Custom Bats Cricket Forum

Equipment => Bats => Custom Made => Topic started by: Jackson29 on October 12, 2018, 03:44:40 PM

Title: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Jackson29 on October 12, 2018, 03:44:40 PM
Do any batmakers(UK) grade bats on performance rather than the grains and looks. I know they don't just grade it on looks but I've had terrible looking bats that play well and feel like it's a lottery for those top top bats. Cheers
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Biggie Smalls on October 12, 2018, 04:11:58 PM
Kippax.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: InternalTraining on October 12, 2018, 04:42:58 PM
Bat grading system is a scam and buyers are gullible enough to pay for it. All bats should be graded on a number of measurable criteria (willow density, dead weight, swing weight, location of node of percussion, swell position, balance point, handle stiffness, handle thickness). We also need to measure the rebound generated off the surface of the ball. From my discussions, I suspect James Laver has some "secret" method of determining quality/ping of a timber before he starts shaping a bat. Whatever that is, we need a way to measure it and standardize. Look at tennis racquets, golf clubs. It is practically a science in those sports but cricket is a stone-age sport with bright stickers.

Bat sizes as we current know them are wrong too - many decades (or centuries) ago, someone arbitrarily drew progressively larger bat sizes on a piece of paper and THAT became the standard. Na-uh uh! Through trial-and-error, we know that a standard SH length with a shorter (than SH) blade generates better bat speed. In general, people use bats that are too long for them. Size SH is too long for many players. Size 6 or Harrow should be the standard bat size.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: adb club cricketer on October 12, 2018, 04:56:43 PM
I don't think bats can be truly graded on performance. Some bats play well right away while some play well after some time. How do you grade those before each has been played in? The one which opened up later could be much better than the one which went right away.
Also, ping test can tell if bat is good or not, but can't really differentiate between two good bats with small differences in performance. So how do you decide if the bat has to be priced GBP 300 or GB 400 for e.g., say

I think if there was a scientific way for batmakers to grade on performance exactly, that would have been done already. In the absence of any such precise way, we have the current imperfect ping test based/similar performance evaluation and so we end up with so many low ends bats which perform great and high end bats not so.


Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Novak on October 12, 2018, 06:00:28 PM
Very true agree with the above

Ball bounce can sometimes be misleading too .

Grading is a con

In my opinion minimal and no concaving is best but there is a shortage of the best willow and retail prices are high

Pressing is a skill
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: CricketXI on October 12, 2018, 10:13:25 PM
Right now there is no scientific way/method followed by any bat maker to rate performance of a bat.
Grading on performance is just a marketing gimmick at this point now. Its to lure general public into buying a bat for a price way more than it should be.
There is no measuring scale for this right now.

I have never seen a very good looking bat being marketed as performance grade bat, does that mean a very good looking bat is not as good performing bat.
Its just that some bats perform better than other regardless of the grade-some times its due to intrinsic property of that piece of wood or just few more ounce of wood on the bat.
If a bat is made properly it will perform regardless of the grade.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: JK Lewis on October 14, 2018, 08:16:12 PM
I'm not sure how one would actually grade on performance to be honest. It is true that Kippax back their manufacturing process to deliver the same quality whatever the willow, and controlling their own forests must help.

But really, how much testing would you have to put into each bat to measure performance? What would be the criteria and who in their right mind would grade their own bats at low levels?

I can't see how it could work. Grading on performance might suit potential bat buyers but would probably bankrupt the batmaking industry.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: edge on October 15, 2018, 05:53:25 AM
I actually read a research paper on this kind of thing the other day - test was to compare the measured performance of a bat with the perceived performance, as judged by a cricketer with a mallet. Blind tests with painted bats of varying grades but identical profile etc. It was a fairly small study, but guess what... huge majority of the participants couldn't correctly rate the performance. What a surprise!
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: WalkingWicket37 on October 15, 2018, 08:16:59 AM
I actually read a research paper on this kind of thing the other day - test was to compare the measured performance of a bat with the perceived performance, as judged by a cricketer with a mallet. Blind tests with painted bats of varying grades but identical profile etc. It was a fairly small study, but guess what... huge majority of the participants couldn't correctly rate the performance. What a surprise!

"These are all painted so must be planks, where's the grade 1's?"
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Seniorplayer on October 15, 2018, 11:23:48 AM
Bat grading system is a scam and buyers are gullible enough to pay for it. All bats should be graded on a number of measurable criteria (willow density, dead weight, swing weight, location of node of percussion, swell position, balance point, handle stiffness, handle thickness). We also need to measure the rebound generated off the surface of the ball. From my discussions, I suspect James Laver has some "secret" method of determining quality/ping of a timber before he starts shaping a bat. Whatever that is, we need a way to measure it and standardize. Look at tennis racquets, golf clubs. It is practically a science in those sports but cricket is a stone-age sport with bright stickers.

Bat sizes as we current know them are wrong too - many decades (or centuries) ago, someone arbitrarily drew progressively larger bat sizes on a piece of paper and THAT became the standard. Na-uh uh! Through trial-and-error, we know that a standard SH length with a shorter (than SH) blade generates better bat speed. In general, people use bats that are too long for them. Size SH is too long for many players. Size 6 or Harrow should be the standard bat size.

Abosultly agree that's why I use a full S/H with an one and half inch shorter blade.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: drawknife23 on February 22, 2020, 09:14:26 PM
Are people in this thread honestly saying that they would pay top price for an ugly piece of wood that was promised by the manufacturer to perform brilliantly? Take for example 1 of the ďtopĒ brands retailing bats at £600+ and when it turned up had 4 grains, pin knots, was sweaty etc etc but was promised to perform well you as a consumer would be more than happy?
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Gurujames on February 22, 2020, 09:28:42 PM
No. I have never paid more than £200 for a new bat. I wouldnít care about the grains/looks as a well pressed cleft will perform regardless of its grade.
People can do what they want with their money, but most people in the know understand that a pretty cleft does not equal performance.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Buzz on February 22, 2020, 09:29:30 PM
No, that is the point.

Welcome to the forum
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: SouthpawMark on February 22, 2020, 09:53:46 PM
Iíve never seen a pro cricketer use a bat made from an ugly piece of willow.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: jonny77 on February 22, 2020, 10:00:13 PM
Iíve never seen a pro cricketer use a bat made from an ugly piece of willow.

Most will use top grade willow because they are provided that by the sponsor, who wouldn't want them to be seen with lower grade/'uglier' willow, for obvious reasons.

However I can remember Glen Maxwell used a Kook low grade because it felt good. There's a video of it somewhere.

If you can afford top grade and that's what you want, then fine. But if you can't, be assured you can get equally good performing bats on lower grades.

Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: brokenbat on February 22, 2020, 10:20:01 PM
Bat grading was never meant to be related to performance. Itís purely cosmetic. You pay more for prettier looks (they are also more rare than uglier clefts). A grade 1 cleft can be a plank and a grade 5 bat can be a gun. There is no scam here - everyone should know that grading is all about looks and thatís it. I personally like pretty clefts, so am willing to pay up for them. To each their own.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Komdotkom on February 22, 2020, 11:14:05 PM
I would be on board if a reputable smaller brand like B3 had a category for ugly low density performance bats that was priced somewhere around their 'two stripe' range.
Ultimately they probably know more than most players about the performance of each bat and there would be a market for 'hand selected' bats or some other fancy name
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: InternalTraining on February 23, 2020, 12:17:12 AM
Unfortunately, it is a no win situation for people - either way you are made to pay high prices either for cosmetics or ping.

If you want to save money, have someone who knows bats, hand pick for you an ugly stick (graded low - hence cheap) that pings. Bat prices are borderline criminal these days!
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: SOULMAN1012 on February 23, 2020, 08:20:10 AM
Unfortunately, it is a no win situation for people - either way you are made to pay high prices either for cosmetics or ping.

If you want to save money, have someone who knows bats, hand pick for you an ugly stick (graded low - hence cheap) that pings. Bat prices are borderline criminal these days!

GM for me still have the monopoly on this value vs looks vs performance in the Sig range. U.K. Made, sub £140 and always on the ok side to some being amazing lookers.  To know how a bat will perform in its brand new state is impossible to tell. Until make makers make, knock in, match use for 5/7 games fully clean up and re-sell could you have any idea on the the true performance of a bat. But I for one donít go anywhere near ďwe grade our bats on performance aloneĒ sales pitch

As for grading on performance itís all marketing ploys to get the punter to part with there money. Same as this G1++ nonsense and other grades that donít exist.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: jonny77 on February 23, 2020, 09:02:40 AM
I think it's just the terminology which may confuse, as essentially anyone saying they 'grade on performance' is really saying they don't grade at all, as all bats will perform regardless of the look of the willow.

I don't have an issue either way. The buyer will make their decision and if dealing with a reputable company/person will get a bat which performs. It just might be they pay more than they would elsewhere for the same grade of willow. 

However I don't think anyone is being underhand. Grading can be confusing for a lot of people, even those who play the game, so in some ways this may actually help?

Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: nivaga on February 23, 2020, 09:43:23 AM
Kippax.

Please explain more / justify? I may have missed it but I see nothing on their website about this?
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: WalkingWicket37 on February 23, 2020, 10:04:36 AM
@nivaga straight from the horses mouth on this very forum

http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=43350.15 (http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=43350.15)

we sell all out bats on performance and not grade of wood
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Psi on February 23, 2020, 11:24:24 AM
I think it's just the terminology which may confuse, as essentially anyone saying they 'grade on performance' is really saying they don't grade at all, as all bats will perform regardless of the look of the willow.

I don't have an issue either way. The buyer will make their decision and if dealing with a reputable company/person will get a bat which performs. It just might be they pay more than they would elsewhere for the same grade of willow. 

However I don't think anyone is being underhand. Grading can be confusing for a lot of people, even those who play the game, so in some ways this may actually help?

You say that but lots of people have stories about expensive bats from good makers that turned out to be 'planks'. So maybe someone with enough experience could grade on performance? Or maybe it's all a mystery and noone could tell that it would turn out to be a plank.

I must say the only plank I've had so far was a cheap Slazenger KW from sports direct. First bat I ever bought after returning to cricket a couple of seasons back. A couple of times it sounded so bad out in the middle that team mates came on pitch to offer me a replacement for my 'broken' bat. I would challenge anyone to knock that one in and get it playing well.  :)
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Northern monkey on February 23, 2020, 11:34:27 AM
Had a young lad take my bowling apart ,(not hard really), a couple of seasons ago with a sd Slazenger bat
Ruined my figures for the season
Iím sure it was one of the white painted ones
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Psi on February 23, 2020, 11:38:16 AM
Sure, and I'm not saying I didn't score a few boundaries with it. It just sounded and felt awful.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: SOULMAN1012 on February 23, 2020, 12:24:44 PM
Had a young lad take my bowling apart ,(not hard really), a couple of seasons ago with a sd Slazenger bat
Ruined my figures for the season
Iím sure it was one of the white painted ones

Our No11 has a kook Kahuna 100 that came from SD sale for £13 I think i paid for it for him. He smashes it miles and itís actually a decent bat. No idea what willow it is but itís as good for him as a GN legend
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: GDP1964 on February 23, 2020, 07:01:33 PM
Maybe heís not a no 11 :)
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: edge on February 23, 2020, 08:03:10 PM
Iíve never seen a pro cricketer use a bat made from an ugly piece of willow.
You've not looked very hard!
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: WalkingWicket37 on February 23, 2020, 08:11:14 PM
You've not looked very hard!

Maybe it didn't look ugly on the telly because it had been bleached! ;)
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Mfarank on February 23, 2020, 08:22:34 PM
Razzaq famously bludgeoned 109 against South Africa in Abu dhabi with a 4 grainer Boom Boom
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: SOULMAN1012 on February 23, 2020, 08:33:11 PM
Razzaq famously bludgeoned 109 against South Africa in Abu dhabi with a 4 grainer Boom Boom

Didnít Shane Watson score a test Ton with a 505 model a few years back I thought I read
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: Tom on February 23, 2020, 11:18:42 PM
I'm not sure any manufacturer yet has a way to accurately and consistently grade a bat on performance. If any batmaker is, ask them how they're doing it.

In my view the only way to grade a bat is by using things which can be measured accurately and objectively. That's essentially looks or cleft weight (when dried to the same moisture %).

Perhaps one day a widely available test will exist for bat performance. If that can be done at the point of manufacture then it is only at that time grading by performance should be adopted.
Title: Re: Bats graded on performance
Post by: SD on February 25, 2020, 07:16:02 PM
I guess even if it were possible to objectively test performance, JSW and the bat makers / sellers have a vested interest in being able to charge a premium for the better looking clefts. The cost of g1 bats seems to go up exponentially at the same time as the requirement for a bat to be graded as a g1 seems to continuously go down