Baseball Pitcher Training—Is Cross Training Valuable For Producing Velocity?

by Dick Mills on December 05, 2004

Are doing various activities…which are considered "cross training" in most sports valuable in helping baseball pitchers improve throwing velocity?

I liken high school baseball pitchers to busy little bees in an effort to boost performance…especially their fanaticism of trying to reach the magic 90 mph velocity goal. Only a very small number will reach it…no matter what they do. Just like only a very small number of sprinters will run a sub 10 second 100 yard dash or a sub 4 minute mile.

Most that reach their velocity goals will do it because they have the inate talent (not ability) or they will be early developers. The late developers may reach it but won't do so until later than high school years.

Some have the capability now to throw harder but because they are trying a "little of this" and a "little of that" spend their time uselessly not really making gains.

The problem is they do not know what to do. So they do what is referred to as "cross training" which is doing a little of this and a little of that.

Cross training for baseball pitchers would include some of the following activities:

• weighted ball training
• weight room training
• distance running
• playing handball or raquetball
• swimming
• playing football or basketball
• throwing footballs
• long toss
• weighted vests
• crow hopping down the mound while throwing
• balance beam training
• flexible tubing exercises
• doing an aerobics class
• pilates
• yogo
• tennis
• golf

Is there anything wrong with doing cross training activities. Cerainly not. Especially during the offseason as a means of improving general overall conditioning…since pitching is a full body activity.

However what is wrong is thinking that one of those activities is going to be responsible for better overall pitching performance…including boosting baseball pitching velocity.

Here's where pitchers and coaches get into trouble…deducing that one of those mentioned activities is responsible for improving velocity once the next regular baseball season begins.

For example, the high school baseball pitcher who throws a football during the offseason or weight trains and then finds out that his velocity is up 6 mph in the Spring. Or the lessons by the private pitching instructor. The conclusion that is erroneously drawn is that the activities that the pitcher engaged in were the "reason for" the velocity improvement. In most cases they are not.

The private pitching instruction could have a positive effect if the pitcher's mechanics improved to the extent of allowing the pitcher to be more explosive. Improving mechanics can have a positive effect on pitching velocity with pitchers who are fully developed as well. Or a pitcher can improve by doing explosive training where he is teaching his brain how to be more explosive and is able to take that feeling into his pitching delivery.

We forget to factor in natural growth and development which may actually be governing factor for most of a high school pitchers improvement.

You can see that both weighted baseball throwing or long toss are just another form of cross training—or full body conditioning which will have a non-specific benefit to increasing throwing velocity.

Here is a typical high school pitcher who believes that cross-training such as throwing a football for better baseball arm strength is the "primary reason" (or using flexible tubing) for improved throwing performance:

"We throw at 90 and 120 feet. We try the line drive approach where the ball is released just above eye level. However, as I posted early last year, do a lot of stuff that many posters disagree with. Example, today we met at 6:15 in the morning. We ran, stretched, then did band work which took approximately 20 minutes. Next, we threw footballs. I know that many think that this is a waste of time. However, I had a young man that played centerfield and many colleges were "off him" because they rated his arm as poor to average. He did this program and his senior year got an offer for college. I looked yesterday and he will be in the top 5 in 4 different offensive categories at his college. Good think they liked his arm! LOL! Back to the post—We throw the footballs as if they were baseballs so we don't care for the spirals very much. Just for fun, we have baseball written on each football. After this, we throw weighted softballs. I know, again, many will disagree with this. "

You can see that this high school pitcher believes that the mentioned college pitcher got better by doing this offseason program. And that if he does it—he too will get better.

The question is did the football throwing during his offseason in high school provide the throwing performance improvement his next year in college? Highly unlikely.

It is also highly unlikely that this high school senior will see any of the same benefit in his throwing performance that can be proven to be the result of his throwing a football or doing flexible tubing exercises.

But this is the the thinking that dominates many high school and even come college players…and coaches as well.

Cross training is a non-specific form of training which has little to do with improving a skill activity such as pitching. Again it is a good way to improve overall conditioning but will not transfer to building specific throwing skills in pitchers…including velocity since pitching is not a strength activity but a speed of movement activity.

Here's what sports science says about cross training and it's ability to boost a specific activity or sport:

"The belief that "general" and "cross-training" exercises are valuable for specific competitive performances is refuted by this investigation. If an athlete is going to perform in a certain manner in a competition, then training exercise intensity, duration, and form need to mimic the competitive demands. Otherwise, training fitness will not be employed in the sport competition. For example, swimming coaches set a substantial amount of training at 75%, 85%, and 95% of race pace/intensities. "Percentage" training of that type is useless for competitions that are to be performed at a particular "100% pace/intensity" because for each varied exercise intensity, the physiological demands are specific and differentiated. [Note: This abstract pertains to physiological adaptations that occur with conditioning. Its implications do not cover neural adaptations or strategic plans.] The value of cross training diminishes proportionally with the increase in performance level of the athlete." End.

A baseball pitcher who engages in cross training activities to be better conditioned should also spend time working on the mechanical skills of pitching…especially if he expects to throw harder with better control.

Here is a sports science study that refutes the benefits of cross-training.

CROSS-TRAINING NOT AS GOOD AS SPECIFIC TRAINING

Foster, C., Hector, L. L., Welsh, R., Schrager, M., Green, M. A., & Snyder, A. C. (1995). Effects of specific versus cross-training on running performance. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 70, 367-372.

The cross-training hypothesis suggests that despite the principle of specificity of training, athletes may improve performance in one mode of exercise by training in another mode. Well-trained (M = 10; F = 20) individuals were placed in an 8-weeks program of enhanced running training or a control group. The enhancement consisted of increasing the work output by 10% through performing either extra running or swimming. The control group followed the basic, non-enhanced running program.

There was a significant increase in running velocity at a lactate concentration of 4mM/l in the enhanced-running group but not in the cross-training or control groups. The swimming/cross-training group improved in arm cranking which is associated with that arm-dominant activity. The running groups did not display any arm adaptation. The only changes that were significant in the cross-training group were physiological measures. There was no change in running performance. This study suggests that muscularly dissimilar cross-training may add to improved specific (running) tests but not to the same degree as increased specific training. Only specific training affected running performance.

Implication. While cross-training occasionally might show some transfer effects, the size of effects will be less than those which could be attained by increasing specific training by a similar amount. Although cross-training "benefits" are sometimes observed, they usually are in some physiological measures, and rarely in performance. Thus, cross-training, when it works, is a very inefficient method for producing slight performance capacity increases. The emergence of effects in performance is an even rarer event.

If you have questions about this blog post or on any phase of pitching—mechanics, strength and conditioning, mental training, strategy send those questions to dickmills@gmail.com and I will answer them here.

If you want an explosive body and explosive mechanics you need to get my Free Report at www.pitching.nexcess.net. We won't waste your time. We show you how to recognize exactly what is holding back most pitchers…find the problem—fix the problem. I show you a comparison between two high school pitchers and a major league pitcher who throws mid to upper nineties. You will see the biggest problem that reduces velocity in the majority of pitchers.

(If you are a high school or college coach, ask for our special Free Coach's Report.)