win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: A BrunsNick response...  (Read 13044 times)

BrunsNick

  • Brunswick Rep
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7306
A BrunsNick response...
« on: August 01, 2007, 06:33:05 PM »
In light of the recent topics, I have decided to provide a clean slate for a new discussion. The pointless jabbing and having my name called out was expected, and more often than not, comical.

First and foremost, the testing that Paul at USBC has performed is a great step in the right direction. He is a brilliant person to talk with, and an all around good guy. His information is without alterior motivation, never deviating from delivering pure and raw data to the general public. With that being said, the reason Paul, Brunswick, Lane #1 and myself used test balls with a radical variance in CG placement is to show the absolute maximum amount of difference in reaction.

Onward.

With the USBC test, two balls were used with over 2 1/2oz difference in sideweight, thrown by Harry, the robotic wonder. (thrown on a 53' flat pattern 17mph with 375RPMS) This would be considered a "Rev-Dominant" player. Now in this controlled experiment, Harry was able to find about a foot difference in actual breakpoint, with 4 feet of difference between the skid/roll phase. Along with that data, 2 boards of backend hook was found.

So what does this mean to me?

1. Roll does not equal hook.

A ball transitioning from skid to roll does not mean the ball is starting its hook phase. Chitown, you have outlandishly called me out in your thread (now deleted for whatever reason) without regard for the countless times in the past you have messaged me looking for information, layout help, etc. You have absolutely no merit, no first-hand knowledge and only know what you are spoon fed. You were quick to point out how 4 feet was such a gigantic and huge finding, yet, you don't quite understand what you're saying.

2. Two boards is not as much as it sounds over the course of 60 feet.

If you're using Harry set to 17mph/375rpm, who always repeats shots perfectly, using two rough bowling balls with over 2 1/2oz difference in side weight, 53' pattern in a controlled environment test and you only see 2 boards of difference, then how do you apply that to the human game with USBC specification? You can't, you can only theorize. I can give my own opinion on the results of another test, this time using more plausible CG placements in the current game. (i.e. - CG in palm vs CG "kicked" to give 3/4oz pos) USBC will post more findings, taking this into account.

3. Core orientation is not affected.

Notice the post-drilling numbers of the two balls. (nobody has yet to mention this) Not much of any measurable difference even with the radical swing in layouts. Maybe there would be absolutely zero difference if the two fingerholes were drilled to equal depth, but once again, I am just theorizing.

To sum it up, does the CG matter?

Mathematically? Yes, Paul's data shows that.

Realistically? Not by any human. One would be better suited applying this overanalytical attitude to the mechanics and execution in their bowling game. CGNOMADDAH is a theory, and apparently, is one that makes sense to quite a few people. My CGNOMADDAH video has sparked the curiousity of our governing body, and that by itself is exciting! This will not be the end of CG testing, as confirmed by the USBC. I also intend to make an additional video on the subject, with different variables in place. Basically, the best anyone can do is make a decision based on their first hand experiences, and the information presented to them.

Thanks for reading.

--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.AskTheBowler.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
Friends don't let friends drink the Kool-Aid!


Edited on 8/2/2007 2:37 AM
Nick Smith
Digital Media Manager - Brunswick Bowling
http://www.brunswickbowling.com
http://www.youtube.com/c/brunsnick

 

vilecanards

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2007, 02:57:26 AM »
Well said. Concise. Much appreciated.... thanks!
--------------------
r.k.wolfe

Dan Belcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3954
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2007, 07:42:13 AM »
The test proved that a blatantly illegal amount of positive or negative CG makes a difference to a perfect robot.  However, with the CG within legal limits, the amount of difference in reaction between two balls is going to be much, much smaller.

RRay, stop being overly defensive and look carefully at what he just said again:  CG DOES matter technically... but not that much.  When within legal limits, CG isn't going to make but maybe a one board difference in overall hook and maybe a few inches earlier or later roll and hook.  To a human bowler who doesn't throw perfectly repeated shots every time, this is a miniscule difference.  You're going to make a bigger change in ball reaction by hitting the same ball with some 1500 instead of 2000 abralon.  So, in essence, CG just doesn't really matter that much in the real world.

azguy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8364
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2007, 07:48:21 AM »
I have stayed out of this for my own reasons, but, reading all I could from both "sides", this is my opinion.

Math is a funny thing, one can take math and show just what they want to , given the right starting point. As far as a human being able to make the same exact movement/shot, no we can't. As far as anything being proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, IMO, it has not...however, this is what they make Fords, Chevys, etc...etc.

If one person feels it makes a difference to them, then it does, If one person feels it doesn't matter to them, then it doesn't. What works for one will not for another, always. Take the Presidential elections, one will say he/she has the best plan for something and if that voter feels it will help them, then the other candidate are all wrong.

IMO, if you feel the CG matters, then it does for you and you should drill your stuff accordingly, If you feel it has no bearing on your balls, then forget it and drill it the way you feel helps you the best.

To make it simple, that's also why there are more than one company that makes balls, it matters to some where it doesn't to others. No one will ever agree on this, so I say do what you feel helps you the best and don't give a hoot what someone else thinks on the matter.

As for me, it matters, so I use the CG placement, do I push my feelings onto someone else ? No ! Last time I went bowling I didn't see anyone from either side throwing the ball for me so I'll use what I feel works for me and allow the next guy to use what works for him.

BTW, I own ( or my wife does) a GMC, Plymouth, Dodge and a Mercedes. I'll never own a Ford, but, as with the CG thing, that's MY OPINION and not trying to push my opinion on others.

'nuff said.
--------------------
az guy aka: R & L Bowlers Pro
rlbowlerspro@cox.net
www.rlbowlerspro.com


Powermachine-

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 863
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2007, 08:24:13 AM »
nick lane1 needs "bro"
--------------------
yes i sandbag im left handed.
Typical house bowler

freak761

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 565
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2007, 08:32:26 AM »
Nick, I don't throw Brunswick or Lane #1, and see no reason to bash either company. They both make good equipment. But I do appreciate your efforts and enjoy your site. Some of the vids have been hilarious and some have been very informative for me. I use any and all info. that I can pick up and form my own opinions. You are one of the guys providing that information and you are at least trying to make the sport better and for that I thank you.

chitown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5876
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2007, 09:16:02 AM »
quote:
 1. Roll does not equal hook.

A ball transitioning from skid to roll does not mean the ball is starting its hook phase. Chitown, you have outlandishly called me out in your thread (now deleted for whatever reason) without regard for the countless times in the past you have messaged me looking for information, layout help, etc. You have absolutely no merit, no first-hand knowledge and only know what you are spoon fed. You were quick to point out how 4 feet was such a gigantic and huge finding, yet, you don't quite understand what you're saying



Nick, I was not OUTLANDISHLY calling you out!  Well those were not my intentions.  I was calling you and others out from the CG DON'T MATTER group to see what your take was on the USBC findings.  I was not trying to bash you guys by any means.  I had a wink with a smile on the end of my post.

I brought up the 4ft because it does show that the CG did in fact influence the balls reaction.  4ft is a big difference in showing that.  Now does that mean the the CG has a huge influence on the balls OVERALL reaction?  No!  The pin placement is the major factor when it comes to layouts.  Layouts in general don't come close to how the coverstock effects ball reaction.

I deleted my post because it was getting off of the topic I posted.  I wanted to read your guys (cg don't matter group) view on the USBC findings and how it may or may not have changed your views.  I probably could have worded my post differently to not come across so harsh.  I didn't think you or anyone else would have taken it that way.  Sorry if I came across harsh.



--------------------
This fall it's Raw Hammer Time!

chitown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5876
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2007, 09:19:48 AM »
quote:
I have stayed out of this for my own reasons, but, reading all I could from both "sides", this is my opinion.

Math is a funny thing, one can take math and show just what they want to , given the right starting point. As far as a human being able to make the same exact movement/shot, no we can't. As far as anything being proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, IMO, it has not...however, this is what they make Fords, Chevys, etc...etc.

If one person feels it makes a difference to them, then it does, If one person feels it doesn't matter to them, then it doesn't. What works for one will not for another, always. Take the Presidential elections, one will say he/she has the best plan for something and if that voter feels it will help them, then the other candidate are all wrong.

IMO, if you feel the CG matters, then it does for you and you should drill your stuff accordingly, If you feel it has no bearing on your balls, then forget it and drill it the way you feel helps you the best.

To make it simple, that's also why there are more than one company that makes balls, it matters to some where it doesn't to others. No one will ever agree on this, so I say do what you feel helps you the best and don't give a hoot what someone else thinks on the matter.

As for me, it matters, so I use the CG placement, do I push my feelings onto someone else ? No ! Last time I went bowling I didn't see anyone from either side throwing the ball for me so I'll use what I feel works for me and allow the next guy to use what works for him.

BTW, I own ( or my wife does) a GMC, Plymouth, Dodge and a Mercedes. I'll never own a Ford, but, as with the CG thing, that's MY OPINION and not trying to push my opinion on others.

'nuff said.
--------------------
az guy aka: R & L Bowlers Pro
rlbowlerspro@cox.net
www.rlbowlerspro.com




Well said Roger!
--------------------
This fall it's Raw Hammer Time!

storm making it rain

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2007, 09:23:49 AM »
i dont care if cg matters or not. but i have to agree with ric hamlin bottom line is we as bowlers need to get more people to bowl and enjoy the sport we all love

Eddie M

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2007, 09:26:02 AM »
In reading the opening post of this thread, I couldn't help but to be reminded of a quote from someone else who went to great lengthes to talk thier way out of a losing arguement....

 
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
--------------------
Visionary Test Staff 07-08
Right Handed
Motiv Venom Shock, Motiv Freestyle, Storm Mix
avg: 221 - hg: 300 x7

Left Handed
Storm Street Fight, Storm Mix
avg: 180

KDawg77

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11594
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2007, 09:41:33 AM »
Stop that! That's Silly!

It's time for something decent and military: some precision drilling.
--------------------
Texas is neither southern nor western. Texas is Texas - Senator William Blakley
http://www.myspace.com/lefthandedhammerpride
http://members.bowl.com/FindAMember/memberView.aspx?mp=418&ms=2006&s=2006-2007

Fluff E Bunnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5617
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2007, 09:45:47 AM »
I would make light of the situation or make a bad joke just to make a few people laugh and the rest roll their eyes as per usual, but I barely made it out of the kiddie table alive.

CGMADDAHSONLYFORROBOTS.

  • Guest
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2007, 09:51:49 AM »
quote:

I would make light of the situation or make a bad joke just to make a few people laugh and the rest roll their eyes as per usual, but I barely made it out of the kiddie table alive.

CGMADDAHSONLYFORROBOTS.

_____________________________________________________________

By the way, Fluff, sorry you got grouped together with me yesterday. I guess our "moronic" posts fell upon sensitive ears.  People really need to laugh once in awhile...

But, I would like the above-mentioned T-shirt, should you decide to make them...



--------------------
notclay

Lane Carter, Strike Zone Pro Shops - Salt Lake City, Utah


"He who dies with the most bowling balls is still dead."

KDawg77

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11594
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2007, 09:55:12 AM »
quote:
quote:
In reading the opening post of this thread, I couldn't help but to be reminded of a quote from someone else who went to great lengths to talk their way out of a losing argument....

 
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."


Maybe Bubba should have told everyone to f-off and continuously cite executive privilege, like the Bush Administration, to get out of having to admit to getting a bj in the oval office, which is oh such a dastardly crime, lol.



Neither comment was germane and one was not factual. Sad.
--------------------
Texas is neither southern nor western. Texas is Texas - Senator William Blakley
http://www.myspace.com/lefthandedhammerpride
http://members.bowl.com/FindAMember/memberView.aspx?mp=418&ms=2006&s=2006-2007

Fluff E Bunnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5617
Re: A BrunsNick response...
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2007, 09:59:25 AM »
quote:

But, I would like the above-mentioned T-shirt, should you decide to make them...



Hehe, nah that would be a blatant rip-off and I would feel dirty...  Half of the joke of the shirt was that it would such a stupid shirt to make.  Have an insanely long word on the front etc.  No one got the joke.  Standard.

For the record, I don't have a side in the debate between the CGicans and the NOMADDAHcrats.  I like watching all the test results and seeing everyone insult each other.