No Change in ASA Bat Standards
 

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>ASA Bat Performance Standard for 2013 for fast pitch
7/3/2012

</TD></TR><TR><TD><!--Put content below this line-->http://www.asasoftball.com/images/ot...tball_Logo.jpg

There will NOT be any changes for Certification Mark and Test Standard for all bats used in the game of ASA Fast Pitch Softball for the 2013 season.

The current 2000 and 2004 Certification Marks will continue to be the appropriate Marks for the Fast Pitch bats.

Any new models produced by the manufacturers will continue to display the 2004 Certification Mark for bats used in the game of Fast Pitch Softball for ASA.

Any questions or comments regarding this matter should be directed to Craig Cress at 2801 N.E. 50th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73111.



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

KR spoke at length in WAX two weeks ago about a new logo for 2013 and an actual change in standards due to a new 'formula' used. But then again CC has the trigger to pull. Oh well. :D

Known about what KR was speaking since April when CC shared the same info at a territorial meeting.

Nothing has changed that much except they will be using the 52/300 ball exclusively, but will still be as 98mph max on BES. Not sure, but I think they are changing the replicated bat speed due to the numbers they discovered during last year's on field testing.

thats what I got out of it as well. (a few 'hotter' bats may now pass the standard)

The change (the way KR explained it in WAX when I asked why the new logo) is due to the bat swing speed being lowered from 85 mph to 80mph after extensive testing. The ball speed of 98 won't change, therefore the bats can be a tad hotter now to make up the difference.

Surprising to me as well that CC didn't pull the trigger. Perhaps for 2014...

Apparently, this was discovered through the live testing using the Trackman.

Not sure which trigger to which gun you are referring, but none are CC's to pull without the direct of the BoD which usually involves concurence with the ETCC.

However, that was a prospective date previously noted for potentionally going exclusively to the 52/300

What is wax? Or better where is it?

Well, the way KR made it sound, the BoD and the ETCC already said "go"... and that it was going to happen as soon as CC blessed it and gave the green light.

Okay, sounds good. But there is often more consideration given than just saying "go".

For example, ASA does try to give manufacturer's an amount of time to sell down inventories. Contrary to some belief out there, the manufacturers are pretty much kept in the loop. If they ever say they got screwed by ASA, it was probably because someone wasn't listening.

For example, when the discussion of the 52/275, 52/300 ball became serious in committee, one of the first questions was directed toward the mfg. reps as to how long it would take to exhaust their inventory of 44/375 to which a couple immediately responded "18 months". When that was stated, you could pretty much bet the house that the 52/300 would not be mandated for at least two years. Looks like it is going to be longer, but I understand that is because the ETCC wanted more "science" behind any move in that direction.

OTOH, when facemasks became mandatory for batting helmets, on mfg. rep stood up in the ETCC meeting and stated that they wanted ASA to back off the mandate for a year because they were not ready. The chair asked other reps if their companies were prepared and all stated they were and some even had the NOCSAE approved masks on the shelf already. The rep then stated they needed more time because THEY wanted to manufacture their mask to a safety level higher than the standard. That didn't work and the ASA moved ahead with the rule.

I can only think that the FP game is remaining the same because there will be no change in the ball. Meanwhile, maybe they are waiting to "pull the trigger" based upon how many 2000/2004 certified bats are being offered for the new testing. I believe under the plan, any model not offered for testing will be added to the non-approved list and that really doesn't need to be any longer than it is.

SRW,
didn't KR mention something about Utrip bat standards making a huge change in 2013? Something like 'all utrip bats will have to have the 2013 utrip stamp, and that any older bats would not be legal or grandfathered in' Did I hear that correctly? (or was I dreaming of another 'Wild Bill' story! :D

TRUE

Except I'm sort of confused by the way the dates are noted on here.

Easton (and every other bat MFG loves this! :rolleyes:

A lot of talk for something that DIDN\'T change. It was good for ASA to give us a 1/2 notice for something that ISN\'T changing. That way I can prep for the 2013 test...

Hey, I know it great to use initials and/or acronyms to shorten the lengths of the posts but if someone has to ask what "Wax" meant, just say\'n?