Author Topic: Do we make the game way too complicated? (Read 10251 times)

Russell · « **on:** April 14, 2011, 10:22:25 PM »

I was reading another forum where a ball driller suggested a couple of layouts for a bowler going to nationals. On one it was like a 4 and 3/4" with a couple of degree coordinates. The other ball had the same degree coordinates but the pin distance was listed as 4 and 13/16".

Let's be real....does a 1/16" make any difference when most bowlers aren't tolerant by less than 2" at the breakpoint? I am a "KISS" (Keep It Simple Stupid) kind of guy. I have seen bowling try to go to the space age with core technology over the past few years, and what has it given us?

Most of the super cores roll like crap overall. Mo Pinell has been designing cores that are at the cutting edge of physics for 2 decades, and for the most part his balls roll like a wet turd. I can take a Tornado and sand it to 220 and make it roll like most MoRich balls...and at 1/2 the price. I'm not hating on Mo himself...he's an incredibly bright man, I just question how much technology we REALLY need.

The game is still the same...the pins are 3.5lbs, the ball is 27" around, and the lane is 60' long. Most of the BEST balls over the past years have had simple cores with good stable covers on them:

Gamebreaker

V2

Tour Power

Hyroad

Black Widow (Int Diff wasn't that high)

505C

There are plenty of others, and yes I know there are some balls that people have loved that were highly asymmetrical. Most of those balls end up being condition specific, and very sensitive to release. For example at Nationals this year, very few people seem to be having success with hook monsters, and most are throwing balls that are asymm with weaker covers or symmetrical cores altogether.

I had a fellow ball driller tell me a while back when I had a ball that was baffling me on why it wouldn't hook "oh you should have done a 4" mass bias not a 4.5"....really? 1/2" would make a ball go from hitting flush in the 3/6 pocket to high flush? Have we really convinced ourselves that this stuff matters THAT much?

Am I the only one that feels this way?

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #61 on:** April 18, 2011, 07:33:18 PM »

Late to this but have skimmed through it some.

Simple layouts are relative to the persons understanding of bowling. Dual angles if nothing else is a very easy way to layout your equipment exact from one ball to the next. Also from one bowler to the next. If we all picked up and threw the same bowling ball, our different styles would have some different reactions from that one bowling ball. The reason being is the balls pin to pap is different for each bowler even thought it is the same ball.

Now in terms of does a half inch or inch make a difference when dealing with pin locations on a bowling ball?

Yes.

It will also depend on the bowling ball. In general with your mid to higher end bowling balls and the aggressiveness of the core, every bit the pin is moved will have a larger effect then on something like a Slingshot.

That being said I prefer simple. I found after drilling many many bowling balls that I have about four main layouts that I use consistently and thats it. Occasionally I will try something outside of the box for something specific, but by in large I go with a standard four patterns and let the BALL be the DIFFERENCE. It is simple.

Be good, or be good at it.

Russell · « **Reply #62 on:** April 18, 2011, 07:46:27 PM »

kidlost,

I am not saying that 1/2" doesn't matter....I said 1/8". I agree dual angle is a good layout technique. I prefer to place pin and mb by coordinate method (ex 4.5" pin 5" mb 3" above midline). In the grand scheme of things they end up the same, as the higher the pin, the more dramatic the move downlane....same as low angle dual layouts.

Doesn't make dual angle wrong....just not running out and changing everything I have ever done because of the new flavor of the month. I talk to people that think because something new comes out that everything done before that point is wrong. I find it funny that a couple of the tour reps don't even use dual angle....you would think that if it were the gospel they would use it for the best on the planet.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

« **Reply #63 on:** April 19, 2011, 09:37:56 AM »

Those that want to worry about every 1/8 of an inch on their layout will always do so. They want to have something to talk endlessly about after league as to why they did (or did not) score that night.

The rest of the bowling population will do their best to execute shots, and after league probably blame themselves whether they did (or did not) score that night.

I have been cornered many times by the former asking the endless questions about their equipment, etc., when in actuality their physical and mental games need improvement. It's true that the science of the sport isn't going away. I just don't think I need to know ALL of it to enjoy the game.

To those who love the technical side of the sport I say knock yourselves out. Read anything and everything you can get your hands on. We are not all the same, so if it appeals to you then keep after it. In the event that you find that magical layout that doesn't require that you come near your target on a regular basis I will be all ears. Until then I will trust that execution and surface preparation are the key and I will keep working on them. Good luck to all of us as we move forward. It has been fun hearing both sides of this question.

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

www.brunswickbowling.com

The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.

Edited by notclay on 4/19/2011 at 9:39 AM

Coolerman · « **Reply #64 on:** April 19, 2011, 09:59:38 AM »

With so much time and energy being spent on telling us that we should be

concerned about layouts and dynamics,just the opposite is true.Ball cover

and surface adjustments are key to matching up to the pattern in front of you.

When us bowlers or PBA members are not matching up,the first thing we

look for is matching up with the right ball that has the correct coverstock

strength, and the correct cover adjustment to the surface.

If you are using a plastic ball on a 46' heavily oiled flat surface,and the

ball is not working,are you going to go get another plastic ball we a

dynamic drilling that transitions sooner.Or are you going to get a different

ball with a stronger coverstock and the proper cover adjustment.Keep it simple.

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #65 on:** April 19, 2011, 07:39:32 PM »

1/8" does make a difference in the respects of what it does to the ball. Is it noticeable to us? Not likely. I agree that in the scheme of things after the ball is drilled it all comes down to surface.

The problem with most of the Morich LevRG series in my opinion was that most of the balls in that series had strong duller covers. When I added polish to my LevRG and N'tense LevRG they went from being so so to amazing. Only one house that I came across had enough oil for the N'tense to be used OOB. I know many people including myself had the same problem with the Hammer Jigsaw. OBB was a turd, but after some polish was the most amazing ball I've seen in a while. Even then it still was too much ball to use more then a game and a half most nights of league.

Only time I get concerned with small fraction changes in pin distance is when trying to keep the pin away from finger holes. I prefer a little bit of a buffer.(thats just me)

Be good, or be good at it.

completebowler · « **Reply #66 on:** April 20, 2011, 08:50:45 AM »

Thought I would chime in. Imo, the technology is very important. That said, nothing overrides throwing it better. But guys, I think we can all recall having a bout where we threw the ball better than our opponent only to lose because of bad matchup. That includes cover strength, cover prep, core type and strength, and layout. Every one of those things have evolved greatly in the last 5 years alone.

I think the "hook monsters" are very important. They allow a speed dominant player to see more motion that helps them carry more corners. They also help a power tweener like myself step left and carry. It is just fact. When watching other guys scoring well in a squad playing 5-10 boards deeper it gives me a clue where the pattern should be attacked. I can tell you now, I won't be stepping in there with a Tropical or Freeze. Now, I could continue playing my 10-8 little belly but not all of us are Norm Duke or Walter Ray.

The layout techniques to me are reserved for the best players. I don't bother getting a PAP off a 160-170 bowler who I am going to go out and coach after I drill the ball.

Russell and Jug I definitely see your points and many times agree but this topic got skewed a bit. We all want to score better....not just bowl better. And every ball, every technology has a place in today game to help us in that pursuit.

ALL STAR BOWLING & TROPHY
LANGAN'S ALL STAR LANES
IBPSIA MEMBER
WALLED LAKE MI

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #67 on:** April 20, 2011, 09:01:00 AM »

Reminds me of something I've learned while bowling as well.

When your bowling good the ball doesn't matter.

When your bowling bad the ball doesn't matter.

Be good, or be good at it.

completebowler · « **Reply #68 on:** April 20, 2011, 09:03:07 AM »

And as an aside....the scoring pace is much bigger these days, but I think it isn't necessarily a bad thing. All four major sports in this country have done things in recent years to increase scoring because it is more exciting. Same goes for bowling. It is more fun to watch guys crush the pocket then it is to watch them attempt to cover the 3-9-10 split. We all know which one takes more skill right?

ALL STAR BOWLING & TROPHY
LANGAN'S ALL STAR LANES
IBPSIA MEMBER
WALLED LAKE MI

Russell · « **Reply #69 on:** April 20, 2011, 09:52:03 AM »

Complete I agree with your points...and yes the technology is different. I honestly don't think the scoring boom of the past few years is due to ball technology. I went and looked up balls used by guys that have shot 900...and there are VERY few high end balls on the list. Most of them are midline...or even older balls. I think it has more to do with the changes in lane oil.

I remember bowling second shift leagues a few years ago starting around 5th arrow and ending the night sliding in the left ditch. Now you make one...maybe two moves a night and never change balls....or speeds...just a quick 4 and 2 left and you're back on the strike train. I started bowling at the end of last year after taking most of the year off. I threw it horrible and one night shot 770...I remember I didn't feel like I had bowled well at all...I just never had to move one time. I started looking 14 at the arrows...and ended looking 14 at the arrows. That was unheard of 10 years ago.

I think that has more to do with the scoring than cores....just my opinion.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #70 on:** April 20, 2011, 10:03:08 AM »

It would be hard to shoot 900(with any ball) or with many of the high end balls because of the covers. They break down the lanes/lines quickly and you would have to move a lot through the course of three games. With most of the midline and less equipment you can go a whole night and make much smaller moves.

There is a lot of talk about this new oil but I haven't seen it. During league we rarely see a heavy oiled shot and most tournaments are the same. Maybe it does exist somewhere besides nationals or maybe it is relative to your style of bowling.

Be good, or be good at it.

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #71 on:** April 20, 2011, 10:44:10 AM »

It seems like I have to move more now than I used to just five years ago. I've had plenty of nights this past season where I started with a baby swing of 10 at the arrows to 8 at the breakpoint, and by the end of the 3rd game I was playing 20 at the arrows to 10 at the breakpoint with a weaker ball. On the other hand, I've also had a few nights at the same house where I got to camp out and move only 2 and 1 left the entire night. (Not coincidentally, almost all of my best series came on those nights.) Almost all of those were cases of me being one of only two or three people playing anywhere close to that part of the lane.

Russell wrote on 4/20/2011 9:52 AM:
I remember bowling second shift leagues a few years ago starting around 5th arrow and ending the night sliding in the left ditch. Now you make one...maybe two moves a night and never change balls....or speeds...just a quick 4 and 2 left and you're back on the strike train. I started bowling at the end of last year after taking most of the year off. I threw it horrible and one night shot 770...I remember I didn't feel like I had bowled well at all...I just never had to move one time. I started looking 14 at the arrows...and ended looking 14 at the arrows. That was unheard of 10 years ago.

Author Topic: Do we make the game way too complicated? (Read 10251 times)

Russell

Do we make the game way too complicated?

kidlost2000

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Russell

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Coolerman

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

kidlost2000

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

completebowler

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

kidlost2000

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

completebowler

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Russell

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

kidlost2000

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Dan Belcher

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?