Topic: . (Read 3704 times)

edge · « **Reply #15 on:** January 23, 2020, 08:54:18 AM »

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.

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.

FattusCattus · « **Reply #16 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:03:45 AM »

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

Jimbo · « **Reply #17 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:40:24 AM »

Quote from: FattusCattus on January 23, 2020, 11:03:45 AM

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

ch1p · « **Reply #18 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:59:04 AM »

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

WalkingWicket37 · « **Reply #19 on:** January 23, 2020, 12:58:48 PM »

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...

Jimbo · « **Reply #20 on:** January 23, 2020, 01:04:41 PM »

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!

SD · « **Reply #21 on:** January 23, 2020, 01:05:20 PM »

Quote from: ch1p on January 23, 2020, 11:59:04 AM

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

AJ2014 · « **Reply #22 on:** January 23, 2020, 01:29:33 PM »

Quote from: edge on January 23, 2020, 08:54:18 AM

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.

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

Six Sixes Cricket · « **Reply #23 on:** January 23, 2020, 01:36:23 PM »

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

Kulli · « **Reply #24 on:** January 23, 2020, 02:26:10 PM »

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�.

WalkingWicket37 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 23, 2020, 02:36:21 PM »

@Kulli as per my post above I didn't even know without checking! Now I know I won't think about it ever again

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!

Kulli · « **Reply #26 on:** January 23, 2020, 03:11:19 PM »

Think it�s fine to care about it, but wrong to think it has any actual noticeable difference physically.

Author Topic: . (Read 3704 times)

edge

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

FattusCattus

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

Jimbo

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

ch1p

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

WalkingWicket37

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

Jimbo

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

SD

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

AJ2014

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

Six Sixes Cricket

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

Kulli

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

WalkingWicket37

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?

Kulli

Re: Spine in to the toe... love it or hate it?