Print

[Washington]

haha true enough pete

[SAF Bats]

Morning....

Ok lets say hypothectically speaking I grade via a simple test would that be acceptable?

It would be self regulating with spot checks similar to the new Law 6 stuff....

[Jamieh]

In my personal experience of the business world people are more interested in results than grades/qualifications. By this I mean if you took two consultants, one who is "qualified" and has all the professional merits (for example, equal to a grade 1 bat as a comparison) and a second person who gets results but no professional qualifications (i.e. a grade 2/3 bat that you see score a big hundred) people would follow/use the 2nd person as they would think it's more effective.

I guess my point is, bats are so subjective and that the difference a grade 1 would make to the avergae player over a grade 2 would be minimal, therefore having specific guidelines are not necessary. If a bat carries a (self regulated) grade 1 label I just don't see it making much actual difference to performance, except in your head.

Therefore sticking with grading on the look of a cleft is the only option that is realistic I think? Although I ntoice on Julian Millichamps site he has a grading system on performance, but again I suspect this is subjective and his opinion (not that I'm doubting him!).

[Black Cat Cricket]

Which method do you think would provide more 'grade 1' bats- grading cosmetically or by performance?

There are at least certain guidelines for grading cosmetically, but grading by performance is more subjective. Does the batmaker not have an incentive to 'over grade' his bats.  (A 'grade 1' bat can command a higher price tag...)  My point is, it may be easier to get away with over-grading if you grade by performance. 

Savvy bloke, Mr Millichamp...

[SAF Bats]

The thing about Julians' opinion is that he's going to be pretty much bang on the money when he grades the bat.  He'll hit the bat and based on the sound and rebound he gets from his tapping up mallet he grades the bat.

We all do similar rebound tests be that with a mallet or bouncing a ball on the bat. We form our opinion which would generally be the same for a good bat and bad for a bad bat.

Now back to Julian but for everyone and take it one stage further to the manufacturering level.  We drop a [predefined] ball from one metre and measure the rebound off of the bat.  The height of that rebound determines the Grade of the bat.

Now that said and maybe you think it is a good idea but it isn't, there is an element of trust and consistency involved here. You may bounce the ball at the right spot on the bat, even on a stain and "ping" she bounces high G1++.  You may have a bat that will come to life when you knock it in for bit G2 / G3 but you know it will be great. 

The thing about this question is that it, as SillyShilly said, almost impossible to answer with a valid scenario as there are counter arguments for all types of grading, other then Julians that is :-)

edit: My opinion is that, if you can, grade on performance but do it honestly, cosmetically it won't be to far out either.

[Swing King]

Would you pay a Merc price if it looked like a Lada or would one take a chance on a Lada ?

[frankspop]

Agree that there are too many variables to establish an industry accepted standard, let alone try to implement, ensure compliance, and regulate.   It's a less than perfect system as it stands, but as long as you find a bat maker you can trust, always ask the right questions, tolerate the margins of error, and have a good returns policy if you're not happy with it, then that isn't a bad compromise.  The further you move away from bespoke locally supplied custom bats the less control you have on the look and performance of your bat.  Those that buy from mass-produced and online have to accept that - you could say it's one of the reasons for the price differential.

[Swing King]

Agree that there are too many variables to establish an industry accepted standard, let alone try to implement, ensure compliance, and regulate.   It's a less than perfect system as it stands, but as long as you find a bat maker you can trust, always ask the right questions, tolerate the margins of error, and have a good returns policy if you're not happy with it, then that isn't a bad compromise.  The further you move away from bespoke locally supplied custom bats the less control you have on the look and performance of your bat.  Those that buy from mass-produced and online have to accept that - you could say it's one of the reasons for the price differential.

Would the same rules apply if someone was to order say 20/30 custom made bats for a retail outlet ?

[SAF Bats]

Would the same rules apply if someone was to order say 20/30 custom made bats for a retail outlet ?

You tell the retailer, I can grade on performance or I can grade cosmetically it is up to them if they are putting there stickers on your blank bats.  If not this is how I grade bats that is how I would like you to sell them

[Apple]

It would be nice if they graded on PERFORMANCE alone, that makes the most sense for me

[niceonechoppy]

Yes, that way you'd pay for quality ping and performance, rather than pure aesthetics!

[slogger02]

it just isnt going to happen though.  tests to determine rebound qualities would take time and therefore money.  this test would also have to bought in across the board to ensure all bats undergo the same test, again more money for businesses and someone will have to organise it all!  i would fear mysterious upgrading would still occur unless a cricketbatpingometer regulator (like ofcom) was bought in.
individual companies such as screaming cat maybe able to do this but this is through julians expert knowledge and his honesty, nothing scientific.
aesthetics is the only way to do it im afraid....