This article was pretty interesting and well written, so i thought you guys might find it an interesting read also. Back to Bowling Basics

That's the point, and that's why I said there are plenty of things you can do to increase your chances, but scientifically, logically, and mathematically, you're dependant on certain prerequisites.  The angle I was trying to work must be too abstract, because nobody is getting it.  You have zero control over how the pins bounce around, therefore you have zero control over the results.  There are a lot of things you can do to improve your chances, but improving your chances and having control over something are totally different.  Just like poker, you can have aces vs kings, but is that any guarantee you will win the hand?  Yeah, the percentages are in your favor, but you aren't in CONTROL of the cards that come out.  If you were in control of the cards coming out, meaning you were choosing them, you could ensure you'd win.  Since you aren't, you simply do your best to make your chances the best you can make them.  You are either in control or not in control, you are 100% responsible or 0% responsible.  It's not a discussion of influence, because that is a secondary factor.  If you were in control of the pins falling down, they would all fall on every single shot, but you aren't, so you are in 0% control.  Your probability may be 99.9% success, but again is secondary to control. 

I would hope you don't think I'm so inept that I think the bowler has absolutely zero to do with the outcome and that you can chuck a ball down the lane and then things magically happen.  You think I'm so dumb I don't realize that throwing the ball at the 10 pin wouldn't result in a strike?  I wish people would try to figure out what angles somebody is working or what they mean before assuming something so simplistic.  OBVIOUSLY the bowler has a significant amount of influence, but they have ZERO control by hard and fast definition. 

How many strikes have you gotten hitting the 10 pin??  Of course ability and accuracy count!  There just aren't any guarantees that a "perfect" pocket hit scores a strike although the percentages are much higher.

Obviously you still need to make good shots, the bowlers accuracy does play a part of it, but it doesn't matter how well you throw it if the physics going on aren't working.

I'm getting the feeling alot of what is getting argued is words. You can stand on the lanes, have a perfect release with perfect timing, and all of that good stuff and it all doesn't matter if something between point A and point B has changed with the physics of it.

I get what you are saying Gizmo, lots of things can change that the bowler himself just simply can't see or feel that can change the physics side. Most of the list would sound like some crazy excuse list and we would all point and laugh at anyone that tried to use it as an excuse. Mathematically speaking though, any slight change does change the sum and could possibly change the outcome.

I see it really as two different things, all that stuff we do before the ball hits the lane ( for me thats the actual shot) and then everything else. The most accurate bowler we know of is that robot they use to test balls. It throws a perfect " shot " indefinitely, however it doesn't adjust for the physics part of it therefore it can't throw a perfect game.

I may be wrong but I'm guessing that is what you are arguing Gizmo. You could have someone that could replicate the same footwork, timing, release, and hit the same spot every single time but they still won't always strike. We as bowlers are really doing two different things at the same time, trying to replicate prefection and adjusting for the physics involved. We are human so generally its the first part that causes the problem, but on occasion the physics will get in the way.

I thought you guys would find this topic interesting and get in a discussion. excellent points

Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about.  Yes, it may be splitting hairs to a degree, but that's the point.  When you make a bold statement like that, and it's either startling, or even confusing, it gets people to really engage their heads or invest a lot more thought in the article or topic rather than just passively reading.  And yes, I would hope that people realize and understand that how you throw the ball definitely matters . . but that physics are still in control.  It speaks to me specifically, because a few months ago before I started diving this deep, I always thought that I had a lot more control than that.  This all has changed my perspective, so I'm throwing the ball a lot easier now and scoring a lot better because I'm not trying to control everything. 

Obviously you still need to make good shots, the bowlers accuracy does play a part of it, but it doesn't matter how well you throw it if the physics going on aren't working.

I'm getting the feeling alot of what is getting argued is words. You can stand on the lanes, have a perfect release with perfect timing, and all of that good stuff and it all doesn't matter if something between point A and point B has changed with the physics of it.

I get what you are saying Gizmo, lots of things can change that the bowler himself just simply can't see or feel that can change the physics side. Most of the list would sound like some crazy excuse list and we would all point and laugh at anyone that tried to use it as an excuse. Mathematically speaking though, any slight change does change the sum and could possibly change the outcome.

I see it really as two different things, all that stuff we do before the ball hits the lane ( for me thats the actual shot) and then everything else. The most accurate bowler we know of is that robot they use to test balls. It throws a perfect " shot " indefinitely, however it doesn't adjust for the physics part of it therefore it can't throw a perfect game.

I may be wrong but I'm guessing that is what you are arguing Gizmo. You could have someone that could replicate the same footwork, timing, release, and hit the same spot every single time but they still won't always strike. We as bowlers are really doing two different things at the same time, trying to replicate prefection and adjusting for the physics involved. We are human so generally its the first part that causes the problem, but on occasion the physics will get in the way.

I agree with Gizmo, after games of 226-213 was shooting at a possible 268 in the 8th frame left the 7-10 on what seems to be pretty good ball ended up striking out 9th and 10th frames for 235 did not change anything on  the lane I left the 7-10.

Please don't take this the wrong way. But the article's topic is "Back to the Basics". Yet I see nothing in the article that mentions what these basics in bowling are?

Okay read. Just needs more direction and specifics. Yoda touch is nice. But again...what is it that we bowlers "must unlearn that we have learned".