Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Equipment => Bats => Topic started by: WalkingWicket37 on February 06, 2016, 10:53:57 PM
-
Evening all
It's Saturday night, so while most people are on the booze and getting ready for a night out I'm playing with my bats!
As most of the regulars on here will have seen, I had B3 map SimonMay5's Screaming cat that I fell in love with. I also bought a Chase off eBay for a very good price considering it was barely used. I couldn't help but notice the similarities between the two while they were side my side.
Other than the obvious concaving (none vs. Minimal) the shapes are almost identical. The B3s swell extends slightly further down the blade than the Chase, while the Chase has a very subtle bow compared to the dead straight B3 which has an angled handle to create the same effect.
I'm not sure when Simon's Scat would have been made, but the Chase is around 10 years old and I'm guessing if would have been a similar time. This was obviously before the big edge craze took over, but it goes to show that this shape works well. Both bats have good coverage with wood in the right places. This results in a nice long hitting area and both bats tap up just as well as any big edged bat I have recently owned.
What was the point of all this waffle? I feel these bats unscientifically prove that big edges may look nice, but what really makes a bat perform well is coverage. You try to hit the ball out the middle of the bat, both these bats have a lot of wood there giving an extended sweet spot. Because of the full shapes and having wood in the right places you get value for your shots that may not be so present on a heavily concaved bat.
(http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb450/CPye061194/20160206_214742_zpsl4ds19jf.jpg) (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/CPye061194/media/20160206_214742_zpsl4ds19jf.jpg.html)
(http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb450/CPye061194/20160206_214701_zpsp3fd0tj3.jpg) (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/CPye061194/media/20160206_214701_zpsp3fd0tj3.jpg.html)
(http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb450/CPye061194/20160206_213832_zps1ypqhout.jpg) (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/CPye061194/media/20160206_213832_zps1ypqhout.jpg.html)
(http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb450/CPye061194/20160206_214409_zpszjkkzwen.jpg) (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/CPye061194/media/20160206_214409_zpszjkkzwen.jpg.html)
(http://i1206.photobucket.com/albums/bb450/CPye061194/20160206_215248_zpsu4mvc1aj.jpg) (http://s1206.photobucket.com/user/CPye061194/media/20160206_215248_zpsu4mvc1aj.jpg.html)
-
Looks very similar. B3 is a bit bigger - more exaggerated in measurements, but shape looks good. (btw, great buy on the chase!)
-
Couldn't agree more, I've had numerous bats over he last 6 years but I for one am glad the big edge phase is over, the obsession with how big a bats edges were confused me. (Even as someone selling bats at the time 2/3 years ago).
As commented in n other threads surely having more wood behind the desired hitting area has to achieve better results than having big edges on an area you try not to hit.
I've had my Scat copied twice now over the years in an attempt to find something as good bit like a nymphomanic ex Gf I fear nothing will ever match the mark it achieved 😳
-
I'm glad I'm not the only one mucking around with bats on a Saturday night!! Seem to have one or two bats scattered in each room in case I want to do some shadow batting.
-
Totally agree. None of my bats have huge edges yet most of my teammates dont bat an eyelid as they love the huge edged Asian bats. Do my bats play as well as theirs do? Most certainly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I have a couple of XxX GN aussie style bats from a sponsered WA player. Reckon its 2007-08 - pretty much this shape, brilliant pickup, stripped weight only 2.6!
-
Couldn't agree more, I've had numerous bats over he last 6 years but I for one am glad the big edge phase is over, the obsession with how big a bats edges were confused me. (Even as someone selling bats at the time 2/3 years ago).
As commented in n other threads surely having more wood behind the desired hitting area has to achieve better results than having big edges on an area you try not to hit.
I've had my Scat copied twice now over the years in an attempt to find something as good bit like a nymphomanic ex Gf I fear nothing will ever match the mark it achieved 😳
Why did the GN scoop work so well?
-
Why did the GN scoop work so well?
I think this was something to do with optimum wood volumes to create a sturdy structure that would stand up to hitting a ball while still removing the scoop. It works in a similar way to a cavity back golf club in theory
-
I think this was something to do with optimum wood volumes to create a sturdy structure that would stand up to hitting a ball while still removing the scoop. It works in a similar way to a cavity back golf club in theory
Yeah but it still blows the wood behind the hitting area out of the water surely. I have seen magic bats with and without concaving, big and small edge, cheap and expensive, twin scoops etc. Years of playing cricket and selling cricket I am still search of that perfect bat.
-
There are exceptions to every rule. ;)
Basic phisics dictate that, with all other things equal, more wood behind where you hit the ball will result in better performance than less wood. But as we all know not all other things are equal.
My basic theory stands up and has other players backings as well as scientific support. However there is no such thing as a perfect bat shape, otherwise there wouldn't be all these different profiles (and out beloved forum wouldn't exist!)
-
Don't think it's about volume of wood, as much as the overall weight (physics only tells us "F=mass x acceleration").
I was playing around with a friends flare (tiny edges) and it pinged like a beast....BUT anything off the edge would barely reach the 30 yard circle.
So...I think the only advantage (but a significant one in a game situation) the bigger edges provide is that mishits can go slightly further....and I think it's because a tiny edge doesn't present enough surface area for the ball to respond from.
I also think once you start getting to 35 mm edges, it's enough to benefit from bigger mishits and that further increase in edge size leads to diminishing returns....that 35vmm number is just a rough guess
-
^Makes sense.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I like big bats with big edges and big spine - best of both worlds.
-
I like big bats and I can not lie
You other brothers can't deny
-
Couldn't agree more, I've had numerous bats over he last 6 years but I for one am glad the big edge phase is over, the obsession with how big a bats edges were confused me. (Even as someone selling bats at the time 2/3 years ago).
As commented in n other threads surely having more wood behind the desired hitting area has to achieve better results than having big edges on an area you try not to hit.
I've had my Scat copied twice now over the years in an attempt to find something as good bit like a nymphomanic ex Gf I fear nothing will ever match the mark it achieved 😳
well said Tom.
-
The B3 just looks more or less like an evolution of the chase
-
In my mind it's the batsman not the bat that effects performance.
One of our team used a G&M 404 for 2 years. One of those years he ended up on the AOC team of the year for the amount of runs he scored (2305 in a season). The bat to anybody else that pickedbit up/tried it was an absolute dog, but for him it just worked.
No matter what the bat looks like, size of edges or anything is all irrelevant if the guy holding it doesnt use it properly or what he/she has isn't suitable for their style.
Big bats look impressive and may intimidate a bowler, not sure why though, but it's all about finding a bat which works for you and suits your game.
-
Well Said!!
-
In my mind it's the batsman not the bat that effects performance.
One of our team used a G&M 404 for 2 years. One of those years he ended up on the AOC team of the year for the amount of runs he scored (2305 in a season). The bat to anybody else that pickedbit up/tried it was an absolute dog, but for him it just worked.
No matter what the bat looks like, size of edges or anything is all irrelevant if the guy holding it doesnt use it properly or what he/she has isn't suitable for their style.
Big bats look impressive and may intimidate a bowler, not sure why though, but it's all about finding a bat which works for you and suits your game.
That's just not the cbf way buddy. Ofc you play better with 10+ straight even grains on a freshly bought bat.. Never go down on gear!
-
In my mind it's the batsman not the bat that effects performance.
One of our team used a G&M 404 for 2 years. One of those years he ended up on the AOC team of the year for the amount of runs he scored (2305 in a season). The bat to anybody else that pickedbit up/tried it was an absolute dog, but for him it just worked.
No matter what the bat looks like, size of edges or anything is all irrelevant if the guy holding it doesnt use it properly or what he/she has isn't suitable for their style.
Big bats look impressive and may intimidate a bowler, not sure why though, but it's all about finding a bat which works for you and suits your game.
To each their own. I have tried sad bats and balls never went anywhere. Then, I tried a nice bat and a great score resulted in the first game with heaps of boundaries (7 or 8 I think). I never looked back. A friend was looking to unload some "heavy" bats from his kit. Cheap too. I needed a net bat. This monster had a huge bow, big edges with lots of concaving. 2-12. I hadn't used a big edged bat before. My top edges to bouncers were flying to 50 yards for some good runs. At the club level, at least for myself, I want to make the best of my cricket weekend. I know I will not have the power and timing of Amla or ABD. I take whatever aid I can get from a big bat.
-
That's just not the cbf way buddy. Ofc you play better with 10+ straight even grains on a freshly bought bat.. Never go down on gear!
Exactly...and you need a few so you can rotate them (as you would a good pair of shoes).
-
It's probably all a placebo ale great. But never under estimate one.
When I have big big bats, b3s, gray nics extremes, kooks biggest kahunas. I've always scored runs and the balls gone miles.
Hence I've used highly concaved planks, or thin edged older bats, it's not gone as far.
The exception is my affinity, it's quite concaved and isn't that big. But I've used 2 affinities before that went miles, and the general consensus is they go.
So when I went out to bat with it I wasn't thinking this is small, I was thinking. This is an Affinty and its gonna fly!!
Never underestimate the placebo the other way. Bowlers and fielders all comment on big batts. It may not effect most but the ones it does. It's gonna help somehow.
I remember when the mongoose first came out and I used it all season midweek. Averaging 75 and a strike rate in the 150s for the season I came out to bat at 4 with the game in the balance.
There skipper shouted. "It that kid with that little bat that goes miles, everyone on the fleece"
We won at a canter just knocking it about.
-
Big edges may not matter to players who like to knock it around, but they definitely do to aggressive batsmen. I feel that with thin bats, one really needs to time the ball as well as find the middle to clear the field. But with a big bat, a decently timed shot off the middle will go the distance. Big edges are definitely not just for show, they do make a difference.
-
Hell Cam your stating the obvious once again. (sorry bit harsh)....
Coverage is something 6 years ago we all talked about good it come around again and although bat sizes have changed coverage has not is all important to club cricketers because we do not hit the ball in the same place all the time.
the 1271 in this thread is the best bat in terms of coverage in a normal sized cleft because it has been calculated to use most of a cleft even though it only has 34mm edges.
http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=23466.0 (http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=23466.0)
big edges do align and keep stiffness in the blade but if it concaved then your losing coverage.
the zizi was designed for coverage evenly over a space for a equilateral balanced bat with wood all over shape was not liked but over the next 12 months more shapes will become this.
If you have scalloping/concaving normally it a ploy to keep the weight down but at a cost.
I always have said this and the diagram below will show this
concaved bat profile
(http://i65.tinypic.com/2vxgkf7.jpg)
coverage (show with paper) i call form bat narrower middle
(http://i64.tinypic.com/63zsoy.jpg)
full profile with edges above 38mm
(http://i66.tinypic.com/nganms.jpg)
coverage
(http://i65.tinypic.com/245bk9u.jpg)
It is about getting the bat that suits you 100 per cent and the 1271 is very similar in some ways to the Scat.
It's about allowances and finding what suits but coverage should play a massive part in our bats as we tend to hit the ball all over the place edge plays a part too.
This is my theory anyhow and in the bats i have used have found this
-
sorry about crude mock up
-
I may have been stating the obvious Dave, but if enough people preach it then others may take notice! :)
-
Haha agreed pal bit harsh but it has always been the way coverage in the weight however there is a cabiat with it all.
Weight
I mean i have used many heavy bats they play better or tend it i personally think it hard to make a bad bat over 2-12 due to wood in the bat but alot of people can not use that weight so the real skill is the lightweight bats where more thought and positioning of the Willow is needed to put in and as wood is a premium big edges are not needed and cause many issues.
Smaller edges will help batmakers as well in terms of getting realist expectations at lower weights
but that's my two pence!!
-
Good stuff guys it may be a bit obvious but it's still a good read
The second bat looks so much better with that profile - more like bats as they used to be shaped for years until heavy concaving came in
-
So do big edges matter or not?