Doesn't mean anything. Some companies sponsor more bowlers. Some bowlers are just better. Some gear "matches" up better with certain bowlers.

Or... The bowlers who are appearing on the show were simply the better bowlers that day 

I personally feel the tv representation is a combination of "this is who was performing well" and "these are the best ball reps". If ball reps were not allowed near the lanes and bowlers were on their own out there, I think you'd see a somewhat more even distribution of brands on tv...but still a little Storm heavy.

Radical has exactly 1 pro out there and he made TV. So there.

This may be true, and I don't watch a lot of golf on TV, but last time I did I don't remember any announcer talking about what ball brand someone is using. With bowling it is front and center for the most part. The world #1 could be using Nike, Titleist, or Brand X, unless they do advertising for the company, no one would know.

Titleist has the most people using their golf balls on the leaderboard every week due to sheer numbers.  The more people they pay to use their balls, the more there will be on TV.  And the better those players are, the more they will be at the top of the leaderboard.

Does that mean they make the best balls?  Only to the uninformed.  The current #1 uses Nike.

As to the OP, I think others have said it right. While Storm makes good equipment, it isn't head and shoulders above the competition for the most part. They just happen to have some of the best bowlers out there right now on staff. And I think that comes down to $$$. Storm is doing well, and they can afford to pay for the best bowlers to make sure their equipment is on TV. By doing so, they get people asking the exact questions you are, and for some (maybe even a lot) people, it does mean that their equipment is better and they buy Storm. Add in the other marketing they do....and it shows why they are the #1 ball company right now.

By and large, the top bowlers in the world can use just about any brand and be successful; that's because they know how to read lanes, adjust to transition, and repeat quality shots.

Now, that being said, ball/company selection can still be very important in terms of matching up. Bowling is all about matchups. When you properly match ball type, drilling layout, ball surface and bowler style to the conditions, you will get good scores (provided the bowler can handle his or her end of the bargain). When you have bad matchups, you often get bad scores.

Take a guy like WRWJr. Walter has spent time on several different staffs, and he has been successful with pretty much all of them. Then you take guys like PDW (Storm/Roto) and PBIII (Brunswick) who have been with one company for a large part of their careers. Personally, I'm guessing either of those two guys could switch companies tomorrow and still be just fine; they are that good. However, they stay with what they know because they are treated well by the companies (theoretically anyway), and they feel confident that the balls from those companies have always matched up well for them. That confidence can go a long way.

Now, we have also seen other pros switch companies and then go into a funk. If I'm remembering correctly, Patrick Allen struggled after moving from Hammer to Track. Did that mean that Track balls were bad while Hammer is good? No. There could've been lots of factors. Maybe it was matchups, maybe it was injuries/off-the-lanes issues, and maybe it was just a lack of confidence after the move.

So, long story short, it's a bowler's individual decision. In the end, I don't think any of the mainstream manufacturers make bad balls. Your bigger companies, Storm, Ebonite, Brunswick, etc. tend to have more money to operate with, so sometimes they can do more R&D than the smaller brands. Still, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find "bad balls" out there. It's more bad matchups to the bowlers and conditions.

Titleist has the most people using their golf balls on the leaderboard every week due to sheer numbers.  The more people they pay to use their balls, the more there will be on TV.  And the better those players are, the more they will be at the top of the leaderboard.

Does that mean they make the best balls?  Only to the uninformed.  The current #1 uses Nike.

But does the average viewer even know what ball a golfer is using? Probably not.


I seeing Bowling related more to Nascar. Before the COT, the top teams usually had backing by the manufacturers the same as in bowling today. With the COT, that has went away, but they still show the "brand" of car used when displaying race results even though it has almost nothing to do with the actual car.


If you put Jimmy Johnson and Chad Kanuss together, it doesn't really matter what "brand" is applied to the car, they are going to win a lot of races.


Just like professional bowlers.

Seems most of you believe it is just a matter of better selling balls and $$$.  So why don't other companies spend more $$$ on top athletes to promote their products?  EBI and Brunswick are clearly older companies, so I would think they would try to be more competitive. 

I'm still not so sure it isn't better balls.  There has to be more to better sales than just more advertising.  Also folks on here do seem to be more praiseworthy of Storm and Motiv. 

I'm not trying to be a rabble-rouser.  I can only afford to get one ball a year so I value the opinions on this website very highly.

It is about the $$$. Brunswick is looking to sell it's bowling ball manufactring business. Do you think it is doing so because it is raking in money hand over fist? The manufacturing and selling of bowling balls is not going to make anyone rich. EBI isn't exactly flying high right now either. Storm (along with it's sister company Roto Grip) seems to be in the best shape. So they have the added dollars to spend to bring in the names they want, like Mike Fagan. So they are making sure they have the best chance to get their balls on the show. Plus they have the largest staff in total. They have the smaller stature (as far as recognition, not in talent) pros that other companies may not want to sign, like a Chris Loschetter. Or they take a chance on younger players, like Marshall Kent. And with those added dollars they can take a free agent and give him a contract for a specific show if they were using their balls during the week (if that sort of thing still happens).

So yes, Storm makes good balls, no doubt about it. They make balls that match up to a wide variety of players. But the money they are willing to spend is the main reason we see more Storm balls on the TV shows over the other companies.