr. Andrews a "kinesiology idiot" and says even worse things of Fleisig.

Marshall's main problem is not merely arrogance, it is a deep and foolish arrogance.

quote:

Originally posted by Bighit15:
First pitch for a strike is the best pitch I know of.

It's what you learn after you know it all that really counts.

The first pitch for an out is the best pitch.

With such lessons learned, care to answer the question: "What is the second best pitch?"

laflippin,

“also describes the tool you appear to think you invented.”

Where did I claim provenance?
The first time I saw it was back in 67 at LBCC.
Long before Sain used it. I think. Does Sain say he invented it?

“ I'm curious to know, Yardbird, under what exact circumstances was your 12 yo required to take "a Bone test" so that you could then generate this heart-warming anecdote?”

Health class. why do you need to know?
I know you're not writing a book.

”There is no question that LL-aged kids are fully capable of memorizing long lists of names of the bones, muscles, and tendons, used in throwing a baseball.
But, such lists do not "fill up the sponge" and neither do they teach a kid how to use his body to pitch a baseball, per se.”

Sorry to hear that your teachings don’t fill this sponge, per se!

”So, Yardbird, your little sponges are then primed to learn your interpretations of Mike Marshall's pitching mechanics and they are further given to understand that anything that you label as 'traditional mechanics' will merely destroy their arms.”

They don’t need priming they feel it!

”What a fun voodoo cult!”

Kharma really worked you over !!, your still fuming over that?

”Just as a bit of calibration for this discussion, I'd say that Dr. James Andrews and Dr. Glenn Fleisig are both fully competent with the proper names and physiological uses of the muscles, tendons, and bones used in throwing. And, they are widely published authors of peer-reviewed research studies on the kinesiology of pitchiong motion and many other related subjects.”

What do your calibrations have to do with the subject?
One is a surgeon and the other is a Biomedical engineer.
Both Kinesiologically challenged, Glenn is learning.
In their largest study on when and how muscles work in the pitching motion (published)they had muscles contracting against each other, study debunked.

Peer-reviewed, LOL, show me a review? Other than Marshall’s

What does any of that have to do with this subject and trying to help people understand pitches?

“Never mind that Marshall's baloney is crack-pot voodoo science--that is, "made up" rather than "experimentally verified"--Mike Marshall calls Dr. Andrews a "kinesiology idiot" and says even worse things of Fleisig.”

I have experimentally and in games verified it and so has he.
But again you’re way off subject!

ASMI uses anecdotal surveys from X-players to formulate pitch count recommendations then calls it a research study, No merit, kids are still blowing up arms and shoulders. all of their? studies look at the injurious “traditional pitching motion” with the hopes that a little tweak hear or there may alleviate their problematic beliefs, you can not go into research with pre-conceived ideas and hope to find answers.

I have never seen or read one piece of mechanical advice from any orthopedic surgeon including Dr.Andrews. If they did they would be subject to mal practice law suits and guess who would be the expert witness against them? Andrew's never physically participates at ASMI anyways, to do so would mean he would have to find a way to put himself OUT OF BUSINESS.

Again what’s all this have to do with helping with pitches?

Sounds like laflippins main problem is not merely revenge, it is a deep and foolish revenge!!

Are you going to turn every thread into a Dr.Marshall thread?

You didn't see or read the following papers, Yardbird? It's a very short list of the peer-reviewed research that has come out of the ASMI; however, it is infinitely longer than the list of peer-reviewed research that Marshall has published (that would be zero peer-reviewed articles). Of course, Marshall tells you that he has no peers worthy of reviewing the veracity of his claims...so peer-review doesn't really work for him...LOL...and you apparently believe that.

You belong to a voodoo cult, in my opinion, and it is completely relevant to point this out to persons who might otherwise take your crack-pot ideas seriously.

Since, as a Marshall parrot, you obviously have no independent idea of what you're talking about I urge you to bring these papers to Marshall's attention so that he can tell you what to think of their conclusions.
------------------------------

A Biomechanical Comparison of Youth Baseball Pitches, Am. J. Sports Med. , vol 36,2008 (Fleisig, Andrews, et al)

Biomechanical Comparison of the Fastball From Wind-up and the Fastball From Stretch in Professional Baseball Pitchers, Am. J. Sports Med, Vol36, No1, 2008 (Fleisig, Andrews, et al)

Relationship of Biomechanical Factors to Baseball Pitching Velocity: Within Pitcher Variation, J. Appl. Bioomechanics, v 21, 2005 (Fleisig, Andrews, et al)

Kinematic and Kinetic Comparison of Baseball Pitching Among Various Levels of Development, J Biomechanics, v32, 1999 (Fleisig, Andrews, et al)

how do you throw a good 2 seamer?

Laflippin,

Where’s the beef?

Do you even know what peer review means? I don't.
Let's see the injury from mechanics stuff?

“You didn't see or read the following papers, Yardbird? It's a very short list of the peer-reviewed research that has come out of the ASMI;”

I thought they had many at ASMI

"however, it is infinitely longer than the list of peer-reviewed research that Marshall has published (that would be zero peer-reviewed articles)."

Marshall’s work on Valgus stress is being actually studied as we speak by actual peers on these subjects at a leading University. The early word is he is correct that the traditional pitching motion over stresses the UCL and his mechanic has 50% less stress. His mechanical fix can even be performed with a traditional leg kick. Do you know what the fix is? Or do you still teach forearm bounce that traditional instructors cling to.

“Of course, Marshall tells you that he has no peers worthy of reviewing the veracity of his claims...so peer-review doesn't really work for him...LOL...and you apparently believe that.”

Marshall took 2 of his full mechanic pitchers down to ASMI 2 months ago to be evaluated by? at ASMI, are you still LOL.

”You belong to a voodoo cult, in my opinion, and it is completely relevant to point this out to persons who might otherwise take your crack-pot ideas seriously.”

Now your sounding paranoid, there is an old saying about Pioneers and arrows, now how did that go? You sound like one of the bow benders.

”Since, as a Marshall parrot, you obviously have no independent idea of what you're talking about I urge you to bring these papers to Marshall's attention so that he can tell you what to think of their conclusions.”

I’ll bet he’s read every one of them but he did all that work 30 years ago on the traditional motion and dug out all of the reasons for injuries produced by these mechanics, then took the most logical path, rebuild a safer mechanic. All researchers in time will come to the same conclusion eventually even the NPA who’s advisory board has 20 yards of elbow zippers to boast about. If they keep studying the traditional motion they will just keep spinning their wheels and selling their product to the unsuspecting Public.

Now answer that kids question about 2 seamers, I don’t teach them any more until they reach College, we would never get away with 8 main pitches.

On second thought keep on slinging those arrows and never stay on subject, I'm starting to enjoy doceing you. Is this how you had Kharma removed by hounding him with bad information that he could hammer you back with? On third thought the subject is not me! and Dr.Marshall does not post here so try to stay on subject so that kids can learn something, pretty please.

There seems to be some confusion here on what constitutes "peer review".

Basically, it refers to a process in which an author submits a manuscript for possible publication in a "peer reviewed" journal. The editor of the journal passes the manuscript on to a few reviewers whom the editor believes are experts in the field of the manuscript. These reviewers look for scientific consistency and logic in the manuscript, and they may accept the manuscript as written, suggest revisions, or recommend against publishing. Acceptance of a manuscript does not necessarily mean that the reviewers agree with the conclusions, but only that the conclusions are scientifically defensible. The system has been in use with scientific research for well over a hundered years. The system depends in part on the independence of reviewer and author. In fact, frequently the reviewers are scientific adversaries of the author, and I can tell you from personal experience that the conflict tends to increase the level of scrutiny!

3FingeredGlove,

Is there a written critique for public consumption by the journal?
Or does the Editor compile this information?

Usually, each reviewer writes up his comments and sends them to the editor. The comments are generaly not made public, and only the editor and author see them, but without revealing the identity of the reviewer to the author.

Here's a link which probably will tell you more than you want to know.....
Peer Review--Wiki

What a pitcher does as 12 year old is not an indicator of what he will be doing on the 60-90 field. You guys can't throw hard. I know a shot putter that uses the mechanics similar to Marshalls and he was injured. So much for being injury proof.

MTS,

“What a pitcher does as 12 year old is not an indicator of what he will be doing on the 60-90 field.”

Some Irony,

This is why Dr.Marshall did his Doctoral thesis on adolescent male maturation ratios.
Also Ironic, I have a 12 year old Full Marshall mechanics club player, playing up on the big field with 13 YO’s striking out 12.5 a game. He’s around 75, I would not call that slow. I’ve seen no velocity difference at any age group from traditional mechanics to Marshall mechanics unless the kid is also doing the full training schedule then there is a difference to the higher side with crow-step mechanics.

“You guys can't throw hard. I know a shot putter that uses the mechanics similar to Marshalls and he was injured. So much for being injury proof.”

This is also Ironic, Marshall guy’s train with a shot put then lead ball. Apparently you have never seen these mechanics to make a statement like that, they throw closer to Javelin throwers, more Irony (self inflicted) they also do motor skill work with a training Javelin. Can you imagine”traditional” pitcher training with 15 lb lead ball; he would snap every tendon and ligament in his arm and shoulder.

3-FingeredGlove,

Your definition of the peer-review system for scientific journals was dead on.

But, it doesn't matter in the context of a discussion of Marshall mechanics because he has never published anything in a peer-reviewed journal. That's because, despite all of his self-serving claims, Marshall has never done any research that meets the generally accepted minimum standards of coherent science. Instead, he makes up theories and "proves" those theories by self-affirmation. It's a great system, if you like voodoo cults.

To the question--how do you throw a 2-seam FB:

Grip the ball with index and middle fingers each lying with the seams--pictures of standard 2-seam grips are very common and easy to find. Rather than burn 4 inches of column space with a written description of the grip I suggest that you look at pictures to get the basic idea.

One very important point that may not be obvious from all pictures--your thumb and middle finger should "cut the ball in half". A 2-seam grip where the tips of your index and middle fingers rest on a "cross-seam" can help you get more backspin on this pitch. You should experiment with variations on the standard 2-seam grip idea to see what you like best.

This pitch is thrown with exactly the same body mechanics as every other pitch that you throw, and with the same arm-speed.

What makes it a "fastball" is that you will release this pitch with your palm facing directly at the target, same as your 4-seamer.

The orientation of the spinning seams typically gives this ball a bit more movement than its 4-seam cousin.

Interestingly, there is a scientific research study that used college and pro pitchers which shows (for the small group studied, about 20 pitchers, I think) that for a given pitcher there is almost no velocity difference between his 2-seam and 4-seam fastballs. Difference in movement and difference in the spinning ball's appearance to the hitter is why many pitchers use both.

quote:

I have a 12 year old Full Marshall mechanics club player, playing up on the big field with 13 YO’s striking out 12.5 a game.

That's very funny! Marshall specifically recommends that no kid pitch competitively until he is "biologically 13 yo". Even having reached biological 13 yo, Marshall's pitchers may not pitch more than 1 inning per game, within a maximum of 2 games per week.

Unless the rules are very different in your fantasy league, Yardbird, a pitcher can't get 12.5 SOs per inning.

As usual, Yardbird, your stories (like the 12 yo aceing his "Bone test" in "health class" have a certain "smell" to them: Reckless evangelism at its worst.

Laflippin,

“That's very funny! Marshall specifically recommends that no kid pitch competitively until he is "biologically 13 yo". Even having reached biological 13 yo, Marshall's pitchers may not pitch more than 1 inning per game, within a maximum of 2 games per week.”

All my parents are told of the information and some comply, I have children who train to pitch yet do not pitch competitively. Others prefer to go ahead and pitch, I try to convey very low innings, some pitch 1 time through the line up some pitch 2. The parents know of the effects of premature growth plate closure (even with Crow-step mechanics) yet pitch their kid’s pitch a lot, when the Mother is in control all my recommendations are usually followed.

”Unless the rules are very different in your fantasy league, Yardbird, a pitcher can't get 12.5 SOs per inning.”

AABC is not fantasy league, it’s becoming quite dominant, it’s probably one of the reasons LL is now after all these years starting to talk over use. Who said anything about an inning, if you think about it all you would have to do is figure how many innings in a game for this age group and Wah! La! You’re the only one who seems to care.

”As usual, Yardbird, your stories (like the 12 yo aceing his "Bone test" in "health class" have a certain "smell" to them:”

Are you going to keep dising children every time I relate one of their stories?

“Reckless evangelism at its worst.”

Apparently you have never seen the devastation to a family when a 10 year old
Blows up his future!!!

Devastation? 1st, how many 10 year old blow up their arms? In the 7 years I played as a kid and the 14 years I have coached including league and club, I have seen 0 kids with arm injuries of kids 12 and under. At 13/14 year of age I have seen two. Both over pitched and played for three different teams. They played Little League, Pony and club ball year round. We had told the dads that their kids were pitching way too much. So, there was no surprise when they injured themselves. Devastation is when a kid skateboarding without a helmet lands on his head and has to relearn how to talk and walk. Devastation is when a kid playing tackle football spears another and ends up paralyzed from the neck down.

Ummm, Yardbird's stories don't add up (well, duh!).

He says he's in charge of a mystery youth team and that he has a 12 yo "full Marshall pitcher" on this mystery team who averages 12.5 SOs per game.

But Marshall voodoo cult followers know from the Master's own lips that they are destroying young pitching arms if they allow anyone in their care to pitch competitively before biological age 13 yo. After biological age 13 yo they are allowed by the Master's edicts to pitch 1 inning per game, and a maximum of 2 games per week. This is gospel according to the Book of Mike.

Under those circumstances, there is no possible way for Yardbird's fantasy 12 yo pitcher to average 12.5 SOs per game--his pretend example might not be able to average 12.5 SOs per season under the circumstances.

But, now Yardbird says that the parents of his players are given the appropriate dire warnings, but then the parents are allowed to dictate their mystery-Johnny's pitching load.

Well, well, well. Yardbird, you have a lot of explaining to do (but you should work this out with MM--he may disagree with your fantastical interpretation of his fantasies.