To Pronate Or Not To Pronate: Part 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Turn 22

    September 13th, 2013 at 4:38 PM

    Paul, That may be the most informative, best, explanation of pronation I’ve come across.

  2. Paul Nyman

    September 13th, 2013 at 9:32 PM

    Turn 22,

    Thank you for the kind words. Too long in coming…. but as a wise man once said all good things come to those who wait… Although in the case of my articles that may be questionable… 😉

  3. Ken

    September 13th, 2013 at 4:58 PM

    Paul,

    Incredible information ! Thanks for educating and sharing!
    Ken

  4. Paul Nyman

    September 13th, 2013 at 9:33 PM

    I call them as I see them…. Thanks for the kind words.

  5. Brent Pourciau

    September 13th, 2013 at 6:08 PM

    Paul,

    If you say pronation does not protect the elbow then how would you argue this case study below that found it actually does protect the elbow?

    “Recent biomechanical analysis has found that coupling of shoulder internal rotation and forearm pronation forms the physiological basis of varus acceleration to minimise valgus elbow load. ”

    Read the entire study here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2465120/

    And I would argue as well that you can teach pronation because studies correlate leg drive to wrist velocity. This means to improve a pitchers pronation you train him how to increase his leg drive as long as he knows how to move this force up the kinetic chain.

    “Wrist velocity was found to correlate highly with increased leg drive. This study validates the clinical impression that the lower extremity is an important contributor to the throwing motion. Based on this study, strengthening of the lower extremities could be inferred to be important both to enhance performance and to avoid injury. ”

    Read the entire study here:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9474404

    Curious why you insulted me in this article but never actually gave a reason why I deserved the insult. What is the reason?

  6. Paul Nyman

    September 13th, 2013 at 9:39 PM

    Brent,

    Not sure if you’re familiar with my “modus operandi”. But I consider that you got off lightly ….

    As time permits I will address your “concerns”.

    Thanks for visiting and reading.

  7. Bobby

    September 14th, 2013 at 8:35 PM

    Your response to Pourciau’s question is condescending and just plain awful. You remind me of a college professor I once had that wanted everyone to think he was the smartest man in the room. He thought himself to be a deep thinker but often struggled to answer questions regarding his theories. To cover up his inadequacy he would divert attention away from himself by degrading and humiliating anyone who would ask questions – he was nothing more than an arrogant bully. Worst teacher I ever had – and yes, you definitely remind me of him.

  8. Paul Nyman

    September 15th, 2013 at 11:20 AM

    Bobby,

    I would hope your teacher with the smartest man in the room otherwise he should not be teaching.

    I think I made it quite clear that I didn’t have the time to really respond to Brent’s comment that I would do it as time permitted.

    And instead of focusing on brands comment where did I NOT show that I was the smartest man in the room in my article?

  9. Zita Carno

    September 16th, 2013 at 3:22 AM

    That comment about the college professor who fancied himself the smartest man in the room but who was actually a consummate dumb bunny reminded me of a teacher I had in high school. When she would spring a pop quiz on the class she never gave anyone a chance to answer the question; it was always rapid-fire “Zero, next”, “Zero, next” ad infinitum—and ad nauseam. Was I glad to get out of that class and into the next semester, or else I might have popped her one.
    As for pronation—I agree that this is something that occurs naturally and that there’s no point trying to teach it to someone who’s already doing it, and doing it right. I was, if you recall, a natural honest-to-gosh sidearmer who used the crossfire all the time, and pronation in one degree or another was something that just happened; it all depended on the pitch I threw. The first instance of my using it was with my curveball; I threw it with a sharp karate-chop wrist snap, which gave the pitch a very nasty break indeed. Same with the knuckle-curve. It was something I always had. 🙂

  10. Bobby

    September 16th, 2013 at 6:09 PM

    In response to your question “where did I NOT show that I was the smartest man in the room in my article?” Simply put – your inability or unwillingness to academically defend your work. Do you really think anyone that is paying attention should accept your work at face value just because you are ‘Paul Nyman’? I think not.

    From your comments it appears you are just trying to snipe Dr. Mike Marshall; apparently anyone else that happens to get in your way is really nothing more than collateral damage. This became obvious when Pourceau asked “Curious why you insulted me in this article but never actually gave a reason why I deserved the insult. What is the reason?” and you responded “Not sure if you’re familiar with my “modus operandi”. But I consider that you got off lightly ….”

    I do not see how you can expect your position on pronation to be taken seriously if you won’t (or can’t) address the points Pourceau brings to you? It seems to me you would have searched the literature and been aware of the medical studies he cited before you started disparaging others, accordingly your excuse for not responding is not acceptable. This clearly indicates to me your position must be academically shallow and scientifically unimportant, and provides the support that you definitely not ‘the smartest man in the room’.

    From a more cynical viewpoint, are you just trying to make yourself look relevant by disparaging others, particularly Dr. Marshall? Would I be correct to guess you are planning to host seminars and camps with your new-found revelations; do you have the next greatest product/book you are preparing to introduce to the market? A quick look to the internet reveals you have promoted your own great solutions to the baseball world’s woes at http://www.setpro.com – now you have the audacity to criticize other ‘marketing attempts’ in your article.

    In regards to your question about my professor – he indeed was probably smarter than most of the gullible 20 something year olds in his classroom – but he could not measure up to the real college professors on faculty that understood and could truly teach their field.

  11. Turn 22

    September 22nd, 2013 at 5:29 PM

    Paul Nyman certainly doesn’t need me or anyone else to defend his positions. He is quite capable of defending his own opinions.

    That being said, I find it interesting that some people who obviously can not defend their positions accuse this man of sniping at others such as Dr. Marshall, Pourceau, etc. simply because Nyman disagrees and often presents the scientific evidence to prove his theories or discredit theirs.

    When a so called pitching “expert” incorrectly cherry picks articles, puts out misleading or false information based on these articles, Nyman routinely puts them in their place. Bobby, guys like you take these corrections and statements of fact and see them as attacks on your
    favorite(s) pitching guru.

    When in fact they are debates and discussions. If you would take the time to do your own research you would find that many of the debates in which you accuse someone of sniping are based on fact and simply calling out misleading conclusions which these “experts” knew or should have known were misleading.

    Again, try doing some research and you might find that your eyes are a bit more open and not so inclined to blindly follow the ramblings of misguided opinions.

  12. Larry

    November 21st, 2013 at 2:05 PM

    Paul Nyman is the smartest man in the room. If you argue with him and make a valid point that he has seemingly overlooked based on your experience,he will consider your point. What I have always found to be the case is that he has already considered your point and discarded it because he has already researched the subject (and your particular query) with a thoroughness that is scary. For example,those claymation figures he used in the above example of how and why pronation occurs are a superb way to make the topic understandable for the average person.He didn’t just find the blue guy,he created him based on the reality he sees from guys like Ryan and Lincecum etc…
    My criticism of this particular rendering is that the words come up and then disappear before I have had the time to read what is being said about a particular action while the sequence is being paused.Maybe Paul was just allowing the time it takes him to read the facts or maybe he wanted the average viewer to watch the animation 20 times in order to read and understand the description. I did the 20 times and offer my thanks for his effort.
    What irritates me about critics like Bobby is his lack of understanding about who Paul is.He will most certainly answer your concern if he perceives that the question has merit and genuinely comes from a lack of clarity on the information presented.My question to Bobby is “Who did you kill in the war” that you can jump to conclusions about Paul?

  13. Johncarlio

    July 24th, 2014 at 6:24 PM

    Brent Pourceau cherry picks his research and Paul nyman has proven this before on other nyman articles. Pourceau uses complicated angles and studies in cookie cutter style of pitching in which kids aren’t taught to feel or relate but to get to points or positions in their deliveries which cannot benefit many kids who arent 6’2 or higher

Get All 5 Videos For Free

Perfect for Players, Parents, and Coaches!

5 High-Velocity Pitching Hacks Perfect For Any Age

Send Me The Videos