Advertise on CBF

Author Topic: The Storm Damage myth  (Read 467 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JK Lewis

The Storm Damage myth
« on: May 16, 2018, 06:06:18 PM »

When I was a kid, nobody - nobody - talked about Storm Damage to bats. But ever since Michael Carberry's bat got broken in half in the 2014 Ashes series, I hear people talking about Storm Damage at all levels of the game, as if it's a real thing. Honestly, I think it's total BS, really just a convenient scapegoat that's used to head off discussion about the excessive drying processes to which modern clefts are subjected. One of the guys at my club broke his bat just like Carberry's, and inside it was pretty much like Balsa.

Anyway, rather than just talk, I figure I'll try to prove my point, or at least provoke a decent and interesting debate. See the imperfect photos below, my 2018 bat has at least 4 major areas of 'Storm Damage', right across the back of the bat and very obvious (helpfully marked with black dots). I'm going to use the bat through the season, in net sessions and in matches, my bet is that nothing negative will happen to it, mainly because the cleft was air dried in my garage, rather than being kiln dried to within an inch of its life. So far, it has successfully negotiated 2 x 20 minute net sessions, and 1 match inning - approx 10 overs against the new ball. I hope to give it another good go this Sunday, weather permitting.

I plan to post regular reports as I go along. If it gets cracked, damaged or broken in half, I promise I'll report that too and share the photos!



Logged

InternalTraining

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3137
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2018, 07:03:12 PM »

Good experiment! Keep us posted.
Logged

ppccopener

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5371
  • Trade Count: (+6)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2018, 07:11:44 PM »

Yes very interested in if this lasts a season. I had a real nice bat break in half last year just as I was getting used to it, and yes once I looked it had all the horizontal stress marks from storm damage.

Be interested to know if you think a bat actually breaking in half is a fairly modern problem or has always happened-just more said about it in forums like this one
Logged

SOULMAN1012

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4381
  • Trade Count: (+24)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2018, 07:37:23 PM »

A lad I used to play with is into his 3rd season with a bat that has storm damage or compression cracks along the back and front of the bat about 3-4 inches from the toe, U.K. made and well looked after with a scuff sheet and a gentle refurb and light waxing at the end of each season and no issue so far.

Be a good experiment I reckon mate
Logged

JK Lewis

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 399
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2018, 05:45:26 AM »


Be interested to know if you think a bat actually breaking in half is a fairly modern problem or has always happened-just more said about it in forums like this one

Bats breaking in half is definitely a modern phenomenon - simply didn't happen in the 80s and early 90s. But then, we didn't have massive edges and high spines, and the only concaving one saw was on GN Scoops and Dynadrives. These things are intrinsically linked, big bat vanity drove the need for more intensive drying at cleft stage.

I remember a clubmate getting an SS Turbo 333 off Graham Gooch, back in 91 or 92. It was a 'big bat' for it's time, weighed about 3lb 1oz. But the actual size of it, the volume of willow, these day it would probably weigh no more than 2lb 9oz.
Logged

edge

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3143
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2018, 05:59:30 AM »

Interesting experiment - have seen storm damaged bats that have gone for a good while, and one that went clean in two in its' first net.

An alternative thought to the 'it's not storm damage it's just overdried willow argument' - storm damaged willow is linked to, er, big storms. A comparison of when these have happened would certainly be informative, for example if there weren't many big storms in the 60s/70s then that would go a long way to explaining why bats weren't going in half in the 80s/90s. Can't remember who or where but I'm sure I've seen a batmaker or willow grower of some kind refer to a big storm of a particular year (90s from memory) and how it resulted in a load of damaged clefts.
Logged

Northern monkey

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2598
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2018, 07:15:26 AM »

My sons using a storm damaged bat, it's had two years use so far, and is still going strong,, bearing in mind he plays two matches a week and nets at least twice a week, and played in nz over both winters.
This particular bat is the one that was used at a cbf net, a really nice performing bat, that has disproved the myth so far.

I'm not a fan of the whole big bat fad, and certainly not a fan of forced or over drying of clefts to achieve these bats.
Logged
Oxfordshire cricket bats

Calzehbhoy

Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2018, 07:23:24 AM »

Dont disprove the myth... Companies will then stop selling these at a fraction of the cost of a regular bat then...
Logged

JK Lewis

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 399
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: The Storm Damage myth
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2018, 07:30:04 AM »

Yes, good debate building up, nice one. @edge , yep, the 'Big Storm' issue is worthy of consideration, no doubt. I'm not a meteorologist so can't offer much detail on the prevalence of weather over time.  What I can definitely say though, is that the tree my bat came from was 30 years old and 25m tall, approximately twice as old and twice as tall as a normal, commercially grown willow. So, there's no doubt it took a serious battering from storms over it's lifetime, making it an excellent test subject for this experiment.

One bat is not a fair test of willow in general, and it's also true I'm unlikely to face anyone bowling like Sylvester Clarke. But we can only work with the tools we have!
Logged
 

Advertise on CBF