Isn't it possible that if USBC or lane maintenance really wanted to stop teams/bowlers from blowing open patterns, they could simply increase the oil volumes to an extreme amount?

If you put 300 units on a lane, doesn't that in essence make it impossible to blow open in a 3 game set?

Isn't it possible that if USBC or lane maintenance really wanted to stop teams/bowlers from blowing open patterns, they could simply increase the oil volumes to an extreme amount?

If you put 300 units on a lane, doesn't that in essence make it impossible to blow open in a 3 game set?

So now it becomes who can throw a straight ball and carry.  Doesn't sound like bowling.  Why do people get upset when a team has a strategy?  It's a game/sport.  I thought that was the point.

Several random points.   Bowling is like life, it isn't fair.  Having said that, I only know the winning team from this years tournament by reputation, none personally.  By reputation, they  seem totally deserving of winning an eagle. 

The purpose of lane oil was originally to protect the lane surface.  I think it is a useful tool to control the scoring environment in bowling, just as the lawn mower controls the scoring environment in golf.  However, lane surface protection is still an important role.  The only problem I have with the modern balls is that they make protection of the lane surface extremely difficult.  When synthetic surfaces were introduced, nobody thought they would have a life of less than 15 years, but that is typically what we see with the high friction balls that first dissipate the oil too quickly, then really wear on the surface.  There are several reasons why applying mega volumes of oil will simply not work.  One is that even very high volumes will be dissipated quickly in the heads, leaving a soupy unplayable mess on the rest of the lane.  Carry down would become unimaginably bad.  I think there is some room to improve the ability of oils to hold up, but without some limitations on surface altering of balls they will be of no avail.  If every ball was required to be buffed to 4000 at the factory and no surface alteration allowed it would help, but I am not sure how much.   

I don't think a surface that never transitions, would be good for the game.  Part of the necessary complexity of bowling that makes it a challenge is gradual lane transitions.  Emphasis on gradual. 

I am not an anti technology guy when I say this.  I think the game would be much better at every level if balls were limited to polished non resin urethane, or non scuffed polyester.  With the modern lane machines ability to calibrate and apply oil, people would be surprised how decent scoring could be even with polyester balls and a volume of oil half what we are using today.   One reason I think the game would be better is that bowlers would be forced to play the shot the way the lane is set up, rather than carve out the swing area simply by blowing up the pattern as is the case today.   

The ANSWER is to replace oil and lane machines with a semi-permanent, durable, low-friction film that rolls out across the entire lane in desired lengths (ex: 35, 40, and 45 feet), that cannot be carved, and is replaced before any track develops.

Along with cost vs regular oil.

The easiest solution is less oil. Bowlers complain about dry lanes all the time and how to play them because ball A, B, and C hook too much.

Less oil, lower expense, lower scores.

If I remember correctly, the ABC several years ago did some analysis and found that heavily sanded urethane was just as abrasive and damaging to lane surfaces as particle and resin balls.