The basics are that 3 groups of 20 college players were trained 4 times per week for 12 weeks under the following conditions: batting practice group, dry swing group, control group.  The BP and dry swing group followed this swing training protocol using varied heavy and light weighted bats while the control group just dry swung with a regular weighted bat.

The results say that each group significantly imrpoved bat speed, but that’s a little misleading if you don’t read the whole study.  The batting practice group improved 10%, the dry swing group imroved 6%, and the control group improved 1%. 

I believe the 10% improvement from the BP group is the highest bat speed documented in published research.  Bat speed improvements above 10% are shown on the results page…although that’s not published research.

Something I like about this study is that it is practical and easy to implement.  If you work with a team, you can do this same program in your existing practices.  For example, have a group of 4 players take their batting practice – use the regular bat to hit live BP, have two other players swing the heavy and light bat, respectively, while the 4th player takes a rest before the live round in the cage.  Not only does this squeeze in some bat speed training, but it kills some wasted dead time around the cage.

An even easier way to implement this is in the batting cage using front flips.  This is why I formed an exclusive partnership with Max Bats to provide overload-underload training bats that players can actually hit with.  This research study suggests there is a significant difference in being able to hit the ball while training versus dry swinging, and maple bats won’t fray like ash bats or dent like the light aluminum bats used in this study.

Another think I like about the study is the implication of the use of dry swings in the weight room.  More on that at a future time…

Effects of Weighted Bat Implement Training on Bat Swing Velocity

DeRenne, Coop; Buxton, Barton P.; Hetzler, Ronald K.; Ho, Kwok W.

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of weighted bat training on bat swing velocity. Sixty male university baseball players volunteered to participate and were randomly assigned to one of three equal-sized training groups: batting practice (BP), dry swing (DS), and control. The BP hit live pitched baseballs with alternated overweighted, underweighted, and standard 30-oz bats for 12 weeks. The DS dry-swung with alternated overweighted, underweighted, and standard bats. The control group dry-swung with a standard bat during the 12 weeks. All three groups showed significant increase in bat swing velocity during the study (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the differences between pre- and posttest scores (delta scores) were significant between BP and control, between DS and control, and between BP and DS (p < 0.05). It is suggested that training with variable weighted implements will significantly increase bat swing velocity, and that the use of loads specific to the target activity but with sufficient variation about the standard load will induce further training adaptations.

(C) 1995 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Pasted below is the abstract from a bat speed training article published by Chester Sergo and Douglas Boatwright in 1993.  The italics and red text are emphasis added by me.  Read the abstract, but I’ll summarize and make a few points:

 - 24 subjects averaged 19-20 years old and were college students practicing in the off-season

- All the training was done with just dry swings, during practice.  100 swings in sets of 20 performed 3x/week for 6 weeks

- Group 1 (regular bat only), Group 2 (62 oz. bat), Group 3 (alternated sets with 62 oz. & fungo bat)

- Each group improved bat speed 8-9%, with no statistically significant difference.  Group 1 (8.8%, highest), Group 2 (8.0% lowest), Group 3 (8.2 %)

- FYI the average bat speeds reported for these players began in the low 90′s and ended around 100 mph, measured by some light timing device made by the school’s engineering department

Overload-Underload Maple Training Bats

 

 

 

I’ll add these points:

1.) This type of training is relatively easy to implement for any player or team.  Even with just a regular bat and dry swings, players will improve if they set their focus on high intensity, quality swings.

2.) Heavy bats are not bad.  I tried to suggest this in the weighted warm-ups post.  Remember there is a difference between acute and chronic training effects.  I would not recommend the volume of swings with as heavy of a bat as used in this study, but both overload and underload training components are valuable within a suggested range (see swing training page).

3.) The study makes reference to an unpublished thesis from 1970 which concluded that swinging a heavy bat in conjunction with weight training significantly improves bat velocity, whereas weight training alone did not.

4.) It doesn’t take tons of hitting drills or fancy weight room exercises to improve bat speed.  Mechanics and strength training are important, but remember —> intent, specificity, feedback.

 

Training Methods Using Various Weighted Bats and the Effects on Bat Velocity

-Sergo, Chester; Boatwright, Douglas

The purpose of this study was to determine if baseball bat velocity could be improved as a result of training with both weighted and light bats as opposed to training with either bat alone. Subjects (N=24) from a collegiate baseball team were pretested for bat velocity and randomly assigned to one of three training groups (n=8). Each group dry-swung a bat 20 sets of five swings each with 20 seconds rest between sets, 3 days a week for 6 weeks. The control group used a legal bat of their choice. Group 2 used a 62-oz weighted bat. Group 3 alternated a 62-oz weighted bat and a light bat between each set.Subjects took their normal swing through a light timing device, using a 31-oz bat, as if hitting in a game situation. The average of the last five swings was used for data analysis. A 3 x 2 (Group x Time) ANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor was used for statistical analysis. The reliability for the testing procedure was determined by pooling the test-retest data from the pretest and posttest. Data analysis revealed no significant group effect, a significant time effect, and no Group x Time effect. The evidence suggests that swinging a bat of any weight under the training program’s guidelines would significantly improve bat velocity.

(C) 1993 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Something I think that was overlooked there was that the original NSCA article by Dr. David Szymanski also includes a simple protocol for increasing bat speed using overload/underload weighted implement training:

Expected results from implementing this type of program can be found in this post I made about the effect of overweighted forearm training devices on bat speed and batted ball velocity. 

In that study, the control group followed a similar type of resistance training program (minus the medicine ball work) and did only 315 dry swings per week (3 days x 105 swings/day).  This would be the most basic thing you could do to improve bat speed – just try to swing faster! 

Either add swings to the end of your workout or do some compound training (ie add a short set of swings after bench press or squat) and you’re moving in the right direction.  These dry swings alone lead to a 4.6% increase in bat speed for high school baseball players over the 12-week training period. 

Now add some weighted implement bats for overload-underload and some feedback and you’re on your way to serious bat speed improvement!

This isn’t a new topic, but an article in Scientific America brings up the issue again with a new study in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research:

Warming up with 5 swings of a light or normal bat appears to increase post warm-up velocity of the normal bat when compared with warming up with a heavy bat after a rest period of 30 seconds. Within the bat weight spectrum of this study, it is suggested that when preparing to hit, 5 warm-up swings with either a light or normal bat will allow a player to achieve the greatest velocity of their normal bat.

Coop DeRenne, Montoya, Southard and Groomer are all other researchers that have found similar results – basically that bat speed will not be significantly slowed if the warm-up bat used immediately prior does not vary greatly (ie. +/- 13%) in weight from the regular bat.

The show Sports Science also did a piece on this where they showed a slight decrease in bat speed and altered timing after using a couple of donuts as added weight for warm-up swings:

So why do players still use weighted bats to warm-up?

Here are a couple of observations:

1. These images come from the Sports Science video comparing the swings pre- and post-weighted bat warmup.  The video mentions altered timing, but it’s interesting to me that the swing on the right after the weighted warmup is a shorter, quicker swing (this is assuming, of course, that the videos are synched up correctly to initiation of the swing).  All things being equal, I’ll trade 0.7 mph bat speed for the difference in the quickness of those swings.

2. I rarely see someone in the on-deck circle taking full effort hacks with a heavy bat, but players still want to feel good before they get into the box, and part of that for some is still using weighted implements to get loose.  As the player says in the video, it ‘feels’ better.  Understandably lame and non-scientific, but sometimes that’s the way it is…..especially in baseball where the mental game is significant.  If a player has a good pre-AB routing going that gets him focused, then go get ‘em.

Bottom line for me is that getting ready with your game bat immediately before getting in the box (ie. on deck) appears to make the most sense.  If you want to take some cuts with the heavy bat, that’s fine, but get loose and then move on so you at least have a couple of swings with the regular bat.  And don’t forget to watch the pitcher!

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.

From: Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology Jul2007 Supplement, Vol. 29, pS92

In baseball hitting, a powerful bat swing needs to be produced by utilizing ground reaction force (GRF) and it should also be temporally coordinated relative to the flight of a pitch. Therefore, organizing a hitting movement to meet these task requirements is a key for a successful hitting performance. This leads to a presumption that a front-foot stepping motion adopted for utilizing GRF to produce power for a bat-swing motion should be temporally coordinated with respect to an oncoming pitch. The present study investigated the temporal organization of hitting movements by focusing on the timing of the stepping motion relative to the flight of pitches. Six participants hit pitches projected by a pitching machine with following task conditions: 1) hitting pitches traveling at a consistent speed and 2) hitting pitches traveling at fast/slow speeds, which were randomly delivered. The second condition was aimed at eliciting movement modulation to the difference in the pitches’ speeds. Ground reaction forces exerted by left and right feet during hitting movements was recorded by two force plates to measure the timing of the front-foot take-off and landing in the stepping motion. Hitting motions were also recorded by a high-speed camera for interpreting the change of GRF profile relative to the hitting movement. The comparison between the GRF profiles in the two task conditions revealed that the timing of the stepping motion and shifting weight forward for initiating the bat swing was modulated relative to the pitch’s speed. Temporal relation between successive motion phases was compensatory such that the early timing of landing the front foot relative to an oncoming pitch was followed by the late initiation of shifting weight onto the landed front foot, and vice versa. The timing variability in the successive motion phases progressively reduced up to the ball-bat contact. These results demonstrated the coordinative structure of the hitting movement for timing the bat swing relative to the pitch’s flight.

This is a recent article on resistance training for bat speed written by Dr. David Szymanski, who is one of my professors here at Louisiana Tech.

For you high school coaches out there, this may be a good guide especially for players who are not experienced with weight training.  This protocol was used in a few previous studies by Dr. Szymanski and I experienced it myself this past fall in a study we did (which is not published yet, but referenced in this article).  Also, if you have limited facilities, this is a basic way to help young players get stronger.

This is an overview, but you’re going to want to read the whole article:

The article explains general, special and specific conditioning and also explains possible differences in training high school and college players.

I’ve got to throw this in here too, because it was pretty cool to see:

These are references to the studies we have done so far, which have been a great experience.  Maybe someday I’ll have my own publication?  We’ll see…

Actually, I would like to attend the sports-vision and power development presentations for football, but there are a couple of baseball presentations going on at the same time.  One on friday is going to be presented by none other than Tom House, whose topic is Rotational Strength, Endurance and Flexibility for Throwers.  Should be interesting.

Dr. Szymanski has a 2 hour presentation on increasing throwing velocity, which we already got to hear in class.  Interestingly, it covers all of the research that has been done on improving throwing velocity and then goes over some applications.  For anyone who still says there is no documented research on using weighted baseballs to increase throwing velocity for baseball……well, that is not the case!

I am also looking forward to hearing Perry Castellano (head S&C for the Twins) presenting “Power is not Size”.

Here is the full rundown of presenters and topics:

Friday

Saturday

Looking forward to learning some new things…

Happy New Year

Spread over 5 area high school, somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 players began, and only 29 or 30 finished.  Injuries, sickness and plenty of other weird excuses came up for those who dropped out, but there were a number of hard working kids that really made some progress. 

For the bat speed measures, we used the SETPRO sprt5-a.  I’ve had a lot of experience with this and found it to be very reliable in measuring bat-tip velocity.  Why?  Because it measues the tip in the same place, evry time (as long as you have the tee set up correctly.  I have had a hard time telling where some other bat speed units pick up the bat, and some have seemed more inconsistent.

The Speedtrac-XRQ was used to measure ball speed, and this was a bit more tricky.   Many of the players did not like that you actually have to hit the ball solidly in order to get a good reading, but that is the idea – solid contact equals higher ball velocity.  There were a few instances where a player would hit the ball solidly and not get a reading, but this seemed more due to set-up than anything (which I still don’t totally understand).  But, for the most part, when we got the unit setup so that the player could hit a line-drive directly at it, we got relatively consistent results.

Here is a look at part of our testing set-up:

And for strarting off on my own research, I again used the SPRT5-A to measure bat speed and different variances of swing quickness/reaction:

A good time was had by….well, me at least

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)