krunchyfrogg
It's all in the reflexes
Check out the WrapTech. I've never seen or heard of this!
Ever hear of a 2001 ASA stamp?
- Thread starter krunchyfrogg
- Start date
jrock2033
Worth Huer
Check out the WrapTech. I've never seen or heard of this!
gotta be a typo.
krunchyfrogg
It's all in the reflexes
Not a recert.
eolivares1976
LA Lawmen
It's worth RD money with that stamp ijs
bigcraig
when in doubt, mumble
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
Unfortunately, this is not reflected in the rule book. By rule, if the bat was not manufactured prior to the year 2000, it must have either an ASA 2000 or ASA 2004 stamp.
Last edited:
kountrykennels
Member
ive seen it now!!!
krunchyfrogg
It's all in the reflexes
Krunchy -
Based on what TB said, you ought to hang onto it and pass it down to your heirs. 100 years from now it'll probably be worth some big money.
Haha, I don't know about that man.
Taking offers.
krunchyfrogg
It's all in the reflexes
MachoBarracho
Hispanic causin' Panic
Thats what I think, I had a R&D PST that had to be recertified so that I could use it in ASA leagues.
jaj23
Eye Baller
So if the ASA required the 2001 stamp and then rescinded that requirement after a short period of time, the bat is not legal... sounds silly to me.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
At the time, the rule was written differently, and the bat could have been allowed under different circumstances. However, in 2009, the wording of the rule changed, which means that the bat would no longer be allowed.
In looking at the ASA Approved Bat list, the Anderson Wraptech does appear on the list as an approved bat. However, that only satisfies half of the rule, leaving the other half of the rule's requirements unmet.
I'll bounce this off of someone in the equipment committee to see what his take is on it. I'll admit I'm a little curious for my own reference.
BigBL87
29 oz, you say?
Dude, don't you know, he's on a one man crusade against metal! Anybody that can hit worth a darn swings composite!
krunchyfrogg
It's all in the reflexes
You suck!
BigBL87
29 oz, you say?
Ya, I should just quit and take up golf...
MachoBarracho
Hispanic causin' Panic
Exactly, you have to remember this was before the days of different bats for different leagues. This was the first of the ASA and USSSA having different standards.
Worth inserted a rod into the handle to make it ASA legal. I always wanted to take it out, the bat was still smoking hot just weighted different. It was a huge waste of time, money and effort.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
As suspected, the word is that any bat with a 2001 stamp is not to be allowed for use in ASA Championship Play. ASA has only 2 certification stamps: ASA 2000 and ASA 2004.
BigShep
Who's Your Daddy!
That sounds like the dumbest thing I've heard this month.
You're saying that ASA had their ASA 2000 standard. Then they decided on a more restrictive (supposedly safer standard). Then they decided not to use it, and now it's not allowed ... but the ASA 2000 standard bats are???
So a manufacturer who complied too readily is penalized ... and the players holding those bats?
That's just plain dumb. Sounds like a lawyer got involved somewhere here.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
That sounds like the dumbest thing I've heard this month.
You're saying that ASA had their ASA 2000 standard. Then they decided on a more restrictive (supposedly safer standard). Then they decided not to use it, and now it's not allowed ... but the ASA 2000 standard bats are???
So a manufacturer who complied too readily is penalized ... and the players holding those bats?
That's just plain dumb. Sounds like a lawyer got involved somewhere here.
The impression I got was that Anderson "jumped the gun" on the 2001 stamp, not ASA.
NCASAUmp
Un-Retired
A slight clarification
I shouldn't point the finger solely at Anderson, as I wasn't there. However, here's what I do know.
In 2000, ASA created the bat certification that tested bats and their performance fresh out of the wrapper. ASA very soon realized that composite bats, fairly new to a sport that was previously dominated by single and doublewalls, had a break-in period that would far exceed the 98 MPH standard.
As such, ASA wanted to account for this, but their contracts with the manufacturers didn't state that they could test "used" bats. A number of manufacturers didn't take too kindly to this change, so ASA decided to work on a new certification, later to become the ASA 2004 certification.
It's possible that this 2001 stamp shown below was done in anticipation of a new certification, but that certification was never ratified until much, MUCH later (ie., 2004).
So when I was talking about "jumping the gun," that's what I was referring to: the anticipation of a certification that was never ratified.
I shouldn't point the finger solely at Anderson, as I wasn't there. However, here's what I do know.
In 2000, ASA created the bat certification that tested bats and their performance fresh out of the wrapper. ASA very soon realized that composite bats, fairly new to a sport that was previously dominated by single and doublewalls, had a break-in period that would far exceed the 98 MPH standard.
As such, ASA wanted to account for this, but their contracts with the manufacturers didn't state that they could test "used" bats. A number of manufacturers didn't take too kindly to this change, so ASA decided to work on a new certification, later to become the ASA 2004 certification.
It's possible that this 2001 stamp shown below was done in anticipation of a new certification, but that certification was never ratified until much, MUCH later (ie., 2004).
So when I was talking about "jumping the gun," that's what I was referring to: the anticipation of a certification that was never ratified.