Telling/asking a pitcher to consciously adjust their posture for a drop and/or rise is a recipe for disaster. Much like telling a pitcher to step to the left or right of the power line to throw inside/outside.
This is what I was angling for in my last post. I believe that the intention determines how the body moves. If a pitcher is trying to throw a low fastball something has to happen to achieve that goal, an earlier release, a little forward tilt, who knows. Telling a pitcher to release the ball earlier or tilt forward when she is trying to throw a low fastball is a big problem. Then add in a high fastball, a low rise, a high rise, a low curve, a drop, a different body posture for every pitch and it becomes overwhelming. But this is dealing with location and we are talking about vertical dimension spin pitches. Does leaning forward put more top spin on a pitch, or leaning backwards more backspin?Telling/asking a pitcher to consciously adjust their posture for a drop and/or rise is a recipe for disaster. Much like telling a pitcher to step to the left or right of the power line to throw inside/outside.
Usually, when a coach teaches a pitcher to lean back or tilt forward (rise and drop) what they are essentially trying to advocate is how those positions (tilt and lean) change the release points. That's it. Pitchers do not have to change body positions to adjust the release point. The release point is worked on through repetition and practice.For those with students or kids who can spin it up and down, what do you think about actively encouraging posture changes on the drop and rise? I feel like the step-right, throw-left approach (and vice-versa) for the horizontal moving pitches gets a bad rap, especially on this forum. But what about a little forward tilt on the drop and backward tilt on the rise? Is it essential? OK either way (ie, just do what works)? Or should any sort of variation be discouraged, on the theory that mechanics should stay as constant as possible from pitch to pitch?
It seems to help my kid, but it also makes for more inconsistency.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My daughter's coach teaches this way, with basically the opposite opinion that the arm gets to throw the exact same pitch no matter what the angle. It's a logical approach to me, but changing the release to allow the BODY to be exactly the same every time also makes sense to me, so i'm not really arguing for one vs the other.Usually, when a coach teaches a pitcher to lean back or tilt forward (rise and drop) what they are essentially trying to advocate is how those positions (tilt and lean) change the release points. That's it. Pitchers do not have to change body positions to adjust the release point. The release point is worked on through repetition and practice.
Why coaches feel they need to complicate pitching is beyond me. Truly. Pitching isn't easy, it takes a long time to be good, even better to be great. One of the keys to that success is consistency. How can a pitcher be consistent when they constantly change body angles, steps left/right, and follow throughs for different pitches. Learning how to pitch ONE way takes a lifetime. Having 4 different deliveries for 4 different pitchers is mind boggling to me. Never mind how much a pitcher can (and often does) give away their pitch by how the step or lean, that's a whole separate problem. But nobody can get into a rhythm doing this. Moreover, you never see the best pitchers in the world doing it either.
I realize the initial post was about a lean/tilt but, theres a huge population out there that teaches what I described, 4 deliveries for 4 pitches. "Deliveries" can be push off, lean/tilt, step direction, follow through and things of that nature. But imagine you're the parent of a baseball pitcher and you take your kid to a baseball pitching coach and he begins by saying: "You'll throw your fastball like this, then on your curve you're going to step way over your power line and have a different pitching mechanic...." I'm guessing you wouldn't return for lesson #2. But in softball, far too many people nod and agree with this coach and following this logic. To me, it doesn't make sense.
You will hear opinions all over the place on this issue and everyone is POSITIVE they are correct. Far more often than not, coaches teach some type of adjustment or mindset change for both pitches. Regardless the pitch, there should be very little difference in landing spot, posture, etc. But, some subtle changes can help. I always told my pitchers to imagine throwing downhill for a drop ball and uphill for a rise. I even used a portable baseball pitcher's mound to show them what I meant sometimes. I think it is more about their mindset and maybe a slight change in hip position than a significant posture change though.For those with students or kids who can spin it up and down, what do you think about actively encouraging posture changes on the drop and rise? I feel like the step-right, throw-left approach (and vice-versa) for the horizontal moving pitches gets a bad rap, especially on this forum. But what about a little forward tilt on the drop and backward tilt on the rise? Is it essential? OK either way (ie, just do what works)? Or should any sort of variation be discouraged, on the theory that mechanics should stay as constant as possible from pitch to pitch?
It seems to help my kid, but it also makes for more inconsistency.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This phrase is used twice, height in regards to what? How is it 'measured', from the ground, or as a point on the ball circle in relation to the shoulder?height of the release point