win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: USBC E-mail surveys  (Read 12273 times)

the_scarlet_pumpernickel

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
USBC E-mail surveys
« on: April 19, 2017, 10:34:57 AM »
Did anyone else get one of these surveys about lane conditions, bowling equipment? you should check your e-mail to see if you got one. It asked a lot of questions about whether bowling was challenging enough, whether lane conditions are too easy. What is everyone's take on this survey? was it good enough? any questions you would have asked, not asked? did you even get it? do you think they will really use it's results to a positive end?

I think they are just confirming on paper what everyone already thinks. There's no way they don't know what bowlers have been saying about league vs. pro lane conditions, resin balls/dynamic cores being too strong, 2 handed good or bad etc... I would like to have seen more detailed questions about ball durability, which is arguably not as good anymore.
"Men do not fail... they give up trying"
~Fortune Cookie

 

giddyupddp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
Re: USBC E-mail surveys
« Reply #91 on: April 25, 2017, 10:14:19 AM »
I have enjoyed the different points of view on this thread and commend those who have taken the time to explain their thoughts.

Olderdude

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
Re: USBC E-mail surveys
« Reply #92 on: April 25, 2017, 10:57:02 AM »
Bowl.com has some interesting news about oil conditions

http://www.bowl.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?id=23622329086

avabob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2777
Re: USBC E-mail surveys
« Reply #93 on: April 25, 2017, 11:37:34 AM »
There is never any resolutions to these arguments.  People bowl for different reasons, and more important get their satisfaction from different aspects of the game.  Fundamentally there is a human appeal to the violence of knocking down heavy pins with even heavier balls.  People have found the challenge of attempting to knock down pins appealing enough that they want some level of standardization, necessitating the creation of a ruling body.

 As the game advances the types of issues that need to be dealt with become more complex.  For example during the 50's and 60's the ABC didn't have a need to deal with oil patterns.  It was enough to make sure lane men didn't sand physical grooves into the lanes to enhance scoring.  The difference between a flat oiled lane and a wall went away after 2 games when a track developed that made the pocket just as easy on either condition.

  It was really the advancement in ball surfaces that necessitated rules to curb scoring.  The soft shelled polyester increased carry potential so much that a hardness rule was adopted for the first time.  Unfortunately the ABC was behind the curve technology wise.  First they didn't recognize the impact on ball reaction of the change from soft lacquer to much harder urethane lane coatings.  The result was a much more random and difficult lane transition on oil patterns that they had mandated.  Scratch didn't like playing on flat oiled urethane and the ABC lost a lot of support from competitive bowlers.  Even the PBA refused to oil their lanes in accordance with ABC rules. 

The ABC ultimately softened the requirements, but once again got caught behind the curve when resin enhanced urethane was introduced. The resin balls increased the friction differential from oily to dry without violating the hardness rule.  This advancement in ball technology effectively put the game back where it was in 1974 with shore D balls and no lane conditioning standards.

The game would be better if balls couldn't be made to hit so hard, but lane conditioning rules aren't the way to do it.  The balls over power the patterns anyway. 

Just to throw in the obligatory golf comparison the only thing that has saved golf from being over powered by technology is putting.  I am 69 years old, and I can hit the ball as far today as I did when I was 35, thanks to my graphite shafted 460,cc driver. 

Bottom line the USBC is far from perfect, but they are faced with an impossible task when you add prize money to all the technological issues they must deal with.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2017, 11:43:03 AM by avabob »

ITZPS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
Re: USBC E-mail surveys
« Reply #94 on: April 25, 2017, 12:32:08 PM »
That guy shot a 300 in the same time it takes a "good bowler" to throw a single shot. 

I don't know what your deal is.  We can say virtually the same thing and you for some reason aren't getting it.  I've been a shop operator for 11 years, I'm a director on our city association, I'm in charge of lane certification for the city, I coach, am involved with our youth program, and spend 60-70 hours a week in the bowling center, not to mention all the comments, texts, and messages I field when I'm not there.  I know what people are saying too.  I have been saying exactly this: "because not everyone feels the same things about everything," in every single comment I've made on this post so far, and you're skimming over that or missing it somehow.  There is ONE absolute in bowling, and that is that EVERYONE ENJOYS IT DIFFERENTLY.  I've been using ALL CAPS because lowercase letters don't seem to be getting the point across. 

Horse has been beaten, and you're just not getting what I'm saying.  FYI, I despise social media and hashtagging and whatever else. 

Every one likes to make golf comparisons, but yours is way off.  You cannot score on a house shot without executing.  What you can be on a housevshot is one dimensional. 


Is this the execution you are talking about?? 12 strikes in less than 90 secs. Great repeatable shots at it's best!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQnphc6qeNs
Storm Amateur Staff
Turbo Regional Staff