1. Montana State University –Billings
Billings, MT
Graduate Studies
The Effect of Right View Pro©
on Bat Velocity and Batted-Ball Exit Velocity in College Baseball Players
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master
of Science in Interdisciplinary Studies: Exercise and Sport Leadership
Dan McKinney
Montana State University – Billings
April 23, 2015

2. 2
Abstract
McKinney, Daniel K. The effect of Right View Pro© on bat speed in Miles Community
College Male Baseball Athletes. Published Masters of Science Thesis, Montana State
University Billings, 2015.
The effects of Right View Pro© Video Analysis on bat speed and batted-ball exit
velocity were evaluated in 29 male collegiate student-athletes. The 29 athletes were
divided into three groups and evaluated on both dependent variables (bat speed and
batted-ball exit velocity). Group A participated in weight training only, Group B
participated in weight training and video analysis, and Group C participated in weight
training, video analysis, and Right View Pro© video analysis. The Pocket Radar© was
used to measure bat speed of each individual, while the Stalker Radar Sport 2 Radar
Gun© was used to measure the speed of the batted-ball exit velocity. On the initial day of
testing (September 3rd, 2013), participants completed their baseline bat speed and batted-
ball exit velocity. After two semesters of the academic year (until May 6th, 2014),
participants completed their post-test on bat speed and batted-ball exit velocity. A one
way analysis of variance with post-hoc Tukey was used to analyze the data. The analysis
of variance showed no significant difference between the three groups, p=0.18. The
batted-ball exit velocity was significantly different (p=0.02), between Group A and
Group B only. The Tukey post hoc criteria for significance indicated that a significant
difference existed between Group A (Weight Training only) and Group B (Weight
Training and Video Analysis), HSD (0.5) =5.44; HSD (.01) =6.97; and M1 vs. M2 P<.05.
All other groups and dependent variables were found to be non-significant. From the
results, one can conclude that Right View Pro© has no significant effect on bat speed or
batted-ball exit velocity.

3. 3
Table of Contents
Chapter
I. Introduction…………………………………………………………… 4
a. Bat Speed and Definition of Successful Hitters…………………... 4
b. Mirror Neurons and Macaque Monkeys………………………….. 4
c. Visual Learning…………………………………………………… 5
d. Right View Pro Video Analysis©………………………………… 5
e. Problem Statement………………………………………………... 6
f. Research Purpose…………………………………………………. 7
g. Hypothesis………………………………………………………… 7
h. Operational Definitions…………………………………………… 7
II. Review of Literature…………………………………………………... 8
III. Methodology………………………………………………………….. 30
IV. Results……………………………………………………………….... 32
V. Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 36
a. Limitations………………………………………………………... 38
VI. Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………….. 39
VII. References…………………………………………………………….. 42

4. 4
Introduction
Research has shown that in the game of baseball, bat swing velocity (bat speed) is
an important characteristic of successful hitters (Szymanski, 2009). The ability to hit
professional major league pitchers whose fastball velocity can exceed 95 miles per hour
requires good bat speed. A hitter that can move the bat in a quick manner is able to gather
more information from the flight of the ball, letting the ball travel farther and creates the
possibility of making a more informed decision. With an increase in decision time, the
time it takes to move the bat is decreased. With great bat speed, comes the reality of an
increase in batted-ball exit velocity. With higher exit velocities translating into hitting the
ball farther (more homeruns) and harder (less reaction time for the defenders), possessing
one or both of the qualities of swing speed and decision making is important to a hitter’s
success.
This particular study focuses on using a visual training aide called Right View
Pro© (RVP) as a way to increase bat speed by observing what the best hitters in baseball
do. The ability for a person to watch someone else perform a task and then repeat or try
to replicate that movement was first seen in macaque monkeys. A visuomotor neuron
system in the monkey’s premotor cortex responds both when a particular action is
performed by the monkey and when the same action performed by another individual is
observed. The mirror neurons located in the monkeys appear to form a cortical system
matching observation and execution of goal-related motor actions (Gallese & Goldman,
1998). Furthermore, several experiments in humans and monkeys found mirror neurons
in frontal and parietal lobes in tasks involving manual action observation and that the
neurons have been associated with various forms of human behaviors such as: imitation,
mind theory, and new skill learning. Specifically, imitation is involved in learning

5. 5
through the transformation of visual inputs encoded into action by the observer (Carvalho
et al, 2013). The observation and critiquing of elite hitters was portrayed to the collegiate
players in this study. Regardless of their interpretation of what they were observing,
mirror neurons were being fired as some sort of picture or mental image was presented to
the participants.
Visual learning is just one of four fundamental ways that a person may learn. The
VARK learning style model is an acronym that classifies students into (1) visual, (2)
aural, (3) read/write, and (4) kinesthetic types of learners. This model was first introduced
by Neil Fleming in 2006, in which he categorized each mode based on different preferred
senses used in information gathering amongst students (Prithishkumar & Michael, 2014).
In baseball specifically, hitters may use one or all of these attributes to gather the
appropriate information needed to be successful. The visual learning style is the main
focus throughout this study. While RVP might benefit hitters through other components,
such as bat path, hand path, mechanical efficiency, and bat plane, it does not cover one of
the most crucial aspects of the swing, bat velocity.
Studies show bat velocity can be increased through specific resistance weight
training and mechanical efficiency. However, no research has been found to determine
the effect a visual training program has on bat velocity. Presently, baseball players from
high school to the professional ranks use RVP to help young aspiring baseball players
focus on how current and past major league baseball player’s swing. It defines the
principles that make these players the most efficient and the most successful while
communicating it in an easily understood fashion (Slaught, 2009). Additionally, the video
system is a tool designed for players and coaches to compare and contrast the major

6. 6
differences between nonprofessional athletes (amateurs) and professional athletes. The
video is designed to accelerate learning by improving communication between students
and coaches to optimize each learning experience. According to the Cone of Learning
developed by Edgar Dale, students retain about 20% of what they hear, 30% of what they
see, 50% of what they hear and see, 70% of what they say and write, and 90% of what
they do as they perform a task (Dale, 1969). Before any player can improve, he/she needs
a clear mental picture of what success looks like. With RVP, a coach can instruct a
student through a hitting motion indicating what is expected at each phase of the motion.
The key dialogue in enhancing the learning experience for the performer is in how the
instruction and feedback in regards to the learner’s focus of attention is portrayed by the
coach. Studies show that directing performers’ attention to the effects of their movements
(external focus of attention) appears to be more beneficial than directing their attention to
their own movements (internal focus of attention) when learning a motor skill (W &
Prinz, 2001). This is a critical point of communication and where the coach and player
get on the same page. A player is able to match what they think they are doing to what
they are actually doing (Slaught, 2009). In using RVP, amateurs are able to see what the
professionals do from a biomechanical and physical standpoint. With the visual aide,
hitters can compare and contrast their own swing mechanics to that of professionals by
using the tools available on RVP to make the necessary corrections.
Problem Statement
Over the years, baseball players and coaches have worked to find a way to
improve bat velocity and ball exit speed. Several studies have used resistance weight
training and weighted implement training to increase both attributes. To date, no study

7. 7
could be found that has attempted to use a visual aid, such as RVP, to help increase bat
speed and or bat velocity. The effects of this study will show if a visual aide can improve
mechanical efficiency of a collegiate baseball player so much that his bat velocity and
batted-ball exit speed increase.
Research Purpose
The overall purpose of this study is to determine if hitters can increase bat velocity and
batted-ball exit velocity through the use of a visual hitting module (Right View Pro©)
and more specifically, by watching skilled professionals perform the same task.
The specific purposes are:
1) To assess the effect that Right View Pro Training Model has on bat velocity and
batted-ball exit velocity in male collegiate baseball players.
2) To assess if there is more than one specific way that a hitter may increase their bat
velocity.
3) To assess if a significant difference in bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity
exists between RVP users, Non RVP users, and Pitchers.
Hypothesis
Ho: No difference in bat velocity will exist between RVP users, Non RVP users,
and Pitchers.
Ho: No difference in batted-ball exit velocity will exist between RVP users, Non
RVP users, and Pitchers.
Operational Definitions
Simples Reaction Time: Simple Reaction Time (SRT) is a test which measures
simple reaction time through delivery of a known stimulus to a known location to elicit a
known response. Measured in milliseconds.

8. 8
Decision Time – the time that the hitter has to evaluate the pitched ball and decide
whether to swing.
Kinematics: Branch of classical mechanics which describes the motion of points,
bodies (objects) and systems of bodies (groups of objects) without consideration of the
causes of motion.
Bio-Mechanical Efficiency: Whole body system working as one in a constant
dynamically balanced state in the best possible time, order, and place.
Dynamic Balance: The motion of the balance point (called the center of gravity)
through the swing.
Kinetic Link Principle: The ideal Kinetic Link produces high bat velocity by the
sequential transfer of energy from the stronger and heavier body segments (legs and
trunks) to the arms and finally to the bat.
Bat Speed or Bat Swing Velocity: The highest speed of the bat head (peak
velocity) through the hitting zone. Bat speed is measured in miles per hour (MPH).
Batted-Ball Velocity: The speed at which the ball exits the bat measured in miles
per hour.
Bat Quickness: The time it takes to move the bat head from launch position to
contact with the ball, measured in seconds.
Literature Review
The success of a hitter has been classified as a professional hitter with a batting
average greater than .300 (Breen, 1967). Others have defined a successful hitter as one
who had a minimum batting average of .275 for more than 220 times at bat and/- or
superior skills shown through other hitting statistics, such as home runs, total bases, or
slugging percentage (Race, 1961). Breen determined that former Major League Baseball
Players; Ernie Banks, Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Henry Aaron, Willie Mays, and
Mickey Mantle shared no less than five central mechanical characteristics. Those five
attributes include but are not limited to: 1) The center of gravity (belly button, core) flows

9. 9
in a fairly straight plane throughout the completion of the swing. 2) The hitter is able to
change the position of their head from pitch to pitch in order to obtain the longest and
best possible look at the flight of the baseball. 3) The bottom hand on the bat begins to
straighten immediately at the start of the swing movement. The result of this factor shows
an increase in bat speed. 4) The stride length of the hitter is almost always the same on
every pitch. 5) After the conclusion of contact with the ball, the upper body (torso)
follows the same direction as the flight of the ball. This attribute puts weight on the
leading foot and leg (Breen, 1967).
Although many hitters share the same characteristics and the definition of what
constitutes a successful hitter can be altered, experts and non-expert batters can be
separated in greater detail. The basis of this research focuses on bat velocity, batted-ball
exit velocity, and the vital role that it can have in determining the success of a hitter.
However, the success of a hitter isn’t solely defined by bat speed or exit velocity. Success
is dependent on many attributes that include; cognitive processing, reaction time,
movement time, visual cues, making sound decisions, mechanical efficiency, and
physical (resistance training, weighted implement training) training. The ability to access
and process information from one’s environment is the foundation on which a hitter can
build.
What does the pitcher throw? Can they locate? Where have they been throwing
me? What are their tendencies, patterns and sequence? Does their ball move? What is the
count? These are all questions that involve cognitive processing, a mental process of
thinking and obtaining knowledge. Cognitive processing (e.g., expectations about the
upcoming pitch) plays an important role in successful baseball batting. Previous research

10. 10
on baseball hitting has focused mostly on perceptual judgments and biomechanical
aspects. Experimental evidence through a two-state Markov model has shown that prior
expectations expressively affect the timing of a baseball swing, most notably on the
premise of a pitcher’s body language, the previous history of pitches (sequences), and the
pitch count (2-0, 0-2). Using cognitive cues can carry significant positive benefits when
correct and imposes significant penalties on reaction time when incorrect. Cognitive
processing of the aforementioned attributes are primarily used when the hitter has
inadequate perceptual information in the hitting situation, lack of processing time (<300
milliseconds), and issues tracking the ball with his eyes. The model shows shifts between
anticipation situations and helps explain why hitters get fooled on a certain pitch after a
sequence, and the pattern has been altered by the pitcher. In addition, the model also
helps explain the distinctive advantage hitters have when they are ahead in the count (2-0,
3-1) and alternatively, the disadvantage when they are behind in the count (1-2, 0-2)
(Gray, 2002). Cognitive processing and gaining knowledge can give the hitter an
advantage before he steps into the batter’s box. Once cognitive processing takes place, a
decision and reaction must occur to complete a baseball swing. As humans, we are all
processers of information. How we use, react, and respond to that information is a key
concept in helping predict the success of a hitter.
As previously mentioned, perceptual judgments play a critical role in a baseball at
bat. Through visual cues and anticipatory movements, the hitter has the ability to
accurately decipher between a fastball and change-up. Using one’s senses (sight,
hearing), and becoming cognitively aware of their environment, humans perceive and use

11. 11
relevant information that is presented to help direct their movements. Baseball is no
different than any other activity that involves fast moving objects.
In a recent study conducted in a virtual environment, expert hitters were found to
be more capable of using visual information of the ball (type of pitch), rather than the
movement pattern of the pitcher. Ten expert and ten novice hitters were given the task of
discerning a fastball from a change-up through two different response models: a) an
uncoupled response in which the hitters made a verbal statement trying to accurately
predict the pitch and (b) a coupled response in which the batters swung a baseball bat at a
virtual baseball. The ability to do so is separated by two neurophysiological streams
involved in visuomotor responding. It involves a ventral stream which is in control of
identifying and classifying visual stimuli (environmental stimuli), and a dorsal stream
that controls motor actions based on the given visual stimulus (movement or action). In
this study, hitters were more accurate in determining the pitch when the response was
uncoupled. Furthermore, in coupled responses, experts were more accurate when using
the first 100 milliseconds of ball flight independently of the pitcher’s body movements
(kinematics). Therefore, predictions of the pitch by experts are more accurate with visual
information than when just having the movement of the pitcher (Ranganathan & Carlton,
2007).
After combining previous research on perceptual, cognitive, and indirect
information available for hitting a baseball, specific behavior of college baseball players
in a virtual batting task has been studied and examined by Professor Rob Gray at Arizona
State University. Prior to Gray’s explorations, available perceptual information examined
the science behind necessary means of moving a bat or hand to the right place at the right

12. 12
time. The margin of error found in top sports players has been minimal. Less than 5 cm in
positional errors and less than 2 or 3 milliseconds in temporal errors were found and
reliably maintained through each assignment. The task is predominantly achieved
through three different types of actions. The actions are predictive visual information
about when and where the ball will be, correlation between visual information and the
required movement to move the bat to the correct position, and use of prior knowledge to
aid in the effort when little visual information readily available (Regan, 1997). In earlier
research, the discovery of the single determinant that the hitter must know in order to
accomplish the task of contact, is the position of the baseball when it crosses the plate
and the time in which it will arrive to that area (Bahill & Karnavas, 1993). Two primary
sources of information about when the ball will cross the plate are provided by a change
in the angular size of the ball’s retinal image. Particularly, when an object (baseball) is
approaching at a constant speed directly at the observer’s eye, the distance at which the
observer judges the object to be hittable increases with ball size (Hoyle, 1957). However,
very few studies have examined how a hitter uses the perceptual information present to
help direct a motor response. It is evident there is more complexity in hitting a pitched
ball than simply judging the pitch location at time of contact. Hitters must learn to use
perceptual information to simplify the intricacies of the swing. Limitations, particularly
eye movements, hamper certain actions and limit the type of information a hitter can use
(Gray, 2002). Due to the combination of senses and response attributes often divided for
individual analysis, the hitter’s step (stride) and movement (response) must be in process
during the sensory perceptual phase. If the two processes don’t occur simultaneously, the
hitter may be off time with the pitch (Hubbard & Seng, 1954). Perception, previous

13. 13
knowledge of pitches, and certain pitch counts can help aid in the process of a hitter
being more successful when faced with the difficulty of hitting.
Aforementioned research on cognitive information states that hitters use past
history such as previous pitches and pitch count to accurately calculate the location and
speed of the upcoming pitch (Gray, 2002). In this particular study, Professor Gray used a
baseball batting simulation to further investigate perceptual and cognitive information
used in hitting a baseball. Specifically, he used temporal and spatial swing accuracy to
test whether batters (a) use speed to estimate pitch height, (b) initiate a constant swing
duration at a fixed time to contact, (c) are influenced by the history of previous pitches
and pitch count, and (d) use rotation direction (Gray, 2002). In conclusion, this study
indicated that by varying the speed of each pitch, an increase in error in the height of the
swing occurred. Hitters primarily use the history of previous pitches, knowledge of the
pitch count, and ball rotation to move and direct their swing. These findings combine the
correlations between perception and action in controlling one’s swing (Gray, 2002). Once
the cognitive and perceptual phases are in process, a reaction to the information gathered
by those processes must be initiated. Being able to react quickly, efficiently, and
accurately is an important skill for any expert hitter.
Reaction Time
Simple reaction time is the time from detection of stimulus until first, initial
movement. In this instance, and for the purpose of this study, the potential stimulus for a
hitter could be the pitcher and or ball. For over 120 years, research figures for simple
reaction time in college aged individuals has been about 190 milliseconds (0.19) for a
light stimulus and about 160 milliseconds (0.16) for a sound stimulus (Kosinski, 2014).

14. 14
Furthermore, Hick’s Law refers to the increased amount of time it takes for a person to
make a decision as the number of choices increases. As the number of choices increase,
the time to react to those given choices also increases. In turn, the time it takes to make
that decision is the reaction time measured in bits (Hick, 1952).
In their first study, Hammel & Stumpner surveyed the batting reaction-time in
twenty-five physical education students at Indiana University. They examined the batting
reaction-time under two experimental conditions and found that the average starting
reaction-time was around .21 seconds and the average movement reaction-time to be
approximately .27 seconds (Hammel & Stumpner, 1950). They followed their initial
study with an examination that added two more specific conditions, choice starting
reaction-time and choice movement reaction time.
In baseball, there is only one choice that a hitter must make in order to be
successful; swing at a pitch or not swing at a pitch. However, the single choice a hitter is
given involves a variety of cues that are embedded into the process in making that
decision. The type, location, speed, curve and spin of pitch are all examples of visual
cues that a hitter might use to make an informed decision. In the first condition, starting
reaction time, researchers measured the speed when a batter starts moving the bat based
on a visual stimulus. In the second condition, the measured speed a hitter could start to
change direction of the moving bat upon the presentation of a stimulus. Twenty five
physical education majors were measured and the results showed the average choice
starting reaction time to move the bat was 0.29 seconds and the average choice
movement reaction-time in the same students was 0.34 seconds (Hammel & Stumpner,

15. 15
1951). In addition, coaches and players have long been concerned with reaction time as a
determinant of categorizing a hitter to be successful.
Those same coaches and players have stated that a successful batter must learn to
start the swing late and delay their swing until the last possible moment when the ball is a
few feet from home plate. By allowing the ball to travel farther, the hitter is able to gain
relevant knowledge of the pitch, location, and speed. The contact between bat and ball is
potentially more accurate the closer the ball is to the plate. However, if the reaction time
of a simple hand response is between .150-.225 seconds and a fastball traveling from the
mound to home plate arrives between .43-.58 seconds, it is evident that the ball must be
more than a few feet from home plate if the hitter is to have enough time to react, start the
swing, and move the bat in the direction of the baseball (Hammel & Stumpner, 1950).
Therefore, knowing when to start the swing (reaction time) and be on time with the pitch
(movement time) is critical to the success of a hitter.
Interestingly, an increase or decrease in reaction and movement time does not
accurately predict the offensive ability of a hitter. In a study correlating reaction time
(RT) and movement time (MT) with batting average, slugging percentage, and total
averages; 40 varsity baseball players from Colorado State University, University of
Wyoming, University of Utah, and Brigham Young University were found to have no
significant relationship (Nielsen & McGown, 1985). In contrast, vision reaction time
(VRT) has been found to be linked with an increase in batting average. The vision
reaction time of 213 professional baseball players in the Southern Baseball League were
tested and 92 players who had at least 100 at bats, was found to be significantly
correlated with batting average (p=0.017) (Classé, 1997). In another study, 82 university

16. 16
students (22 baseball, 22 tennis players, and 38 non-athletes) and 17 professional baseball
players were assessed to see if a significant difference existed between baseball
experience and skill levels in simple reaction time and the Go/No Go reaction time. The
Go/No Go is a recognition test that involves decision making and requires a subject to
press a button when a given stimulus is presented, while not pressing the button when
another stimulus appears. There was no significant difference in simple reaction time in
regards to experience or level. However, there was a significant difference in the Go/No
Go reaction time for baseball players, and the difference was the shortest for the
professional baseball players (Kida, Oda, & Matsumura, 2005). This research has
significant implications in the ability to make a quick and accurate decision as a
professional/expert hitter. Go/No Go Reaction time seems to be an attribute than can
separate experts from novices. Perceptual judgments, and more importantly, visual cues
and visual search patterns have also been found to aid in the development of professional
hitters.
Visual Research & Feature Integration Theory
While visual cues have been shown to show a significant difference between a
novice and an expert, a majority of the research presented to date has focused mainly on
perceptual and biomechanical elements of the swing. One of the most important
perceptual attributes in determining the potential success of a hitter is whether or not they
can see the baseball coming from the pitcher. It is important to understand what experts
and non-experts focus their attention on, their particular eye movements, and what cues
they use to their advantage. The basis of most visual research and the role of focused
attention have come from the Feature Integration Theory that was introduced by Anne

17. 17
Treisman and Garry Gelade in 1980. The theory states that one’s attention must be
focused on each particular stimulus in a display whenever combinations of more than one
distinguishable piece are needed to depict or separate all of the potential objects
displayed (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). The first stage of this paradigm is known as the
Preattentive Stage in which a person perceives an object and analyzes that object. This
analysis occurs early in the perceptual process, happening automatically or
unconsciously, and has no attention limitations. Features include color, shape,
orientation, and movement. The second stage is known as the focused attention stage in
which the individual attributes of the perceived object are combined in order to recognize
the object as whole. This conjunction requires attention and when disrupted or other
features are present, the combination can be lost and the attributes of unattended objects
may be spatially misplaced. Identifying important elements and obtaining their location is
critical during this stage. An unattended stimulus is only recorded at a fundamental level
and if not critical to the comprised features, should not affect one from discerning the
conjunctions needed (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). While standing in the batter’s box,
hitters are presented with an array of visual objects (pitchers, fielders, grass, dirt, etc.)
and must be able to discern and focus on what is important and what isn’t in the pitchers
pre-movement phase. At this moment in time, hitters usually unconsciously and
automatically see color and movement as they widen their focus on the pitcher. As the
pitcher begins his motion, the focus moves from acutely fixated to the object as a whole.
While the process of throwing the pitch continues, a hitter’s attention must focus solely
on the next movement in sequence when the visual objects in the hitters view are
unlimited. With unlimited objects to view, hitters must learn to focus on each movement

18. 18
and move their eyes to the next available position to get the earliest and best possible
view of the baseball leaving the pitchers hand.
Visual
In baseball hitting, visual search strategies and decision making play a vital role in
a batter’s success. Experts tend to focus solely on the important features of the pitcher.
An expert hitter’s eye movement patterns, accuracy, and timing of their swing judgments
are significantly different from non-experts. Using the correct visual cues prior to and
during the pitching delivery separates the two groups. Experts (college baseball team)
tend to shift their observational point of focus from the head, chest, or trunk of the pitcher
to the pitching arm and the release point before the ball is released. Non-experts
(graduate and college students) observed the head and face of the pitcher. With the focus
on specific visual cues, the experts outperformed the non-experts in the aforementioned
categories and were more accurate and quicker in their decisions (Takeuchi & Inomata,
2009).
Furthermore, a hitter’s eye movements and visual search patterns while viewing a
baseball pitch is important in distinguishing experts from novices. An information-
processing theory has been used to predict that performers obtain information from
stimuli and their environment through particular eye movements and fixations. Experts
tend to fixate their vision on the predictable release point during the wind-up.
Approximately 150 milliseconds after release, they move their eyes to the ball. After
release, the hitter must then gather relevant cues to make a decision about the motor
response within the first 9.1 meters (30 ft.) of the ball’s flight, or the initial 200
milliseconds. Novices were found to move their eyes prior to release and focused their

19. 19
attention away from the release point, such as the head of the pitcher (Shank & Haywood,
1987). Additionally, similar research has been conducted in cricket batsman where the
eyes are originally on the point of delivery or the release point. Following the release;
cricket, baseball, and table tennis players use a saccade or a fast movement to bring the
central fovea of the eye close to the anticipated location of the object (Land & McLeod,
2000).
Moreover, visual, auditory, and tactile information are all examples of sensory
feedback batters can use to determine the success of a swing and assess their performance
from pitch to pitch. Visual information can be separated into two sources: (a) the location
of the contact point between ball and bat, and (b) the flight (speed and direction) of the
ball exiting the bat. Research on eye movements suggest that because the ball is so far
away from fovea at the point of contact with the bat, batters most likely could not
perceive this information accurately enough for it to have any value (Gray, 2009).
A probable smooth-pursuit eye movement is used to track the flight of the ball out
of the pitcher’s hand. Smooth pursuit movements are much slower tracking movements
of the eyes designed to keep a moving stimulus on the fovea. Such movements are under
voluntary control in the sense that the observer can choose whether or not to track a
moving stimulus (Purves et al, 2001).
However, this movement is not fast enough to monitor the ball from release point
to the plate. A pitch traveling 100-mph travels at approximately 500 ° /s and the fastest
recorded smooth-pursuit eye movement has been recorded at 100 ° /s. Subsequently, it is
not physiologically possible that experts can track a pitch but must judge the point of
contact by following the ball with a smooth-pursuit eye movement, followed by saccadic

20. 20
eye movement to calculate the location of contact. If this strategy is used, it is likely that
the hitter can use foveal vision (area of most acute vision) at the point of contact (Gray,
2009). In conjunction, batters use the flight of the ball to adjust and increase performance
in between pitches and at-bats.
Four attributes can be used to make these adjustments: 1) movement of hands, 2)
movement of bat, 3) pitch of an auditory tone, and 4) direction of the ball. Experts exude
low temporal errors in the fourth attribute, which indicates the importance of the ball
exiting the bat as a measure of success. An external focus of attention effects ideal
performance. In addition, hitters can use tactile information to assess and diagnosis
quality contact. The amount of vibration that is felt by a hitter is directly related to the
point of contact. When contact occurs near the sweet spot (the widest part of the bat) very
little vibration is felt. In contrast, strong vibration occurs when contact is away from the
widest part. Lastly, auditory information can be used to make adjustments in a
subsequent swing. The sound that is produced by a well struck ball hit on the sweet spot
is typically distinct. Contrary, a ball that is hit on the handle or at the end of the barrel
produces a low frequency radiation and or sound (Gray, 2009). After a hitter swings and
makes contact, they are provided instant feedback as to where they hit the ball on the bat,
direction of the ball, and the sound that the bat-ball collision makes. Experts are able to
use that feedback as a learning tool in order to make the necessary adjustments to be
successful during their next swing or at bat.
Consequently, a batter has approximately 0.13 seconds to make a decision to
swing or not following the release of the baseball. The ability of a hitter to discern the
type of pitch (ex: curve ball, fast ball, change-up, knuckleball), location of the pitch (ex:

21. 21
in, out, up, down), and speed of the pitch is critical to their success. One predictor is the
spin of the baseball. The previously mentioned pitches all depend on different
characteristics in terms of spin and rate of rotation. Explicitly, a curveball spins in a
downward direction. The direction and spin on a curveball directly affect the lateral
direction (curve) of the baseball. The faster the spin of the baseball, the more movement
on the ball. Highlighted seams (marked balls) of the baseball were investigated to
differentiate the rate of rotation in order to improve the hitting of curveballs. In this
study, the mean overall increase in a well-hit marked ball compared to an unmarked ball
was found to be significantly different. Therefore the addition of visual cues (marked
balls) appears to increase a batter’s performance. However, further research is suggested
regarding the training procedures, effect of feedback, rate of fading cues, generalization
to live pitching, and generalization to other types of pitches (Osborne, Rudrud, &
Zezoney, 1990). Using these cues, a batter can learn to differentiate pitches by marking
the seams of a baseball in order to pick up the different rotations of each pitch and
therefore become a more successful hitter. Although there are many critical attributes that
contribute to the success of a hitter, the focus of this study is on bat velocity.
Bat Speed
Bat velocity, bat speed & bat quickness is a result of two primary attributes, Bio-
Mechanical Efficiency & Torque (Rotational Force). Strength is one variable that
contributes to the goal of high bat velocity. Bob Keyes, the owner and operator of Bio
Kinetics: Research and Development has spent years working with major league
organizations in which he applies the latest computer and video technology with the laws
of Biomechanics, exercise physiology, and motor learning to improve baseball

22. 22
performance. His team of experts at Bio-Kinetics Research and Development describe
biomechanical efficiency as the whole body system working as one in a constant
dynamically balanced state in the best possible time, order, and place (Keyes, 2005). The
concept of dynamic balance has been confirmed through the work of DeRenne and his
thirty plus years of research and video analysis. All great hitters work through a range or
state of motion in their swing from stance to follow through, and remain balanced while
moving. The center of gravity, which is mainly comprised of the core, is the hitter’s
balance point and foundation of support (DeRenne, 2011).
The success of a hitter is dependent on many variables. Bat velocity is considered
a characteristic that is essential to a batter’s success. Bat velocity is defined as, the speed
at which the bat head (barrel) is traveling at the point of contact between bat and ball
(Lund & Heefner, 2005). Additionally, only the best hitters in the game reach their
highest bat speed just before contact is made with the ball (Keyes, 2005).
Furthermore, bat velocity in the game of baseball is important for several reasons.
According to the equation, force equals mass times acceleration, the greater the velocity
of the bat at contact- other variables held constant, the greater the force that can be
imparted to the ball and the farther the ball will travel once hit. In addition, since energy
equals one-half mass times velocity squared, a bat swung with more velocity will result
in greater energy imparted to the ball. Essentially, the higher the velocity of the moving
bat at contact, the higher the velocity of the batted ball. This is true for both wooden bats
and aluminum bats since physics applies equally to both materials (Lund & Heefner,
2005).

23. 23
Bat quickness is defined as the time it takes to move the bat head from launch
position to contact with the ball, measured in seconds. However, the correlation between
bat velocity and bat quickness is opposite in the overall result and effect. Hitters who
display high bat velocities, tend to demonstrate poor bat quickness and longer swing
times. Bat quickness of major league hitters has been calculated to be 0.14 to 0.15 of a
second in contact hitters, and 0.17 to 0.18 in power hitters, demonstrating the inverse
relationship between the two swing variables. This relationship shows the importance of
making an informed decision to swing or not to swing. Decision time is defined as the
amount of time the hitter has to read the pitch and decide if, and when to swing the bat
with the information given. As bat quickness improves, decision time also improves.
Ultimately, the opportunity for the hitter to make a more informed decision also advances
(Lund & Heefner, 2005). Bat quickness is critical to the contact batter who wants to put
the ball in play more because they have a shorter swing to the ball which translates to less
velocity. In contrast, the power hitter has a longer time to contact, thus creating more bat
velocity and ultimately producing more power.
Moreover, ESPN’s Sports Science states that, bat speed is the most key
component in equating and hitting for distance. For example, a bat moving 65 miles per
hour (mph) at a 60 mile per hour pitch can send a ball flying 400 feet. Hitting a ball
pitched 5 mph faster (65 mph) with the same bat speed, only propels the ball 5 feet
farther. However, if you increase the swing speed 5 mph on a 60 mph pitch, the ball will
travel about 25 feet farther or roughly around 5 times farther (Brenkus, "Sport Science-
The physics of hitting a baseball"). This shows how truly important bat speed is to a
power hitter. It is important to know and understand how to increase bat speed in order to

24. 24
become a more efficient hitter. Two main factors contribute to an increase in bat speed
are: mechanical efficiency and specific resistance training programs, e.g. overweight
training, overweight and underweight integral training and progressive overload
resistance training. A majority of hitters produce high velocity bat speeds through their
mechanical efficiency (Dynamic Balance, Kinetic Link Principle). However, a hitter can
also produce bat speed equal to or greater than with more strength (specific resistance
training program) (Keyes, 2005).
In 1979, Dr. Coop DeRenne began his research by asking two specific questions.
How do you pitch and throw the baseball faster; and how do the best hitters hit and
increase their bat velocities? These two questions guided him to the scientific areas of
biomechanics, exercise science and visual training (DeRenne, 2013). At that time, very
little was known in regards to how bat velocity could be increased. With his first initial
research project, DeRenne and his team concluded that hitters traditionally train with
overload exercises when beginning to improve and increase their bat velocity.
Furthermore, the majority of baseball overload exercises consist of isotonic weight
training exercises and the use of overloaded hitting implements (i.e. Weighted
Doughnut). However, little was known of the effect an overload weight training exercise
program would have on hitter’s and their normal bat velocity (DeRenne & Okasaki,
1983). Ultimately, DeRenne defined the effect of specific resistance training programs,
and what over-loading/under-loading hitting implements have on bat velocity. Primarily,
it is important to discuss how resistance training improves bat velocity and the
importance of flexibility within the confines of the elite hitter’s swing.

25. 25
Research shows that bat velocity can be increased through a specific resistance
training program. A player cannot strengthen one muscle group and expect to see a
dramatic increase in bat speed. A player must build a good balance of functional as well
as absolute strength from the lower torso up through the core, into the upper torso and
arms to see an improvement. Strength is only the foundation. The key components are
torque, force, and kinetic energy. Furthermore, a player who engages in resistance
training and training muscles to fire faster must also maintain good flexibility throughout
the entire body. The more inflexible the player is, the smaller displacement between
segments and the slower the transfer of energy from one segment to another. Therefore, a
player must not only add strength but must also maintain or add flexibility (Keyes, 2005).
Under-loading and overloading principles during warm-up swings have also been
found to have a vast effect on bat velocity. Since 1980, DeRenne has conducted six
warm-up hitting projects using high school and collegiate players that support the
principles of Specificity of Training and Weighted Implement Training. In study one,
twenty-three players were used to help determine the effect that a weighted object had on
a normal game bat velocity after warm-up. The results showed a significant increase in
bat velocity when the players swung a normal game bat after warming up with a wooden
overloaded bat (34 oz.) and a 27 oz. under- loaded bat (DeRenne, 1982). One year later,
60 college players were tested in the same exact manner. The results showed a significant
difference and increase in bat velocity in the 34 oz. overloaded bat, as well as a 29 oz.
and 27 oz. under-loaded bat (DeRenne & Okasaki, 1983).This was confirmed in a repeat
study in 1984. In study four (1987), the effects of overloaded and under loaded weighted
implements on bat velocity after warm-up (dry swings) were tested. Once again, the

26. 26
results showed a significant difference and increase in bat velocity using the 27 oz. bat.
Heavy implements had the opposite effect, slowing bat velocity down. In his fifth study
(1988), the effects of bat velocity in under loaded and overloaded bats were tested during
batting practice following a warm-up. The results showed that the best results came from
the under-loaded bats (27 oz., 28 oz., and 29 oz.). In contrast, the Top Hand Bat, donut
ring, 34 oz. bat, and the fungo bat all had negative effects on bat velocities. In the final
warm-up research (1992), DeRenne determined which of the 13 weighted implements
would produce the highest bat velocity in succeeding trials. The results showed that
warming up with a bat that is 10% + or – the weight of a standard bat (30 oz.) produced
the greatest bat velocity. A distinct pattern in decreased velocity was shown the further
the weight was from the original bat weight. The most commonly used donut ring
produced the lowest bat velocity. In conclusion, DeRenne recommends high school and
collegiate players’ warm-up using a bat that is two ounces less than their normal
weighted bat. The original assumption that a heavier bat will increase velocity proved to
be wrong and is not recommended (DeRenne, 2011).
In addition, DeRenne has produced three separate hitting exercise studies with
weighted implements since 1981-82. In study one (1982), participants ranging from ten
ex-college players to current professional players were given a ten-week training program
and then divided into two groups. Group 1 used the power swing while Group 2 used a
wooden lead bat. Each participant had approximately 60 cuts per day for four days a
week and were limited to ten sets of six repetitions to account for fatigue in the swings.
The results displayed a significant increase in bat velocity after the ten-week training
program, while the wood leaded bat and the Power Swing also enhanced bat velocities. In

27. 27
study two (1985-86), the effects of selected under-loaded and overloaded implements on
normal game bat velocity after two prescribed exercise programs were examined. Three
college players and three research groups were divided into three groups that included;
Group 1- Batting practice program, Group 2- Dry swings program, and Group 3-
Controlled group-no program. Participants engaged a 12-week training period, which
included four workouts per week, and began with a weighted bat being swung with 15
warm-up dry swings or 15 batting practice swings, followed by 50 dry or batting practice
swings with heavy-light-standard bats (150 total swings). Every three weeks participants
swung with heavy and light required bats, eventually moving up to the next heaviest bat
and next lightest bat until the conclusion of the 12 week period. The results showed that
Groups 1 and 2 increased their respective bat velocities and that Group 1 (Batting
practice group) improved greater than Group 2 (Dry swing group). It was recommended
that the interchangeable weighted bat concept be done in the weight room and batting
practice and therefore, the principles of specificity and weighted implement training are
confirmed. This study was reproduced in 1987 using 30 high school hitters and 20
university students with similar results. Through certain hitting exercise and specific
weighted implements, hitters are able to increase their bat velocity. Research has shown
that some hitters decrease their bat velocity if these programs are not done properly
(DeRenne, 2011).
Furthermore, DeRenne and others have performed several additional weighted bat
training studies, specifically identifying factors for increasing bat swing velocity. The
importance and benefits gained from an increase in one’s bat speed and bat velocity can
be categorized into three specific areas of significance: 1) increased decision time, 2)

28. 28
decreased swing time, and 3) increased batted-ball velocity. The first benefit, decision
time, has three specific variables that must be determined by the hitter prior to making a
decision on whether to swing at a certain pitch. The hitter must first identify the type of
pitch that has been thrown (i.e. fastball, change-up, curve ball). Secondly, the velocity at
which the pitch has been thrown. Fastballs and breaking balls will be thrown at speeds
that differ by as much as 10 miles per hour or more. Lastly, the hitter must determine
where the location of the pitch will be and discern if it is a ball or strike. In a short
amount of time, hitters must process all of this information in deciding whether to swing.
The longer the hitter can wait before swinging, the more likely they will swing at a ball in
the strike zone (allowing them to be more accurate at contact) and arrive on time. The
player’s ability to wait longer to swing should increase his or her accuracy and time, and
should lead to an overall better performance (Szymanski, 2009). With an increase in bat
speed, a hitter can decrease the time it actually takes to swing the bat, and can therefore
make a more informed decision while hitting and selecting strikes.
An increase in one’s bat speed leads to the second benefit of decreasing a hitter’s
swing time. Swing time is defined as the time it takes for the distinct change (from the
launch position of the barrel) of the bat’s path to travel in the opposite direction to
contact. The less time it takes to swing the bat, the longer the hitter’s decision time is,
assuming the velocity of the pitched ball stays the same. If a hitter can decrease their
swing time, he or she would have a longer decision time, which would allow him or her
to be more selective in the batter’s box and swing at more strikes and less balls. This
concept directly affects the hitter’s ability to identify the type of pitch thrown, the
velocity of the pitch, and the location of the pitch, thus increasing the possibility of being

29. 29
more accurate at bat-ball contact. If a hitter does not swing at balls outside of the strike
zone, he or she has a greater chance of getting on base because of a possible walk, or it
might allow him or her to select a better pitch to hit (Szymanski, 2009). As bat speed
increases, decision time decreases and ultimately decision time to make a more informed
decision increases. In part, these two concepts lead to the possibility of an increase in the
batted-ball velocity. With an increase in exit velocity, the defense in turn has less reaction
time to make a play.
The third benefit of increased bat speed is an increase in batted-ball velocity. If a
hitter could swing a heavier bat than their standard bat at the same speed, or swing his or
her standard game bat faster because of increased bat swing velocity (through
biomechanical efficiency and specific resistance training), the batted ball would differ
two important ways. 1) It would travel farther, and 2) be hit harder, or both, because of
the larger transfer of energy and momentum placed into the ball (Szymanski, 2009). An
increase in batted-ball velocity carries with it the opportunity for more home runs, more
hits due to less reaction time for the fielders, a higher batting average, and an increase in
slugging percentage.
Researchers and coaches have not, however, adequately addressed whether or not
video analysis training increases bat speed. Right View Pro©, a hitting analysis system,
captures video clips of Major League Baseball Players and allows an amateur player to
visually compare his or her swing to the professionals’ swings. The system allows a
player to visualize what they are doing correctly or incorrectly, in comparison to the
professional. It defines the principles that make these players most efficient and most

30. 30
successful, while communicating it in an easily understood fashion. This system is used
by high school, college and professional programs worldwide.
Methodology
Three different groups were used to test the effects Right View Pro© has on bat
velocity and batted-ball exit velocity in male collegiate baseball players (n=29). The 29
subjects were broken into Group A (weight training), Group B (weight training and video
analysis) and Group C (weight training, video analysis, and Right View Pro© video
analysis). The study started with 38 total participants but due to injuries and students
transferring, only 29 athletes completed both the baseline and post-test.
The bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocities were tested with participants
taking swings with brand new Rawlings R100HS Official League ABCA Baseballs© off
a standard Tanner Tee©. Each participant used the same exact Easton S1 CXN advanced
composite handled baseball bat. The Easton bat was BBCOR certified and 33 inches in
length, 30 ounces in weight, and had a 2 5/8 inch barrel. Each participant was given one
practice swing using the tee, baseball, and bat prior to being recorded. The subjects were
given specific instructions to hit the ball off the tee directly into a square net placed
straight in front of the tee and in the path of the flight of the ball. The participants were
given 10 swings each, with their bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity recorded after
each swing. A portable plate was placed six feet in front of the screen while the tee was
placed six inches in front of the front edge of the plate. Depending on whether the hitter
was right-handed or left-handed, the hitters were instructed to place their lead foot
perpendicular to the corner of the plate, and that both hands were to be placed on the bat
with the bottom hand near the knob of the bat.

31. 31
Participants were tested on bat speed using the Pocket Radar©. The bat speed was
calculated for each participant’s swing in which the recorder was stationed approximately
30 feet directly in line behind the hitter’s back shoulder. As the hitter began his initial
movement (load of the swing), the recorder pressed down on the pocket radar button to
emit the radio waves and let go of the button immediately preceding the bat-ball
collision. The Pocket Radar products are Doppler speed radar systems. They work as a
speed detector by emitting a small pulse of radio waves in an invisible focused beam,
similar in shape to a flashlight beam. When the radio wave hits an object that is moving
towards or away from any of the Pocket Radar’s, a small amount of the wave reflects
back. The moving object modifies the reflected radio wave based upon how fast it is
moving directly towards or away from the Pocket Radar unit. The unit then receives the
reflected radio wave and compares it to the original transmitted radio wave. It then
calculates the speed of the moving object based upon the difference between the two
radio waves (Pocket Radar, 2015).
Participants were tested on batted-ball exit velocity using the Stalker Radar Sport
2 Radar Gun©. The batted-ball exit velocity for each participant’s swing was recorded by
the Stalker Radar that was placed approximately five to six feet directly on the other side
of the screen the ball was being hit into.
During the course of two semesters the athletes were assigned to either Group A,
Group B, or Group C. The conditions included weight training, video analysis, and Right
View Pro© video analysis. The first condition, Group A, participated in weight training
using a baseball specific functional program. The second condition, Group B, participated
in the same baseball functional weight lifting program as well as received video analysis

32. 32
breakdown with the coaching staff where they saw only their swings. The third condition,
Group C, participated in the functional weight training program, used video analysis
where they only saw their swings and additionally received five 30 minute sessions with
the coaching staff using RVP© where they could compare their swings to professionals.
Results
The data obtained on the bat velocity baseline and post-test are summarized in
Table 1.0. The results show that Group C acquired the highest average bat velocity in the
baseline test, followed by Groups B and A, respectively. The averages in the post-test
collection show that Group C had the highest bat velocity once again, followed by Group
A and B. Group A was the only group that improved their bat velocity between baseline
and post testing. Further results show that the average difference (±) of total swings,
improved in Group A, while Group C and Group B actually decreased. Group C
decreased the least, while group B decreased the most. These results are summarized in
Table 1.1. A one way analysis of variance was used to analyze bat velocity. Results
showed no significant difference in bat velocities between Groups A, B, and C. F=1.84,
P=0.17. See Table 1.2
Table 1.0-Average bat velocity (mph) of Groups A, B, and C in the baseline and
post-test
Groups Group A (Weight
Training)
N=9
Group B (Weight
Training, Video
Analysis
N=8
Group C (Weight
Training, Video
Analysis, RVP
N=12
Baseline 73.93549383
(MPH)
77.47633929
(MPH)
82.76087963
(MPH)
Post-Test 75.34757496
(MPH)
74.75833333
(MPH)
81.40277778
(MPH)
Table 1.1- Differences between baseline and post-test bat velocity (mph) of Group A,
B, and C and standard error

33. 33
Groups A B C
Baseline Test 73.93549383
(MPH)
77.47633929 (MPH) 82.76087963 (MPH)
Post-Test 75.34757496
(MPH)
74.75833333 (MPH) 81.40277778 (MPH)
Average
Difference (±)
1.412222 -2.72 -1.356667
Standard
Deviation (±)
5.816882 3.818313 3.941556
Table 1.2- Results of Bat Velocity Anova
Source (Bat
Velocity)
SS Df MS F P
Treatment
[between
groups]
77.098633 2 38.549316 1.84 0.178905
Error
[within
group]
543.640022 26 20.909232
SS/Bl
Total 620.738655 28
For the second measure, batted-ball exit velocity in baseline and post-test is
summarized in Table 2.0.The results show that Group C acquired the highest average
batted-ball exit velocity in the baseline test, followed by Groups B and A. The averages
in the post-test collection show that Group C had the highest bat velocity once again,
followed by Group A and B, respectively. Group A was the only group that improved
their batted-ball exit velocity between baseline and post testing. Further results show that,
for the average velocity difference (±), Group A improved while Group C and Group B
actually decreased. Group C decreased the least, while Group B decreased the most.

34. 34
These results are summarized in Table 2.1. A one way analysis of variance of
independent samples was used to analyze the batted-ball exit velocities. Results show that
there was a significant difference in bat velocities (F=4.93, p=0.015301, <.05) See Table
2.2. A post hoc Tukey test showed that batted-ball exit velocity differed significantly
between Group A and B. See Table 3.0
Table 2.0-Average batted-ball exit velocity (mph) of Group A, B, and C in the
baseline test
Groups Group A (Weight
Training)
N=9
Group B (Weight
Training, Video
Analysis
N=8
Group C (Weight
Training, Video
Analysis, RVP
N=12
Baseline 70.96790123
(MPH)
76.69146825
(MPH)
82.27314815
(MPH)
Post-Test 75.11014109
(MPH)
73.87931548
(MPH)
81.64444444
(MPH)
Table 2.1- Differences between baseline and post-test batted-ball exit velocity (mph)
of Group A, B, and C and standard error
Groups A B C
Baseline Test 70.96790123
(MPH)
76.69146825
(MPH)
82.27314815
(MPH)
Post-Test 75.11014109
(MPH)
73.87931548
(MPH)
81.64444444
(MPH)
Average
Difference (±)
4.142222 -2.8125 -0.628333
Standard Deviation
(±)
7.10226 3.264881 3.071469
Table 2.2- Results of Batted-Ball Exit Velocity Anova
Source SS df MS F P
Treatment
[between
groups]
220.633424 2 110.316712 4.93 0.015301
Error 581.926072 26 22.381772

35. 35
Ss/Bl
Total 802.559497 28
Table 3.0- Post Hoc Tukey HSD Results for Batted-Ball Exit Velocities
Tukey
HSD Test
HSD (.05) HSD (0.1) M1 vs M2 M1 vs M3 M2 vs M3
5.44 6.97 P<.05 Non-
significant
Non-
significant
Present results show that the use of RVP does not increase bat velocity or batted-
ball exit velocity at a significant level. In fact, both the overall average between baseline
and posttest bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity in Group C (RVP Group) had a
small decrease. The overall mean difference in batted-ball exit velocity between Group A
(37.28015873) and Group B (-22.50) was the only combination of two different samples
that were found to obtain a significant difference at the P<.05 .
Bat velocity increased from most improved to least improved between baseline
and post-test with Group A (∑x = 12.71 mph, SE = ± 1.94) the most, Group C (∑x = -
16.28 mph, SE = ± 1.14), and Group B (∑x = -21.76 mph, SE = ± 1.35) the least.
Moreover, batted-ball exit velocity increased from most improved to least improved
between baseline and post-test with Group A (∑x = 37.28 mph, SE = ± 2.37) the most,
Group C (∑x = -7.54 mph, SE = ± 0.89), and Group B (∑x = -22.5 mph, SE = ± 1.15) the
least.
Although Right View Pro© did not increase bat velocity or batted-ball exit
velocity overall, there was a significant difference (P>.05) between Group A and Group
B in batted-ball exit velocity. The HSD showed at the .05 level, the absolute [unsigned]

36. 36
difference between sample 1 (Group A Mean= 4.142222) and sample 2 (Group B Mean=
-2.8125) was found to be significant. Specifically, the HSD (.05) = 5.44 and the HSD
(.01) =6.97.
Discussion
In this study, Right View Pro© was used to determine if visual aids could
increase bat and exit velocities in college aged baseball players. Perhaps the main
difference between bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity in this present study was due
to the relationship between the bat and ball. That relationship can be related to the
baseball-bat collision and the coefficient of restitution between the two. In regards to bat
velocity, a swing typically lasts 0.2 seconds during which the rate of energy transferred to
the bat increases from 0 to about 9 horsepower during the first 0.15 seconds and then
decreases to 0 as the bat crosses the plate immediately before contact with the ball. Due
to smaller muscles (hands & wrists) only contributing to about 1 horsepower per 10
pounds, the power from a swing generally comes from the large muscles (legs & thorax)
in a hitter. This only occurs if the hitter stores translational and rotational kinetic energy
early in the swing process and then transfers and imparts that energy to the bat right
before contact (Adair, 2008). The difference in bat velocities and most likely batted-ball
exit velocities is due to a lack of energy, the kinetic link chain/principle being disrupted
sequentially, and the lack of use of the larger muscles. Another explanation of the
differences in the groups is the coefficient of restitution (COR) and batted-ball collision.
For example, a ball that is dropped on concrete from 10 feet high will bounce
about three feet after impact. The COR in this scenario would be √3/10=0.55. At
increased velocities the ball is considered to be less elastic. A home run that sends a 90
mile per hour pitch back with a velocity of 110 miles per hour generates the reversal in a

37. 37
very short time. This leads to the question of why aluminum bats produce farther
distances of ball flight than that of wooden bats. In a solid wooden bat, the bat
compresses approximately 2% at impact and therefore stores 2% of the collision energy.
A standard game ball has a COR of 0.45 at high velocities and returns about 20% of the
98% stored energy. The bat returns about the same proportion. In contrast, a hollow
aluminum bat becomes distorts around 10% at impact and stores 10% of the collision
energy. Approximately 80% of the energy is returned. Adding the ball and bat
contributions, 26% of the collision energy is returned and the ball off an aluminum bat
leaves at a higher velocity and carries a farther distance (Adair, 2008).
In this study, no energy was provided from the ball due to its stationary position
on the tee. The explanation of the low batted-ball exit velocities and differences could be
in part to vibrational nodes felt in each hitter’s hands and the bat-ball (sweet spot) contact
point. A model was developed by Nathan (2000) to further investigate the collision
between the bat and ball, taking into consideration the transverse bending vibrations of
the bat. The effect of vibrations on exit speed of the ball was found to be significant and
compares closely with previously established experimental data within low impact
velocities, similar to this study. Also examined was the exit speed of the ball by relating
the initial speed of the ball and the initial speed of the bat at the impact point. In contrast
to this study, vibrations in the bat at higher velocities play a vital role in determining the
ball exit speed. It is most likely that vibrations in the aluminum bat used for this study
had little to no effect on the exit speed of the 29 participants. Due to the use of a
stationary ball, a greater bat and exit velocity was not found even though an aluminum
bat was used which has more vend than a wood bat causing the ball to exit faster.

38. 38
Limitations
Several uncontrollable variables could have contributed to the results of this
study. One variable is the amount of time each group spent hitting outside the video
analysis and practice sessions throughout the season. It is likely, though unknown, if
Group A spent time hitting ground balls to position players or could have easily had
access to hit on their own time outside of practice. Although the same bat was used in the
baseline and post-test, the status of the bat could have deteriorated over the course of time
by being used while hitting during practices and games.
The health of the athletes could also be a factor in the results. During baseline
testing in September, the athletes had just taken a long break from baseball. This could
have been beneficial and detrimental at the same time. It is beneficial because they have
been away from the game for a while and should have a better range of motion along
with a relaxed body. The disadvantage is being away from baseball for an extended
period of time. It is possible their mechanical efficiency was decreased due to lack of
practice. Their attitudes towards the study at the beginning of the year and at the end of
the year could have changed the effort that they put into their swings. The attitude of the
players during sit down video analysis, expectations of what they would get out of the
video analysis breakdown, and perceived interpretation of the breakdown of their swings
compared to professionals could have also affected the results.
Players in all three groups either improved or decreased their bat velocity or
batted-ball exit velocity. As the groups were tested, they did not go in a particular order
of groups or individuals within those groups. They were tested based on availability and

39. 39
convenience during practice hours. Some players hit before they tested, while others
waited several minutes to get tested.
The radar gun and pocket radar do not yield exceptionally precise data, more so
with the Pocket Radar (PR) than the radar gun. A button on the PR must be pushed at a
certain time in order to send the radio waves out to get the best possible swing velocity. If
the recorder pressed the button too early or too late, the results and velocities could have
been from the actual ball. A typical Stalker Radar Gun and Pocket Radar gun are usually
pretty close in their accuracy when compared side by side. When the PR did not pick up a
speed, the number was omitted in the data analysis. Some of the participants were able to
be recorded with 10 fairly accurate swings while others had several low numbers or
zeroes omitted from their averages. The accuracy, reliability, and skill of the radar
systems/recorder could all be significant factors in the results of this study.
One of the most important variables in getting the best possible batted-ball exit
velocity is that the ball be hit directly into to the middle of this screen right in front of the
Stalker Radar Gun which proved hard to accomplish for most hitters. Often swings would
produce hits at the top or bottom of the net.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Results of this study show that the use of a visual training aid such as RVP did not
make a significant difference in terms of increasing or decreasing bat velocity and batted-
ball exit velocity. RVP serves a purpose in allowing a novice to compare their swing with
an experts. Other potential benefits of RVP in regards to bat velocity and or batted-ball
exit velocity would need to be analyzed in another series of studies.

40. 40
This study solely used aluminum bats. A study with wood bats with a lower
coefficient of restitution would provide additional data. It is recommended that an
aluminum and wood bat be used in the same study, replicating one of DeRenne’s studies
with RVP as one of the groups.
Considering the dynamics of the bat-ball collision, it is recommended that a
baseball moving at a standard speed be used in a follow-up study. While this could create
some difficulty, it also would add to the quality of research in determining exit velocity.
Furthermore, a study involving the “sweet spot” could be more clearly defined on the bat
and contact area, perhaps only recording swings that contact the ball in a certain location
on the bat (sweet spot or slightly larger). Also, this study may have obtained different
results if only swings that produced baseballs hit within the confines of a smaller area
into the net had been recorded.
It is possible that a more defined study using RVP could test for bat velocity
and batted-ball exit velocity within the confines of testing certain swing characteristics,
separate from the ones Breen described in 1967, and the four biomechanical absolutes of
the elite hitters swing described by DeRenne. Using the transformation from standard
film and video to a three-dimensional analysis, several studies performed by DeRenne
developed an elaborate method of assessing a hitter’s mechanical efficiency (Welch,
Banks, Cooks, and Draovitch, 1995). More specifically, DeRenne along with the aid of
hitters and coaches have defined six swing components: (1) stance, (2) load & stride, (3)
launch, (4) bat approach, (5) contact, and (6) follow-through. Within the six components
mentioned above, lie the four biomechanical absolutes: (1) Balance, (2) Kinetic Link, (3)
Bat Lag, and (4) Axis of Rotation. The absolutes are based on the implementation of the

41. 41
laws of physics and motion with the common dynamic performance ideas of successful
hitters (DeRenne, 2011).
In conclusion, possessing great bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity are just
two of the many critical characteristics that defined the successful hitter. Specific
resistance training, overloaded, and under-loaded weight training techniques have been
shown to increase one’s bat and exit velocity. The two benefits can help attribute to
hitting baseballs farther and fielders having less time to react. It is recommended that if
coaches and or players desire to increase their bat speed they keep their training methods
within the parameters set forth by DeRenne. Training with a baseball bat that is only two
to three ounces greater than or less than the normal game bat is the optimal training tool
to increase bat velocity and in turn has the potential to increase one’s exit velocity. The
use of a weighted doughnut in the on-deck circle slows bat speed down.
Conducting more elaborate bat velocity and/or batted-ball exit velocity studies
with DeRenne’s principles and absolutes, as previously mentioned, could potentially
contribute to the crucial benefit of elite bat velocity and batted-ball exit velocity.

42. 42
References
Adair, R. K. (2008). The physics of baseball. Physics Today, 48(5), 26-31.
Bahill, A. T., & Karnavas, W. J. (1993). The perceptual illusion of baseball's
rising fastball and breaking curveball. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 19(1), 3.
Breen, J. L. (1967). What makes a good hitter? Journal of Health, Physical
Education, Recreation, 38(4), 36-39.
Carvalho, D., Teixeira, S., Lucas, M., Yuan, T. F., Chaves, F., Peressutti, C., ... &
Arias-Carrión, O. (2013). The mirror neuron system in post-stroke rehabilitation.
International archives of medicine, 6(1), 41.
Classé, J. G., Semes, L. P., Daum, K. M., Nowakowski, R., Alexander, L. J.,
Wisniewski, J., ... & Bartolucci, A. (1997). Association between visual reaction
time and batting, fielding, and earned run averages among players of the Southern
Baseball League. Journal of the American Optometric Association, 68(1), p. 43-
49.
Dale, Edgar. Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching, 3rd ed., Holt, Rinehart &
Winston, New York, 1969, p. 108
DeRenne, C. (1982). Increasing bat velocity. Athletic J, 28, 30-31.
DeRenne, C., & Okasaki, E. (1983). Increasing bat velocity (Part 2). Athletic J,
63, 54-55.
DeRenne, C. (2011). The Scientific Approach to Hitting-Research Explores The
Most Difficult Skill In Sport (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: University Readers.
DeRenne, C. (2013, October 10). DeRenne Delves into Bat Control, Accuracy.
Collegiate Baseball Newspaper. Retrieved April 17, 2015, from
http://baseballnews.com/derenne-delves-into-bat-control-accuracy/
Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of
mind-reading. Trends in cognitive sciences, 2(12), 493-501.

43. 43
Gray, R. (2002). “Markov at the bat”: A model of cognitive processing in baseball
batters. Psychological Science, 13(6), 542-547.
Gray, R. (2002). Behavior of college baseball players in a virtual batting task.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(5),
1131.
Gray, R. (2009). How do batters use visual, auditory, and tactile information
about the success of a baseball swing? Research quarterly for exercise and sport,
80(3), 491-501.
Hick, W. E. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 4(1), 11-26.
How the Pocket Radar Products Work. (n.d.). Retrieved March 1, 2015, from
http://pocketradar.com/blog/how-the-pocket-radar-products-work/
Hoyle, F. (1957). The black cloud. London: Penguin Books.
Hubbard, A. W., & Seng, C. N. (1954). Visual movements of batters. Research
Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation,
25(1), 42-57.
Keyes, Bob: Bio-Kinetics Research & Development- SPARQ Magazine (2005).
Kida, N., Oda, S., & Matsumura, M. (2005). Intensive baseball practice improves
the Go/No Go reaction time, but not the simple reaction time. Cognitive brain
research, 22(2), 257-264.
Kosinski, R. J. (2008). A literature review on reaction time. Clemson University,
10.
Land, M. F., & McLeod, P. (2000). From eye movements to actions: how batsmen
hit the ball. Nature neuroscience, 3(12), 1340-1345.
Lund, R. J., & Heefner, D. (2005). Training the Baseball Hitter: What Does
Research Say?. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 76(3), 27-33.

44. 44
Nathan, A. M. (2000). Dynamics of the baseball–bat collision. American Journal
of Physics, 68(11), 979-990.
Nielsen, D., & McGown, C. (1985). Information processing as a predictor of
offensive ability in baseball. Perceptual and motor skills, 60(3), 775-781.
Osborne, K., Rudrud, E., & Zezoney, F. (1990). Improved curveball hitting
through the enhancement of visual cues. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
23(3), 371-377.
Prithishkumar, I., and S. Michael. "Understanding your student: Using the VARK
model." Journal of Postgraduate Medicine Apr.-June 2014: 183. Academic
OneFile. Web. 9 Feb. 2015.
Purves, D., Augustine, G. J., Fitzpatrick, D., Katz, L. C., LaMantia, A. S.,
McNamara, J. O., & Williams, S. M. (2001). Types of eye movements and their
functions.
Race, D. E. (1961). A cinematographic and mechanical analysis of the external
movements involved in hitting a baseball effectively. Research Quarterly.
American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation, 32(3), 394-
404.
Ranganathan, R., & Carlton, L. G. (2007). Perception-action coupling and
anticipatory performance in baseball batting. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39(5),
369-380.
Regan, D. (1997). Visual factors in hitting and catching. Journal of sports
sciences, 15(6), 533-558.
Shank, M. D., & Haywood, K. M. (1987). Eye movements while viewing a
baseball pitch. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 64(3c), 1191-1197.
Slater-Hammel, A. T., & Stumpner, R. L. (1950). Batting reaction-time. Research
Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and Recreation,
21(4), 353-356.
Slater-Hammel, A. T., & Stumpner, R. L. (1951). Choice batting reaction-time.
Research Quarterly. American Association for Health, Physical Education and
Recreation, 22(3), 377-380.

45. 45
Slaught, D. (n.d.). How RVP Works-The Concept. Retrieved January 1, 2009,
from http://www.rightviewpro.com/how-rvp-works/concept
Sport Science- The physics of hitting a baseball [Motion picture]. (2010). United
States: Sport Science.
Szymanski, D. J., DeRenne, C., & Spaniol, F. J. (2009). Contributing factors for
increased bat swing velocity. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research,
23(4), 1338-1352.
Takeuchi, T., & Inomata, K. (2009). VISUAL SEARCH STRATEGIES AND
DECISION MAKING IN BASEBALL BATTING 1. Perceptual and motor skills,
108(3), 971-980.
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.
Cognitive psychology, 12(1), 97-136.
Welch, C. M., Banks, S. A., Cook, F. F., & Draovitch, P. (1995). Hitting a
baseball: A biomechanical description. Journal of Orthopedic & Sports Physical
Therapy, 22(5), 193-201.
Wulf, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Directing attention to movement effects enhances
learning: A review. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 8(4), 648-660.