Isnt that weird though?? Im mean to push a new ball by marketing it as the new and improved versa max is obviously a smart means of marketing, but from what ive seen as a proshop operator/driller/ and over all a huge fan and spectator of the sport, i think I'm the only person (note: that Im talking from just what ive seen) that can actually back up that claim as it being a cleaner stronger backending versa max.... And actually I cant honestly say it had more backend or entry angle as the versa, i couod just compare them as being somewhat similar in total hook, however i saw about 3/4 boards more backend out of the versa than the melee. but then again this is not a true OOB comparison. Because OOB the versa was the T*TS, whereas the Melee's OOB surface was WAAAAAY too long. (and it was our typical freshly oiled 41' house shot) so although the shot was the consistent for both balls, my comparison is not 100%, i had to the completely adjust the surface on my Melee immediately after a few practice shots by bringing it down to 500/800/1500 and added a small hole just about 1/2 inch down my VAL, although it was just at the legal static limit prior, i really wanted both balls to have identical layous.
I hate ball comparisons that say both layouts are the exact same, when one clearly has a flare/diff increasing weight hole and the other has no hole, or worse one up towards tge true P1 location. How is it that bowlers that r well versed enough to upload some great quality ball vids, still dont understand the Huge roll characteristics that r directly affected by simple weight hole variances?
You alwatpys here nonsense like "because this balls higher rg value, u can clearly see how clean it pushes down lane, and vise versa. Theres been GREAT studies shared on Bowlingchat that weight holes provide much more real world differnce when comparing two similar balls vs rg differences.
I digress
