> BUY > Pitching > Tommy John Twist Studies

Cardinals Pitcher Alex ReyesIf you follow me on Twitter @thepainguy, you'll get the sense that the Tommy John Twist sure SEEMS to predict injuries.

I mean, the tweets...

So why don't people like Keith Law buy that the Tommy John Twist is bad?

Below are some comments on the two "studies" of the Tommy John Twist.

And the problems with them.

TLDR: The "studies" of the Tommy John Twist are fraudulent. First, they relied on the Motus device. Which doesn't work. Then there's the issue of Straw Man-ing.

Tommy John Twist: Some Comments on the "Studies"

Recently, two different groups have published papers they say debunk the idea that the Tommy John Twist is bad.

While some have written off my ideas as a result, both papers have serious methodological problems.

The Carroll Study

Among other things, the problem with Will Carroll's study of the Tommy John Twist that he didn't bother to shoot any video, so we have no idea what the subjects were doing.


Were they doing the Tommy John Twist?


We'll never know.

The Dowling Paper

As for the Dowling study, it's an example of a Straw Man; they use a different definition of Timing than the one I use.

They focus on (Stride) Foot Contact.

I know that's the common milestone, but it's NOT what I use to judge Timing in baseball pitchers.

I pointed that out to Ben Hansen, one of the authors of the Dowling "study," in this tweet.

Why then would they define the Tommy John Twist as...

...excessive forearm pronation at foot contact (FC) during a pitch, also known as ‘Tommy John Twist’...

There was no significant correlation between forearm pronation at FC and maximum external rotation (MER) and elbow varus torque.

...when they KNOW -- because I TOLD them -- that's not how I define it.

about | contact | copyright | sitemap | liability policy