Print

[procricket]

Mate I have personally knocked in Ben stokes bats and I tel you this pick up and balance spot on performance better than mine I wouldn't have said so

I own a England players bat Match used is it better than my other bat I wouldnt have said so

Oh I have also knocked in a Gary ballance bat too was nothing special.

Shane watson used a very low grade gm and scored a ton with it I'm sure it was a grade 3.


Look at Ben stokes latest bat I guarantee it was a grade 3 when selected by Mr Ruggles.

I have worked with Williow ad seen the grading process I can say the pro would score runs with almost any bat.

I just wish you was uk based I would show you.

True top pro bats tend not to go out if there not quality tested.

Ps have a look at Rahane bats through crickinfo look at the face on some would you call them as grade 1 there many more.

Of course the top players get the pick but they would score with lesser bats

I love a pro bat I really do when I helped out at b3 I think I got better than lots of the pro bats goin out and I think many bats sold on this forum by some of the sponsors are better than pro bats.

Ps kippax are making bairstows current bats and chase made a few too

[Bats_Entertainment]

The Knowledge. 

[InternalTraining]

Fair comment, @procricket  and I am not doubting your experience. I have a few "pro" bats and I have seen some of Test cricketers bats as well. There is a serious difference in ball rebound of those bats v/s others at that weight and made by different brands or weights. If you factor in physicality (strength) of pro players, blazing fast outfield, and short boundaries at pro level, some of the "big" scores with crap bats would make sense. But I doubt this mythical Pro player quality that makes a below average bat a scorer. It just sounds too good to be true.

[procricket]

Sorry didn't want to come across as a belter like you I love cricket I just don't want people buying on the pro pretext.

The top players tend to get the very best I terms of everything an of course you wouldn't want to send duds to top players.

I like many just wish I had there talent and in truth if you thin a bats better than you have already won.

[edge]

@InternalTraining I don't think Dave's trying to tell you that Ben Stokes uses crap bats! Obviously pros get top performing bats, but they aren't mythically different from bats that many amateurs or CBF members have. I've had my hands on a few pro bats, they were all nice sticks (surprise!), but would I use them ahead of my personal favourites? Not a chance.

[InternalTraining]

Sorry didn't want to come across as a belter like you I love cricket I just don't want people buying on the pro pretext.

I don't either but there is a lot of confusion out there regarding grading and what-not. On top of that, amateur level conditions and physicality is not the same as a Pro. Nobody wants to grade bats on ping alone but also, not all conditions require same kind of "ping" either. How do you measure ping?

Regarding pro/non-pro bats, these stu kranzies are out of this world! What pro wouldn't use that bat?

[potzy248]

I've seen his Pro bats and they were much bigger than the off the shelf bats. As we know, Pros get the lowest density (Maybe over dried) willow so a 2.8 in their shape is far bigger and fuller in shape than an off the shelf bat. I agree with @procricket that some pro bats e.g. First class players bats don't look that good. Even some of KW's didn't look that good but will/should ping straight away. I'm fairly certain most Pro's don't get the same looks as some go the GM Players editions Ive seen or the UK legends because the brands know normal punters will pay big bucks for them.
That being said, if Kohli etc want the best looking and best performing then they will get them too.

I think my point was and it has been said that Pro's can use the off the shelf bats against the worlds best and the middles on them are still exceptional. The only difference would be the off centre shots in my opinion.

I did find it hard to believe that he didn't ask (Or maybe he did and was told no) his team mates who were sponsored by GM for one of theirs. Maybe the size and weight was too far off for him.

What ever the case I think its a good endorsement for GM and their bats...Apart from all the pros bats that broke last season 

[potzy248]

Or, Neesham?

Neesham's with Kookaburra.

[Biggie Smalls]

I think i want to change my name , via deed poll , to 'Pro' , or even 'Pro Bat' ...... then i can sell all my sticks ( even  buy and resell kashmir etc ) as legitimate,  authentic pro bats .   

[edge]

I don't find it a hard concept at all that if anything it is the pros who should/ would be least demanding about an individual bats ping/ rebound/ whatever you want to call it. Balance and feel to feel confident and relaxed  about the bat + skill are key I'd imagine

What always strikes me on the TV is how generic 90% of international players bats' profiles are. Some a bit fuller (Keaton Jennings is a nice convex it seems), some a bit duckbill, some spine to the toe, but almost all mid-ish middle and look pretty well balanced, nothing complicated. Yet us amateurs go wild for all the funny shapes!

[potzy248]

What always strikes me on the TV is how generic 90% of international players bats' profiles are. Some a bit fuller (Keaton Jennings is a nice convex it seems), some a bit duckbill, some spine to the toe, but almost all mid-ish middle and look pretty well balanced, nothing complicated. Yet us amateurs go wild for all the funny shapes!

Sort of agree but shapes have changed a lot over the last decade. You also have the Warner's, Lynn's, Dhoni's, shorted blade's etc so some different shapes and sizes. I think the biggest difference for the Pro's is the ability to hit off centre and they go better than a bat off the shelf, simply because of the fuller, bigger, lighter profile. Plus as has been said the golf greens they play on. How many times do you see a slow mo shot of the bat twisting in the batsman's hands only for it to slam into the rope.

[Gingerbusiness]

^ You got lucky.

Here is what I am reading so far: grading system as we know is upside down. Let's grade bats on ping / performance and save consumers from their innocence.

Kookaburra have been doing this but then people moan that they don't look like "pro" grade bats.

[smilley792]

Was told a story by a GM employee

They'd just signed Shane Watson. He sent his bat's specs for a bat to be made when he arrived at the factory for the England tour.

They banged a 404 graded cleft in to test weight and pick up.

Watson arrived. Waved it about, knocked a few balls and declared it perfect.

They said cool we'll run a few pro clefts through.

He said no! This bat's is perfect. And took the 404 with him, and apparently used it in the test arena for a few seasons.

[Neon Cricket]

Yeah I'd heard that too @smilley792 - pretty cool by all accounts!

In my opinion the whole 'pro bat' thing is all a bit of a myth. Any piece of willow pressed correctly should perform, regardless of the grade - I've been using a Grade 2/3 for the past 3 seasons and it's still the best bit of willow I've ever had (and that's compared to 'LE' grades etc).

[northernboy1987]

This has been a ridiculous argument. Of course the pros could score loads with a lower grade bat, that's why they're pro's and we're not, getting the pick of the willow is just a perk for them, if it was as easy as "get pro bat makes you play like a pro" then all the lads on here who have been gifted pro bats etc. would now be playing first class cricket or getting excited over an overseas tour rather than dreading playing against Wimbledon Wanderers 6th XI because apparently they've got a fella who bowls at 70mph.

Talent makes a pro, not the bat.