Roger M. Enoka best sums it up in his textbook “Neuromechanical Basis of Kinesiology”

“Training adaptations are specific to the cells and their structural and functional elements that are overload.

EFFECT OF OVERWEIGHTED FOREARM TRAINING ON BAT SWING AND BATTED‐BALL VELOCITIES OF HIGH SCHOOL BASEBALL PLAYERS (Resistance Training/Periodization) David J. Szymanski, Jeff M. Albert, Dustin L. Hemperley, Hung‐Sheng Hsu, Roland M. Moore, Jeff D. Potts, Josh G. Reed, Justin E. Turner, Jeremy P. Walker, and R. C. Winstead. Louisiana Tech University/Applied Physiology Lab, Ruston, LA

In baseball it is important to increase sport‐specific power. This may allow a hitter to swing his bat and hit a ball with greater velocity.

PURPOSE: To examine the effects of 12 weeks of overweighted forearm training on bat swing velocity (BV) and batted‐ball velocity (BBV) of high school (HS) baseball players.

METHODS: Thirty HS baseball players were randomly assigned by a stratified sampling technique to 1 of 2 training groups. Group 1 (n = 15) and group 2 (n = 15) performed the same progressive full‐body resistance exercises while training 3x/wk for 12 weeks according to a stepwise periodized model. Both groups also took 105 dry swings a day with their standard game bat 3x/wk for 12 weeks. In addition, group 2 wore a weighted device (neoprene sleeve with lead inserts) on the forearms for additional resistance while taking dry swings. A 2:1 ratio of resistance was used (70 swings with device & 35 swings without device). Resistance began at 113.4 g (4 oz) and increased by 113.4 g (4 oz) every 2 weeks for the 12‐week study. By week 11 the resistance was 680.4 g (24 oz). Instantaneous BV and BBV were recorded pre‐ and posttraining by a SETPRO SPRT5ATM chronograph and Speed TracTM radar gun. Throwing velocity (TV) and dominant, non‐dominant, and total grip strength were also measured pre‐ and posttraining by a JugsTM radar gun and a Jamar TM hand dynamometer. A 3 repetition maximum (RM) parallel squat and bench press were measured at baseline and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of training.

RESULTS: Both groups showed statistically significant increases (p < 0.05) in instantaneous BV (4.2 & 6.0%), BBV (7.4 & 7.8%) and TV (2.5 & 3.1%) (m∙s‐1 ± SD) after 12 weeks of training; however, there were no differences between the 2 groups. Both groups showed statistically significant increases in dominant (4.9 & 5.0%), non‐dominant (3.2 & 3.3%), and total (4.1 & 4.7%) grip strength (kg ± SD) after 12 weeks of training; however, there were no differences between the 2 groups. Both groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in predicted 1RM parallel squat and bench press after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of training; however, there were no differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that a 12‐week stepwise periodized training program can significantly increase instantaneous BV, BBV, TV, and grip strength among HS baseball players. The use of additional resistance worn on the forearm while swinging did not contribute to further statistical increases in instantaneous BV or BBV.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: Both training protocols increased BV and BBV in HS hitters. Since there was no statistically significant difference between groups on these variables, it is recommended that HS coaches use the program performed by group 1. Perhaps the resistance used on the forearms was not great enough or resistance is not needed on the forearms to make further improvements in BV and BBV. Previous research has indicated that additional forearm and grip strength did not contribute to further improvements in BV. Since the baseball swing is a sequential, rotational movement that incorporates the entire body, perhaps additional resistance should be placed elsewhere on the body, be thrown, or be on the bat itself to produced significantly greater increases in BV. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: This investigation was partially funded by Eagle Training Systems, Inc. Jenks, OK.

A few years ago, I was directed to an article entitled: The Holy Grail in Speed Training by author Barry Ross.

I found the article very interesting, contacted Mr. Ross and got going on the workout. I was “retired” at the time and figured I’d give it a shot…..what I found (my personal experience) was quite interesting.  Within a couple of months, my deadlift improved from the mid-200′s to near 420 pounds while my body weight stayed the same.  For sprint work, I did 10 yard starts from a base-stealing position using an electronic timer.  Over that winter, I decreased my 10 yard time by .2 seconds.  And on the first 40 that I had timed, which was the first sprint I had run over 10 yards, my time was over .2 seconds faster than I had ever run. Pretty cool.

It didn’t take long for Barry Ross, who is a seasoned track & field and strength coach, to open his own site and release his book: Underground Secrets to Faster Running

The book outlines the concept of mass specific force, and sites some nice research studies to back up the claims.  The workout is incredibly easy from an equipment, execution and planning  standpoint, but not so easy in terms of the load/intensity used!  Basically you have to lift heavy!  With all the talk of fast and slow twitch muscle fibers, this method gets right to the point of muscle fiber recruitment and training for strength.  It is a fast, simple read that goes through mass specific force, physiology, exercise selection and workout design in a logical fashion.  Theory and application.

In addition to the lifting and running, I was hitting and throwing with a pair of minor league players and I noticed that my bat speed and throwing velocity were improving above what I had achieved in college.  Also pretty cool.  Although not excatly common-place, strength training for the posterior chain and specific swing/throw training appeared to be a great combination.

Check out Barry’s web site for more information — Bearpowered.com

don’t read into it too much!

OK here goes:

1.) This first graph shows the amount of VERTICAL GRF created by both expert and novice grouns under two conditions – stride and no stride.  The only significant difference was in the stride condition where the novice group, 3 college students in our department, had a much higher vertical GRF.

What threw me off a little was that the expert group, three college hitters, actually had a lower GRF in the no-stride condition.  My only explanation for that, from an observational standpoint, is that their no-stride condition swings seemed closer to what their natural swings would be.  For example, in the stride condition, I literally had to remind them that they needed to lift their front foot off the ground.

2.) The second one simply shows the correlation of bat velocity to GRF.  In both conditions, the novice group showed a high correlation to GRF produced and bat velocity.  Simply put, the more GRF they had, the more bat speed they had.

This was not the case in the expert group.  They showed minimal correlation in both conditions.  What this suggests is that they are relying much less on weight shift in the direction of the pitcher for bat speed production.  I believe the golf study I have (left it at home today, unfortunately) attributed just 10% of club head speed in experts to weight shift, and this would agree with the results here.  In other words, the experts are relying on other means, namely summation of forces from the sequential rotation of body parts – aka kinetic link – to develop bat velocity.

Steve Englishbey got me going a few weeks ago on the topic of Ground Reaction Forces in batting.  While there isn’t a ton of stuff directly pertaining to baseball, I have managed to dig up a couple of studies specifically directed at baseball/softball batting, and there are others as well that deal with other sports (like golf).

Dr. Szymanski is an assistant professor here at La Tech and is one of the main reasons I decided to attend.  As I’ve mentioned, we’ve already started a study about the effects of weight lifting on bat speed and batted ball speed.

Basically, this study finds that although group 2 (which does additional grip/forearm strngthening exercises) achievs significatly greater grip/forearm strength, but their bat speed does not improve significantly as compared to group 1.

I do have a copy of this entire article, but I will post the abstract (as found here) below:

______________________
Szymanski DJ; McIntyre JS; Szymanski JM; Molloy JM; Madsen NH; Pascoe DD
Department of Health and Human Performance, Auburn University, Alabama 36849, USA. dszyman@latech.edu
This study examined the effects of 12 weeks of wrist and forearm training on linear bat-end velocity (BV), center of percussion velocity (CV), hand velocity (HV), and time to ball contact of high school baseball players. Forty-three baseball players were randomly assigned by a stratified sampling technique to 1 of 2 training groups. Group 1 (n = 23) and group 2 (n = 20) performed the same full-body resistance exercises while training 3 days a week for 12 weeks according to a stepwise periodized model. Group 2 also performed wrist and forearm exercises 3 days a week for 12 weeks. Wrist and forearm strength were measured pre- and posttraining. Linear BV, CV, HV, and time to ball contact were recorded pre- and posttraining by a motion-capture system. A 3 repetition maximum (RM) parallel squat and bench press were measured at baseline and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of training. Both groups showed statistically significant increases (p < or = 0.01) in linear BV, CV, and HV (m.s(-1) +/- SD) after 12 weeks of training; however, there were no differences between the 2 groups. Both groups statistically increased wrist and forearm strength (p < or = 0.05). Group 2 had statistically greater increases (p < or = 0.05) in 10 of 12 wrist and forearm strength measures than did group 1. Both groups made statistically significant increases in predicted 1RM parallel squat and bench press after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of training; however, there were no differences between groups. These data indicate that a 12-week stepwise periodized training program can significantly increase wrist and forearm strength, linear BV, CV, and HV among high school baseball players. However, increased wrist and forearm strength did not contribute to further increases in linear BV, CV, or HV.

These accompanying charts and figures may also be of interest:

*of special note is that the study was done with HIGH SCHOOL players

My basic comment is that forearm and grip strength does not have to be totally neglected, but it also does not have to be insanely over-hyped.  There are plenty of exercises and training scenarios that allow a player to focus on moving and using the major muscle groups while allowing grip and forearm strength to improve (ie deadlift)

First of all, think of the term strength training.  Pavel Tsatsouline suggests in his book Power to the People that the amount of tension in the muscle reflects muscle strength.  You don’t necessarily need heavy weight to create tension, but if your training does not create a high amount of tension, chances are you are not gaining a high amount of strength.  I am coming to the conclusion that strength training is really teaching your muscles how to create tension (which can be viewed as a skill, but that’s another topic…)

Here is a question – is there any exercise you can do in the weight room that takes you through the full range of motion in the swing at near or above game speed?

Specificity is another issue, but I’m going to make a quick argument here that your lifting in the weight room is not going to be very specific at all – at least if you define specific by the terms mention in my above question.

You don’t bench, squat or curl on a baseball field.  So what is the point of lifting?  Hopefully the following information will give some insight. 

If you have been involved in some type of weight lifting program, you may have heard of different types of muscle fibers – Type I (slow) or Type II (fast).  I would like to suggest here that a good part of your lifting should involve recruiting Type II (especially IIB) fibers.

This past winter it was described to me that some high level players (MLB) were working on their “fast-twitch” muscles by doing light weights and moving them as fast as possible.  Their concern was that lifting heavy was too “slow”

Barry Ross makes a good analogy addressing this issue in his article Ballistics or Baloney:Heavy weights in the 90%-100% 1RM range can only be moved slowly. However, what you see on the outside does not match what is happening on the inside. What occurs in the neuromuscular system is the equivalent of the field commander’s tent during a heated battle. Calls have gone to the central command to recruit additional motor units; only the largest of which will do since it isn’t clear how long or how often this heavy weight will be lifted. The myofibrils in all of the fiber types are fully involved and working, their motor units firing them at full speed to keep the heavy weight moving. The weight is moving slowly but the motor units are firing as fast as they can, the larger motor units firing faster than smaller ones, to provide the necessary strength. All the new recruits will be trained and ready to work when it’s time for competition if command central believes that there will be a continuing demand for the larger motor units and more myofibrils. When the amount of weight is reduced, there is sufficient strength to overcome inertia and to move the weight significantly faster.

And the following is another excerpt from The Biophysical Foundations of Human Movement, which defines the difference between muscle fiber types and how to recruit type IIB fibers, which are the largest and most powerful:

Conclusion
Lift.  Lift heavy.  Rest.  Repeat.

Use your time in the weight room to teach your muscles how to create tension and to recruit as many of your most powerful muscles fibers as possible.

As far as specicifity goes and carrying this new-found strength onto the field, well that involves a different kind of training (hint: it involves a bat!)

____________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION
Most research in the field of baseball and softball has been done to investigate the relationship to the properties of throwing the ball. Little research has been completed to determine the various aspects of swinging a bat. While throwing is a major portion of the game, hitting is becoming increasingly important. Hitting for power and higher averages are what are more important in today’s game.
One of the main focuses in hitting is the quickness with which a player can “get around on the ball”. This concept may be even more important in the game of softball than in baseball. Decreasing the amount of time it takes to swing the bat will enable the female softball athlete to have more time to decide whether to attempt to hit the ball.

Past research has also shown that the faster a bat is swung, the more force that can be applied to the ball causing it to travel farther in flight, all other factors being equal. Therefore, identifying factors that can increase bat velocity may increase hitting productivity. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship of grip strength (GS) and forearm size to softball bat velocity.

METHODS
Eighteen female college varsity softball players (age = 20.3 yrs; weight = 162 lbs) with a minimum of five years of competitive experience were used in the study. An electronic timing system was used to measure the time interval of each bat swing through a 0.54 m space over home plate. The system consisted of two infrared cells attached to a digital timer. Following five practice swings, each player was measured for three trials, and the average bat velocity used for all analyses.

Three right and three left isometric GS measurements were taken on each subject using a Jaymar hand dynamometer. The dynamometer was held to the side of the body with slight flexion at the elbow to maximize results (Vanderburgh, Mahar & Chou, 1995). Trials were done alternating hands to decrease fatigue, with approximately 45 seconds rest between each trial. The average for each hand was used. Right and left forearm circumferences were taken around the maximum girth immediately distal to the elbow. Forearm skinfold (SKF) measurements were taken on the lateral aspect of each forearm while in the anatomical position. These values were used to calculate right and left cross-sectional area (CSA) according to the following formula:

CSA (cm²) = [(Circumference - (pi)SKF/2)²] / 4(pi)
RESULTS
There were no significant relationships between bat velocity and any size or strength measurements (Table 1). The relationship between bilateral measurements were positive and significant, indicating symmetry in size and strength.

---

DISCUSSION
The current study agrees with Adair’s theory that the torque applied by the hands and wrist during the bat swing are negligible (Adair, 1994; Adair, 1995). This may suggest that increases in either or both grip strengths beyond a minimal amount will have no effect on enhancing bat velocity. Performing exercises such as forearm curls to increase forearm CSA and strength will not have a measurable effect on bat swing velocity.
The current results may indicate that other factors not examined in this study may have more effect on bat velocity. Adair (1994) suggests that the energy for the swing must come largely from the large muscles of the thighs and thorax. The rotational force generated by these large muscles are then transferred to the arms for the swing in a carefully orchestrated summation of forces (Shaffer, Jobe, Pink, & Perry, 1993). Previous research has suggested that strengthening the triceps brachii muscles of the lead arm may increase bat velocity to a greater extent than grip strength (Kitzman, 1964). It would be worthwhile to determine the contributions of arm extensor strength and trunk rotational forces on batting performance (Shaffer et al., 1993).Effective batting may be more dependent on coincident anticipation timing of the bat to contact the ball over the plate than on strength (Mikel, 1984). Therefore, future research might include measures of both anticipation time and trunk rotational and/or arm extension strength. Identifying the contribution of these factors might provide ground work for the development of conditioning programs to improve hitting.

---

REFERENCES

• Adair, R. K. (1994) The physics of baseball (2nd ed). New York: Harper Collins.
• Adair, R. K. (1995). The physics of baseball. Physics Today, 48:26-31.
• Kitzman, E. W. (1964) Electro-myographic study of batting swing. Research Quarterly, 35:166.
• Mikel, R. A. (1984) Relationship of specific variables to successful baseball batting in selected varsity college baseball players. M. A. thesis, Northeast Missouri State University, Kirksville, MO.
• Shaffer, B., Jobe, F. W., Pink, M., & Perry, J. (1993). Baseball batting: an electro- myographic study. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 292, 285-293.
• Vanderburgh, P. M., Mahar, T. M., & Chou, C. H. (1995). Allometric scaling of grip strength by body mass in college-age men and women. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 66:80- 84.

On the other hand, when I started to learn a bit about specificity, over/underload and feedback, things started to change.  During the time when I really increased my bat speed, I did absolutely no direct hand/forearm strength training. 

And I have seen the same scenario play out for a number of other players as well.

Hey, just my experience.

Until I was 21 years old and a junior in college, the focus I had heard from almost every instructor I can remember was the hands.  Throwing the hands at the ball, quick wrists, use those hands, etc.  I’d never had someone explain to me what it meant to use my body efficiently. 

The following is an explanation on the role of the hands and forearms from Yale University Physics professor Robert Adair’s The Physics of Baseball:

The main thing that jumps out to me here is that the role of the hands is to TRANSFER energy rather than supply it.  So the hands/arm need to be strong enough to transmit energy generated by the body’s rotation.

More on “efficient” forearm/grip strengthening to come…