Custom Bats Cricket Forum

Equipment => Bats => Bat Making => Topic started by: Washington on November 15, 2009, 09:48:37 PM

Title: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 15, 2009, 09:48:37 PM
Just been thinking about recent bat innovations such as the double sided bat, the mongoose etc and ive always had this idea about having a really big bat e.g. the Biggest Kahuna that picked up like a salix fera but the obvious question was how?

Then i had this idea . . .

drilling 100's / 1000's of tiny holes half way through the back of the bat thus reducing the weight considerably without comprimising the structural integrity of the bat (in theory).

So im just wondering if any of the resident bakmakers could give me their opinion on this?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 15, 2009, 09:52:35 PM
Surely you would lose the feeling of solidity ? the feeling of solid shot when driving ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 15, 2009, 09:58:04 PM
Im not sure ive not put it into practice but it something to be considered, but i do have a newbery Uzi that i bought last season that im not too keen on that i might try it with as its a big bat. But by keeping the holes as small as possible im hoping it wont comprimise the feeling of solidity of injecting the holes with cork?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 15, 2009, 10:12:15 PM
Im not sure ive not put it into practice but it something to be considered, but i do have a newbery Uzi that i bought last season that im not too keen on that i might try it with as its a big bat. But by keeping the holes as small as possible im hoping it wont comprimise the feeling of solidity of injecting the holes with cork?

How many holes you thinking off ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 15, 2009, 10:14:59 PM
Well in order to get the necessary weight off i would have to say it will need to be 1000's
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 15, 2009, 10:21:47 PM
Or about 50 tactically drilled holes ? Theory would say it would be the same as the scoop theorem. Would love to see this put into practise.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: slogger02 on November 15, 2009, 10:23:57 PM
i have a cheapo kashimr bat here so will have a go just for you pinchy!
pics tomorrow hopefully!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 15, 2009, 10:30:53 PM
But the idea is not to have big ugly holes all over the bat that will detract from the bat, or to copy the theory of the scoop where the weight is transferred to the outer edges of the bat.

But slogger if your gonna do it would love to see the result, plus if you could feedback if does in fact lower the weight . . .hit a few balls too see if it breaks the bat??
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: slogger02 on November 15, 2009, 10:34:47 PM
well i wont do it to look cosmetically good as me and my drill dont do pretty!  but will hopefully get some weight off!  will see what affect it has aswell.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 16, 2009, 10:18:09 AM
M&H do the S6 which has holes in it refilled with lighter wood.

Also, Hunts County did a bat with some of the back taken out then refilled with some kinds of honey comb insert, it wasnt successful and the one i used was awful nad sounded shocking.

I cant see holes making that much of a difference, plus surely it would weaken the bat? might be interested in hearing what happens if you try it though
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:07:39 AM
Yeah i know M&H did the S6 but they were 6 large holes roughly around the 'middle' and ive not heard of the hunts county . . do you remember the name?? I know puma also did the stealth but i think this is a different concept entirely.

How my idea is different is that involves drilling, very small holes, possible 1000's of them across the whole length of the bat maybe with the exception of the toe area, therefore hopefully not unbalancing the bat or weakening it by removing huge chunks of willow. . . its just a theory
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 11:11:11 AM
Modulus.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:14:22 AM
Modulus?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 11:18:26 AM
Hunts County Modulus
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:21:06 AM
Oh ok cheers . . . being a bat maker yourself Tom what do you think of the hole theory?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 11:29:00 AM
Don't think it would work personally, I'd think 1000's of holes would weaken the bat. That's based on no scientific theory and is just my initial thought though.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:34:49 AM
Yeah fair enough, there really hasn't been much scientific thought on my behalf either, just a stab in the dark really, but if the holes were pin size? (width)
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Ayrtek Cricket on November 16, 2009, 11:36:03 AM
Worth giving ago if you have the patience to drill 100's-1000 holes in the back of the bat. Personally i would make them all symmetrical so that it isn't like the bat has been eaten by termites!

May improve the look if they are spaced out every 3mm or something dependant on what drill bit size you intend to use i guess.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:40:31 AM
Yeah i have a mounted drill so could take sometime to do it but i might do it this week sometime. Yeah the holes will be tiny, pinsize, the smallest drill bit i can find in the workshop! Yeah i had intended to do it symmetrically, also planned to do a design with the holes, and inject the holes with different colours to replace conventional stickers . . .
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 16, 2009, 11:44:01 AM
It was the modulus and yes it was a horrible plank.

I'm not sure about the legality of a bat which you propose to make - i'm not sure on the laws myself, i know someone who would......come on Norb, dont be shy!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 11:46:43 AM
Holes would be legal as far as I know, you just can't fill them.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:49:06 AM
M&H S6 has 6 holes filled with a lighter wood/cork?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 16, 2009, 11:52:59 AM
is it done as a proportion - i.e. you cannot have more than 5%-10% of the bat with these holes that are filled - i too have often wondered how a bat like this would perform/hold up - might have to investigate the merits of this......personally i cant see it adding much to the bat but i could be wrong

(Do these holes constitute a repair under the MCC laws?)
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 11:53:23 AM
Law 4c a drilled then filled hole would contravene.

You can drill through the bat parallel to the face and insert a lighter wood into it, although it would be a Grade B bat and you could only drill and fill 1" into the bat.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 11:57:05 AM
ahhh ok,

so i guess the newbery uzi's carbon core technology is evidence of the as it has a hole running the length of the bat, any laws saying you cant drill perpendicular to the face? i think 1 inch would be sufficient?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: raymond on November 16, 2009, 12:41:30 PM
Didint duncan fearnly have a bat with loads of inty holes in it?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 03:01:53 PM
Oh did they? Can you remember the name?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 03:05:41 PM
This is the Hunts County Modulus cricket bat that was mentioned . . . ugly as sin!

http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg306/kenbriooo2007/bat6.jpg (http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg306/kenbriooo2007/bat6.jpg)

But again this design is only a small percentage of the bat, like the S6, Scoop etc
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 03:23:13 PM
Slightly confused other material can be added only for repairing damage

"solid material may be inserted into the blade for repair after damage other than surface damage. Additionally, for protection from damage for Grades B and C, material may be inserted at the toe and/or along the sides, parallel to the face of the blade. The only material permitted for any insertion is wood with minimal essential adhesives."
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 03:29:26 PM
ok so you cannot use any other material apart from wood to insert into the bat . . .however does it stipulate that it must be willow? Is it legal to drill out willow and replace with cork (which is wood im guessing)??
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 03:39:37 PM
yes the way I read the law 6 appendix E - unless you are repairing the bat

4. The blade
(a) The blade comprises the whole of the bat apart from the handle as defined above. The
blade has a face, a back, a toe, sides and shoulders. See Appendix E.
(b) The blade shall consist solely of wood.
(c) No material may be placed on or inserted into either the blade or the lower portion of
the handle other than as permitted in 3(d) above and 5 and 6 below, together with the
minimal adhesives or adhesive tape used solely for fixing these items, or for fixing
the handle to the blade.

Where 3(d) is the Handle 5 is Covering the blade, 6 is Protection and repair
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 03:44:53 PM
Ok Norb cheers. . . what affect do you think this will have on a bat? Do you see any benefit in doing it?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 03:46:38 PM
What exactly there are a few suggestion on this thread about drilling holes
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 03:51:36 PM
ok my initial theory was to drill 100/1000's of small holes covering the entire back of the the blade, and either leaving them hollow or injecting the holes with cork. The idea was to lower the weight of the bat but not the size?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 04:11:47 PM
you have to remember that mass plays a big part of the impact reaction, less mass = less force to transfer to the ball

also energy absorption, cork will absorb more energy then willow the idea is to transfer the energy of the swing and ball speed

--- Is that what you were after?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 16, 2009, 04:18:19 PM
Thats a very convoluted way of saying no
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 04:25:10 PM
If I said no I only would have been asked why anyways and beside who is expecting a one word answer from me :D
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 04:30:20 PM
Yeah i guess that kind of answers my question and ruins my theory . . . i do have a few more one being corrugation . . . .
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 04:35:27 PM
However, saying that, although you would lose some mass through the drilling process, the ball would still be hit with willow that is merely complimented by cork inserts, additionally whatever force transfer is lost due to the removal of mass would be compensated by the inevitable increase in bat speed?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 04:38:01 PM
good stuff keep the ideas flowing, I'm doing a couple of prototype shapes soon too!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 04:42:44 PM
However, saying that, although you would lose some mass through the drilling process, the ball would still be hit with willow that is merely complimented by cork inserts, additionally whatever force transfer is lost due to the removal of mass would be compensated by the inevitable increase in bat speed?

Yes and no as I said the cork will absorb the energy and not transfer it so you'd lose some of that [complete] swing speed gain. I bracketed complete as a lighter bat will allow you to react quick but not necessarily swing it faster....

So there is no real benefit over buying a normal bat but in a light weight based on the extra hassle involved
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 04:45:05 PM
Yeah ive got a couple of bats that im gonna butcher up soon! haha! Just bought a new house and it comes with an outbuilding that i hope to turn into a workshop . . .has always been a dream of mine to make cricket bats! Now im in the financial position to do so will get cracking in the new year . . .after some long hours of research!

Norb have you seen Stacs new design . . .the Viper?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 04:56:19 PM
Richard Wensley is forever scooping out bit and pieces from the back of his bats, Talisman had one he talks about on long journeys.  Actually not sure if Richard is still at STAC
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Apple on November 16, 2009, 04:59:35 PM
surely a crack on the side of that bat would be far more dangerous, if there are tiny holes?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 16, 2009, 05:00:37 PM
good stuff keep the ideas flowing, I'm doing a couple of prototype shapes soon too!

Not a bat geek norbs but surely there is a way of making the handle lighter ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 16, 2009, 05:04:23 PM
Why would you want to make the handle lighter it is the only thing you have to really help you counter balance the toe end.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 16, 2009, 05:09:10 PM
Why would you want to make the handle lighter it is the only thing you have to really help you counter balance the toe end.

Well, Are over seas pro Ant Bullick who plays for otago in NZ has his hands so far down the handle that his right hand comes over the bat shoulders. Couldn't you do a 50/50 handle where the bottem half is normal weight and the top half is some super duper light material ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 05:11:16 PM
The bat would pick up heavier.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 16, 2009, 05:12:11 PM
The bat would pick up heavier.

As i said, im no nerd lol. How would it be heavier ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 05:14:40 PM
i think what tom is getting at is that if you move the weight closer to the middle of the bat instead of the evening it out over the entire length of the bat it will be like a big lump of wood . . .wouldn't actually make it heavier just heavier pick up
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 05:15:49 PM
Plus you are only catering for your overseas player and they way he holds the bat and not the general market
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 05:21:04 PM
As i said, im no nerd lol. How would it be heavier ?
Counterbalances, pivots etc.

Imagine you've got a see saw. Your hands are the middle of the see saw. On one side you've got 2lb of wood, the otherside is 8oz of handle. Decrease the weight of the handle and the see saw will tip towards the wood more meaning it picks up heavier. The Impala Redback and Newbery Merlin are examples of bats which had heavier handles to make the bat pickup lighter.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 16, 2009, 05:22:53 PM
Sorry, will pipe down :D

Have loads of different theory's ready to be shot down ! ahaha
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Fusion on November 16, 2009, 06:58:35 PM
Tom, you could post a pic of the bat I made for your brother, I will try and send a pic a bat called The Stradivarius. It's full of holes and has a concave face.

Bill
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Master-Basterd on November 16, 2009, 07:01:39 PM
Tom, you could post a pic of the bat I made for your brother, I will try and send a pic a bat called The Stradivarius. It's full of holes and has a concave face.

Bill

Concave face :S ?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 07:14:36 PM
Bill, I have pics of both the Stradvarius and the prototype you did which I'll post later.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Fusion on November 16, 2009, 07:16:50 PM
Thanks Tom
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 16, 2009, 07:29:07 PM
Great thread guys, really interesting this one.

If you are looking to reduce weight, going back to the hole theory, why not look at the shoulder less bats, or the first woodworms, and lose weight from a useless area. I think willowstix (or something) are trying it again- its in AOC cricket mag.

How about we try making an aluminium bat?!!

I would actually be interested in having a go with one in all seriousness... like the new carbon hockey sticks.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 07:42:58 PM
I think the biggest challenge for any batmaker is incorporating any innovations without deducting from the design of a bat . . .to me the shoulderless bat (was it centurion) was ugly, woodworm faired a little better i think but was it more a gimmick than an innovation?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 16, 2009, 07:51:07 PM
agreed, cool thread though. I guess the mongoose is the latest thing, which Tom knows a thing or two about.

Would be interested to hear how their first year shaped up, and what sales looked like, and seeing what model was more popular. would be interested to see how the shorter bats stack up against a traditional one.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 07:57:06 PM
Sales exceeded all targets had a waiting list of 4-6 weeks in May for a bat. It's looking like it's going to be stocked in the majority of cricket specialist stores, have signed a few International players and will be signing more. MMi has been the biggest seller this year by far. Not bad for a bat unheard of 6 months ago.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 08:03:54 PM
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i29/02thoeva/guess3.jpg)
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i29/02thoeva/guess2.jpg)
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i29/02thoeva/guess1.jpg)

Stradvarius. It was used for a guess the bat comp, hence why the top is covered off.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 08:08:38 PM
Think that emphasises my point exactly about innovation and design. . . earlier when i mentioned drilling holes in the bat i certainly didn't mean through the whole depth of the bat!! Just about 1/2 way through!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 08:11:25 PM
(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i29/02thoeva/SSA50094.jpg)

(http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i29/02thoeva/SSA50096.jpg)
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: AlRidd on November 16, 2009, 08:12:05 PM
Wasn't that your Indoor bat Tom?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 08:13:48 PM
Yaa I used it Indoor after my brother outgrew it. It was a SSH weighed 2lb 6oz.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 08:21:35 PM
How did drilling those holes effect the bat Tom? Lighter pick up?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 08:23:24 PM
The bat came with holes drilled so I can't really say how it affected the bat, I don't think much weight was lost by them being drilled out though.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 08:28:29 PM
so was it just a gimmick by batman100 or an attempt to lighten the bat?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 16, 2009, 08:32:25 PM
I think calling it a gimmick is a tad unfair, it was a prototype bat using a technique to try and lighten the bat.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 16, 2009, 08:35:05 PM
I wasn't saying it was a gimmick i was asking whether it was a gimmick or an attempt to lighten the bat
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Apple on November 16, 2009, 09:03:20 PM
looks really weird
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 16, 2009, 09:37:09 PM
wierd, but that actually looks feasible.I could see that working and having an impact in weight loss.

Tom, why dont you make a new Mongoose with similar holes in and see how it goes down?!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: PennineCricket on November 25, 2009, 12:38:07 AM
The holes would have to be very strategically placed else is it not simply is not like having low density willow and lightly pressed clefts or overly dried willow?

The only aim I can think of is you are strategically trying to control the density at various points to give it an optimal pick up and whilst maximising the middle.

Instead of concaving, drill in the areas where you would be concaving, I think the fusion bat seems to be attempting that.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 26, 2009, 11:01:26 AM
wierd, but that actually looks feasible.I could see that working and having an impact in weight loss.

Tom, why dont you make a new Mongoose with similar holes in and see how it goes down?!
We're working on a different design which would save a lot more weight than holes.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 26, 2009, 11:04:06 AM
I think the most important innovation is something Norb has eluded to, treat every piece of willow on an individual basis and get the most out of it this way.......would be difficult to do on a larger scale, but not impossible.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 26, 2009, 11:06:37 AM
Only reason that won't be implemented by anyone huge is you'd find it tricky to sell/market any.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 26, 2009, 11:11:54 AM
If it works as well as Norb suggests the bats would sell themselves purely on being a better bat, no need to market.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 26, 2009, 11:15:26 AM
A punter walks into a shop, looks across the wall at the bats. How will they know what bat has been pressed correctly and had the willow nurtured and looked after.  There needs to be something visual, something physical they can see as a change in the bat.

If it was all about the best bat selling the most, then Woodworm wouldn't have had such a huge market share.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 26, 2009, 11:23:57 AM
Why the need to physically change a bat Tom? Innovations can take place in parts of the process and high quality can come as standard, not at a premium. From what you say, you are copying exactly what woodworm did through the innovation of seeing something different when you walk into the shop.

I just guess we have different perspectives on this.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 26, 2009, 11:46:02 AM
My view is that you need to market a product to sell it, it's very difficult to market something as a radical change if there's nothing physical they can see.

Ayrtek helmet is another good example, would the likes of Gavaskar mention it if it just looked like a regular Masuri/Albion?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 26, 2009, 11:52:52 AM
I mention no radical change, merely an innovation that impresses me and that i think will work for Norb and maybe others in the future.

Anyway, back on track...... can you imagine the shape of the MMi3 being refined in the future, or as a brand are you happy with it as it is?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Tom on November 26, 2009, 11:58:52 AM
Well ok as an innovation, why are they going to buy from a no name brand who just claims to be able to press bats individually and get better performance from it? I don't know if you see my point.

Very happy with the MMi, everyone has been incredibly positive who has used it in the 6 months we've been around. Will definitely keep the shorter blade and longer handle combo. As I said earlier the innovation you may see is a new weight saving technique and soft gear.
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 26, 2009, 04:27:27 PM
Tom's right the more gimmicky, noticeable changes, sponsored players attract not claims or for that matter testing backed up with Science. I think I've said this before, testing is fine, Science is fine but who the heck understands it! Even if you put it on a bat you cant say it is better then the next bat just better the bat it was tested against.  Not like Asda, Tesco & Sainsbury who can categorically say my Tin of Beans are cheaper then yours based on blah blah on a weekly basis!

That said you can slowly build a reputation for yourself within the industry & customers for innovations, great performing bats but it depends which way you want to go about things
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Washington on November 26, 2009, 04:35:02 PM
Norb, but do you think that if a gimmick is purely that, a gimmick, the novelty will eventually wear off i.e. Woorworm? It would obviously be better to have an innovation that is firstly gimmicky/eye catching and secondly and maybe more importantly that the innovation actually has some benefit e.g. concaving?
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 26, 2009, 04:40:13 PM
A true gimmick yep the novelty will wear off...  but as you put it in the second part and using Tom as an example instead of concaving as concaving isn't really a gimmick, there is science behind the Mongoose as well based on Mass Moment of Inertia

My personal opinion is build a reputation but I don't have to sell loads to cover sponsorship deals, marketing / advertising budgets, employee costs etc etc

Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: cd0070 on November 26, 2009, 04:43:50 PM
Not sure how this would work.. But the holes instead of being filled with cork, is it legal to fill it with some kind of light weight molding clay which would also help with the weight and absorption of ball impact??  ???
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SAF Bats on November 26, 2009, 04:46:21 PM
read the thread you don't want to absorb the impact you want to transfer that energy back to the ball think of Netwons Balls!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Ayrtek Cricket on November 26, 2009, 06:31:18 PM
Great last line there..hands up who's thinkin of newtons balls??

Can see the argument here and Tom is correct when he says your marketing will become much easier if you have a physical/aesthetical difference in the look of the product your trying to sell. This was the view we took when designing the helmet as having the external shape appear the same as Masuri/Albion would have been fine but would have proved difficult to recognise as an innovation/new product from the boundary rope. Same goes for Tom and Mongoose, they have created a media frenzy by changing the physical appearance and therefore making it very easy to recognise as a Moongoose bat from 100 yards away.

Think of 30 blank bats lined up on a shelf what's going to draw Joe public over to it in order to part with his hard earned money if there are cheaper alternatives which appear the same as the product you are pitching? Unless you have a product someone goes in the shop and asks for sales on it when placed next to competing products would be difficult in my view if you don't know how good it will be until you get it into the nets etc.

Just my 2 pence worth
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 26, 2009, 07:08:33 PM
Agreed, agreed... BUT... it takes a brave player to be the first with something utterly new. As a bowler I remember slaughtering anyone using a Woodworm for the first few years, because they thought they were "Freddy", or if someone batted in shades. If someone used a Mongoose, no disrespect, but I would go nuts as soon as they mistimed one, or worse, got out to me! As if to agree ,Woodworm bats became more and more orthodox the longer they were in business.
Just see the previous threads around Canterbury pads and the stick people got for wearing them!
So i guess its a fine line between catching the eye and being innovative, and looking like a d*ck!!!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: Ayrtek Cricket on November 26, 2009, 11:44:56 PM
Indeed the CCC Cut pads were to everyones liking but if they appeared as everyone Else's pads that were of the shop shelf/wall as a new company coming into the cricket market would they have gained any exposure/publicity from the product launch/sells?

If i asked what the canterbury pads looked like would you be able to give an answer that distinguishes them from the 30-40 other branded pads out there?

If a product is recognised be it positive from some and negative from others at least it has gained some exposure in the market for daring to be different. Most companies may be happy to produce soft goods the same as others and simply add their own company colour or logo to try and distinguish themselves from others

But does this really make them stand out from the pack in the way that the Mongoose bat does when put up against the wall with 10 other bats or (if i may be so bold) an Ayrtek helmet when placed next to a Masuri/Slazenger, Albion, GM or GN helmet. Can you pick out the innovative products easily from the pack that have dared to introduce change to the sport?

From my view as a sports equipment designer the product has to serve a purpose and improve what already exists, this may mean change in shape, material or an entirely new design but at least its progressing the existing technology available. I'm happy to take some stick from people as id rather be the Shepperd than in the herd following but i guess that's down to personality of the individual. Craig Johnston got laughed out the room with his predator football boot originally when he introduced it for being to radical!!! Who has heard of them now?

Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: leeroy_acko on November 27, 2009, 08:40:19 AM
Great reply, and i absolutely agree. My point is that with my skills as a batter, i would prefer to be a sheep in the batting equipment stakes and until the innovation is tested fully and has some good feedback, i would sit tight.

I work in software, and no one ever uses the first release of a software as it generally is riddled with faults, you would wait until the 2nd or 3rd revision. But, agreed, someone needs to be the leader!
Title: Re: Cricket Bat Innovations?
Post by: SillyShilly on November 27, 2009, 09:49:39 AM
Is it the case that perhaps with the introduction of 2020 that there is a place for the mongoose style bats, as has previuosly been mentioned - these bats and their design are not as revolutionary as some would suggest, as John Newbery and SS made these style of bats over 20/30 years ago - but i guess that you have to have the right product and introduce it to suit the corrct environment, i guess Mongoose, and to the same extent Ayrtek, have timed their products at the right time to suit the demands of modern cricket