Custom Bats Cricket Forum
Equipment => Bats => Topic started by: DorsetDan on January 22, 2020, 05:57:59 PM
-
.
-
How many pros regularly hit the toe though? Plus they don't need to worry about longevity of the bat or damage to the toe.
-
Possibly likes the balance better with a bit of extra weight down the bat? At that level I reckon it's all about feel, much more so than for your average club player.
-
Spine into the toe, for me, as it does add pick up, plus bat or responsive very near to the toe, don't know if it adds durability, though
-
It is a fashion thing in my view. I used to love a bat with a whale tail, now I am not such a big fan... pretty sure I did a thread on this a while back (think 7 years...😂)
Here we go. Gutted the pictures aren't showing...
http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=17484.0 (http://custombats.co.uk/cbforum/index.php?topic=17484.0)
-
I’ve gotta say first of all,,,that’s a lovely bat qdc is using
Personally, I honestly don’t care on the whole shape /profile side of it.
The reason I moved over to the duckbill profile was after seeing a kohli bat,(please don’t question me on its authenticity etc) ,this particular bat picked up nice, whilst still having plenty of wood across the toe.
I copied it, but kept the toe thicker, and rounded the toe edges off.
My new bat profile
Tbh it’s nothing new,,,every man and his dog uses the same profile these days, and probably has since the law changes.
As for spine into the toe,,,,to me they look prettier,,,there’s possibly more skill involved in shaping them,,,it’s definitely a fine line between pick up/balance/etc,,,,with many manufacturers really thinning the toe profile out to create this profile
It’s a great topic Dan for sure, and I’m sure most will have their favourite for many reasons.
It’s funny, I was repairing a lovely redback this week that has the spine into the toe profile, and I was thinking what a pain it was to sand it.
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/qBGx7cFk/4-C874-BB5-ABF2-4-A23-839-C-ADE0-F88-F0-E0-E.png)
Not sure if that shows it?
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/59kjp6YB/A305-D7-C7-D5-BA-4-B66-8-FF4-03-E4-BB65-EB20.png)
Better
-
I have coupe of both shapes and personally both the duck bill shaped bats pick up better but ping wise not much in it. I do agree that they look thinner and not as big in the stance as a duckbill shape but that may be because mine have square toes as well as the duckbill toe.
Iv heard this toe more prone to break line but so far having mainly used a duckbill shape as my match bat for the last few seasons not broke one yet so as has been said I think if a toe will go it will be down to the ball used, pace and how hard you try and hit it and won’t make a difference if your bat is full spine or not.
-
Seems like you hate that QDK GM and need to shift it on...?
-
I've never liked spine into the toe bats, ever. Kay never looked right to my eye but don't feel they have positive or negative performance benefits personally. Its more about the visual for me and just don't like the look odd them.
-
^ Completely agree. But then I used some and loved the bats (the QDK PE excluded). Bats are strange :D
Whereas the owners are "perfectly normal" ;)
-
I have never really liked the spine into the toe profile as the ones I have used have tended to compensate for more wood in the centre, the corners are more vulnerable. The more even distribution in a duck bill toe seems more robust to me
-
I would also add that the other minus point in my mind about the Icon/ Paragon/ new Finback style shape is @Six Sixes Cricket calling them "a bowlers bat shape" :D
:D Finback for bowlers, Volante for batsmen
-
In my experience, spine into toe works really well with high middle bats (CAs for example usually have this set up and pick up like a dream, with a long hitting area).. it doesn’t quite work with a lower middle (pickup too heavy).
Also, by definition, a bat with spine running into the toe is going to have some concaving, which all else being equal, leads to lighter pickup.
It’s not a terrible feature to have - as long as the balance and pickup are still good.
-
Spine to toe definitely gets you a bit more go when you get one a bit low on the bat, but a proper spine all the way through the toe only picks up ok if it's quite a high middled bat. Duckbill is the easy way to make a bat pick up light, but you do lose a bit for below the middle strikes.
I think duckbill makes sense for a lot of pros in that they want as much wood in the middle as possible and with their cricket being faster/bouncier/more talented they don't need to worry about mistiming one at the bottom of the bat nearly as much as joe average. De Kock is a bit more of a loose cannon than most so is perhaps more likely to end up stretching for one and needing the extra wood to get him out of trouble. Pietersen much the same, to pick a slightly earlier player. Or maybe they just like the pickup that way.
(https://www.crictracker.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Kevin-Pietersen-Surrey.jpg)
Personally, I don't like either duckbill toes or spine all the way down the bat - the balance doesn't feel right on either, and the wood removed from a duckbill is wood I need. Also do agree that spine to the toe doesn't look great. Depends a lot on your batting style though, if you're on the short side and mainly play back foot stuff or punches then I totally get duckbills. I'm tall and tend to reach for the ball a bit when hitting out so a duckbill is a terrible idea. The goldilocks solution is spine going most of the way down but blended in a bit earlier than the toe to get the balance right.
From a batmaking (and cynical) point of view... anecdotally, the large majority of players want the 'oh that's so light' feeling when they pick a bat up - think how successful Kook were a few years ago selling high middled bats with ridiculous amounts of concaving. The easiest way to get that super light pickup is just duckbill the toe out. Does that result in a well balanced bat? Nope, but if you're knocking them out in the thousands it's easier than taking the time to balance each one nicely.
-
Gosh - I'd never though of it in such detail!
Pick up bat - commence trying to whack the crap out of everything - put bat away after inevitable toe-ending to cover.
Maybe I should pay more attention
-
Gosh - I'd never though of it in such detail!
Pick up bat - commence trying to whack the crap out of everything - put bat away after inevitable toe-ending to cover.
Maybe I should pay more attention
More likely the rest of us sad individuals should worry significantly less :D
-
I think i'm a sucker for the latest trend...
Up until a year or two ago the GM Icon was my favorite ever shape and that was a spine into the toe bat - it seemed to pick up so well and have the longest middle. But yes as mentioned in this thread the edges of the toe seemed to be sacrificed for this and that is what lead to its eventual demise when the inside edge of the toe snapped off.
More recently I've moved to the more duckbill shapes. Not the extreme/sharp ones that seem to "dive" to the toe quickly like the BAS bats, think they call it a dolphin. More like the Root and Kohli shape. I think its aesthetically pleasing which shouldn't actually make a difference but seems to, it also allows the makers to put more of the wood up into the area that I hit the ball.
I'm never going to be able to whack the ball a long way with the toe so as long as its a suitable size it isn't at risk of being damaged, keep the rest of the weight somewhere else I say :)
-
I didn't even know if the spine ran into the toe of my bat or not. I guess that tells you how important such things are to me!
Upon looking at pictures I think I've confirmed myself as a bowler...
(https://i.postimg.cc/B6YKHkhm/f3163157-3014-4d5c-b5fc-3fcffbaa766b.png) (https://postimages.org/)
-
That's a pretty nice looking bit of willow for a bowler. Mind you, there's nothing wrong with a bowler having aspirations to move up the order!
-
I think i'm a sucker for the latest trend...
Up until a year or two ago the GM Icon was my favorite ever shape and that was a spine into the toe bat - it seemed to pick up so well and have the longest middle. But yes as mentioned in this thread the edges of the toe seemed to be sacrificed for this and that is what lead to its eventual demise when the inside edge of the toe snapped off.
More recently I've moved to the more duckbill shapes. Not the extreme/sharp ones that seem to "dive" to the toe quickly like the BAS bats, think they call it a dolphin. More like the Root and Kohli shape. I think its aesthetically pleasing which shouldn't actually make a difference but seems to, it also allows the makers to put more of the wood up into the area that I hit the ball.
I'm never going to be able to whack the ball a long way with the toe so as long as its a suitable size it isn't at risk of being damaged, keep the rest of the weight somewhere else I say :)
It was the outside edge of the GM Icon that went on mine. The pick up on the bats was fantastic but the cost was certainly fragility in the toe
-
Spine to toe definitely gets you a bit more go when you get one a bit low on the bat, but a proper spine all the way through the toe only picks up ok if it's quite a high middled bat. Duckbill is the easy way to make a bat pick up light, but you do lose a bit for below the middle strikes.
I think duckbill makes sense for a lot of pros in that they want as much wood in the middle as possible and with their cricket being faster/bouncier/more talented they don't need to worry about mistiming one at the bottom of the bat nearly as much as joe average. De Kock is a bit more of a loose cannon than most so is perhaps more likely to end up stretching for one and needing the extra wood to get him out of trouble. Pietersen much the same, to pick a slightly earlier player. Or maybe they just like the pickup that way.
(https://www.crictracker.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Kevin-Pietersen-Surrey.jpg)
Personally, I don't like either duckbill toes or spine all the way down the bat - the balance doesn't feel right on either, and the wood removed from a duckbill is wood I need. Also do agree that spine to the toe doesn't look great. Depends a lot on your batting style though, if you're on the short side and mainly play back foot stuff or punches then I totally get duckbills. I'm tall and tend to reach for the ball a bit when hitting out so a duckbill is a terrible idea. The goldilocks solution is spine going most of the way down but blended in a bit earlier than the toe to get the balance right.
From a batmaking (and cynical) point of view... anecdotally, the large majority of players want the 'oh that's so light' feeling when they pick a bat up - think how successful Kook were a few years ago selling high middled bats with ridiculous amounts of concaving. The easiest way to get that super light pickup is just duckbill the toe out. Does that result in a well balanced bat? Nope, but if you're knocking them out in the thousands it's easier than taking the time to balance each one nicely.
Yes, that blending spine into the toe is the one I've got all the MB Malik H Pro bats, with no concaving they do pick up very nicely
-
Personally prefer a spine in to the toe, all custom bats I’ve had I’ve gone for that.
On to the finback v Volante comment, when customers come in, and waft bats around, you can guarantee the bowler will go down the finback route, because there prefer the lighter pick up, & are not bothered about the bats ‘size’. The batsmen go for the Volante , as it’s meatier/fuller and go, that picks up ok, I’ll go with that. That’s the difference I find with batters and bowlers
-
Do we really think an extra 2-3cm in one area of the middle of the bat ha a huge difference. Pretty sure I couldn’t tell you without looking what shape a bat I was using was if I hadn’t looked at it. Think this is another one for the ‘all in the mind category’.
-
@Kulli as per my post above I didn't even know without checking! Now I know I won't think about it ever again :D
While it may be "important" to some people (CBF members) I don't think the majority of people would know off the top of their head is the spine went into the toe of their bat or not. What's more, I don't think they'd care!
-
Think it’s fine to care about it, but wrong to think it has any actual noticeable difference physically.