BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Juggernaut on January 20, 2019, 02:09:20 PM
-
And I wondered, “ What will they do, once the amateurs can’t use them anymore?â€
Yes, I realize it’s still over a season away, and yes, I realize the PBA is NOT the USBC, nor is it obligated to follow USBC rules.
Still, the question remains.
Do you think the pros will continue to utilize drilling’s that we can’t after the date comes, or will they stop using the x holes after that point?
Just curious what you guys think.
-
If they can, they will. You’d be dumb not to.
-
I thought the PBA had to follow USBC ball specs?
-
I thought the PBA had to follow USBC ball specs?
As far as I know, PBA and USBC rules only cross when it comes to the Masters. I heard a story a long time ago where Shafer won with a ball that had 2.5 oz of thumb, and when he took it to Nationals, they tried to put an extra hole in it and he objected. "I just won with that ball on Tour!"
-
They go through equipment so fast what you see them use now doesn’t even really matter.
-
I thought I had read that the PBA will adopt the new USBC ball specification rules, but I could be wrong. The PBA Rule Book is currently being revised and is unavailable to check things out.
Regardless, most accomplished PBA players use fairly basic layouts and use their hand versatility to create the right look. Most players don't want layouts that do crazy things. That's been my experience participating in Regionals and National events and observing what other players are doing.
For the handful of balls I've had drilled up since the new specifications, I've seen almost no real difference in not drilling x-holes. As usual, it comes down to how well you throw the ball. That's the only thing that ultimately matters.
-
Not sure why they wouldn't use weight holes
-
PBA,rules generally are the same as USBC but there hsve been differences over the years. When ball hardness was adopted PBA was at 72, ABC was 75. Also PBA didn't follow ABV amendment 4 requiring even oil edge to edge. Also in late 70s.
-
Don't you guys think that the majority of course haven't caught up with the weight hole rules yet?
Like the stuff that's out is still very advantageous to use weight holes. In a year's time I better majority of core specs might change to where it's beneficial to have no hole with most cores?
I would imagine they're spending a lil more dough on core R&D and still a ton on cover tech to ensure the difference isnt a ton when they can't do x holes anymore...
-
I for one just posted a long objection to this weight hole rule on the USBC Facebook page! I doubt seriously that Mr. Chad will read it! I think it's one of the more stupid rules that they've ever come up with.....and I have yet to hear the reason why it's being implemented!
I told them if this goes through, I for one will NOT be attending anymore USBC events. Not Nationals or any other tourneys that they sponsor. And I will be encouraging folks to divest themselves from joining the USBC, period!
This rule is an imposed financial hardship on me. Some of my favorite pieces have weight holes on them and a couple of tournament only pieces have "Mo Holes" on them! It's not like the USBC is sending me a check by which I can pay to get all my favorite pieces re-plugged!! We know that ain't happening!
And, by this single decree, they have made my attendance at certain seminars that I paid good money for.......null and void!! All that knowledge that I obtained in learning how to customize your hook shape on the lanes is totally useless to me now.
I am not happy that they choose to take a productive tool away from my toolbox, and if the Pros are continuing to use them, I'll be doubly pissed!
-
I for one just posted a long objection to this weight hole rule on the USBC Facebook page! I doubt seriously that Mr. Chad will read it! I think it's one of the more stupid rules that they've ever come up with.....and I have yet to hear the reason why it's being implemented!
I told them if this goes through, I for one will NOT be attending anymore USBC events. Not Nationals or any other tourneys that they sponsor. And I will be encouraging folks to divest themselves from joining the USBC, period!
This rule is an imposed financial hardship on me. Some of my favorite pieces have weight holes on them and a couple of tournament only pieces have "Mo Holes" on them! It's not like the USBC is sending me a check by which I can pay to get all my favorite pieces re-plugged!! We know that ain't happening!
And, by this single decree, they have made my attendance at certain seminars that I paid good money for.......null and void!! All that knowledge that I obtained in learning how to customize your hook shape on the lanes is totally useless to me now.
I am not happy that they choose to take a productive tool away from my toolbox, and if the Pros are continuing to use them, I'll be doubly pissed!
It sucks so bad for so many.
I feel so lucky because I ended up developing my game to pretty much not use weight holes over the past decade or so
-
I know for a long time PBA events were not ABC/USBC sanctioned.
I believe in the last 5 to 10 years with USBC sponsorship in some events and possibly other reasons they did start having the PBA tournaments USBC sanctioned.
So I would presume all USBC playing rules would be followed, including static weights and weight holes.
However since the rule is not yet in effect I see no problem with PBA bowlers still using weight holes.
-
USBC wont say it but weight hole rules to keep no thumbers from being able to get multiple layouts on a single ball.
-
PBA went unsanctioned soley because they didnt want to be encumbered by the ABC lane oil initiatives prior to 1989. As for balance hole rule it is the most ill conceived legislation I have seen. It alienates a signuficant portion of bowlers without achieving any significant impact on the game.
Agree that rule is thinly veiled attempt to limit 2 handers. It isnt going to have any significant impact on them either
-
Honestly at this point it's whatever. I have equipment with and without, I could care less. I think folks that used weight holes for increasing or decreasing flare will just have to adjust their pin-pap accordingly.
-
PBA went unsanctioned soley because they didnt want to be encumbered by the ABC lane oil initiatives prior to 1989. As for balance hole rule it is the most ill conceived legislation I have seen. It alienates a signuficant portion of bowlers without achieving any significant impact on the game.
Agree that rule is thinly veiled attempt to limit 2 handers. It isnt going to have any significant impact on them either
Exactly Avabob! To me, this is a dumb rule which actually affects a larger proportion of the bowling public. I know a ton of older bowlers, affectionately called "Fluffers" who have double thumb holes just so they can stay competitive! That double thumb hole gives them that little bit of extra hook that they can no longer physically achieve by way of speed or revs!
This will most aptly affect them the most! In my area we have multiple Senior leagues that bowl; we also have multiple retirees leagues. This, to me was an idea not well thought out in regards to its overall effects!
Well one thing folks will not have to worry about happening, when they go to Nationals and get their balls weighed........they won't be punching a hole in the ball you intend to use, any longer!
-
PBA went unsanctioned soley because they didnt want to be encumbered by the ABC lane oil initiatives prior to 1989. As for balance hole rule it is the most ill conceived legislation I have seen. It alienates a signuficant portion of bowlers without achieving any significant impact on the game.
Agree that rule is thinly veiled attempt to limit 2 handers. It isnt going to have any significant impact on them either
I completely agree with what I bolded above. Just from the PR aspect, being a dumb move is an understatement.
Still, the new 3oz rule is much more driller friendly. I just got a new Track Paradox V that came with a short pin, but I wanted a pin-up layout. The high top weight would have normally required a P1 hole or fingers drilled to China, which were both non-starters for me. Under the new rules, we drilled my standard pin-up layout without worrying about an x-hole, and the ball rolls great. I'm happy. :)
-
I have had all new bowling balls drilled for me this season. None of them have weight holes. I am bowling better than ever. This weight hole debate is overrated.
-
WOW
Lots of opinions on both sides, and both sides have compelling things to say.
I, myself, am in favor of the new rule, even though I do have a few that will need to have the extra hole plugged. Or replace them altogether.
I hope the PBA does away with the x holes as well. It would look bad for them to continue to use them when the amateurs can’t.
If we can’t use them, why should they?
-
Yeah ended up being less hassle than I expected as I just brought a ball or two every time went to pro shop and it spread out cost as well. Didn't really affect ball motion at all as most of mine are already drilled strong. Have some gems may never plug though. Still sure beats Chad banning half my arsenal with higher diffs like he was talking about.
-
I only have one ball in the bag that has one, and I was planning on replacing that anyways. #Score