Would you allow it? (ASA)
 

Would you allow the Zapper III, pictured below? It's the 6th bath from the left.

http://i74.servimg.com/u/f74/14/64/64/18/collec10.jpg

My vote? I see no reason not to allow it.

The Axe Handle?
 

Its a legal bat.

Are you sure it was manufactured prior to 2000? :D

Just kidding, of course...

Explain to me why the crooked handle is necessary.

That Easton directly to the right of it isn't legal. I think I saw that bat used over 20 years ago! I guarantee it doesn't have an ASA stamp on it!

So if it's 20 years old, what's the problem?

I used to use this bat in baseball some 20+ years ago. At least this handle. I don't think it helps a mature ball player - but for the younger ones it kind of forces your hands to break the wrist at the right moment and gives the end of the bat more batspeed than you'd have gotten naturally.

Once you learn to break the wrists naturally, it actually just feels uncomfortable.

Prior to 2000
 

It doesn't have to have a stamp on it if it is made prior to 2000. It only has to, in the sole judgment of the umpire, pass if tested by today's standards.

This is the baseball version of Baden Axe Handle. It is the same on the softball bat.

http://images.justbats.com/images/pr...1-axem271b.jpg

The Zapper was used by many who pulled the ball too much. Some tried to use it to force a pull hit, but that didn't work to well.

It is believed that it helps the batter to hit a curved ball.:D

From what I remember when those first came out (early-mid 80's?) the bent handle was supposed to have something to do with changing the geometry of the pivot point or moment arm and that was supposed to let the batter create more torque or leverage.

For you guys that live in snowy climes, it's the same principle behind those curved handled snow shovels you see today.

I tried to hit with one once...never again
 

Almost broke my wrist.

I believe it was designed much like axe handles. You are supposed to be able to get more torque.

Really. Well, live and learn. Guess I can break out the old Freak '98 in the closet. :)

Is that an ASA only rule in regards to bats made prior to 2000? I don't do ASA, just NFHS and USSSA. NFHS rule 1-5-1d states:

"The bat shall meet the 2004 ASA Bat Performance Standard, bear either the 2000 or 2004 certification mark, and not be listed on the ASA non-approved bat list."

I don't see an exception for bats made prior to 2000 in the NFHS rulebook.

Only ASA. NFHS has always applied the ASA bat certification more strictly than ASA has, ironically enough.

The Original Freak, while bearing the 2000 stamp, is on the non approved list. The Freak '98 is still approved.

In ASA play, while the bat does not need to bear either certification seal, if it doesn't, it must be manufactured prior to 2000. Any composite bat would not be allowed, as the first composite bat (The Miken Ultra) was introduced into the market in 2002 (thus creating the first certification mark).

I am unaware of USSSA's rule involving certification.

See about what Dakota says about the Fed and certification seals. PIAA (the governing body for PA scholastic sports) is even more stringent, as we only allow bats with 2004 certification (and not be on the non approved list).

For the sake of newbies and anals, " it must be manufactured prior to 2000" ITUJ who also judges it to pass testing, as all we know about before 2000 would.