swells9232 wrote:So dd xeno, that she got at Christmas, was taken out of tournament play this weekend. I questioned the uic who said xenos break at a higher rate, therefore they inspect them more, therefore find more problems because that is what they are looking for. Anyone else see a bias with this? I saw 3 bats impounded and all 3 were xenos. ASA qualifiers in Fontana. They shake the hell out of it and say there is a "wobble".
Of course everyone affiliated with ASA stated there were not any bias, but wouldnt answer how many bats get impounded and how many are xenos.
Confusing
If you thought of this as a safety check, instead of thinking about it was YOUR bat, this would make all the sense in the world. It is only logical that the safety check would match how a bat breaks down.
The older Anderson bats had rivet issues; umpires checked for loose rivets. Metal bats dent and deform out of round, composite bats do not; so metal bats are checked for that more than composite bats. Metal bats hit against steel cleats get sharp edges and burrs; they are checked for that. Composite bats split and crack (especially after being rolled!!); they are checked for that. Bats with joints (Stealth, Synergy, Xeno, Torq) tend to weaken at the joint; they are checked for that evidence of breaking down.
This is the same as your family doctor looking for a family medical history to help identify what he should be screening for or against. A history of heart disease gets more and special tests; a history of breast cancer may suggest more frequent chest x-rays. Do you / did you smoke? Hereditary and genetic diseases and factors are strongly considered in any good health exam. Would you consider that a "bias"?