Advertise on CBF

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Are we going back to traditional shapes?  (Read 6872 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ProCricketer1982

  • Forum Legend
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7432
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2014, 11:50:10 PM »

I personally blame golf brands and the evolution of drivers.

It has influenced cricket :-[

I blame KP. Gotta be his fault. Surprised the saffas aren't pinning their batting collapse on him too tbh
Logged

Gingerbusiness

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1538
  • Trade Count: (+8)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2014, 11:51:31 PM »

I blame KP. Gotta be his fault. Surprised the saffas aren't pinning their batting collapse on him too tbh

Might as well, worked for the useless ECB for years...
Logged

WalkingWicket37

  • International Superstar
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12983
  • Trade Count: (+26)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2014, 11:56:23 PM »

"If only I had a low density, CNC, carbon handled, grade 1+ with 40mm offset edges..."

Perfect quote for some strettons??  ;)

And I'm going to use that quote if (okay when) I get out playing a dick shot this year  :D
Logged

Gingerbusiness

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1538
  • Trade Count: (+8)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #18 on: February 16, 2014, 12:00:18 AM »

Chipping a full-bunger to mid-wicket quote! :D
Logged

M77

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 261
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #19 on: February 16, 2014, 12:18:05 AM »

About time.

Nice to see experience outweigh fads and trends dictated by those with only $$$ as currency.
Logged

Buzz

  • Administrator
  • International Superstar
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12679
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Clear your mind, stay still and watch the ball
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #20 on: February 16, 2014, 07:02:45 AM »

I personally blame golf brands and the evolution of drivers.

It has influenced cricket :-[

I use some blades for golf, they are lovely and have meat behind the contact zone. 
Logged
"Bradman didn't used to have any trigger movements or anything like that. He turned batting into a subconscious act" Tony Shillinglaw.

procricket

  • International Superstar
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14521
  • Trade Count: (+33)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2014, 07:26:33 AM »

My point and it is a simple one and it it too the point.

Offset edges,concaving,non concaving ,big edges,low density , of them will not make a crap batsman good if you will there all fads to some degree but as somebody mentioned it is mind game is batting.

Pressing and handle is key if you get that right performance to the maximum of your skill your going to get.

I could quote off set edges you see there generally lower than the centre of mass so they usually I have found they add more weight to the bottom so normally producing a slight bottom heavy bat.

The full non concaved profile you see on telly lads is great because there using the lightest timber so the pick up will be great but you pick up a tour they have a horrible pick up in the main.


   
Logged
"Doubt whoever but never doubt yourself"

Blank Bats

  • Forum Sponsor
  • International Captain
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1158
  • Trade Count: (+20)
    • Blank Bats
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2014, 07:43:23 AM »

The modern shaped bats , in the main have, I would refer to as illusionary wood distribution. Make something look bigger than it actually is.


Logged
Blank Bats
http://www.blankbats.co.uk
For more info email blankbats@gmail.com

Northern monkey

  • World Cup Winner
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3657
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #23 on: February 16, 2014, 08:16:52 AM »

Mjoliner classic shape is always gonna work, ,but I don't see the harm in trying to innovate with bats,
A lot of batting is in the head, but you have to have the right bat for your batting style etc, and it has to be pressed well.
I've always looked for value from my shots, if I hit the ball right, and the ball doesn't fly, ,doesn't matter what the bat looks like,
It's a (No Swearing Please) bat.

That same bat may work for someone else tho.

Looking at the Mjoliner , Affinity carbine, Aldred, GN legend,B3 profiles, ,I would say these,would work for most people,most of the time?

Blank Bats

  • Forum Sponsor
  • International Captain
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1158
  • Trade Count: (+20)
    • Blank Bats
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #24 on: February 16, 2014, 08:44:45 AM »

I agree with that
Demand driven too, if everyone is after big edges they get big edges. Suppliers supply what customers want.
Logged
Blank Bats
http://www.blankbats.co.uk
For more info email blankbats@gmail.com

gerhard303

  • First XI Captain
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 197
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #25 on: December 08, 2015, 04:45:05 AM »

I have seen Kane Williamson's bats and they have absolutely no concaving whatsoever.

Pics, specs, weight or any other info about Kane Williamson's bat?
Logged

potzy248

  • International Captain
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1673
  • Trade Count: (+1)
Re: Are we going back to traditional shapes?
« Reply #26 on: December 08, 2015, 07:42:30 AM »

Pics, specs, weight or any other info about Kane Williamson's bat?

Sorry mate, I only got to hold them for a minute. They seemed to be the traditional GN players shape. Like the GN Legend. Faces were not the bets looking either and they all had that ugly mesh covers on them.
Logged
Kane Williamson for Prime Minister.
Pages: 1 [2]
 

Advertise on CBF