Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shot Put technique question

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: shot technique

    > With your expertise amd my millions in
    venture capital, we could run a great scam. <

    The thought of The Donald providing venture capital to this guy is scary. Be warned, everyone. The love of Root is the money of all evil.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: shot technique

      You may not want to hear this, but the reverse is not part of the throw. The putter reverses to keep from fouling -if the putter can keep from fouling without the reverse then he/she is not using all of his/her leg strength, and if he/she is not using his/her legs, then he/she is not throwing as far as he/she could. It's elementary physics. Everything Mr. Root has said is true. Take it or leave it.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Shot Put technique question

        On a (somewhat) related topic: why is it that none of the top women putters uses the rotational technique? On the men's side just about everyone at the top does. Any theories/guesses?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Shot Put technique question

          "the reverse is not part of the throw. The putter reverses to keep from fouling -if the putter can keep from fouling without the reverse then he/she is not using all of his/her leg strength, and if he/she is not using his/her legs, then he/she is not throwing as far as he/she could."

          AJP - you just contradicted yourself. You said it wasn't part of the throw, but if you don't use it then you're not getting everything. Therefore, it IS part of the throw. The 'throw' is everything entailed in getting the object out as far as possible. What coach would leave out an essential element (as you describe it) of THE THROW?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: shot technique

            I guess for you to agree with me you would have to fully understand my reasoning.

            Not to start a gender war, but women are not as explosive as men. Art Venegas (UCLA coach, Godina's mentor) pointed this out in an article he wrote on the spin several years ago.

            To expect Michelle to throw the same way as her father (Who just so happens to be one of the most unbelievably gifted athletes who ever lived)is flawed logic from where i sit.

            Also, it is technically possible for this "symbiotic" reverse to occur, but very few have ever been able to do it. It would be almost impossible for Michelle to get as effective a finish if she reversed. And in the off chance that she did, it certainly would not cause a 10 foot improvement-maybe 2 feet?

            Also we need to work on your vocab. There is a difference between "explosiveness" and "brute, ungodly strength". You fail to distinguish the two. Yes I have seen some insanely BIG and STRONG female throwers, but never an extremely explosive one compared to men. Have you ever seen a female shotputter throw over 20m with the spin? I havent either.
            Hunter

            Comment


            • #36
              Above message for Root

              nm

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: shot technique

                AJP- Thanks for your support! Its refreshing to see that someone in this board has the perception and ability to assimilate my writing and insight, which appear to be much too advanced for most others here.

                With regards to "semantics"'s posting, would you like to do the honors with the question or would you rather I do it? Go for it!

                Dubya- You needed to pay much better attention to reading and writing in grammar school. You obvoiusly can't read and you're looking for someone to write for you. My opinion? Look into ADD. You might find some help in that realm. And don't kid yourself, you couldn't afford me anyway.

                The Donald- You're another one! What can I say without dignifying your worthless post except- PAY ATTENTION! Follow the thread and see how many times I've stated that I'm not selling anything, then again that might take some reading on your part.

                Caveat Investor- Lets see...you're a surfer right? You enjoy riding big waves, I can tell, and join a good posse now and then too. Don't ya?
                I do like your last sentence though...you do have some wit and I like that.

                Anne Animus- I would guess, Ann, that it has very much to do with the fact that the glide is a friendlier more basic and stable technique to teach and learn, and yet I have to say that women have proven to be exceptional technicians in general. I believe that the spin requires a great deal more overall strength (relative to the shot weight) in order to control balance throughout, but if you have the strength (more men do) then yield/results appear to be greater.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: shot technique

                  Root - you had me going man! That was brilliant. You have the best sense of irony and eye for satire that I've seen in a while. I totally thought you were serious in all this, but now that I read back through all this, I see it's all been a put-on. Great hoax man!

                  It was this line that gave you away though: "Its refreshing to see that someone in this board has the perception and ability to assimilate my writing and insight, which appear to be much too advanced for most others here."

                  What a great way to put down all the pompous asses here who puff themselves up to be experts. Pretending to be Mr. Know-it-all is a great spoof. Thanks for the best amusement on here in a long while.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: shot technique

                    At last!! Someone who can take criticism without coming apart, clowding perception and becoming disgruntled...Someone who can post sensible opinions and support them with reasonable explanations. Refreshing!

                    I do, however, lightly differ in a few areas with you. While I concede to you and Venega, ever so mildly, that women are physiologically less explosive than men, there is a standard concession in place with the weight differential of the respective implements, to more than cover the difference. So in my estimation, to use the measure of explosiveness as a determinant of technique is simply a non issue. Technique should be selected, altered or augmented by the expected physical contribution of each of its phases or components and once in place, explosiveness can be incrementally applied as muscle memory becomes embedded.

                    I agree with you full heartedly about Michelle's father and she should NOT be expected to "throw the same way as her father", but should be expected to optimally utilize his technique of choice, the glide, as he did, with a post and reverse. Why shouldn't she? Your logic, with all do respect, short-changes Michelle and her God given abilities before she even takes a crack at it. It is confining her already at her young age. Would you apply this same logic to young junior HS boys just starting out with the 8lb shot as well? And, Hunter, the technically possible symbiotic reverse that I talk about has been realized (in differing measure and frequency)by, not a few, but nearly all men in the shot that have bettered 65' plus.

                    Explosiveness vs. power- Yes, you're aboslutely right. Even though I've made mention of "short muscle pop", I haven't distinguished the two (it would take another topic thread), although I have not confused the two either, and am well aware of the difference. And no, I haven't seen a woman spin past 20m, but I have seen plenty with the glide. The spin is still relatively young and women usually trail in time in virtually every sport. Give them time. There's problably one right around the corner as we breathe.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: shot technique

                      Hunter-
                      my last post is for you, buddy...failed to address it. Sorry!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        the root

                        Do you think that any thrower that doesnt reverse in the shot or disc is making a mistake?
                        Hunter

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: shot technique

                          <Do you think that any thrower that doesnt reverse in the shot or disc is making a mistake?>


                          Hunter- In answer to your question above, Hunter, I feel that unless there's real physical impediment or handicap of some sort that directly negates the reverse mechanics, the reverse should always be at least attempted, but never without adequate supervision and good visual resources. Given the inherent quest of throwers to throw farther it would be ludicrous to ignore the huge benefits that a good post, pop and reverse offers face value, in comparison to the fixed leg option.

                          You have a choice of prizes: Behind door #1 there's a popular Italian sports car, and behind door #2 there's an American economy vehicle. Which would you choose? I would consider door #2 a mistake, a BIG mistake.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Lets Get to the Root of the Problem

                            So you would say that the East German (no reverse) style of throwing the discus is wrong? This is a technique that has created a monstrous world record, at least two olympic gold medals, and at least 6 world championships in the 20 years.

                            I'm beginning to question your knowledge of the throws. Obviously some people are effective using the non-reverse and some are the opposite. Both have their faults. The reverse isnt this magical answer that you seem to think it is. It will not add 10 feet to every shot putter or 30 feet to every discus thrower that uses it.

                            Have you ever seen reidel or schult throw before? Go to throwfarther.org if you havent. These men get an excellent "post" and "pop" in their throws-they just dont reverse their feet. They have been very effective without reversing. The same is true for Carter.

                            Dan Taylor is a young shotputter with a near 70' PR who doesnt reverse. I have personally seen Dan throw 66 feet without reversing. Do you seriously believe that if he reversed he could throw 6-10 feet farther, or almost 80 feet!?!?

                            As a final note, I'd just like to say that I think both finishes are effective. Which style you ultimately choose depends on your technique and your physical gifts.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I SENSE A TINGE OF AGRESSION

                              Hunter, the East Germans and the Russians have been kicking our butts in the throws for several decades now, not just the last two, and in all of those decades they have used the entire spectrum of techniques. Its because of this that their success can't be so readilly attributed to the fixed leg technique that you sponsor. There have been a multitude of factors that take credit for their success through time, least of which is (without openning an entirely new can of worms)the mass use of performance enhancing "aids". They were the pioneers and lab rats in the incorporation of steroid and hormone benefits into the throws, have always remained at the forefront of related research and remain, even today, ahead of the detection curve. Considering this, where can you now place the credit?

                              Hunter, I know Riedel & Shult persobally and have trained with them, and Dan Taylor, I have also met and observed (by the way a great talent-big moose!) And, Hunter, please, I've never stated that any part of a throwing technique is magical. C'mon!

                              Your quote "Which style you ultimately choose depends on your technique and your physical gifts." We both perfectly agree with this...just as I've mentioned much earlier in the thread "If you have optimum "momentum", I call it "POP", and the correct technique for yourself, then, like Johnny Cochran would say "you MUST reverse". "... the correct concept of the throwing "POP", or reverse/follow-through..., is not so much the voluntary arm/body continuance through the release, but instead the absolute necessity to do so that is premordial, if the objective is to utilize optimum short muscle (total body) explosiveness, not wasting any muscle group's energy contribution to the throw and to harness the release and contain the circle." So that...if your technique is heavy with post and pop and fierce generated momentum, then your style will have to include a good reverse to contain the thrust. Nothing more, nothing less...

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: I SENSE A TINGE OF AGRESSION

                                Give it a rest. Has this board already forgotten the other 'experts' who ended up contradicting themselves trying to stay in character? You now appear to know no more than the rest of us yahoos.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X