Sotball Bats

[Steve M]

Mike,
I could not agree more - a bad hitter is a bad hitter no matter what kind of bat is used. And a hard linedrive hitter becomes deadly with the technology of today's bats. I suspect that I'd have hurt somebody using today's bats. Using wooden bats in baseball, I hit the ball out of Three Rivers Stadium twice and a tore the glove from a third baseman playing even with the bag.

Steve M

Originally posted by IRISHMAFIA

Just personal opinion, but if the player doesn't know how to hit, these bats do little for them. The danger comes when you have players who know how to swing the bat. Part of the problem is some programs are so small, you have a mix of good/mediocre/bad players all in the same leagues and that is where people are getting hurt.

[/B]

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by ump57006
If ASA doesn't use the 1.2 BPF; what testing standard do we use?? Please explain if you know.

thanks,
van
uic
brookings, south dakota

I would have had that for you a couple of years ago in printed format, but that is long gone.

ASA conducts their own test(s) on submitted equipment. The original standards were along the line of the ball leaving the bat and travelling at approximately 125' per second.
I do not know if that has ever been adjusted.

However, if you check ASA Rule 3.1, A-O, you will not see any mention of any BPF or the level of 1.2.

Thanks,

[kssa]

A team in our league in jersey starting using the Miken Ultra bat. I have never seen the ball travel so far. Their were over 10 balls hit over 300ft. this team has a lot of big guys but some of the average players were hitting the ball just as far as the big guys. It must be the bat.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

I hate to do this..........but here is a list of approved bats...............

Edited for brevity...........

Here is the link.........

Joel

http://www.softball.org/umpires/getM...urerDetail.asp



[Edited by Gulf Coast Blue on Jul 26th, 2002 at 07:31 PM]

[IRISHMAFIA]

Joel,

I think providing the link would have been a bit easier.

Also, your list is incomplete as any bat manufacturered prior to 1995 which an umpire believes would have passed the bat certification test is also legal, but not necessarily on the list.

[Gulf Coast Blue]

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh...........but only for this year...........we think............or maybe not.........but maybe next year.........I hope.........or maybe not.........heck...........I don't know..........

All I know is that I have a couple of darn good bats (that I guarantee would pass the ASA standard) 1 of which was NOT allowed in FED ball this year and the other may/may-not have been allowed if my youngest would have gone on to championship play...........

BUT........you are correct...........I was being an @ss and should be chastised............grin

I have edited the post accordingly..........

Joel

[Steve M]

ASA's doggone list. I know it's expensive to replace the bats, but ASA got gutless this year with the list. I think we should commend the way the Fed handled this - no seal on the bat means the bat is not legal period. I really do not want the responsibility of deciding whether or not a bat would have met the standard. I could probably accept dealing with that list again, but take this third acceptance critereon away.

Steve M

[IRISHMAFIA]

Originally posted by Steve M
ASA's doggone list. I know it's expensive to replace the bats, but ASA got gutless this year with the list. I think we should commend the way the Fed handled this - no seal on the bat means the bat is not legal period. I really do not want the responsibility of deciding whether or not a bat would have met the standard. I could probably accept dealing with that list again, but take this third acceptance critereon away.

Steve M

No argument from me and I've told every ASA official I know the exact same thing for the past year.

The Fed held by the rule and did fine.