BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: SVstar34 on June 16, 2018, 03:05:45 PM
-
https://www.bowl.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?id=23622331380
-
This makes more sense.
Let new balls being currently being drilled be legal with the new statics and give a couple of years to phase out the weight holes.
-
Let the fun begin
-
And the fun LITERALLY is about to begin without question. Start your engines.....
-
I tend to give the USBC credit in many situations, but I have 2 problems with this adjustment.
1. It was so blatantly obvious that it's impossible to believe they couldn't figure it out the first time, so not well thought out at all. My willingness to say "well there HAS to be a reason they didn't do it this way the first time"... Nope, gone.
2. "after hearing from all stakeholders"... They never got feedback or they would have known.
Seriously, this is the biggest example I've seen that USBC is mismanaged. Anyone from corporate America can see the parallels and obvious fail to any rollout/project. Stupid... Simply stupid. No excuses possible.
-
“Task force†means Chad made another uninformed decision.
-
So the herd complains that the balls they drill "now" will be useless in 2 years. USBC actually makes an adjustment and allows balls drilled "now" to conform to a rule 2 years out, the herd still complains. I've already said this, but bowlers are divas....
-
So the herd complains that the balls they drill "now" will be useless in 2 years. USBC actually makes an adjustment and allows balls drilled "now" to conform to a rule 2 years out, the herd still complains. I've already said this, but bowlers are divas....
Using band-aids on a self inflicted gun shot wound to the foot is a good gesture admittedly. Honestly I don't care what USBC does any more.
-
TKK, Maybe you're missing the point or I'm misreading your thought..... The adjustment is a good one, but it was so dang obvious it never should have been missed. They clearly never asked for feedback in the first place. True or false in your opinion?
-
TKK, Maybe you're missing the point or I'm misreading your thought..... The adjustment is a good one, but it was so dang obvious it never should have been missed. They clearly never asked for feedback in the first place. True or false in your opinion?
Let me answer this question with another question. By asking for feedback, are you meaning before or after they made the initial change?
Anyone with some sense here would have sent out something regarding this and a request for feedback to gauge interest in making such a change. That would have been the logical thing to do and when getting the right interest on this, either go ahead with a gradual implementation of all changes and not something they did the first time around.
So IMHO, they should have asked for this feedback well before they made any initial change to begin with, not after the fact.
BL.
-
EXACTLY!... That's my point. They must not have asked for feedback or they wouldn't have changed their mind and issued the correction. So, while the correction is good, their process was flawed and/or they didn't care....
-
Guys,
They probably knew it would matter, just not to nearly as many people as it has seemed to. Since there was such a reaction, no harm in altering the timeline a bit to help out the people constantly drilling new stuff. Now, you can just go ahead and drill your new stuff for next season by the forthcoming regulations, and it will already comply when 2020 finally gets here.
It really isn’t that big of a deal, and I really fail to see why there was nearly the hue and cry about it as there was, but there was. I’m going to have to either buy, or plug, too myself.
Three of the four balls I bought last year have holes in them for balance. I will need to plug those holes before 2020, or buy new stuff.
NOW, I can go ahead and plug them up if I want, but honestly, I’ll probably have 3-4 more before 2020 anyway, as will MOST of everybody else that posts here regularly. Not everybody, but most.
If for some reason you ARE one of the people throwing an older ball that already has an extra hole in it, you still have until 2020 to either get something new, or plug the hole. And I’m sorry if that is just too much for you to handle. I get it that you were following the rules at the time when you did it, so was I, but everything changes over time, and unfortunately for us, that archaic rule has finally died.
GOOD RIDDANCE!
-
TKK, Maybe you're missing the point or I'm misreading your thought..... The adjustment is a good one, but it was so dang obvious it never should have been missed. They clearly never asked for feedback in the first place. True or false in your opinion?
well, rumors floated for a while. It seems there was so much negative feedback about the diff rumor, they went with statics instead to control the post drilling diff.
http://above180.com/2017/12/mo-pinel-on-possible-usbc-changes/ (http://above180.com/2017/12/mo-pinel-on-possible-usbc-changes/)
http://www.bowlingboards.com/threads/21381-USBC-thinking-of-new-rule-changes-regulations (http://www.bowlingboards.com/threads/21381-USBC-thinking-of-new-rule-changes-regulations)
http://forum.bowlingchat.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=13483 (http://forum.bowlingchat.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=13483)
https://www.scribd.com/document/372942166/USBC-Proposed-Ball-Specification-Changes-Letter-to-Manufacturers-Jan-16-2018 (https://www.scribd.com/document/372942166/USBC-Proposed-Ball-Specification-Changes-Letter-to-Manufacturers-Jan-16-2018)
-
I felt it was obvious when taking away "thumb holes" from no thumb bowlers if not being used it should apply to finger holes. Contacted usbc and they defended their reason not to because it didn't affect ball reaction as much. Then fast forward years later and the obvious decision was made…..
-
My problem with the new rule remains the same. They created a ton if animosity against a rule that will have minimal impact on the actual game. In addition there will be unintended consequences as manufacturers respond with cores that will be impacted significantly by the increased static weight limits
-
Again, I was referring to the rule change from a business/project viewpoint, which seems to escape many here, so let's talk about it from an actual impact viewpoint. I'm not knowledgeable in that area, but one thing keeps going thru my head.. Thinking back to all the so-called experts who kept saying "1 oz in a 16 lb ball doesn't matter!"... How many times did we all hear that? So... if 1 oz didn't matter, 3 oz won't either, right?
-
My problem with the new rule remains the same. They created a ton if animosity against a rule that will have minimal impact on the actual game. In addition there will be unintended consequences as manufacturers respond with cores that will be impacted significantly by the increased static weight limits
There's nothing new in ball motion that we haven't seen for years. With 1 oz or 3 ozs manufacturers would have exploited it already. The biggest affect on bowling ball cores are the interchangeable thumbs.
Here's how little bowling technology has changed. Watch this video and listen to whats said, the terminology, the technology used etc. Then watch any new ball video today…. Same sales gimmick from 20+ years ago.
-
My problem with the new rule remains the same. They created a ton if animosity against a rule that will have minimal impact on the actual game. In addition there will be unintended consequences as manufacturers respond with cores that will be impacted significantly by the increased static weight limits
There's nothing new in ball motion that we haven't seen for years. With 1 oz or 3 ozs manufacturers would have exploited it already. The biggest affect on bowling ball cores are the interchangeable thumbs.
Here's how little bowling technology has changed. Watch this video and listen to whats said, the terminology, the technology used etc. Then watch any new ball video today…. Same sales gimmick from 20+ years ago.
...... and that ball was a MAJOR piece of crap !!!!!
-
...... and that ball was a MAJOR piece of crap !!!!!
I liked mine.........
-
...... and that ball was a MAJOR piece of crap !!!!!
I liked mine.........
Same here! I bowled my first 300 with that ball and averaged 220+ with it for a couple of years.
-
...... and that ball was a MAJOR piece of crap !!!!!
I liked mine.........
Same here! I bowled my first 300 with that ball and averaged 220+ with it for a couple of years.
I liked mine too!
The big general complaint was just that it wouldn't stay white (unless your like me and cleaned it religiously after use.) because of the oil it absorbed.
The XS wasn't crap it was just like any other ball, you either matched up with it or you didn't.