http://seniorsoftball.com/?page=12

 
SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

Message board   »Message Board home    »Sign-in or register to get started

Online now: 1 member: Hitemdeep; 29 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: Ultra II Beyond 2005

Posted Discussion
Jan. 3, 2005
Gumper
10 posts
Ultra II Beyond 2005
Gentlemen: I would like to start a "grass roots" campaign to encourage all senior softball players, who are in agreement with me, to write or call Terry Hennessy telling him that you want SS-USA to continue the use of the Miken Ultra II's in all of their tournaments AFTER the year 2005. The Ultra II is why we play in SS-USA's tournaments. It is their biggest single reason they have such a good draw of teams to their tournaments. The "overlap" of the 60's division at the 2004 nationals [SS-USA vs LVSSA] is a classic example of where teams will and want to go for tournaments. Please let Terry know your feelings about this issue ASAP.
Jan. 3, 2005
metrojim33
9 posts
i agree with gumper. we pay to play, we should dictate what rules we want to play by.
Jan. 3, 2005
einstein
Men's 50
3114 posts
Right on, Gumper.
What's Hennessy's email address so we can get in touch with him?
Jan. 3, 2005
armyho211
Men's 60
52 posts
i agree with you guys, we need to vote here on this post, emails are hidden, we need to show everybody, senior players and associations that we want to keep the ultra ii beyound 2005. if the associations are concerned about injuries, i think the ULTRA II and a good .44 core 375 minimum compression ball would be acceptable to the senior players. LETS VOTE HERE ON THIS POST AND SHOW EVERYBODY HOW WE REALLY FEEL , THIS MIGHT BE OUR LAST SHOT! """"'VOTE HERE!""""VOTE YES TO KEEP IT BEYOUND 2005!
Jan. 3, 2005
Walk
192 posts
I agree with you guys that the bat should be allowed so I vote to keep it.
Walk
Jan. 4, 2005
Gumper
10 posts
The email address for SS-USA use frand@seniorsoftball.com This is a very important matter for all of us who want the Ultra II to remain in the game into the future. Needless to say Miken would appreciate it and I have to assume SS-USA would to as it puts their organization at the top of all senior softball organizations. Gumper
Jan. 4, 2005
Contrails
5 posts
It is the number one choice of bats for all the senior players. I agree. Let's keep what the players want to use, the Miken II
Jan. 4, 2005
ZEEMAN
6 posts
I agree with gumper 100%. We pay to play so we should have a say in the matter. I vote yes.
Jan. 4, 2005
dannydan
43 posts
i vote yes
Jan. 4, 2005
BruceinGa
Men's 60
2667 posts
I vote yes.
I also think that only pitcher should be allowed to vote.
Jan. 4, 2005
curveball
Men's 65
400 posts
In answer to BruceinGA as a pitcher I vote yes for sure.
Jan. 4, 2005
DMac
Men's 60
185 posts
I vote yes and I don't even use a Miken.
Jan. 4, 2005
Fred Scerra
Men's 80
542 posts
After our League Meeting tonight which voted to ban the Ultra's I would say not to extend them past this year. The deciding factor in the vote was the story of 1 of our players who plays in Florida had his ankle shattered with a hit from an Ultra II which required major surgey and the story of a good friend of his that lost a lower leg after getting a line shot off his leg from an Ultra II.
Jan. 4, 2005
Wally World
2 posts
I totally agree, let them change the balls and leave our bats alone, we pay a lot of money for them, get used to them, so let us keep what we have. Another nice thing about the Miken is it lessons the shock for guys who have arthritus in their arms and hands, hence another good reason to vote for keeping this bat...
Jan. 5, 2005
Fred Scerra
Men's 80
542 posts
we are down to 375's now how much lower do you to go just so a few players with big egos can use their Ultra's.

I think that if you ask players do you want to restrict the bat and use a good ball or use and ball with a low compression ball I think that most players would take the better ball over the bat.
Jan. 5, 2005
socal52
Men's 50
12 posts
Sorry to hear about the player who got hurt.. but playing softball for over 30 + yrs freak accidents happen be it with a loose bag,sprinkler, errant throw or a batted ball and I seen my fill and experianced them all it seems. but to blame a certain bat? not logical.. let the players swing all bats rated 1.2 if you paid the money than you have the right to swing it.. I vote yes on the ultra 2 or any other rated bat that someones hard earned money paid for.
Jan. 5, 2005
curveball
Men's 65
400 posts
Fred Scerra-I also am sorry to hear of a softball brother getting injured. You know these guys, do they have the talent to field the ball cleanly without injury?
Are you saying they would have caught the same hit ball if the batter had been using a Crush or a Demarini for example? Every accident has it's set of circumstances , and in this case we are only given the results.


. As far as balls hit to infielders, there isn't a noticible difference in speed of "shots" off great hitters bats no matter what bat they use. Sometimes you have to take into consideration the ability of the fielder vs. the ability of the batter. I guess what I'm asking in such a roundabout manner is, "do you believe the fielders would have made the plays they got injured on if the batters were using any other bat"?
Jan. 5, 2005
Robert
Men's 50
64 posts
Speaking for our team11out of 13 would go with the Miken in tournament games.
YES FOR 2006!
Jan. 5, 2005
Fred Scerra
Men's 80
542 posts
Knowing one of the players involved I would say yes. From all that I have read over the last couple of years was the big advantage of the Ultra's was the speed of the ball off the bat. I seem to remember somewhere that they were tested at 114 MPH of the bat way faster than any other bat. I really don't care how far you hit the ball but I am concerned on how fast the ball comes of the bat. If it isn't the speed of the ball going through the infield than what is the advantage of the Ultra over other bats?
Jan. 5, 2005
Dana22
Men's 55
16 posts
i vote yes!
Jan. 5, 2005
Gumper
10 posts
Gentlemen keep up the good work making your thoughts known about continued use of the Ultra II. This is a follow up to my original posting.
Jan. 6, 2005
cpope
Men's 60
160 posts
My vote is Yes
Jan. 6, 2005
jah#4
Men's 55
551 posts
I vote yes also, I pitch in the winter National in Fla. the ball come by me as I waved at them on there way to the outfield just like the PST's and the other bats. If don't or not able to field your poistion you should be able to dance like me.
Jan. 6, 2005
Lefty
Men's 65
485 posts
I agree with you guys that the bat should be allowed so I vote to keep it.
Jan. 6, 2005
Duke
Men's 60
720 posts
If Ultra II is elimated or any other bat, then I will play somewhere else.
Jan. 6, 2005
DocRock
Men's 65
3 posts
Gentlemen, I think you ought to be able to hit whatever you want with whatever you have!
Jan. 6, 2005
einstein
Men's 50
3114 posts
I broke bones in my hands from batted balls before Ultra 2's and not since.
And importantly as G Tryhorn has said
using Ultra 2's tends to keep illegal bats from being made and used.

Also, infielders adjust by playing deeper and the 6 foot box extending back from the pitching rubber should be universal which will keep defenders from getting bonked.
Jan. 6, 2005
T-REX
64 posts
NO...the speed is to much and playing at night,is dangerous,I still have a bruise from july,in a day game.guys that hit home runs are going to hit home runs,defense is not just a place to stand until its your turn to hit...
Jan. 7, 2005
KillAbrew
Men's 60
55 posts
I just cringe at agreeing to anything that GT has ever said. But I want the Ultra II's to stay.
Jan. 7, 2005
riflearm13
Men's 60
3 posts
I say, let us use the bats that we are accustomed to, such as the Ultra 11, and change the balls if necessary.
Jan. 7, 2005
ssalt
Men's 70
9 posts
I'm old (play Major + 65s), I'm a pitcher and I want the Ultra II to be legal forever. I vote yes. However, the problem with the Ultra II is that it is so good that Easton, Worth etc. have lost a lot of business (read $$) and they pay TDs and senior organizations to outlaw the Ultra II (of course I don't really know this for a fact, it just seems logical).
Jan. 8, 2005
DoubleL10
Men's 65
833 posts
ssalt- You hit the nail on the head. When the Ultra and Ultra II came out, they were THE bats to have and the other bat mfg. lost a LOT of market share. They were not going to allow another DeMarini situation so they banded together and got the Mikens outlawed THEN came out with their own composite bats.

Our Senior League in Houston still allows the Ultra II and some of the "Bar-B-Que" tournaments we have for Seniors in Texas still allow the Ultra I! I think it's the Texas Softball Association...

Anyway, I vote to keep the Ultra II.

Jan. 8, 2005
batter4u
Men's 65
77 posts
I vote yes to keeping the UtraII, and every one have a safe and enjoyable 05
Jan. 8, 2005
sjuhoops
123 posts
ultra ll forever
Jan. 9, 2005
Contrails
5 posts
There will always be some sort of injuries no matter what equipment we are using. If not batted balls, running or sliding or fences or what ever. We can't avoid every possible injury. It is unfortunate but injuries do occur. The sentiment is that the highest percentage of players would like to keep the Ultra II. I am in favor of keeping the Ultra II.
Jan. 9, 2005
Joncon
289 posts
I vote no because I am an arguementative honery old coot!
Jan. 11, 2005
bandylegs5
Men's 55
6 posts
YES. Hennessy himself said that the SSUSA pole/study showed "no difference in injury rate between metal and composite bats" so there goes the safety argument.Yes balls move faster so it makes the defensive part of the game even more important. Fred S--there are lots of other organizations that have Sr. tournaments you can play in--that way you won't have to face the Ultra 2 and the vast MAJORITY of players with, as you said, "big egos" who prefer to use the bat. Thanks to SSUSA for allowing the game to evolve towards what the players want. RB 55MAJ+
Jan. 12, 2005
The Pro
81 posts
I have lost faith in the fact that anyone in power gives a rat's rear end what the players think anymore, but for what it's worth and to no one's surprise I strongly support the continued use of the Ultra II, regardless of the core/compression of the ball. Anyone who still thinks the banning of the Ultra was EVER about safety is delusional.
Jan. 12, 2005
mzb 11
1 posts
I HAVE OBSERVED AND PLAYED IN MANY TOURNAMENTS SINCE THE MIKEN 1 & 2 HAVE COME ON THE MARKET. MY OBSERVATION IS THAT THE OLDER THE GROUP THE LESS HOMER/HARD HIT BALLS THERE ARE. I AM CURRENTLY PLAYING 65 AND WITH THE 44/375 BALLS THAT ARE BEING USED THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE. IN A DEC. TOURNAMENT IN MENIFEE THE 60 YEAR GROUP, HIT MORE OVER THE FENCE IN 1 GAME THAN THE 65 HIT IN THE TOTAL TOURNAMENT. I PERSONALLY VOTE TO KEEP THE LOWER BALLS AND THE MIKEN 2.
Jan. 12, 2005
Bat-Heater
Men's 50
64 posts
I think if you use bats that follow the USSSA guidelines and a good ball you don't need the Ultra or original Synergy. However, I don't pitch so don't really care one way or the other.
Jan. 12, 2005
Steve
Men's 55
24 posts
I agree with T-Rex. As a pitcher there is a little more danger with those bats. Those who can hit homeruns can do so with the other bats. They don't need the extra POP. In .2 seconds the ball is on you. Move the bases back and lets get some defense.
Jan. 12, 2005
Mitch
Men's 50
68 posts
To Fred Scerra, I watched one of our players get hit with a ball so hard in the face that it knocked him out and when he fell, he broke one of his ankles. He was in the hospital for a week or two and rehab after that.
The only difference between the injuries you referred to and the one I'm talking about here is that in this case, the ball was "thrown" by the shortstop to second base and he accidently hit our player in the face.
Does this mean we should ban shortstops???
Jan. 13, 2005
KillAbrew
Men's 60
55 posts
Mitch you are right on. All SS's and OF's with good arms must be banned immediately.
Jan. 15, 2005
william wallace
42 posts
keepthebat!!!!!
Alba gu bra
William Wallace
Jan. 15, 2005
ssalt
Men's 70
9 posts
Letés simplify this thing about bats and injuries to players. The player most at risk of injury because of a batted ball is the pitcher (heés the closest to the batter). I donét know how fast a batted ball comes off a bat but I am assuming for this analysis it is in the 100 mph range.

If a ball comes off the bat at 100 miles/hour it is traveling at a rate of 146.667 feet/second and thus (assuming no reduction in speed because of wind resistance) will travel the 60 to the pitchers plate in 0.409 seconds. If the pitcher is standing 5 feet behind the pitchers plate when the ball is hit (thus 65 feet from home plate) the ball will reach him in 0.443 seconds which is a difference of .034 seconds or (expressed differently) an increase of 8.3% in his allowable reflex time to catch or get out of the way of the ball.

If the ball comes off the bat at a speed of 110 miles an hour (a theoretical 10% increase due to a superior bat) it would travel at a rate of 161.334 feet/second and would reach the pitchers plate in .372 seconds and 5 feet behind the pitchers plate in 0.403 seconds, still an 8.3% difference.

All this fuss and bother about bats (and assuming the Ultra II is 10% better than any other bat) equates to a reduction in the roughly 0.40 second time the pitcher has to react by about 0.03 seconds. Further, by allowing the pitcher to stand (and of course, move back from) a point 5 feet behind the pitchers plate, his allowable reaction time is increased by roughly the same as the decrease in time due to the superior bat (0.409 seconds. vs. 0.403 seconds). So it appears that the recent pitching rule change allowing the pitcher to pitch from up to 6 feet behind the pitchers plate was all that was needed in rules tinkering to get away from all this bat controversy.

How much better is one bat from another in terms of the speed of the ball coming off the bat? I donét know. Can anyone tell me the relative speed the balls come off the various legal bats in use today? Even if my assumptions of speed used here are not correct, the percentage differences in reaction time for a bat with 10% superior bat speed will still hold true and thus the reaction time differences will hold true also.

I still vote ∑ keep the Ultra II legal forever!
Jan. 15, 2005
armyho211
Men's 60
52 posts
guys, almost 3000 players have viewed this thread, BUT ONLY 45 reponses have been posted, does this mean they dont care,one way or the other? or they are not registered, (IT'S FREE!) just visiting? i really thought we would get more of a response to this. we ar not showing the association leaders that we are serious about keeping this bat legal, even it' its only in SSUSA. very simple: YES OR NO.
Jan. 16, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
armyho211, I vote to keep the U2. I love it! I would like to keep the U1, also. I, like many of the 3000 readers, agree, but we just didn't bother to answer. I think the % is way up there. Also, if we view this site more than once, does that count as part of the 3000? Maybe it isn't 3000 DIFFERENT readers, just 3000 viewers.
Jan. 16, 2005
crusher
Men's 70
395 posts
armyho211...
About many views and few response's.
I really love the U-II. Greatest bat ever used.
Why I have not said something until your post is...I do not own a U-II..
So, it is not vital to me.
Believe me though, if I get the chance to get one in my hand at a tournament that allows them, the U-II is the bat of choice.
Because the majority of players do not own a U-II may be the reason response is so small.
Crusher
Jan. 16, 2005
Cobrapilot
Men's 50
27 posts
I am one of the 3000, and I just did not get around to responding till now. I do feel this is an important issue and hope that the remaining 3000 also get around to it.

I vote "YES" that we do keep the MIken Ultra II and keep it well pass the 2005 season.

Jan. 16, 2005
Proudtex40
57 posts
I vote that the Ultra II should be legal if the following recommendations are also adopted:
1. Move the bases to 70'.
2. If the ball is touched by the pitcher then the batter is automatically out and runners can't advance. Belive this would keep batters from using the pitcher as a target (although I don't believe batters truly target the pitcher to injure them.)
Just my wee thoughts.
Jan. 16, 2005
BillyMac
Men's 55
91 posts
Player Advisory Board at Senior Summit recommended ASA batted ball speed test should be used for bat specs. (98mph) across the board (terrible, IMO). Safety was main issue. Very poor cross section of players in 12 man board. 3 major+, 1 major, & 8 AAA/AA. 4 pitchers & 1 ASA official, who had a lot to do with the decision. 11 to1 (me) carried vote. I also believe that this particular recommendation will carry absolutely no weight with
exchanging hands, so don't worry.
peace
Hit To WIN!!!!!!!!

B Mac
Jan. 16, 2005
BillyMac
Men's 55
91 posts
sorry, that post should have read

Player Advisory Board at Senior Summit recommended ASA batted ball speed test should be used for bat specs. (98mph) across the board (terrible, IMO). Safety was main issue. Very poor cross section of players in 12 man board. 3 major+, 1 major, & 8 AAA/AA. 4 pitchers & 1 ASA official, who had a lot to do with the decision. 11 to1 (me) carried vote. I also believe that this particular recommendation will carry absolutely no weight with way too much bat company $$$$$ exchanging hands, so don't worry.
peace
Hit To WIN!!!!!!!!
Jan. 17, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
Proudtex40, They could just put a pitching screen 5-15 feet in front of the pitcher. If it hits the screen, you could play it as a dead ball or an out, whatever the players prefer. They are doing this in some leagues.
Jan. 17, 2005
BillyMac
Men's 55
91 posts
Skins6...the screen was discussed at the summit, and voted down.
peace
B Mac
Jan. 17, 2005
BruceinGa
Men's 60
2667 posts
I'm glad the screen was voted down, it would change the game too much.
Jan. 17, 2005
jah#4
Men's 55
551 posts
I agree the screen would make to big of a change in softball
Jan. 17, 2005
stever
Men's 65
62 posts
I agree with the idea we, as players, should let our opinions be known. I DO NOT agree that we have the right to dictate rules because we pay association fees. If we don't like the rules, play in another organization. That being said, I am for keeping the Ultra II. I have yet to see ANY statistics that has shown an increase in injury from the Ultra II over other bats. Everything I have seen has been opinion and supposition. I believe the absence of proof, and the fact that the majority seems to overwhelminly enjoy the Ultra II's,
should be considered in the decision.
Jan. 17, 2005
Proudtex40
57 posts
I wouldn't be in favor of the screen, but I still believe batters would stay away from the middle a little more (and hit the pitcher less) if it was an automatic out. Of course if I were King for a day, I would let the seniors play real softball like we use to and not create rules to please a few people.
Jan. 18, 2005
Duke
Men's 60
720 posts
I pitch in the 50's and 55's AAA division. In 30 years of pitching, I have been hit only 3 times, all on the shins. Three points I want to express. One is that it only hurt for 4 months, and I still pitch from the closest point on the field to maintain my accurate pitching. If you cannot field your position as you get older(due to slower reflexes, not a bat), then play another position and move back, AND invest in a football uniform. Lastly, all 3 times that I was hit was in my 20's with a wooden bat, never hit by a Miken Ultra II, YET!
Jan. 18, 2005
Donny
Men's 55
4 posts
I'm a pitcher, I've been hit by a batter using a Ultra ll, it hurts, I didn't catch it or get out of the way, my bad, Keep the Ultra ll in the game.
Jan. 18, 2005
Lefty
Men's 65
485 posts
Instead of getting rid of all the good bats let
the pitcher wear a light catchers mask and leg guards. We are not talking about alot of money.
Jan. 18, 2005
Proudtex40
57 posts
One of our pitchers last year has worn hockey shin guards for years. Some players may make fun of him, but he certainly hasn't been hurt since wearing them.
Jan. 18, 2005
Bobby L
Men's 55
29 posts
I`ve been pitching for over 30 years,10 in senior ball,and yes I`ve been hit more than once, but I vote yes keep the Mikens.We paid for them so let us use what we want to play with.
Jan. 19, 2005
stig 52
Men's 50
46 posts
The Ultra should be illegal. Everyone who has swung this bat knows it is hotter than any other bat and there is no way it passes any bat test legally. It is bad for the game when 90% of the players in a tournament use the same bat. When the Ultra is illegal there are differeny bats being used. This bat is not very durable and is expensive. The main reason players want to use this bat is because it makes them the home run hitter they have never been or will ever be. If they continue to use this bat we will be hitting 40 core or lower balls and it won't matter what bats are legal. We do not need composite bats in the game we need to use good balls.
Jan. 19, 2005
mad dog
Men's 60
3938 posts
keep the u-2,i've been pitching for 20 yrs and been hit only a couple of times all my own fault(aka misjudge it some how).so i say lets play ball.
Jan. 19, 2005
Robo2
223 posts
I vote to keep the Ultra II.
Jan. 19, 2005
william wallace
42 posts
my fellow warriorpoets I applaud your desire toexpress you opinion on this thread but please takeinto consideration what happen when the exempt player protest came about. The three kings voted tonot allow anyexempt players which was the exact opposite of what was asked.

it would then seemto me that they may allso do the samehere and gototallywith the asa batstandard. i forone donot know if i could bearit if we have to endure another wellthought out decision bythe threekings.
William Wallace
Jan. 19, 2005
The Pro
81 posts
William Wallace, tell me your kidding. There is no chance that the ASA bat standard will be unilaterally accepted by Senior Softball, right!? Say it isn't so!
Jan. 19, 2005
william wallace
42 posts
mr pro while this is just a rumor i have no doubt that if the three kings thought it is what the players did not want thenthey would doit. if it were mei would assumethis willsoon bea reality.

2005 u2 legal 2006 asa batstandards and crappysoftballs. yougot to loveit when theplayers aregiven what they want.
William Wallace
Jan. 19, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
Pitching screen: I'm not for the screen, but if the associations would let us use the U 2, then I am all for it. It would change the game, but I would accept the compromise to make the bat legal.
Jan. 20, 2005
Gumper
10 posts
Gentlemen: We all need to contact SS-USA by email [frand@seniorsoftball.com]regarding this issue to let TH know how important the Ultra ll is to the game. I firmly believe that he will listen and be swayed by our insistence on the continued use of THE bat. However, we need to let him know. This site has receive 4,000+ hits [Cobb & Rose] but not many have taken the time to go to the decision maker. PLEASE.
Jan. 20, 2005
SLUGGERS13
35 posts
I play monthly in Florida Half Century in the top bracket in "A" We use Ultra II with some of the top hitters in Florida with no increase in injurys since Ultras came about. I VOTE YES TO KEEP ULTRAS LEGAL. Ultras are the main reason we play SSWC and why we are going to Phoenix
Jan. 20, 2005
Gary Heifner
248 posts
Since all this U2 controversy began, I have been keeping count on pitcher injuries that I have seen in person. An injury is one that a game was stopped to see if he was OK. 19 times the ball came off an aluminum bat and 7 times off a Miken. The two times the pitcher left the game, the ball came off an aluminum. The other factor We have noticed is that when the U2 is used, there are significantly fewer balls hit up the middle. Yes, the U2 adds some distance. Because of that more players drive the ball. In the 1st tourney we played in after the U2 banning, "17" balls were hit up the middle by the two teams. Also, all this talk that senior singles hitters are bashing massive amounts of homeruns with the U2 is pure crap. I play with 8 accomplished singles hitters and not a one has come within 20 feet of the fence in the last four years. The U2 does make the outfielders play an honest depth. I hate tournies with dead balls and bats and the outfielders standing at 200-225 feet with no concern about getting burned. Terry and the guys have it right. The Nationls in vegas were great this year, Keep the U2.
Jan. 21, 2005
KillAbrew
Men's 60
55 posts
Very good point Gary. That is exactly what most of us that do pitch feel about the Ultra II. Many more middle shots in the Associations where it is not allowed. Most hitters do not bother going middle with the better bats.
Jan. 21, 2005
MrBill29
Men's 70
42 posts
MY VOTE IS FOR THE ULTRA ll.
IF YOU ARE AFRAID OF GETTING HURT STAY HOME AND WASH YOUR CAR
Jan. 21, 2005
Bat54
Men's 50
1 posts
Gary is right on the money. If I don't have an Ultra II in my hand, the middle is my game. Keep the U-II!
Jan. 21, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
Gumper, I finally got around to emailling SS-USA, and stating that I would love to keep the U2 legal.
Jan. 24, 2005
jah#4
Men's 55
551 posts
Gary make a good point and has followed the path of the ultra II. I feel the first 30 ft of a hit softball is very close to the same no matter what bat the player is using. The size of the hitter and his skill level has a lot to do with it also. When pitching I rather see a 160 lbs person hitting than a Bruce Meade type with the HR gone. just my 2 cent worth.
Jan. 24, 2005
salio2k
Men's 60
548 posts
I too vote to keep the U-2. If you're pitching, concentrate more or learn to dance.
Jan. 25, 2005
biggeorge
Men's 60
25 posts
Remember when 275' was ASA official distance? Remember when Bombats were spun aluminum and state of the art?
Remember when the wound core Dudley Red Stitch wouldn,t go out if the wind was blowing in? Remember when we fouled off 10 in a row so they'd throw in a new one? Remember when Gatti, and Meade were true homerun hitters and you weren't? Of course you do, you're all seniors and now everyone wants to hit homeruns. All these bats do is cheapen the word. I guess you can figure my vote.
Jan. 26, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
biggeorge, If the fences were all 275', and the batters could use an Ultra 2, do you think very few hitters would try to hit up the middle?...even if over the fence was a single or a double. That would make it a little safer for the pitchers.
Jan. 26, 2005
biggeorge
Men's 60
25 posts
I think if bats were spun aluminum and balls were truly restricted, nobody woyld be in danger except maybe some egos.
Jan. 26, 2005
biggeorge
Men's 60
25 posts
I think if bats were spun aluminum and balls were truly restricted, nobody would be in danger except maybe some egos.
Jan. 27, 2005
TexasTransplant
Men's 70
420 posts
biggeorge,

I'm afraid you're a voice crying in the wilderness on ths board, but I hear you.

Also, if bats were still made of spun aluminum they wouldn't cost so much.

If softball bats are supposed to cost $300, maybe we should call it golf.
Jan. 27, 2005
Skins6
Men's 65
34 posts
biggeorge and TexasTransplant, I loved playing fast pitch, but the scores of 1-0 & 2-1 killed the game. Everyone wanted more runs and to hit the ball, so everyone went to slow pitch. Please make some more comments. I want to hear your side of the story.
Jan. 27, 2005
biggeorge
Men's 60
25 posts
My daughter was a division 1 fast pitch player on scholarship. Going to her games and watching was a toutureous conveyance to say the least. Slow pitch is a hitter's game. We all know that. What is hitting? It's basically technique. Add strength and you have a homerun hitter. Meade, Gatti, Young, et al., could hit a rolled up sock out with a branch. They were truly special. What they did should be acknowledged as special. Nowadays, bats are designed for mediocre hitters to be able to hit state of the art balls 310 ft. on 300 ' fences. Gatti and Young can hit it 380', but since all home runs look the same in the scorebook, I say lets get back to the big hitters cranking it 320' and the weaker hitters becoming the long outs that they always have been. There are a million excuses why lots of homeruns are good and they are all based on ego. Simple test. When did you last hear a man admitting to being a bad lover or poker player? Easy solution. Any core ball and wooden bats or any type bat with wound core balls. Works either way. Game is fast, action filled, a hit every time and those with great technique like Meade, still hit em out.
Jan. 28, 2005
TexasTransplant
Men's 70
420 posts
skins6,

I don't think the fast pitch analogy is an accurate one. Slowpitch was an excitiging game before the Dimarini era, as it continues to be today.

My point is that the advent of high tech bats has brought on a sort of arms war, where guys feel pressured to have 2 - 3 $300 bats just to keep up with the Jones and stay competitive. While we buy more expensive bats to gain a competitive advantage, we get to hit significantly less lively balls as the organizations (correctly or not) strive for some kind of balance. It seems to me that, from a financial standpoint, it just makes more sense to hit a lively ball with a cheaper bat.

I enjoyed the game in the old days and continue to enjoy it today (well actually, not today, because I'm sitting here with my foot in a cast-not a bat related injury- while my buddies here in Texas are getting ready for a new season). I'm not going to quit playing because of the bats. They'll probably drag my body off a ballfield someday, But I could be just as happy with my old single wall Supercell and a good ball.

Have a great season!

TT

Jan. 28, 2005
crusher
Men's 70
395 posts
Hey TexasTransplant. Hope your foot gets ok by season time.

I really like the UII, however,
having a good ball is more important. As bats get worn out and the manufactures stop making the hotter bats then,
we are stuck with balls that are extremely limited in flight.
If we could keep good balls and decent bats people will not be playing at 225 in the outfield.

The cost to make a hot or cold ball is very little, does not cost me much to buy. A really good bat cost me $250 to $300 plus.

I do not want to get flamed here, just put more pressure from all players in all orgs AA,AAA,M and M+ to keep good balls so the game can stay exciting at all levels.
Hope everyone has a good season.

Crusher
Feb. 2, 2005
armiho211
Men's 70
410 posts
hopefully TERRY H has read read this thread and will push for us beyond 2005. ( i needed to bring this topic to the top, it is getting too far down! )
Feb. 12, 2005
abram
Men's 50
2 posts
ultra II TO TERRY HENNESSY I AGREE WITH ALL THE PLAYERS THAT WE SHOULD STAY WITH THE ULTRA II . AND USE A LOWER BALL , .44 CORE 37 MINMUM. I VOTE YES
Feb. 16, 2005
biggeorge
Men's 60
25 posts
.....learn to dance...stay home and wash the car...don't need the middle with ultra 11....all catchy little phrases to hide the testerone factor. If you need a certain bats to hit the long ball I got news, you're not a long ball hitter
Feb. 18, 2005
kosmala 13
Men's 55
6 posts
THE BAT ENERGIZED ME INTO CONTINUE PLAYING. IT GIVES MANY MARGINAL HITTERS ENOUGH POP TO HIT HOME-RUNS AND MAKE THE GAME MORE FUN FOR THEM. PEOPLE THAT HAVE NO POWER AT ALL, ARE THE PEOPLE AGAINST THE ULTRA.
Feb. 18, 2005
kosmala 13
Men's 55
6 posts
I VOTE KEEP THE BAT!
AND BIG GEORGE, IF A PLAYER SOMETIMES CAN HIT A HOME RUN, AND IT MAKES IT A SPECIAL MOMENT FOR HIM, THEN WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT SPECIAL MOMENT FROM HIM. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE GOOD POWER AND DO NOT NEED THE U2. IT'S NOT A MACHO THING AT ALL. IT'S ABOUT FUN.
Feb. 18, 2005
Burdman
20 posts
Last year in Fla Half Century a poll was taken and players voted to keep the U2 for 2005. Recently a player was seriously injured and, along with the numerous homeruns hit, the U2 ban contorversy has started again. While none of us likes to see fellow players injured, we all know the risks when we take the field. And if homeruns are taken away by any means, we will lower our sights and I believe more injuries will occur. In FHC we use a 44/375 ball and that seems to be acceptable for most players. Softball is a hitters game......keep the U2 and let us hit.
Feb. 19, 2005
hittnropes
Men's 50
2 posts
I'm in favor big time...why penalize a group of men who contribute financially (BIG BUCKS) to this wonderful game.
Feb. 20, 2005
Walk
192 posts
The last time I played against Bruce he used a U2. He is now retired but I played with and against Bruce in the 80' and 90's and he used the best equipment he could get. As did Bill G, Mike M and all of the super major boys. Most of our teams were sponsored by bat companies and thus we used the best bats available at the time. People like Bill G, Mike M., Bruce Meade and the rest did not bust their ass in the gym lifting weights to use crap equipment. They used the best they could get. Even Bruce's Bombat was made for him to his specs.

The worst injury I ever saw was the guy who was killed in FL in the late 70's by a line drive to the chest off a metal bat and what would be considered a dead ball by todays standards.

I can't use the U2 too balanced but those who have them should be allowed to use them until they are gone. They do not make them any more so it won't be long. JMHO
Walk
March 10, 2005
Gumper
10 posts
To Terry Hennesy: Here is a wealth information concerning the desire of players for the continued use of the Ultra II for years to come.

I myself would like an answer to the following question:

Is the Ultra II a "dead" issue in SS-USA after 2005?

It is inconceivable that the Ultra II is coming to the end of the road in tournament play in your yery respected organization. Please hear the plea of YOUR CLIENTELE.
March 10, 2005
Bat-Heater
Men's 50
64 posts
Keep the Ultra or any bat like it including a decent ball. If it makes players & teams better then perhaps more teams will be forced to move up a division or two?
March 10, 2005
mad dog
Men's 60
3938 posts
i'm in favor of using the u-ii's until they are gone,like walk said they aren't being made lets use them until there are non left.lets play ball.
jim nice to see u on here again.see ya in st george.
bob
March 14, 2005
avs
10 posts
I agree 100%. Keep the U2 and Synergy.
April 3, 2005
huggydabear
Men's 50
3 posts
the ASA bat specs are the only way to go for safety and to keep softball the game it was. Get off your egos guys and vote down these hot bats! I can hit a ball just as hard as I ever did and I sure don't want to hit a pitcher and kill him. You guys that want to hit those hot bats know one thing, it makes it a whole lot easier to hit that 12" ball through that 20 ' hole and your stats go up. As we get older we are suppose to get wiser not more egotistical. I don't get, what are some of you guys thinking? I Played for thirty something years and I sure ain't better than I used to be. Of course maybe I can practice with this equipment and change that. I wouldn't want to! So now I'll get off your board and get ready for church and maybe even say a prayer for you now instead of after you've been hit in the head with a 12" bullet off of some hot bat. Get a grip Boys! Now let the crap talking begin!
April 3, 2005
einstein
Men's 50
3114 posts
Huggy,
You sound like a nice enough guy.
But your comments are as egotistical as the "evil doers" you are currently talking about.
Pray for us?
Get off yourself.
Let the boys have some fun.
I haven't been hurt by a ball or seen a guy hurt by a ball since the Ultra's.
We're men.
Let us have our game.
We know what's good for us and don't need self serving "do rights" to tell us what to do.
I sure as heck don't.

April 3, 2005
Red del
Men's 55
34 posts
huggy
Why would you bring prayer into this?
If you have read the comments you would have noticed that we are all aware and for the Ultra 11
April 18, 2005
Contrails
5 posts
Over 6000 hits regarding the Ultra II and the positive percentages of posts are for the Ultra Ii. Is that telling us something? Is anyone listening? That is the bigger question.
April 19, 2005
coach4250
7 posts
I vote Yes! Yes! Yes!
April 20, 2005
KansasCo
8 posts
I vote yes
April 25, 2005
Proudtex40
57 posts
Isn't it great to live in a country where we have choices. My personal choice is to play softball and keep the U2 for those of you that have the desire to use it. If you are concerned about getting hurt, play another sport. I tried golf and got hit in the head with an errant ball. Too bad it was my own ball bouncing off of a tree that just happened to be to darn close to where I was standing. So, I'm sticking with softball 'cause it's less dangerous - at least to me. So many pitchers have pointed out that with the U2 fewer guys are going up the middle. Ok, just my wee thoughts again. Look forward to seeing all of you 50 plus guys this year. Best of luck to all.
Steve Shannon (Damon's)
July 14, 2005
Dusty
Men's 60
7 posts
My vote is to keep the U2 in 2006. Freak accidents not withstanding, since the 1.20 BPF has been in use, senior softball accident rates have gone down. The data seems to say keep the bats that meet this standard.
July 14, 2005
Rod
Men's 70
24 posts
It's a beautful bat why should I not use it. I vote yes.
July 15, 2005
Grommet
3 posts
Doesn't seem that long ago that some players were whining about double-wall bats being too dangerous, especially for seniors. Now you seldom even hear the term used anymore. Quietly, they've become safe bats for everyone, and all talk now centers on the Ultra II. I used the U2 for one year and hit 11 home runs-- ten more than I had hit any year before. I enjoyed that year immensely and still fantacize about what I was able to do with the help of "technology". There were no bat-related injuries in our 500-player senior day league. Miken users were going for the fences, not up the middle. Now, with our detuned bats and 325 ball, I have seen more close calls involving hot shots back through the mound. Given the opportunity, I would vote for continued use of the Miken Ultra II, but I do understand the feelings of the singles-hitting defensive specialists who play on the infield corners or on the mound.
July 18, 2005
Juno
11 posts

As a hitter I think it's a great bat, as a third baseman im not as thrilled but I could live with it ( hopefully ). Having said that, since they will not be making these bats any longer and many players will not be able to get one I think they will be at a huge disadvantage, I know we could say TS but I think that would be a bit selfish. So if they continue to make the bat I vote Yes, if they don't I vote no. Just my opinion.
Aug. 10, 2005
KansasCo
8 posts
I agree with you that we pay to play. We all bought the bats legal and I already aviod some of he tournament that don't allow it.
Bat rules are made by guys who can't hit the long ball and not for safety reasons. Put on a mask or don't play at that level if your afraid.
Aug. 10, 2005
Rocket
5 posts
Back in the 70's and the Bombat was the "Bat" We had guys modify the bat by making it longer. It weighed 44 ounces it was too heavy for me. My introduction to Miken was in 2001 and I loved the bat. In 2002 I bought an Ultra 11 after much arguing with my wife on the need for another bat. And then bam I could not use it in my leagues or other tourneys. I felt cheated out of that money but lo and behold their is one organization that still allows me to use it. Thank God. Its not just the flex that I like, Ilove the balance and feel which I cant find in any other bat. Mikens forever as far as i'm concerned.
Aug. 10, 2005
The Pro
81 posts
Thanks to Terry's lead the LVSSA has also approved the Ultra II for use in it's World Campionship play. They will also be using a 44/375 Decker "Shark" ball as the "official" ball for the World's.

Great bat, great ball and Las Vegas, who can ask for anything more in a World Tournament!
Aug. 10, 2005
BB205
Men's 65
9 posts
Yes,keep the Ultra-2.It is what keeps us going to SSUSA tournaments.
Aug. 11, 2005
JOHN BOB
Men's 60
76 posts
I vote Yes on Ultra ll.I really like the feel of the bat but the main reason is I belive some players are putting Freak decal's on Ultra ll's & using it when Ultra ll are not legal.
Aug. 11, 2005
Robo2
223 posts
I prefer to believe that most players do not cheat. However, when you see an individual using a Freak when UII's are allowed and there are several UII's on there team's rack; and when all of the players on one team are using only one bat when there are 10 leaning against the fence; then you begin to wonder. Allowing UII's would stop most of the cheating. Even though it is said that some individuals bore out some bats like the PST's.
Aug. 11, 2005
JOHN BOB
Men's 60
76 posts
It's a shame but there is always going to be some that cheat.I have seen Freak decal's for sell on Ebay so they are out there.Our team has played in 5 tournaments this year, in 2 ultra ll were legal & the hardest ball I had hit to me at 3rd base was in a SPA tournament hit by a mid size batter using a Freak bat.
Aug. 11, 2005
Robo2
223 posts
John Bob it ws in Plano that seven or eight players all used the same bat and it was a freak. They would hand it from one person to the next, even though there were other freaks on the rack. Was it doctored? I do not know, but it did make you think. Remember, SPA (Plano) also used a lively core ball - so if it was a doctored UII it wuld make sense that it was the hardest hit ball to you this year. All that aside, wan't that a well run tournament?
Aug. 11, 2005
ernieb
5 posts
Robo2 ! was not in Plano in July I play AAA will be going in Sept.Ridge always runs a real good tournament.I don't know for sure that Bat was a doctored Ultra ll,but ball got to me real quick.I know we'll be watching real close next month in Plano
Aug. 29, 2005
Paul P
Men's 65
44 posts
As a career first baseman, Im used to getting "hot shots" and think I field them fairly well. Every once in a while one gets thru the glove and bounces off my shin "ouch". I blame not the bat, nor the batter, nor the ball. I blame me. I enjoy using the Ultra II and will continue to do so as long as its still legal.
Aug. 29, 2005
Robo2
223 posts
As a thrid baseman, I agree the mistakes I make are mine and no excuses and I have made a few. I tip my hat to the batter for the hard hit balls. As a batter I want to continue to use the UII and I think all associations should make it legal. I believe the UII makes a distinct sound - a lot like cracking of an egg. Can anyone tell me if a Freak makes that same sound after it is broken in? It is obvious that the balls that travel off the UII go faster and longer. So lets even the playing field and allow them.
Aug. 29, 2005
boston
306 posts
I am all for the Ultra ll. If we cannot use the Ultra ll let's go to the .47 core ball. The Ultra ll supplies the extra pop for us smaller players.
Sept. 2, 2005
Bob50
Men's 60
240 posts
Its simple. Read the posts. Keep the bat. Enjoy large turnouts at 2006 tournaments.
Sept. 2, 2005
Duke
Men's 60
720 posts
There should be no restrictions of any bat. Let them adjust the ball, if they want to control us. We can run our own tourneys, if it is not run to our satisfaction.
Sept. 2, 2005
bogie
Men's 55
154 posts
My son and I hit alot of batting practice. I offer one observation also, we both have hit the longest balls with PSTs and have hit as far on the long end as the U2 with a Synergy + and a well broken in Synergy 2. We think the major advantage to a U2 is that the sweet spot is so large and you get the optimum distance more often because of it. But some of the other 100 mile per hour bats seem to go as far when hit on the sweet spot. Like when the Demarini doublewall came out...it had a far bigger sweet spot than the single walls..but guys like Meade and Macenko hit the single walls 500 feet...I would say let the guys use the U2 and take advantage of the bigger sweet spot..I think a ball off the sweet spot of a PST would maim just as bad as what the U2 has a reputation for doing.
Sept. 9, 2005
the dawg
Men's 55
17 posts
i vote yes this is the only place we can use a good bat
Sept. 12, 2005
Eskie37
5 posts
Let's allow the Ultra II beyond 2005. I vote yes.
Oct. 21, 2005
youngjane
1 posts
After reading most of the these posts, I hope all your opinions for the u2 will help keep this bat. As a senior female player, this bat has improved my batting average immensely...whether because of the bat, or just the confidence it exudes...
Oct. 21, 2005
turn2
486 posts
why cant everyone just use all the other hot bats out there. why do you need the u2? we (turn two/rekco/county sports played florida all stars in the championship game and both games lasted about 5 hours. this was crazy. sure we all wolud have still hit some home runs but with the ultras the ball was just flying out. give the defense a chance to play and filed the ball.a great hitter can hit with any bat.
later,
donnie
Oct. 22, 2005
Walkoff
8 posts
Great hitters can also hit with a shaved bat. Soon it's going to be where the tournament director will be supplying the bats for all teams to use.
Oct. 26, 2005
MikeC
Men's 60
38 posts
I have played Senior ball for 7 years now and enjoy playing in SPA and SSUSA. I enjoy using my Ultra II as it is just FUN. Keep the bat! I have played and watched ASA since the new bat and ball standards and the game is BORING. I have also noticed that players respect the pitcher more and try to stay out of the middle more now than ever before. Yes a Ultra can hurt you but so can a Worth or a wood bat.
Oct. 26, 2005
the wood
1086 posts
Ultra 2 in 2006 >...
I've read many of these posts and I find some of them amusing... it helps folks with arthritis (so does Motrin)... the big boys don't lift weights to use low end equipment (how do the big boys feel about guys w/ WTP hitting the ball 320? I know that the ones I spoke with (Cellura, Parnell, Wheeler) don't think too highly of it)... it doesn't pose that much of a safety risk (any time a missile gets there faster it poses a greater risk). The fact is that I don't really care if they can be used or not. One thing in favor of them is that there might be fewer cheaters if we all use them. But if they are legal in SSWC next year, don't whine about having to use others bats elsewhere... or the cost ($190 for a non-warrantied bat). Yes, allowing them in SSWC does boost their # of participating teams. It hasn't translated into more teams in the SSWC 55 major + division... 5 teams in SPA, 5 teams in SSWS, 7 teams in LVSSA and 4 teams in SSWC. Perhaps it swells the ranks in the lower divisions.
Dec. 1, 2005
cutty
42 posts
ultra II is To Senior Softball As Track Shoes Are to a runner I Don,t need it But it feel Dame good to have them. I vote For Shoes.(ultra II)
Dec. 1, 2005
JTS2
Men's 55
88 posts
Guys get over the Ultra II It is not good for the game when you have to use the same bat to compete and especially whebn that bat cost $300 and will break in a heart beat. I have seen this bar ruin many a ball player by making them thnik they are power hitters. Everyon that uses the U II should have to stand on the mound and take a few balls hit up the middle at them. Remember Miken wants you to break as many bats as possible so you will buy more. Bats should last longer than 4 or 5 hundred swings.
Dec. 1, 2005
william wallace
42 posts
Having never used this Ultra 2 I do not know what it brings to the table but I have watched it being used and I am considering getting one. Why one might ask? It is simple when you look over at the other team and 12 of the 17 bats lined up against the fence are the U2 then you realize in order to play and win you must use the same equipment.

I understand those who do not want the bat in the game but I ask this simple question how many of you are willing to take a team to a U2 tournament and lose out because your team refuses to use the bats?

The guys who are against the bats I assume do not use it but can you say your whole team does not use the bat? I play for fun but I also want to win and it seems to be a very clear point that in order to beat a team using the U2 one must comply.
William
Dec. 5, 2005
the wood
1086 posts
Are you the same bill Wallace that used to play out of LV (or New Mex) 25-30 years ago? I have used the U2 for 3 years and have spent over $5k on them. I definitely like to use when all of the other teams use them. I'm not into using a rock in a gun fight. But I could be happy if they were no longer legal... for reasons of safety, game integrity and cost. People with wtp should only hit it to the warning track.
Dec. 14, 2005
blinddog
1 posts
I play in a league where the gray Ultra and the Ultra II are both used, plus we use high compression balls, .525/.47 and man do we have fun. The pitchers have never been hurt as the batters are very good about not going up the middle. Hitting a ball over the light towers is a thrill. Our old guys love the bats and balls because they can actually make the outfielders respect them and get a few doubles and an occasional home run which they would never get otherwise. We play to have fun and the composite bats are lots of fun.
March 22, 2006
backgammonexpert
1 posts
Yes, but how come hardly anyone mentions the Ultra 1. I love my Ultra 1.
March 23, 2006
lgnd50
36 posts
i am for keeping the U-2, there is no verifying proof that the u-2 is causing increased injury to any players, young or old,
Sign-in to reply or add to a discussion or post your own message and start a new discussion. If you don't have a message board account, please register for a free nickname. It will only take a moment.
Senior Softball-USA
Phone: (916) 326-5303
Fax: (916) 326-5304
2701 K Street, Suite 101A
Sacramento, CA 95816
Send us e-mail
Senior Softball-USA is dedicated to informing and uniting the Senior Softball Players of America and the World. Senior Softball-USA sanctions tournaments and championships, registers players, writes the rulebook, publishes Senior Softball-USA News, hosts International Softball Tours and promotes Senior Softball throughout the world. More than 1.5 million men and women over 40 play Senior Softball in the United States today. »SSUSA History  »Privacy policy

Follow us on Facebook

Partners