Advertise on CBF

Author Topic: Bats graded on performance  (Read 881 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jackson29

  • Village Cricketer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Trade Count: (0)
Bats graded on performance
« 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
Logged

Biggie Smalls

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1687
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2018, 04:11:58 PM »

Kippax.
Logged

InternalTraining

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3425
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #2 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.
Logged

adb club cricketer

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 528
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #3 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.


Logged

Novak

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #4 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
Logged

CricketXI

  • Village Cricketer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #5 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.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2018, 11:17:56 PM by CricketXI »
Logged

JK Lewis

  • County 2nd XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 474
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #6 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.
Logged

edge

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3535
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #7 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!
Logged
HS: 126, BB: 7-20

WalkingWicket37

  • International Superstar
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12058
  • Trade Count: (+26)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #8 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?"
Logged

Seniorplayer

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5751
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bats graded on performance
« Reply #9 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.
Logged
 

Advertise on CBF