(de)EVOLUTION or DESTRUCTION of BOWLING
Has the game of bowling been devolving or slowly destroying itself thru the so-called evolution of technology?
The game is competed in an ever changing, invisible environment (playing field) that has a multitude of variables that can dictate play, more now than ever.
Many wish to point a finger at one single entity but it will always be the playing field & applied condition that will dictate scoring pace and play, along with competitors choices; in other words too many variables can affect the game & the scores.
*For example take golf, how would you explain to a person void of sight, wind or rain?
Imagine explaining to the them where to correctly place the golf ball (or not), avoiding any placed hazards (trees, sand or water) or ever-changing effects such as wind or rain?
All while playing the game in front of them, in which they are unable to see?
This would be comparable to explaining bowling and ball motion to a layperson.
Another example would be playing tennis, with needing to hit a tennis ball inside lines that are constantly moving & changing, on every hit of the tennis ball; along with the player being unable to see the lines.
Equipment
In the winter of 1991, the game of bowling would see the largest advancement in bowling ball technology, with the inception of NU-LINE bowling and a team led by Steve Cooper; a new era would arise termed as the 'reactive resin era' - referenced as such due to the fact that this new cover stock reacted to friction (due to heat) stronger than basic urethane or polyester cover stocks, which increased angularity & pin carry.
'Reactive resin' is a combination of polyester, urethane (polyurethane) and a resin additive creating an all new reaction.
Cooper also pointed out, in his last interview just before his passing (2012?), that the last true advancement in cover stock technology was in 1997, by Bill Wasserberger (then head of R and D for the Brunswick bowling ball division, before his passing in '06) with the introduction of particle or pro-active cover stock, an interesting thought to say the least.
Many point to this single advancement (reactive resin) as the beginning of the end. In many purist's eyes, it changed bowlers true abilities, as it was perceived to produce reaction, with less effort or ability.
In reality, it changed reaction overall.
And to be fair, golf & tennis both evolved with technology as did the athletes, to compensate for the changes.
Another factor that evolved or progressed, in the latter part of the '90's was core technology (or the inside dynamics) as they increased in strength; the more dynamic the core (higher RG differential numbers) the more potential for flare and flare creates traction.
But in the truest form of effecting reaction, surface still dictates amount of ball motion, as well as length, by how it slows down and responds to the lane and the environment.
*It is best understood that in every explanation or situation, potential is implied...implied in the sense that any reaction is predicated by the bowlers attributes (rev rate, ball speed, length of levers, plus overall knowledge) nothing else.
A bowling ball in a static state does nothing...it does not hook or hit in any prescribed manner or way until the bowler applies the necessary force.
Bowling balls have potential, nothing else.
A lane condition is only true until a bowling ball is delivered onto the lane, then it changes or transitions due to participants and their choices-area of the lane and/or surface choices.
There are NO magic layouts in regards to ball motion, they merely enhance as surface dictates the majority of ball motion (70-75%) and truly only enhance when the bowling ball is allowed to slow down properly.
Why do we talk about the bowling ball slowing down? It has to in order for it to change direction.
Hook
Back to the cover stocks technology and reaction - confusion arises (in regards to bowling) in understanding & truly defining 'hook'.
'Hook' is defined as any deviation from a straight line; this can occur in the front part of the lane, the middle or the back-end, wherever friction manifests itself, due to applied or created and the cover stock interacts with it.
Before the inception of 'reactive resin', bowling balls had a smoother arc type reaction and tended to be considered hook lazy-slower response to the friction. Angles were created more through the front part of the lane than the down lane; bowling balls did not have the angularity they possess today.
Reactive resin has a stronger response to friction side to side, as well down lane, thus creating entirely different angles, previously seen with urethane or polyester. This created a new thought in regards to 'hook'; bowlers now perceived 'hook' as any motion down lane more so than anywhere else on the lane.
This changed how bowlers approached conditions; today's bowlers play an area down lane vs the front part of the lane as in previous eras, as well as changing how conditions are effected.
Lane oils & machines
In the early part of 2000, at the PBA stop at the Orleans in Las Vegas, the introduction of additives in the lane oil or conditioner appeared for the first time.
There had many other instances where proprietors had used their own additives in their lane conditioning process, such as STP or Vaseline, but this was the first actual produced product to see the market.
It was the first attempt at conquering the bowling ball or better controlling the playing field. Lane conditioner went from being described as mineral oils to motor oils through the increase in viscosities or thickness of the oils.
As this process has went on, the industry has not only seen the inception of super oils or conditioners, but advanced computerized lane machines costing as much as a mid-sized automobile, ALL with the intent of better controlling the lane - playing field - environment.
Super oils designed to minimize migration or mutilation of the 'patterns' applied by the highly technical machines used to apply them.
Patterns
With technology came the roll out of 'patterns' as another move towards controlling the ever changing playing field or the attempt at purifying the game.
Specific 'patterns' would attempt to force players into playing a prescribed portion of the lane, with the intent of controlling the playing field and scoring pace devoid of the topography or characteristics of said playing field; all allowing the 'condition' to transition in certain prescribed manner.
*This in itself has created a new version of mass confusion.
Many of the middle-to-upper of the road level bowlers immediately subscribed to this theory but in a bigger sense, become less educated, by believing that they were being shown/told exactly how & where to play in the invisible environment, devoid of educating on how & why this should or could be happening.
Too many instances, suggestions are posed based on what was perceived instead of actuality...if this so-called condition 'played' a certain way, at a certain center then it has to be the same everywhere, right?
Bowlers have been brainwashed into believing there is absolution in pattern play, instead of understanding their ball motion.
One of the main stays of the elite, in the game of bowling, has always been in their ability to understand what was occurring on the lane devoid of any 'road map' and adapting their games to it quicker than their competition.
The largest portion of confusion is explaining what may occur in an invisible environment, where having the innate ability to correctly guess, in an educated manner, generally wins out, all without truly seeing any of it happen.
As I write this, I must state, I vehemently detest the concept of patterns and teaching pattern play; the creation of patterns has had the largest impact of confusion (dummying down) on the game, as any other single entity created so far.
We need to educate the masses on understanding what their bowling ball is doing and why, to allow them to attack any lane condition; bowlers are being told, mistakingly, how to properly attack nothing more than a piece of paper.
There is a belief in purity or absolution that a pattern will bring to a tournament; there is also a belief in fairness or level playing field...one thing that will never change, conditions are dictated by the competitors and the scoring pace is generally always relative...
In addition, another conundrum was the decision to name patterns...chameleon; viper; Taj Mahal; this implies a certain assumption of a characteristic or 'way to play' a condition; another misinformation in the game.
A lane condition is dictated by applied conditioner in prescribed areas of the lanes. Varying amounts of conditioner plus length & ratios dictate potential ball motion and difficulty of scoring pace, all taking topography into play and competitors intended choices.
Topography
The topography of the lane always wins out no matter the condition applied, in the smallest or largest way, depending on amount of games competed.
Topography is the landscape as microscopic as it may be, it is best seen as peaks & valleys; friction or wear portions of the lane.
Topography is created by underlying foundation & how foundation may settle, plus transition through age and friction...thus creating a different finger print on every lane bed.
Every lane has an individual fingerprint & personality...
Environment
Another area that is generally missed in explaining lane play is residual friction on any lane surface, especially synthetics.
With the inception of higher friction cover stocks and the increase in competitors rev rate, the lane, through longer formats and continual play, heats up throughout the process of competition.
With any plastic surface, it retains a certain amount of heat which takes longer to cool down - the lane surface is staying hotter longer; which in turns softens the surface thus creating more friction than a harder, less played or effected portion of the lane surface.
Lane machines smartly apply the same condition onto a surface, that may or may not still be 'hot' from the previous day or timeframe of competition, thus creating a quicker dissipation of conditioner in these 'hot' zones.
This effects the way the competitors will potentially see & attack the lanes, along with effecting the future of the environment by creating a wear spot (track area) on the lane. Bowlers see reaction they'll tend to camp out in these areas; reaction is easier to respond to than a lack of.
Lane play
So, we all realize bowlers compete in an ever changing environment, through the movement of the conditioner, created not only by -
*the type of conditioner applied
*the cleaner applied
*the thoroughness of the cleaning process
*the type of lane machine used
and lastly
*the topography of the environment (largest contributor)
but also the decisions the competitors make, through their perception of their environment, effect it greater going forward.
The bowler generally chooses what may or may not look correct to their eye, in the appropriate portion of the lane, in creating the proper entry to the pocket, ALL in hopes of creating the strongest amount of strikes in conquering the environment, void of what they are forced to do through a prescribed 'pattern'.
If a condition is created, forcing players to start or play an area a player may not be comfortable playing, the player will attempt to play where they are comfortable; this happens through equipment choices, surface prep (80 grit to 20k grit), area of the lane to play and rev rate.
Education
The bottom line is, what has truly been the de-evolution of the game of bowling? The miseducation & confusing of the competitors? Or the equipment used?
Too many times, we hear bowlers are accused of knowing the alleged 'pattern' ahead of competition, some advantage is given, eliminating any credit given to competitor on succeeding on the condition, through proper choices and intelligent adjustments. The champions generally never say a pattern didn't play properly.
Bowlers NEED to be EDUCATED on why they are failing NOT why the pattern didn't play right or correctly?
What is correctly? Who are said patterns exactly created for?
The elite use their bowling ball to explain to them the applied condition and base judgements off of that, not what they've been informed by a piece of paper.
