WebBall asked Dr. Tom Hanson to provide his expert assessment of the 3 competing 2007 WebBall Challenge articles - without being told who the authors are. We then asked the voters to see if his opinions changed theirs.

I feel like I'm judging the Miss Universe pageant. 

For two reasons.

First, all the finalists sizzle.  I confess that the level of thought and writing is higher than I anticipated.  I'm looking forward to finding out who wrote what.

All three clearly are highly experienced, intelligent, passionate baseball people who have studied the pitcher-hitter dual closely for a long time.

The second reason it feels like the Miss Universe pageant to me is I'm left unsatisfied.  I want more than I can get from the experience ("she's great, but it's not like I'm going to get a date with her"). 

In each essay I got engaged and was impressed, but at the end each left me wanting more.  More information and dialogue, yes, but also more specific information on what to do with this information.


"No one will dispute that the first part of the swing is the vital information that is processed in order for the hitter to determine where, what, when and if the ball will enter the strike zone."

Well, I dispute that, and the author essentially does also later on saying "Maximum pitch recognition is premised on the hitter's ability to reduce the inside chatter or analytical thoughts that invade many hitters."

The batter's mindset leads the way.  It determines how well the batter is going to see the ball.  The more focused he is -- and by that I mean how close he is to his own personal optimal mindset (it's different for different people) the better he will see the ball.

The swing starts with a thought, with an intention.  The batter's intention (What am I going to do?) is primary.

I love the "reading" analogy, particularly this line: "Great hitters not only see the ball, they read and understand the 'story' being launched from the pitcher's mound."

The Hall-of-Famer hitters I've interviewed (Aaron, Carew, Musial, Yaz, others) echoed this idea, although they didn't use the term "story."

Yaz talked to me about how he'd go back years with a given pitcher, recalling what the guy had thrown in different situations.

In the end I give high marks for the conclusion of playing with they eyes, letting them lead.  I talk about it more often as trust, but allowing your eyes to lead your performance captures much of the essence of success for both parties and I'll likely talk about it more often now after reading this.


This one made me think the most.  He spends a lot of time talking about how hard hitting is.  Very relevant.

I got to thinking though if I agree with him and Ted Williams and others who say it's the hardest thing to do in sports.

I could never cover Terrell Owens.  He would never not get open.  I have a much better chance of hitting a big league fastball solid than I do covering Terrell Owens. 

The 0-2 vs. 2-0 stats are interesting.  I'm trying to think what other variables are involved that aren't discussed.  It seems like there's something else not being considered in his discussion, but I can't put my finger on it.

The stats certainly speak volumes for the importance of the mindsets of pitchers and hitters, that much I know.

In the end, this is a case of my being left unsatisfied.  I would love to have had this insightful coach write about specific things a batter and pitcher could do in his final four paragraphs, instead of just saying that the battle will become more intense.

For example, what does a hitter need to do to know more? What information should he seek out? Some of that is discussed, but what does he do with it once he has it? 

I have a strong sense this author has much more to offer so I give him a demerit for leaving me wanting.


I want to meet this guy.  Excellent stuff.  In other words, I agree with him.  Particularly high marks go for his emphasis on:

1. Practice -- effective practice is paramount.  The issue of creating practice situations that mimic game situations is huge. 

I once worked with a major college punter who was great in practice but terrible in his first few games.  We realized that in practice he took his time getting ready, then punted.  But in games the punt team huddled on the sidelines, than ran to their line-up positions on the field and snapped the ball. The punter felt hugely rushed.  They never once practiced huddling on the sideline than running out to punt.  The only time they ever did that was in front of 70,000 people on game day.  That's stupid. (This happens too much in baseball.  BP is not much like real hitting.)

2. Feel and Process -- helping hitters learn what their good swings feel like so they can coach themselves based on their own awareness is great. Too few coaches do this.  Instead coaches tend to simply tell a player what he does wrong, leading the player to rely on the coach instead of feeling it himself.  Come game time, the player must make his own adjustments (based on his feel and understanding of his own process).

3. Richard Schmidt!  I had a class in grad school where we used that book. I don't really like the term "hyper-vigilance," but I love the description of the phenomenon and tip my hat to such an erudite coach!

Performance is first and foremost about focus (it even beats out confidence) and this author brings that out consistently.

He even gives a good shot at what to do to help. "Giving up" is a good one.

The common golf example is a guy shoots a bad front nine, "gives up" on the round and shoots lights out on the back nine -- until on the 18th tee he realizes he could have a 9 hole personal record, then he goes back to caring and blows it. 

The thing that stands out for me with #1 is hitting with your eyes and reading the story.  For #2 it's the "knowing vs.
reacting" idea.  For number three there are the several points I just mentioned, plus I just felt from the beginning that I really connected with what he was saying.  That it just felt right on.

That feeling of connection wins the day.

My winner is: #3.

(I would give bonus points if the first two authors would complain that they suffered from the "recency effect" -- a motor learning concept that says the one I read last would stick in my mind the most.  For more, see Schmidt, Richard, "Motor Learning and Performance".)

Return to Survey Results