What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? It seems there's a huge problem with the maple bats exploding
and becoming dangerous projectiles:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big...urn=mlb-270755

This isn't completely different than my experience with maple drum sticks;
unless the sticks are made from absolutely STRAIGHT grain that runs from one
end of the stick to the other, you can almost bet the sucker is going to pop in
half. I don't use 'em; strictly hickory for me.

From the pictures in that article it appears to me that the bat in question
was NOT constructed from straight grain lumber. Don't you think somebody in
the bat making industry would have noticed this by now and made it a selling
point and part of their quality control? Or do you think those suckers would
explode regardless of grain direction?

--
See Nad. See Nad go. Go Nad!
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

Steve Turner wrote:
What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? ...

Don't think there's any "love" associated w/ it at all--suitable ash has
become hard to find (thereby read "expensive") is what I've heard.
Don't think there's anything more to it than that.

--

dpb writes:
Steve Turner wrote:
What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? ...

Don't think there's any "love" associated w/ it at all--suitable ash has
become hard to find (thereby read "expensive") is what I've heard.
Don't think there's anything more to it than that.


I take it you don't play baseball. Maple bats have different
hitting characteristics, preferred by many players.

Most major league bats are custom made for the player.

scott

On Sep 21, 10:06*am, dpb wrote:
Steve Turner wrote:
What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? *...

Don't think there's any "love" associated w/ it at all--suitable ash has
become hard to find (thereby read "expensive") is what I've heard.
Don't think there's anything more to it than that.

They pay the guys a $M a year and can't afford a couple of bucks more
for a bat? If Ash is so expensive, why not Hickory?

In article ,
says...

dpb writes:
Steve Turner wrote:
What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? ...

Don't think there's any "love" associated w/ it at all--suitable ash has
become hard to find (thereby read "expensive") is what I've heard.
Don't think there's anything more to it than that.


I take it you don't play baseball. Maple bats have different
hitting characteristics, preferred by many players.

Most major league bats are custom made for the player.

scott

Although hickory was used at the beginning of the 20th century,
hitters today prefer lighter bats. The maple bats came into vogue
because hitters like Barry Bonds put up good numbers with them, but
they often break in dangerous ways. I do not think cost is a factor
at all for major league hitters.

s

"dpb" wrote in message
...
Steve Turner wrote:
What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? ...

Don't think there's any "love" associated w/ it at all--suitable ash has
become hard to find (thereby read "expensive") is what I've heard. Don't
think there's anything more to it than that.

--


Yes and we all know that MLB players have to watch their money as they don't
make very much.
If suitable ash is hard to find, someone forgot to tell the baseball bat
manufacturers who turn them out by the million. Mable is just the latest
"fad".

On 9/21/10 9:53 AM, Steve Turner wrote:
This isn't completely different than my experience with maple drum
sticks; unless the sticks are made from absolutely STRAIGHT grain that
runs from one end of the stick to the other, you can almost bet the
sucker is going to pop in half. I don't use 'em; strictly hickory for me.


Same with me. I tried maple stick but they gave no warning, they just
snap in half.
Most often, Hickory and Oak start to splinter and weaken and you can
feel it in your hands, which gives you plenty of warning to switch sticks.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/21/10 10:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
I take it you don't play baseball. Maple bats have different
hitting characteristics, preferred by many players.


The maple bats may be lighter, which is probably why players prefer them
(bat speed) but it is definitely more "brittle."

Most of the "power" from a bat comes from its trampoline effect, similar
to a tennis racket. The more the bat flexes when making contact with the
ball, the further the ball will go.

I started hitting a lot of home runs in softball, in the past few years,
and it has nothing to do with me. I'm not a big guy and I haven't gotten
stronger in my old age. :-)

The composite alloys they use to make modern bats allow them to flex so
much at the handle and also in the face of the barrel, that it's like
hitting a golf ball with a tennis racket. When you hit the ball square
at the apex of your swing, you can feel the trampoline effect and the
ball goes about 360 feet.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:38:22 -0500, -MIKE-
wrote:

On 9/21/10 10:40 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
I take it you don't play baseball. Maple bats have different
hitting characteristics, preferred by many players.


The maple bats may be lighter, which is probably why players prefer them
(bat speed) but it is definitely more "brittle."

Most of the "power" from a bat comes from its trampoline effect, similar
to a tennis racket. The more the bat flexes when making contact with the
ball, the further the ball will go.

I started hitting a lot of home runs in softball, in the past few years,
and it has nothing to do with me. I'm not a big guy and I haven't gotten
stronger in my old age. :-)

The composite alloys they use to make modern bats allow them to flex so
much at the handle and also in the face of the barrel, that it's like
hitting a golf ball with a tennis racket. When you hit the ball square
at the apex of your swing, you can feel the trampoline effect and the
ball goes about 360 feet.


I second that. There's a palpable sweet spot.

-Zz

Steve Turner wrote in
:

What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? It seems there's a huge problem with the maple bats
exploding and becoming dangerous projectiles:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big...s-Tyler-Colvin
-hospitalized-after-broken-bat?urn=mlb-270755

This isn't completely different than my experience with maple drum
sticks; unless the sticks are made from absolutely STRAIGHT grain that
runs from one end of the stick to the other, you can almost bet the
sucker is going to pop in half. I don't use 'em; strictly hickory for
me.

From the pictures in that article it appears to me that the bat in
question
was NOT constructed from straight grain lumber. Don't you think
somebody in the bat making industry would have noticed this by now and
made it a selling point and part of their quality control? Or do you
think those suckers would explode regardless of grain direction?


Instead of changing the wood, why not look into some elasticy coating the
bats could be covered with? When the bat does break, the coating would
(perhaps) keep the bat together at least long enough to slow the speed
down to something safer.

The idea is not dissimilar to putting plastic between layers of glass to
make them impact resistant.

Puckdropper

--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.

Instead of changing the wood, why not look into some elasticy coating the
bats could be covered with? When the bat does break, the coating would
(perhaps) keep the bat together at least long enough to slow the speed
down to something safer.

The idea is not dissimilar to putting plastic between layers of glass to
make them impact resistant.

Puckdropper

Right now, it's against the rules. The bats must be made out of a
single piece of wood (no laminations or alterations).

Ask me about the "4 outs in an inning" rule. It's a good one.

-Zz

On 9/21/10 7:41 PM, Zz Yzx wrote:
Instead of changing the wood, why not look into some elasticy coating the
bats could be covered with? When the bat does break, the coating would
(perhaps) keep the bat together at least long enough to slow the speed
down to something safer.

The idea is not dissimilar to putting plastic between layers of glass to
make them impact resistant.

Puckdropper

Right now, it's against the rules. The bats must be made out of a
single piece of wood (no laminations or alterations).

Ask me about the "4 outs in an inning" rule. It's a good one.

-Zz


Not sure about that. I think there are laminated bats, now. I may be
wrong, or maybe they're just experimenting with it in the minors.

In any case, I don't see a need to do anything. If you look at the odds,
someone getting hurt by a flying broken bat is about as rare as getting
hit by lighting while cashing a winning mega-millions lotto ticket.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

-MIKE- wrote in
:


Not sure about that. I think there are laminated bats, now. I may be
wrong, or maybe they're just experimenting with it in the minors.

In any case, I don't see a need to do anything. If you look at the
odds, someone getting hurt by a flying broken bat is about as rare as
getting hit by lighting while cashing a winning mega-millions lotto
ticket.

I've never heard of anyone getting hit by lightning while cashing a
winning mega-millions lotto ticket, but I know of a few Cubs players over
time who have gotten hit with flying broken bats. Right now, it's just a
hazard of being a player.

Puckdropper
--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.

I would think some good old **** elm aka american elm would make a
hellava bat. will not split very easy, it has stringy cross grain and
light weight. kinda like the olde **** elm club.

On 09/21/2010 07:41 PM, Zz Yzx wrote:
Ask me about the "4 outs in an inning" rule. It's a good one.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the "4 outs in an inning" rule?

--
What percentage of the driving populace do you suppose actually
understands the rules of engagement at a four-way stop?
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

On 09/22/2010 02:56 AM, Ross Hebeisen wrote:
I would think some good old **** elm aka american elm would make a
hellava bat. will not split very easy, it has stringy cross grain and
light weight. kinda like the olde **** elm club.

Perhaps, but I'd have to think by now that with the huge popularity of baseball that people
have experimented with bats made from almost every wood, but have rejected most species for
one reason or other. Going back (once again) to what I know, I can see many parallels
between baseball bats and drum sticks. You can make 20 pairs of identical drum sticks from
20 different types of wood, and they will all feel different in a drummer's hand. Some
won't hold up to the punishment for 5 minutes, some are way too heavy, some are too light,
and some are too rigid and transfer unwanted shock straight to your hands. Very few will
have just the right weight and feel, the right "resonance" and "flex", but when they do you
KNOW it. I'd have to think that experienced baseball players are just like any other expert
in their craft; they like to have just the right tool for the job.

--
Free bad advice available here.
To reply, eat the taco.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbqboyee/

On 9/22/10 1:32 AM, Puckdropper wrote:
wrote in
:


Not sure about that. I think there are laminated bats, now. I may be
wrong, or maybe they're just experimenting with it in the minors.

In any case, I don't see a need to do anything. If you look at the
odds, someone getting hurt by a flying broken bat is about as rare as
getting hit by lighting while cashing a winning mega-millions lotto
ticket.

I've never heard of anyone getting hit by lightning while cashing a
winning mega-millions lotto ticket, but I know of a few Cubs players over
time who have gotten hit with flying broken bats. Right now, it's just a
hazard of being a player.

Puckdropper

Hit and hurt are different animals. But I failed to make my point...
Read the article...

"Colvin's upper left chest was punctured by a flying piece of Welington
Castillo's(notes) bat as Colvin came home from third to score on a double.
If the term "impaled" doesn't do the job by itself, the aftermath makes
for one of the scariest baseball injuries in recent memory. Colvin
needed to be hospitalized because of a wound described as "fairly deep."
Sutures helped to close the wound and a tube was inserted into Colvin's
lung to prevent it from collapsing."

That kind of hurt is as rare as what I described and surely doesn't
necessitate any further safety measures.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/22/10 7:45 AM, Steve Turner wrote:
On 09/22/2010 02:56 AM, Ross Hebeisen wrote:
I would think some good old **** elm aka american elm would make a
hellava bat. will not split very easy, it has stringy cross grain and
light weight. kinda like the olde **** elm club.

Perhaps, but I'd have to think by now that with the huge popularity of
baseball that people have experimented with bats made from almost every
wood, but have rejected most species for one reason or other. Going back
(once again) to what I know, I can see many parallels between baseball
bats and drum sticks. You can make 20 pairs of identical drum sticks
from 20 different types of wood, and they will all feel different in a
drummer's hand. Some won't hold up to the punishment for 5 minutes, some
are way too heavy, some are too light, and some are too rigid and
transfer unwanted shock straight to your hands. Very few will have just
the right weight and feel, the right "resonance" and "flex", but when
they do you KNOW it. I'd have to think that experienced baseball players
are just like any other expert in their craft; they like to have just
the right tool for the job.


When I got my lathe, one of the first things I did was make a bunch of
drumsticks.
I was a man on a mission, making sticks from every hardwood and exotic
in my pile.
I quickly learned that there was a good reason most stick makers have
settled on oak, hickory, and maple to make their sticks, and cost is
only part of the equation.

The sticks I made from anything but oak and maple (didn't try hickory),
including a bunch of exotics like cocabolo, wenge, bubinga, padouk,
ebony and others either snapped in a a couple minutes or left my hands
feeling like I'd used a ROS for 7 hrs straight.

The pair I made from oak was the best feeling sticks I've ever played,
but the other thing I quickly learned was that my time was much more
valuable and it took me a lot longer than the stick companies to make a
$4 pair of sticks. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Sep 21, 8:27*pm, Puckdropper puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:
Steve Turner wrote :





What do you guys make of this new-found love for maple bats instead of
traditional ash? *It seems there's a huge problem with the maple bats
exploding and becoming dangerous projectiles:

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big...s-Tyler-Colvin
-hospitalized-after-broken-bat?urn=mlb-270755

This isn't completely different than my experience with maple drum
sticks; unless the sticks are made from absolutely STRAIGHT grain that
runs from one end of the stick to the other, you can almost bet the
sucker is going to pop in half. *I don't use 'em; strictly hickory for
me.

*From the pictures in that article it appears to me that the bat in
*question
was NOT constructed from straight grain lumber. *Don't you think
somebody in the bat making industry would have noticed this by now and
made it a selling point and part of their quality control? *Or do you
think those suckers would explode regardless of grain direction?

Instead of changing the wood, why not look into some elasticy coating the
bats could be covered with? *When the bat does break, the coating would
(perhaps) keep the bat together at least long enough to slow the speed
down to something safer.

Duct tape.

The idea is not dissimilar to putting plastic between layers of glass to
make them impact resistant.

Puckdropper

--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On 9/22/10 2:47 PM, Stuart wrote:
In . com,
wrote:

Although hickory was used at the beginning of the 20th century,
hitters today prefer lighter bats. The maple bats came into vogue
because hitters like Barry Bonds put up good numbers with them, but
they often break in dangerous ways. I do not think cost is a factor
at all for major league hitters.

Well, cricket bats have always been made out of willow so why not that.


97 mph fastballs, that's why not. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 07:28:42 -0500, Steve Turner
wrote:

On 09/21/2010 07:41 PM, Zz Yzx wrote:
Ask me about the "4 outs in an inning" rule. It's a good one.

Ok, I'll bite. What is the "4 outs in an inning" rule?

In certain situations, 4 outs can be recorded in one inning, as per
the following example:

Tie game. One out, runners on first and third. Batter hits fly ball
to outfield, caught (2 out). Runner on third tags and is called safe
on the attempted put-out at the plate. Runner on first is thrown out
at third (3 out). Defense appeals the tag-up at third (runner left
early); he's called out (4th out) and defense succesfully removes the
run scored.

It's actually in the rule book last time I checked.

-Zz

On 09/23/2010 01:11 AM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:
Well, cricket bats have always been made out of willow so why not that.


97 mph fastballs, that's why not. :-)

Jeff Thomson recorded at 99.8 mph

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content...ds/283875.html

Cricket bowling machines used in practice are rated up to 95mph

http://www.clicksports.co.uk/product...ling-machines/

The only reports I have heard of a cricket bat breaking were in more
recent times when they were trying out different materials and laminates.


Try this:

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/38965699/ns/sports-baseball/

On 9/23/10 3:11 AM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:
Well, cricket bats have always been made out of willow so why not that.


97 mph fastballs, that's why not. :-)

Jeff Thomson recorded at 99.8 mph

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content...ds/283875.html

Cricket bowling machines used in practice are rated up to 95mph

http://www.clicksports.co.uk/product...ling-machines/

The only reports I have heard of a cricket bat breaking were in more
recent times when they were trying out different materials and laminates.


Well, there ya go.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 23 Sep, 09:11, Stuart wrote:

The only reports I have heard of a cricket bat breaking were in more
recent times when they were trying out different materials and laminates.

18th century cricket bats used to be solid, triangular in section and
tapered. Bowlers bowled slowly underarm. All was good. As bowlers
speeded up and bowled overarm, these heavy bats could no longer be
swung easily enough to respond. Batsman sought a lighter, faster bat
and began to use a thinner and more "paddle shaped" bat, as today,
made of lighter timber like willow. However willow isn't strong enough
for this and they broke where the narrow handle broadened into the
blade. The fix was to insert a stronger cane handle into a vee slot in
the blade - which I believe to be a local invention (Sudbrook, by the
chap who was also chief engineer of the Severn Tunnel).

On 9/23/10 4:17 PM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:
Well, there ya go.

Youp, stick to willow.


I'm agreeing with that. I'm just agreeing with the mph thing.

In any case, isn't a cricket bat flat? That has to play into the equation.
I'm also curious about the density of willow compared to ash/maple.
Also, how much wood is there in each bat? Like how much volume?

What I'm getting to is would willow be too heavy for a baseball bat...
or too light, for that matter. There's an equation for baseball that
goes something along the lines of each ounce added to the weight of the
bat at the same speed of swing adds X distance to the ball's travel.
Each mph of bat speed for the same weight bat adds X distance to the
ball's travel. So the quandary left to the baseball batter is whether he
can swing a heavier bat fast enough to make up the difference in speed
lost to the lighter bat.

The trend has seemed to go to the favor of lighter bats to get faster
bat speed. Babe Ruth and other prolific hitters of his time used very
heavy bats, well over 40oz. If you see old footage of Babe Ruth's swing,
you can see that bat speed wasn't of much concern to him. :-) He sort of
flicked the bat out and caught the ball at the apex of his swing,
allowing the trampoline effect of the wood's flex to transfer all that
mass to the ball.

Home run hitter of today are only concerned with bat speed. They will us
a 32 oz bat and let bat speed do the work.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/23/10 4:34 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 9/23/10 4:17 PM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:
Well, there ya go.

Youp, stick to willow.


I'm agreeing with that.


Oops, *NOT* agreeing. :-)

--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:34:39 -0500, -MIKE-
wrote:


The trend has seemed to go to the favor of lighter bats to get faster
bat speed. Babe Ruth and other prolific hitters of his time used very
heavy bats, well over 40oz. If you see old footage of Babe Ruth's swing,
you can see that bat speed wasn't of much concern to him. :-) He sort of
flicked the bat out and caught the ball at the apex of his swing,
allowing the trampoline effect of the wood's flex to transfer all that
mass to the ball.

Home run hitter of today are only concerned with bat speed. They will us
a 32 oz bat and let bat speed do the work.

And they are also putting that weight out in the barrel by making the
handles thinner, and voila they break more often. There's no minimum
diameters specified, only the maximum.

On 9/23/10 10:32 PM, Kevin wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:34:39 -0500,
wrote:


The trend has seemed to go to the favor of lighter bats to get faster
bat speed. Babe Ruth and other prolific hitters of his time used very
heavy bats, well over 40oz. If you see old footage of Babe Ruth's swing,
you can see that bat speed wasn't of much concern to him. :-) He sort of
flicked the bat out and caught the ball at the apex of his swing,
allowing the trampoline effect of the wood's flex to transfer all that
mass to the ball.

Home run hitter of today are only concerned with bat speed. They will us
a 32 oz bat and let bat speed do the work.

And they are also putting that weight out in the barrel by making the
handles thinner, and voila they break more often. There's no minimum
diameters specified, only the maximum.


Thinner handles contribute to more flex, too, adding to the trampoline
effect.

I hit another homerun tonight and it was all bat. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Sep 24, 12:54*am, -MIKE- wrote:
On 9/23/10 10:32 PM, Kevin wrote:





On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:34:39 -0500,
wrote:

The trend has seemed to go to the favor of lighter bats to get faster
bat speed. Babe Ruth and other prolific hitters of his time used very
heavy bats, well over 40oz. If you see old footage of Babe Ruth's swing,
you can see that bat speed wasn't of much concern to him. :-) He sort of
flicked the bat out and caught the ball at the apex of his swing,
allowing the trampoline effect of the wood's flex to transfer all that
mass to the ball.

Home run hitter of today are only concerned with bat speed. They will us
a 32 oz bat and let bat speed do the work.

And they are also putting that weight out in the barrel by making the
handles thinner, and voila they break more often. *There's no minimum
diameters specified, only the maximum.

Thinner handles contribute to more flex, too, adding to the trampoline
effect.

I hit another homerun tonight and it was all bat. * :-)


That musta really left that rubber tee flapping, eh?
..
..
..
..
g, d & r

On 9/24/10 12:19 AM, Robatoy wrote:
On Sep 24, 12:54 am, wrote:
On 9/23/10 10:32 PM, Kevin wrote:





On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:34:39 -0500,
wrote:

The trend has seemed to go to the favor of lighter bats to get faster
bat speed. Babe Ruth and other prolific hitters of his time used very
heavy bats, well over 40oz. If you see old footage of Babe Ruth's swing,
you can see that bat speed wasn't of much concern to him. :-) He sort of
flicked the bat out and caught the ball at the apex of his swing,
allowing the trampoline effect of the wood's flex to transfer all that
mass to the ball.

Home run hitter of today are only concerned with bat speed. They will us
a 32 oz bat and let bat speed do the work.

And they are also putting that weight out in the barrel by making the
handles thinner, and voila they break more often. There's no minimum
diameters specified, only the maximum.

Thinner handles contribute to more flex, too, adding to the trampoline
effect.

I hit another homerun tonight and it was all bat. :-)


That musta really left that rubber tee flapping, eh?
.
.
.
.
g, d& r


:-)
Reminds me of those tees at the driving range. Golf is not my forte'.
My golf and bowling scores are usually about the same.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/24/10 2:41 AM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:
Reminds me of those tees at the driving range. Golf is not my forte'.
My golf and bowling scores are usually about the same.

Personally, I'd rather spend my time in the shop. ;-)


I saw the smiley, but I find that a good balance is beneficial.
I can get shop fever when working too long. Some physical
activity out in the fresh air seems to recharge the old batteries,
mentally and physically.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 9/25/10 5:07 PM, Stuart wrote:
In ,
wrote:

I saw the smiley, but I find that a good balance is beneficial.
I can get shop fever when working too long. Some physical
activity out in the fresh air seems to recharge the old batteries,
mentally and physically.

Ah, don't misunderstand me. Once a month my eldest daughter and I go for a
walk along a canal somewhere. Her boyfriend drops us off and picks us up
at the end of the walk. Typically we walk 10-12 miles and hopefully finish
in a pub.

I have also recently joined www.midlandhillwalkers.org.uk


That's better than walking laps inside the shopping malls like there do,
here.


I also have a number of other hobbies including photography, which also
gets me "out and about" and playing 12-string guitar which doesn't. :-)


Are you kidding? How about playing in one of those pubs you end up in? :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Sep 23, 9:52*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
On 09/23/2010 01:11 AM, Stuart wrote:





In ,
* * *wrote:
Well, cricket bats have always been made out of willow so why not that.