Print

[bostoncricketer]

Although stiff handle makes sense from a transfer of energy point of view but here is Robert Pack standing on the bat to make the handle whippy. It could be that a flexible handle causes less vibrations and hence more transfer of energy to the ball?

At around 7:50 in the video below

https://youtu.be/P7LoEBEydm8?t=7m32s

[InternalTraining]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7LoEBEydm8

7:50 mark.

[bostoncricketer]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7LoEBEydm8

7:50 mark.

Fixed the link in my post. Thanks.

[amritpremi]

I have a small theory of my own (no scientific research done on it). If I take a small towel or a handkerchief and hit it with a whip I generate more power, than if I hit normally at around same speed. To generate the whip we again need some power or some way (like whippy handle) to generate extra power. There may be many variables which could affect my above theory but that's just my way of looking at and simplifying the approach.

[Buzz]

Do you hit a cricket ball like you use a whip? That would be an odd way to bat.

[Calzehbhoy]

You mean you don't??? Get in the nets Buzz!

[Seniorplayer]

Although stiff handle makes sense from a transfer of energy point of view but here is Robert Pack standing on the bat to make the handle whippy. It could be that a flexible handle causes less vibrations and hence more transfer of energy to the ball?

At around 7:50 in the video below

https://youtu.be/P7LoEBEydm8?t=7m32s

Although Rob  Pack states  the bat plays  better with a little whip when the nserts  are not tight in the handle  he  states the reason he stands on the handle or bends it in the vice iis to establish if the handle is going to break on impact with the ball

[amritpremi]

Do you hit a cricket ball like you use a whip? That would be an odd way to bat.

Dhoni surely does, & he send the ball a few distance for sure.

[Tom]

I think a lot of people equate lack of vibration in the handle to the ball pinging off better. An ultra-flexible handle reduces vibration even further, but whether the ball actually goes any further is up for debate.

[sachin200]

I think a lot of people equate lack of vibration in the handle to the ball pinging off better. An ultra-flexible handle reduces vibration even further, but whether the ball actually goes any further is up for debate.

I think we have cleared that on this thread already that a flexible or stiffer handle doesn't send the ball any further due to very little contact time so they are irrelevant in sending the ball further. The only question is whether you like more vibrations (like to feel the ball on your bat) or less vibrations. Less vibrations create illusion of middling it even though it may be a miss hit.

[Buzz]

I think we have cleared that on this thread already that a flexible or stiffer handle doesn't send the ball any further due to very little contact time so they are irrelevant in sending the ball further. The only question is whether you like more vibrations (like to feel the ball on your bat) or less vibrations. Less vibrations create illusion of middling it even though it may be a miss hit.

I don't think the first point has been cleared up at all.

[horseman]

I don't think the first point has been cleared up at all.

Well said buzz.

[Buzz]

Thanks @DorsetDan that is a really good explanation. 

[edge]

Reasoning seems pretty sound to me Danno, I agree. Hard to comment in detail rather than principle on things like the contact time etc. without any data - although 0.001 seems short to me, would be interested to see some experimental evidence.

[brokenbat]

A "flexible" handle would have to store and return energy to add anything to a shot (think of the flex of golf/ badminton shafts) but I'm not convinced that the properties of the handle/ blade/ inserts mean a bat behaves this way as I'd be very surprised if after flexing the blade then springs back against the handle on contact in the desired way... certainly not if the contact time is as short as claimed. As someone else posted this would be contradictory.

The handkerchief whip analogy is way off because you'd have to accelerate the bat in to the ball and suddenly decelerate just before contact. "Whippy" players like McCullum ensure the bat is accelerating in to contact to get maximum bat velocity on impact.

The tennis analogy could possibly fit if you think of the blade-handle interface and stiffness provided by the profile as the "frame" and the willow properties as the "string bed". I'm not sure how well that fits in reality but overall , for me, my instinct is a flexible handle wastes energy as it is dissipating vibrations/ impact forces only.

Of course if something is ultra stiff then "performance" can decrease (no sniggering at the back). If you think of motorcycle chassis for example, a ultra stiff chassis is best in an ideal world but in the real world you need to build in flex to deal with road imperfections otherwise the handling becomes impossible. I think this is what the video refers to when saying "without a bow or rubber in the handle the bat wouldn't perform"

I also don't see how the article can start with describing vibration propagation and infer anything about the effect of grip tightness to shot outcome. Fire a ball at an upright bat with a hinge on the handle and it will not come back to you- the bat will pivot around the hinge and ball follow a more downward trajectory. This is a dynamics question, not a material properties question and the two are not the same thing.

I suspect the sentence you are hanging on to with this @sachin200 about vibration propogation has become mis translated while trying to dumb down the science.

At the end of the day the best bat is the ones you can score runs with. If someone is more comfortable with a floppy handle then the positive psychology it provides can outweigh the negative physics

makes a lot of sense.