The Difference In Their Dominance – A Tale of Two Stars: How Justin Verlander and Max Scherzer Are Completely Different Mechanically, Yet the Best in the Game BACKGROUND Justin Verlander is an eight-time MLB All-Star, has led the AL in strikeouts five times and in wins twice. He was the AL Rookie of the Year in 2006, and on June 12, 2007, pitched the first no-hitter at Comerica Park versus the Milwaukee Brewers. In 2011, he threw another no-hitter and by the season's end, Verlander won the Pitching Triple Crown, the AL Cy Young Award unanimously, the AL Most Valuable Player (MVP) Award, and the Sporting News Player of the Year Award. In the 2017 he was named ALCS MVP, and in the 2018 season, Verlander became the 114th pitcher in major league history to surpass 200 career wins, also becoming the 20th fastest to reach the milestone (412 starts). Max Scherzer has won 3 Cy Young Award, is only the fourth pitcher in history with four consecutive seasons of 250 or more strikeouts and a seven-time MLB All-Star. In 2015, Scherzer became the sixth pitcher in Major League history to record multiple no-hitters in a single season, including the first with at least 17 strikeouts and no bases on balls, and the first to accrue a game score of 100 or more twice in one season. In 2016, he tied the major league nine-inning strikeout record with 20, making him the second player to achieve both a no-hitter and 20 strikeouts over nine innings. In 2017, he became the third-fastest hurler to record 2,000 strikeouts. Scherzer has more strikeouts (2,503) than any pitcher in the 2010s. It is fair to say these guys dominate. It is also fair that they have many similarities. They obviously share many, many accolades and awards. They are both power pitchers that throw fastballs in the range average 92-102 mph. They are both tough minded, and have a burning desire to be great. BUT, they are physically different in the way they move, therefore the way they deliver dominance to the plate is completely different. THE MATH AND SCIENCE OF THE DIFFERENCE IN THEIR DOMINANCE To explain the differences, let’s start at the beginning…. From the moment the first creature divided from one cell into two and became a complex organism, every species in history has had two primary goals: 1) Survive, and 2) Propagate the species. That is, organisms want to eat and make more me’s. And, in the survival of the fittest universe we live in, the organism that does so in the most energy preservative manner wins the race. The cheetah goes after the slowest gazelle because he knows he can eat and still have enough energy left to go back to his cave to make more baby cheetahs with momma cheetah. We’ve evolved to the point that we no longer need to worry about survival and procreation: however, our bodies are still solely interested in accomplishing what we deem to be important goals. In the case of a pitcher, his body wants to throw the ball over the white pentagon, make the hitter go back to the dugout, and it hopefully to do it with enough velocity for the guys with the radar guns behind the backstop to ask him to be on their team. What these athletes are looking for is maximizing a sequence of movements that generate the maximum amount of force with the least amount of energy. To accomplish this, the athlete must eliminate disconnected movements that reduce power, add undue stress to connective tissue, and exert more energy than necessary to optimize performance. Sound easy, but all athletes are built differently, so teaching the same motion to Max Scherzer and Justin Verlander would be disastrous for both. One size does not fit all. At the Florida Baseball Ranch we use the term “connection” to describe when body parts are working in proper timing sequencing and synergy. A disconnection is when a body part does something out of proper timing, sequence and synergy with the rest of the body. So, if moving efficiently is natural, then why do disconnections occur? Well, there are quite a few reasons; 1) They are taught by well-meaning people with incomplete information. 2) The athlete has a mobility or stability issue that prevents him from getting into position to optimize the mechanical and elastic properties of his muscles. 3) He’s looking for energy in the wrong places. 4) His body is in a protective mode from a prior injury and has altered its movement pattern. 5) His body is disconnecting as a compensation for an inefficient move further up the kinetic chain. 1) Many disconnections are taught by well-meaning people with incomplete information. It is not my intent to disparage anyone here. I’ve never met a coach or instructors who was trying to make a player worse and there are probably over a thousand former players and students to whom I should apologize. We all teach what we know, with the available information. Nonetheless, my experience has been that most of the disconnections we see have been taught by coaches. Again, I’m as guilty as anyone. 2) Physical limitations prevent the athlete from moving into and through positions to optimize length tension relationships. We don’t need the mobility of a gymnast, but we do need enough mobility to get into positions that optimize length-tension relationships. If an athlete is not able to get into optimal positions due to mobility constraints, he may operate on as little as 30% of his potential force production capacity. Length tension relationships in musculature often demand prerequisite orientation of bony articular interfaces into non- shearing positions. These “center-packed” joint positions often place the surrounding musculature in optimal length-tension relationships. Sometimes, joint restrictions are due to soft tissue tightening or contracture, and sometimes they are due loss of accessory motion in joints themselves. Whatever their “cause,” mobility problems must be addressed before motor control solutions can attained. You can’t bring a motor control solution to a mobility problem. 3) Looking for energy in the wrong places. A classic example of this can be found in the athlete who, lacking efficient and powerful lower half movement, seeks energy in a variety of upper half disconnections. Remember, the athlete’s body is only interested in accomplishing what the organism has determined to be an important goal and according to Dr. Nikolai Bernstein, “The body will organize itself in accordance to the goal of the activity. Unfortunately, the body doesn’t always choose the most efficient or the safest pattern. If the will and the intent of the athlete is great enough, the body may organize itself in a manner that compensates inefficiently and a compromises energy conservation and/or safety. We see this a lot in unguided, intent-based programs that involve high intent, weighted ball throwing into a target-less plyo wall with radar gun feedback. Velocity records may be achieved, but corrupted movement patterns can emerge that limit overall game performance and can lead to increased injury risk. This approach is also present in so-called “data driven” hitting programs that encourage the athlete to “sell out” for exit velocity and launch angle gains. Compensatory patterns may achieve the goal, but the movement that emerges could lack the adjustability and motor control necessary to perform at a high level. 4) Protective alteration of movement due to pain or injury. When an athlete plays through an injury his body may develop protective movement patterns that get the job done in the short term. However, these guarded patterns may deepen over time and erode the efficiency of the movement. Often, even after the injury has healed, the protective pattern remains and inhibits the expression of more optimal power, control and protection form injury. In these cases, the athlete must be presented with a sensory environment that re-introduces him to a more preferred pattern that allows him to optimize length-tension relationships and maximize power, control and protection through synergistic co-contraction. 5) Compensation for an inefficient move further up the kinetic chain. In throwing hitting, as in many other athletic skills, the first move is the most critical. If the first movement is inefficient or sends the athlete’s body in the wrong direction, the body may need to deploy any of a combination of disconnections to get back on course. The compensatory pattern (software) the athlete chooses may be intimately intertwined with any physical limitations or preferences (hardware) his body may possess. These compensatory disconnections may expressed in a wide array of choices. For example, if a pitcher’s hips are retroverted (oriented outward and/or rearward on his pelvis) his body will tend to like external rotation. Since hip external rotation avoids physical resistance and saves calories, this athlete is likely to choose a lead leg disconnection as a compensation for a quad dominant first move that projects him toward the arm side on deck circle. This could disrupt the length-tension relationship of his lower abdominals. Another athlete may choose early torso rotation to get back on course and a third athlete may show a significant lateral tilt of his spine to right his course. Either of these choices disrupts the length and orientation of his abdominals and chest muscles, thus limiting his force production capacity. In many cases, compensatory disconnections are accompanied by a concomitant movement of the head.