My Community
Public: Baseball and Softall Hitting Instuction => Elite Baseball and Softball Hitters => Of Interest => Topic started by: Englishbey Hitting on March 18, 2007, 07:35:05 PM
-
<p><a href="http://www.webball.com/cms/page3400.cfm" target=blank>2007 WebBall Challenge - Optimum Performance by Steve Englishbey[/url]</p><strong>OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE
THE CENTRAL ISSUE OF INSTRUCTION</strong>
<p class="byline">- Steve Englishbey, EnglishbeyHitting.com
</p>It seems to me that the central issue is this: How does one go about creating optimum or near optimum performance in actual game conditions, and do this consistently? How does one go about practicing in ways that would facilitate this? And what is it that one needs to take into game conditions that would facilitate retaining that which you have been practicing?
Within this central question are really two questions:
<ol> <li>Are you in fact actually practicing in ways that would best help to facilitate the enhancement of performance in game conditions? <li>Assuming that this is indeed the case, why is this not "showing up" in actual game conditions?</li></ol>
The first question really has to do with things having to do with understanding the actual biomechanics involved that allow for optimal or near optimal performance. Simply put, whatever inefficiencies that you have that will impede your ability to hit the best pitching that you might face at whatever level that you are playing at, will not really be revealed when you are in the cage hitting against batting practice pitching.
Thus, I would argue that if you are not practicing in ways that promote the kinds of mechanical efficiency that you will most likely need against the top pitching you will face at your level, you are not practicing in ways that will best facilitate optimal or near optimal performance in game conditions.
But, for this article, I want to leave out the issues surrounding this question,and instead focus on the second question - why are my good swings that I have in practice not showing up in games?
About eight years ago, I was working as a part-time select team coach, and there was a particular hitter that really hit well in practice, and he practiced alot, and took lessons regularly, and was very serious about trying to become a better hitter.
But......none of this tended to translate into his game performance.
My advice to him? Did I give him a long explanation as to why his mechanics were breaking down in a game?
No. I said this: "When you go up to the plate I want you to think -seriously think - I DON'T GIVE A S*** ABOUT WHETHER I HIT WELL OR NOT."
This seemingly counter-intuitive "instruction" was given for a very simple reason: He had become OVERFOCUSED on what has been described by motor learning experts as "outcome orientation".
As opposed to having a "process orientation".
In batting practice, he was very much " process " oriented.Meaning he was all about trying to develop a " sense of feel " about what his mind and body were doing or not doing as he swung the bat in batting practice. The focus was on the kinds of feelings involved in creating good movement, and not so good movement. And the focus involved the kind of mental outlook, levels of arousal, concentration, etc involved in " feeling " this process by which he was thinking and acting as he swung the bat. (And I do NOT mean to suggest that all of this kind of focus is of an explicit nature.No. Its both implicit and explicit, or conscious, and subconscious respectively.)
In batting practice then, the focus was on the process" by which he went about thinking thru the experience of "being in the moment", i.e. the thinking involved in having an exclusive and concentrated focus on the mind/body engagement involved in "feeling the process".
In this situation "outcome" is part of the process of course,i.e. there is feedback as to where the balls are going, if he was"early or late", etc.
But, this was not the main or exclusive focus. The real focus was on body awareness and the kind of focus necessary to create this kind of "getting inside" the swing process.
<strong>PROCESS ORIENTATION ABSENT</strong>
In game conditions this process orientation was nearly completely absent. In games it suddenly became an kind of anxiety ridden outlook that could be distilled into "I need to perform now, I need to hit well, I've got to perform well." etc., etc., etc.
This kind of thinking - thinking about the future, thinking about the performance, thinking about the outcome - was not at all how he was thinking when he hit well in the cage.
And I have known quite a few athletes that tend to suffer from this kind of over focus on the outcome when game time comes.
As opposed to taking the mind /body focus that they have when practicing ---the kind of mind/body experience that allows and facilitates the optimum or near optimum levels of focus, arousal, and engagement physical and mental processes that best allow one to eliminate or better control all the many external factors and distractions that have little to do with the kinds of internal processes that are really driving the process of good performance in games.
<strong>FOCUS BECOMES A HINDRANCE</strong>
This kind of over-focus on outcome can take the "psycho-physical "characteristics of what motor learning specialist Richard Schmidt referred to in his book Motor Learning and Performance as "hyper-vigilance".
This is a kind of mental and physical condition wherein the athlete has gone beyond his optimal level of arousal. Simply put, an optimal level of arousal and focus "would be one that produces an 'attentional' focus narrow enough to exclude many irrelevant cues, yet broad enough to pick up the most relevan tones."
By focusing too exclusively on the outcome of performance - that which is external to the process of getting into the "here and now", the level of arousal and focus becomes a hindrance to performance. Which then leads to a kind of "freezing up" of the mind/body.
As Schmidt writes "They freeze because the decision-making ability of people in a hyper-vigilant state is severely limited do to an extreme perceptual narrowing and several other factors. Such a condition also degrades the physical control of movements, causing actions that are normally performed in a smooth and flowing manner under more relaxed circumstances to be stiff and halting."
My experience - both as one who has actually "been in the arena", as well as someone who works with a variety of hitters - is that aspects of the above, i.e. an over-focus on performance at game time can lead to subtle and not so subtle versions of this kind of "hyper-vigilance."
<strong>MITIGATING HYPER-VIGILANCE</strong>
How does one try to help mitigate against this kind of over aroused and"out of focus" kind of mental state at game time?
One of the things that I try to do as an instructor is to try to get young hitters to understand certain fundamental components of the swing, i.e. things which I think underlie all good swings. The goal is to find ways to practice these components in ways that leads to both a greater cognitive and kinesthetic awareness of what these components are and what they "feel like". This is a process that is largely an intrinsic and internal affair ,which over time begins to operate as a kind of "internalized coach" if you will. Overtime and with this kind of practice and focus ,you are able to better understand what it is you are doing to create your best swings versus your less than optimal swings.
In developing an ability to take what you have been practicing into a game, you have to be able to take this "internalized coach" into a game setting.And you have to practice in ways that best facilitate this kind of mental and physical focus, emphasis ,and concentration. This is not something wherein you are "thinking too much" or over analyzing the swing. To the contrary,it is much more "emotionally neutral" and is much more along the lines of coming to understand better the mental and physical factors that are involved in your "good swing".
And the trick is to ONLY think about those factors in game conditions. And to be able to know how to control your mental and physical state in game that keep you within these parameters.
Exactly what these components are, and how one would go about working thru this may be beyond the scope of this article. But one quick example would be a player who I worked with "gave up" thinking about performance in the traditional sense, and instead concentrated simply trying to swing the bat in a game like he had been practicing and doing in batting practice. And"think about the process" in a very similar fashion. By thinking about the process involved in getting off a good swing his performance actually improved.
In terms of development and in terms of transfer from practice to actual performance - this kind of "giving up performance" can potentially be very beneficial to those who tend to be "5:30 hitters" instead of game-time hitters.
<p><a href="http://www.webball.com/cms/index.cfm?group_id=3917" target=blank>More Information on the 2007 WebBall Challenge[/url]</p>
-
Very revealing article!
My son could be the example you used! He becomes SO concerned with "just hitting the ball" that he seems to hold back or restrict his swing just to make contact. He would rather put the ball in play in his 4 AB's than hit the crap out of the ball twice and K twice. As a consequence, his game swings are not nearly as good as his BP swings!!!! Funny thing is though, his fielding and throwing IMPROVE during the game! Last year during our league championship game, he made or was part of the last 6 outs recorded in a very tight game and he was making plays and throws that were eye-popping! So this "performance" thing doesn't have anything to do with "pressure". My son is also the goalkeeper on his travel soccer team and he consistently plays better in close games where his saves are the difference between winning and losing!
I've been scratching my head trying to figure out why he doesn't carry his practice swings into the game. If this switching focus from PERFORMANCE to PROCESS works, I'm flying to Houston to buy you dinner!!!
Please elaborate on some cues I can use to get James into a PROCESS state-of-mind.
Keith
-
So this "performance" thing doesn't have anything to do with "pressure".
You are no doubt correct that the pressure of the game does not effect his fielding.
But, it does probably effect his hitting in the sense that he is quite possibly overly concerned (consciously or otherwise) with failure, i.e. missing the ball.
This kind of influence will usually result in cutting the loading action down or slowing action down in an attempt to control the bat movement with the arms in an attempt to "aim " the bat with more control.
Rather than just doing (and thinking) what you normally think when practicing ---which is not usually impeded with thoughts along the lines of "man THIS swing REALLY COUNTS---I've got to make sure I get my best swing off."
Or "this is THE TIME TO PERFORM and I may only get one pitch and I HAVE to make sure I hit it."
As opposed to practice wherein you know you are going to get quite a few pitches to hit and you know that you can swing your ass off ---with know real apprehension as to performance outcome, i.e. if you swing and miss and if you sense that your swing lacks a certain amount of control or proficiency, the thought (consciously or otherwise) process is guided by you knowing you have multiple opportunities to swing.
As far as cues go, here?s what I'd say as a general principle that you should try to find ways to apply--and it can and should be applied in numerous ways:
Make the practice more like game conditions i.e. try to find ways to make practice more game-like from a psychophysical standpoint.
Try to make the game mindset more like the practice mindset wherein you are not being guided as much by thoughts of performance failure or thoughts of performance apprehension (subtle kinds of thoughts that are focused on the FUTURE and that impede attentional focus involved in "getting in the moment" or "feeling the process" involved in you getting into this "tunnel of rhythm and focus between you and the pitcher."]
I realize that these are rather abstract kinds of considerations. I will try to better describe what I am "trying to get at " when I get time.
steve
p.s. - I would also encourage everyone to read the essay by Tom Hanson at Webball. He had some comments about my article that I think were interesting. He is a sports psychologist.
-
Very interesting.
I just had a very similar converstion with a friend of mine who is a college coach, he said his best advice to a kid under high school age is to forget batting average or results in a game and just try to get 3 or 4 at bats a game where you put the bathead on the ball and to block everything else out. Do not think about situations or results just "square the bathead on the ball".
In other words (not his) tilt and turn the bat into the ball with force- seems I have heard that theory before.
-
Great article Steve - just had a conversation last week where a couple of coaches mentioned that Colton seemed way uptight or tense when at bat in a game. Perhaps I'll try this line on him:
"When you go up to the plate I want you to think - seriously think - I DON'T GIVE A S*** ABOUT WHETHER I HIT WELL OR NOT."
-Buck
-
I personally had the experience when I was in A ball where I gone into a rut and one game I said to myself at the plate in between pitches "fu*k this sh*t .........Im quitting after this game.Sh*t I'll go back and play football ---its an easier game compared to this frustrating bullsh*t."
Two pitches later I hit a three run homer.
And I decided to stay a little longer .
steve
-
Steve,
We are going to the cages today. I need some advice!
When you say make practice more like games, do you mean something like this:
While throwing BP to him. make it like a real AB...IOW, count balls and strikes.
Keith
-
... p.s. - I would also encourage everyone to read the essay by Tom Hanson at Webball. He had some comments about my article that I think were interesting. He is a sports psychologist.
He also declared you the Webball Challenge winner! Congrats Steve :)
-
Steve,
We are going to the cages today. I need some advice!
When you say make practice more like games, do you mean something like this:
While throwing BP to him. make it like a real AB...IOW, count balls and strikes.
Keith
And have a parent or two sitting outside the cage yelling at them to just "hit the damn ball". Maybe have them scream out a few explatives at a make-believe blue ::) Sorry, couldn't help myself.
I think your idea of counting balls and strikes sounds like a good one. I always try to adjust the pitching so that it challenges them but still enables them to hit 0.500. Also, I have them do several rounds but they can only take 8 to 15 swings in a given round.
-
Head and eyes has been the cue for us (my father and I) during a game. You would be surprised how this simple cue helps clear the mind so to speak.
So, instead of the player thinking about not making an out, they (hopefully) are just concentrating on seeing the ball.
Ray
-
And have a parent or two sitting outside the cage yelling at them to just "hit the damn ball". Maybe have them scream out a few explatives at a make-believe blue Sorry, couldn't help myself.
If you REALLY want t0 make it real world, have them out there yelling "hands to the ball," and "stay vertical!" ;)
Regards,
Scott
-
Steve,
Would mentally seeing a good result from a good practice swing be an appropiate approach? We have a freshman in a rut (trying to pull everything and failing) and we have been working on using the opposite field more. Would her focusing on the swings and the result (line drives she hits opposite field in practice) be smart?
Or just seeing the swing?
Another cue I have used is to focus on the release of the pitch (hip). You would be surprised how many hitters do not do this. Most of them report that they see the ball better and I think focuses their concentration on the ball instead of the result.
Ray
-
Ray there are numerous books and articles on athletes and various "visualization " kinds of cues techniques ,etc .
The research ,however , is somewhat unclear as to how effacacious this kind of thing really is .There are somewhat conflicting accounts as to what works ,how it works ,and why .
Having said this ,there is no doubt that for some in some situations ,with some people ,these kinds of visualization techniques can be very effective .
Many athletes [myself included ] have reported as to being able to "see themselves performing " or visually "reherse " their technique in the "minds eye " so to speak .And that this kind of visual rehersal or internalized vision can be variously effective ,ie channels focus , helps to mitigate against negative thoughts or "extraneous "kinds of of impediments,acts a kind of controller of arousal states ,etc .
In terms of the other question ,that of tracking the ball ,this is ,in actuality ,a very complex kind of question .
You might want to do a search on the "ambient visual system" and "optic flow",to better understand why I would say that trying to conciously focus on a point would be somewhat "problematic " ,ie you are using a visual system that is designed for tracking slow moving objects .[If you do this search put it here and start a thread and I will add some stuff to it ].
I know that years ago ,when I first heard people talk of actively focusing on "the square" for example ,I said to myself "where and what the hell did I focus on " and when I went to hit live and think about this ,I said to myself that "I have really no idea exactly what I am focusing on ."
Later ,as I read some of Paul Nymans "stuff" that he put up on high speed tracking ,and when I saw othersimilar articles---including articles on elite athletes and "anticipation "---- I came to realize why my "instincts " were more correct than I realized .
I have Richard Schmidt's book and I have two books that I am currently reading "Visual Perception and Action in Sports" [A.Williams] and "Interceptive Actions in Sports" [eds.Kieth Davids].
Three sources of which have nothing but hundreds of pages explaining why its the BRAIN and not the HANDS that controls the process ,ie the "coupling of action to perception " and the process involved in how a dynamical system --in this case the dynamical system which is the brain ,and the human body ----learns to to ,for example ,find a ball at a precise point with a bat in hand .
Coupling action to perception is a "systems problem with systems soloution ."
Sorry to get all pedantic and sh*t on you Ray .Its just that the question came at a time when I have been going thru these books under the ongoing thoery that ---
-----"I aint that smart ,Ijust aint got nothin better to do ."
steve
-
I will do a search and see what I come up with.
I wonder if it is more of active concentration that helps instead of the actual tracking the ball? I know in my case that when I watch our pitchers and try to pick up the spin coming out of their hand I track the ball better. It seems like it slows down for me rather than just having a general focus and then keying in.
Maybe I am not really focusing squarely on the hip, but just picking the ball up quicker because I am "in that area?" I will have to pay more attention today as we are facing a pretty good pitcher.
I have read that keeping a general focus during the windup and then narrowing the focus to the release works better.
Ray
-
What I am reading is that certain physiological and psychological variables weigh in heavily on visual perceptions.
A person viewing a steep hill from the ground or from the top sees the hill angle much differently because of the associated risk of falling down the hill as opposed to climbing up.
This idea can translate to why hitters hit better off a machine pitched ball at a higher MPH than live pitching at a lower MPH using the same optic focus patterns (concentrating on release point). Bascially, the fear/risk of being hit. The pitcher seems faster because the hitter senses the risk involved.
A study also reveals how carrying a heavy backpack makes distances appear greater than they really are. In my experience, I always felt slower on colder days because of the extra clothing I wore. And maybe I was, but just the thought that I was hindered my ability to perform.
How many others feel this way?
-
.........." I wonder if it is more of an active concentration that helps....."
The simple answer is yes .Of course that begs the question ,"What does active concentration mean?"
Some years back Paul Nyman had a conversation with Jesse Barfield [ex big league hitter whose son is Josh Barfield] and he ask him "when do pick up a curveball ?"
And Jesse replied "before it leaves his hand ."
Meaning that there was some "environmental cue " [Schmidt et al] that he was picking up prior to release .
This would be consistent with numerous studies of elite athletes [tennis players, etc. ] and how they using various environmental cues that are largely tacitly [sub-consciously] generated, and which allows them to actually start moving slightly sooner than would a novice .
Environmental cues would be things such as body movements, body angles, racquet positioning ,etc., etc.
This is known as "anticipation " ---see John McCrone very good articles under the heading of "Going Inside "----or using visual/environmental cues in an anticipatory manner. [See, for ex. John McCrone's very good articles under the heading of "Going Inside."].
In numerous studies of expert performers vs novice or non-expert performers, this is something that is part of explaining /understanding the difference between the expert performer relative to others .
[And of course one of the other relatively stark differences is the relative consistency of performance in terms of kinematic parameters, eg., in a study of world class table tennis players ,the movement of the arm and the paddle was within a remarkably narrow range --- spatio-temporal parameters, i.e., the range of movement and the range of timing of that movement, relative to non -expert performers.]
As to the processes involved in developing the capacity to move and react in anticipatory fashion, that is a subject that is not at all clearly understood.
Other than to say that it has everything to do with the brain, and how it goes about processing information. And how it goes about adapting [learning] in a manner that, over time, heightens this kind of of tacit [sub-conscious] awareness as described by researchers studying high level athletes.
And it also means that all of the above has very little to do with some label as "hand -eye coordination ."
Essentially the term "hand -eye coordination " is a very superficial term that is almost completely bereft of "explanatory power", i.e., it does not remotely explain how one goes about moving body and implement to a precise point in time in expert fashion [or in non-expert fashion for that matter].
Mel Siff has similarly argued that you cannot think of movement in "isolation "--- by noting that even in the relatively simple act reaching for a cup of coffee there are 5 joints and 27 muscles involved, [and not counting the appendages of the fingers].
How the brain, nervous system, and muscle/connective tissue systems goes about coordinating movement is, even in the mere reaching for a cup of coffee , a remarkably complex event .
When you add to this complexity, trying to track a 90 mph baseball and intercept it at a very precise point with an implement like a bat, you are adding complexity by orders of magnitude .
It is a near miracle to even touch a ball much less hit it consistently well !!!
One thing is certain. Explaining it as an act of "hand-eye coordination " does not at all explain the actual complexities of the process.
steve
-
I can relate to the "environmental cues" while playing OF. Many times I was able to see from CF pitch location and the start of the swing that gave me a "jump" on the ball before contact. Late/early swing, etc. Or by seeing previous swings. Or by locations of foul balls.
These cues are very similar to avoiding a car accident by anticipating what another driver is going to do by seeing the upcoming traffic.
All of these have nothing to do with hand/eye coordination. Simply put, the ability to process information and draw logical conclusions are the basis for what we call game savvy or having good instincts.
-
Can someone email Arod the article by Steve...If he is not going up there thinking, "I gotta get a hit, I gotta drive in some runs" then I will eat my hat...