Bat Test We Hosted Recently
Advertise on CBF
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Bat Test We Hosted Recently  (Read 5839 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

ProCricketer1982

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7432
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2014, 12:10:00 PM »
Quote from: fasteddie on March 30, 2014, 11:56:35 AM
Do GM price on looks/grains over performance?

Does anyone actually answer that particular question
Logged

Bats_Entertainment

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5049
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2014, 12:14:44 PM »
Quote from: tim2000s on March 30, 2014, 12:08:21 PM
I'm pretty sure that is how GM have always graded. Always looks. After all, that's how they buy the willow in.

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

This isn't necessarily obvious if a go into, say, Morrant and look at a large selection of their bats.
Logged

Bats_Entertainment

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5049
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2014, 12:16:57 PM »

If it became common knowledge that expensive bats didn't perform better, I feel sure people would stop buying them.
Logged

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2014, 12:23:19 PM »
Quote from: Bats_Entertainment on March 30, 2014, 12:16:57 PM
If it became common knowledge that expensive bats didn't perform better, I feel sure people would stop buying them.
Funny. When i was growing up, i rememberbats all having stars, 1* through to 5*. 5* was always the one that looked the best and was most expensive. Then Slaz introduced names, and Panther was the rubbish willow, usually covered, through to Ultimate. Hunts also had their 8*.

We've done this to death though. All bat makers should grade on looks as you can't guarantee performance.

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

Logged

ProCricketer1982

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7432
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2014, 12:30:34 PM »
It's not really in the bat makers or retailers benefit to make it widely known though really. If they do they'll just wack up the prices for all grades
Logged

Bats_Entertainment

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5049
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2014, 12:31:39 PM »
Quote from: tim2000s on March 30, 2014, 12:23:19 PM
Funny. When i was growing up, i rememberbats all having stars, 1* through to 5*. 5* was always the one that looked the best and was most expensive. Then Slaz introduced names, and Panther was the rubbish willow, usually covered, through to Ultimate. Hunts also had their 8*.

We've done this to death though. All bat makers should grade on looks as you can't guarantee performance.

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

Without doubt, in the past, expensive bats generally performed better. Do they now? We're still undecided...
Logged

Bats_Entertainment

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5049
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2014, 12:36:06 PM »
Some Slazengers I saw in Lillywhite's (SD) the other day seemed to have done away with grading. They just had the model number (eg V600) and varying price tags. Is this clever marketing? Or SD just being rubbish?
« Last Edit: March 30, 2014, 01:26:20 PM by Bats_Entertainment »
Logged

tim2000s

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10678
  • Trade Count: (+21)
  • If I only could bat....
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2014, 01:52:15 PM »
Quote from: Bats_Entertainment on March 30, 2014, 12:31:39 PM
Without doubt, in the past, expensive bats generally performed better. Do they now? We're still undecided...
I completely disagree with this statement. I have a number of older bats that are completely midrange and one that is top range. I wouldn't say there was any difference between them. My only observation is that they have all been properly knocked in!

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

Logged

Bats_Entertainment

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5049
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2014, 01:58:37 PM »
Quote from: tim2000s on March 30, 2014, 01:52:15 PM
I completely disagree with this statement. I have a number of older bats that are completely midrange and one that is top range. I wouldn't say there was any difference between them. My only observation is that they have all been properly knocked in!

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

Cheaper bats used to be made to survive the unique challenges of lower level club and village cricket, rather than offer high performance. You'd get bats with unpretentious names like 'Clubman'.
Logged

Vitas Cricket

  • Forum Sponsor
  • Forum Legend
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6625
  • Trade Count: (+20)
  • Cricket Retailer & Coaching Centre in Peterborough
    • Vitas Cricket
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #24 on: March 31, 2014, 12:43:47 PM »
This was a bat test done for a magazine run by a friend. The tester was a professional cricketer and all the results are his opinion. There are low end bats that fly, and very occasionally, high end bats that are dead. It has been discussed many times. Willow is a natural product, there will never be an absolute guarantee on what you are going to get, even if a local magazine gear test says so ;)

Slazenger bats carry the grade name on the back sticker. This year the ranges are called for example V100 G1, G2, G3, G4 etc rather than LE, Player, 5 star or whatever else companies decide to call their bats.
Logged

Kevtheplumber

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
  • Trade Count: (0)
    • K Fisk Plumbing & Heating Ltd
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #25 on: April 01, 2014, 06:08:27 AM »
I'm with jake on this, we had a session in the net with all the GM bats, ranging from under £100-400 I didn't like any of the £400 ones as much as the £150-200 versions. Just goes to show it's worth having a  play.
Logged
Twitter @kfiskplumbing
           @KimboltonCC

lazza32

  • County 1st XI
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 735
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #26 on: April 01, 2014, 07:07:10 AM »
Quote from: Kevtheplumber on April 01, 2014, 06:08:27 AM
I'm with jake on this, we had a session in the net with all the GM bats, ranging from under £100-400 I didn't like any of the £400 ones as much as the £150-200 versions. Just goes to show it's worth having a  play.
Did you know they were the more expensive ones before or after testing?

Sent from my HTC_PN071 using Tapatalk

Logged

Kevtheplumber

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
  • Trade Count: (0)
    • K Fisk Plumbing & Heating Ltd
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #27 on: April 02, 2014, 06:03:00 PM »
Some before some during some after.
Logged
Twitter @kfiskplumbing
           @KimboltonCC

wayward_hayward

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1335
  • Trade Count: (+9)
Re: Bat Test We Hosted Recently
« Reply #28 on: April 02, 2014, 06:12:12 PM »
Quote from: Kevtheplumber on April 01, 2014, 06:08:27 AM
I'm with jake on this, we had a session in the net with all the GM bats, ranging from under £100-400 I didn't like any of the £400 ones as much as the £150-200 versions. Just goes to show it's worth having a  play.

Oh god, you have reminded of the Zona I tried at the last Vitas forum event. I think it was a high model but it was so hard and lacked any response. Yuck
Logged
Twitter @wayward_hayward
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »
 

Advertise on CBF