Author Topic: Reactive vs. sanded urethane (Read 1934 times)

lion · « **on:** October 14, 2003, 05:28:48 AM »

What are the advantages and disadvantages
of a reactive ball versus a sanded urethane
or sanded heavy load particle ball?

lion · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2003, 05:28:25 PM »

Nice commentary Plus.
I've been doing some experimenting with changing the covers on all three types of balls, urethane, reactive, proactive (aka particle).
A regular reactive can be explosive when it hits the pocket. The problem is on many conditions (blocks etc) the ball is over/under. There can be a drastic loss of control.You can see it on some of the PBA matches.
In the old days, one got lined up on the pocket and could play high,middle or low. Today, with many reactives, it is not possible to do that for very long.
It was interesting at the U.S. open in Reno, when Wolf won with his blue hammer, Denis Horan was lost and out of control with his reactive.
Moving on to the Particles and urethanes, If you match the cover well to the condition you can get control and pretty good hitting power. But it takes a smart cookie to figure out the best cover for the condition.
Finally, I have noticed that heavy sanded covers do not deflect much when they hit the pocket. It seems like they dig in through the pin deck. The hit even sounds harder and there is less deflection. If you saw R. Smith's win in the PBA tournament,his first shot - a strike - deflected badly finishing near the right gutter. It was amazing. It was actually a bad shot, yet he got away with it due to the velocity of the ball and revs.
I do think the friction developed at the pin deck is a key component of making strikes. A perfect strike will see the ball finish between the 8 and 9 for a right hander and sometimes with a good chuck of the 8. Ball deflection at the pin deck shows the ball hitting the 9 heavy and leaving a 10 pin - unless your a 22 mph high rev, thrower.
So my point is that matching up on a lane should take into account the heads, midlane, backend and pin deck.

Edited on 10/15/2003 5:40 PM

lion · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2003, 09:23:59 PM »

By the way Wolf bowls at my home house on Tueday's. It is a sport type condition and he is averaging in the 180s. Jim Pratt who lost to Voss
at the PBA tour has the second highest average at 215. Only 4 or 5 guys
are over 200.
Getting back to cover and match up. They say match the cover to the heads and the pin to the breakpoint. As I said I have been experimenting with a variety of cover set ups all the way down 200 grit. I am video taping and studying the roll. I do average around 200 and have been bowling for years.
I think another evolution in bowling balls is just around the corner. The key of course is to maintain accuracy and hitting power to carry.
My curiosity is focusing more on the pin deck and the way the ball moves through it. I have gone through many tapes and it seems on an ideal pocket hit the ball drops off the tail plank between the 8 and 9 pin for a righty and in some cases very heavy on the 8.
I watched and bowled with Liz Johnson on the PWBA in a pro/am and I think her line up on the pocket is ideal. If you watch her on old pwba tapes you will see that many times her ball hardly deflects going through the pocket. She gets a lot of packed strikes, hard 10s and 4's. She seldom leaves a flat ten. She has had a 300 on the PWBA recently.

Edited on 10/15/2003 9:35 PM

Author Topic: Reactive vs. sanded urethane (Read 1934 times)

lion

Reactive vs. sanded urethane

lion

Re: Reactive vs. sanded urethane

lion

Re: Reactive vs. sanded urethane