BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: stormdamage on November 22, 2012, 11:36:36 AM
-
Hey guys last night I had two ballsdrilled. When I got home I noticed one wasn't drilled right. I asked for a stacked drill pin over the ring and it got drilled pin over ring with cg in the palm. A label leverage you might say. I am furious but what if anything can I do? I know he'd fix it for free but I am not gonna have a brand new ball that's never been thrown plugged.
-
Is the ball in question symmetrical? No need to be upset, its not going to be a huge difference in the two drillings.
-
Well I take that back. It depends on what pin stacked means. Need more information. Pin, Cg and/or MB can be stacked 2" from the PAP or 6". All depends on what you asked for. In a symmetrical, CG will only matter for statics and weight hole.
-
As asked previously, is it a symmetric? If so, there is no need to be upset, because the only real difference would be if you were planning to add a weight hole later. On a symmetric, the CG is used only to allow for extra holes in order to "fine tune" a balls reaction.
IF IT IS ASYMMETRIC, the placement of the MB is far more important than the CG, and the CG could end up off line and still be a "stacked" drilling, depending on the relation of the CG to a line drawn from the pin to the MB.
-
Hey guys last night I had two ballsdrilled. When I got home I noticed one wasn't drilled right. I asked for a stacked drill pin over the ring and it got drilled pin over ring with cg in the palm. A label leverage you might say. I am furious but what if anything can I do? I know he'd fix it for free but I am not gonna have a brand new ball that's never been thrown plugged.
I'm not sure why'd you'd want to do anything.
If you stack the CG below the pin (over the ring finger), then the CG is about 3/4" right (for a right-hander) of the grip.
Even if you wanted to put the CG right of the grip to be able to use a P2/3/4 weight hole, with the CG in the grip you can still put in a weight hole.
Except for the weight hole, that CG location means virtually nothing.
There are significantly more important things to worry about. Honestly.
-
The only reason why I would understand being upset is because you asked to have the CG below the pin...other than that, unnecessary stress especially seeing you haven't thrown it.
-
My ball driller an esteemed multiple time regional champ would disagree with this set of statements.
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
It is a symmetric ball. 2fast. Biggest gripe is that its not what I asked for. I already have a breeze with this drilling and didn't need this one done that way. Maybe it shouldn't bother me but it does. No different than ordering steak and being served a Burger.
-
It is a symmetric ball. 2fast. Biggest gripe is that its not what I asked for. I already have a breeze with this drilling and didn't need this one done that way. Maybe it shouldn't bother me but it does. No different than ordering steak and being served a Burger.
The way I see it it's more like ordering a steak Medium Rare and getting a steak Medium. If I'm reading everything correctly your CG is roughly 1" left of where you wanted it and the pin is in the correct location...minimal difference.
-
I understand its not what you asked for but I wouldnt let it bother you. The ball is going to go 60ft and flip regardless of how you drill it, especially with no hole. Surface on the symmetrical will be the most essential, asymms as well, but the asymm is a little more fine tunable.
-
+1 for the original poster. I'm not a driller, nor do I play one on TV, but I typically use nothing but symmetric stacked or even swung out and at least for me, when I moved the Cg to palm the reaction was noticeably different in the backend.... It may be a small difference to some, but respectfully, without knowing the OP's style of bowling, previous experience and hell, even that fact that it's simply what he ordered, his point is well taken.
-
My ball driller an esteemed multiple time regional champ would disagree with this set of statements.
Regards,
Luckylefty
Unfortunately, the ability to bowl has nothing to do with the ability to drill and the knowledge required to do that.
-
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Good answer...
-
I am a righty with speed around 17-19 MPH with a pretty decent Rev rate. I prefer down and in anywhere from first to third arrow. I wanted this balled drilled a bit weaker than my fire road which is pin above the RF with the cg swung out right. This ball is basically a mirror image of the fire road. Now the problem I have is what do I do with the eraser banshee that I was going to put between the tropical breeze and the two fast? Was gonna go pin under ring withcg stacked. Not sure now.
-
Lefty50....just to comment on your post....to make legitimate statement such as that, you would have to drill 2 bowling balls (that are the same obviously) and have the exact same specs and lay one out with the CG stacked and the other in the center of your grip...then throw them on the same condition the same amount of shots and use a CATs setup to check the data and not use your assumptions or visual perceptions to base data off of...too many times too much is based upon our own perceptions & preconceived notions on what the ball is or isn't doing...
-
Thanks Rico, a good point and I always appreciate your feedback. In this particular case, the ball was an original Inferno that was stacked under ring. I was attending a camp in Texas and heard such rave reviews from one of the students I was bowling with about what a difference it made, that I pluged and redrilled the Inferno to exactly what the OP has on his drill when I got back home. For me, it was a difference compared to what I had before, same house, albeit a week later. TO my eye, I was getting less backend. I totally concur with your thoughts though, it takes more than just my casual observation to definitely indicate the difference. Respectfully though, I still agree with the OP's point...
Thanks
-
Working with Bill Wasserberger and Billy O at Brunswick taught me how to look at ball motion unbiasedly....reaction ALWAYS looks different at the foul line than it does from the concourse or on CATs...glad you had an Inferno while I was there (:
-
It was during that time indeed. Still one of my all time favorites... :)
-
There were a few good ones back then
-
My brother in law still throws a radical inferno.
-
Dude you obviously have no clue what goes into creating proper ball motion....you obviously thinks its just buy a ball and it'll fix all! And when it doesn't roll like you think it should, it's the balls fault, the ball drillers fault or the lanes suck....
-
Actually the cg is only about 1/2" from where you wanted it...and as it has been stated about 9 times already...unless you were putting an extra hole in it...
IT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE....
Sorry I'm not an esteemed PBA title-holder....but one works for me and knows absolutely nothing about core dynamics and ball motion. I can ask him how much 1/2" means and get back to the poster above.
-
So any suggestions on what to do with the banshee to make it a little weaker than the 2fast? Or should I drill it to be more aggressive?
-
CG NO MATTAH
-
So any suggestions on what to do with the banshee to make it a little weaker than the 2fast? Or should I drill it to be more aggressive?
It depends on your PAP, but you could try a P1 hole or surface adjustments. I would have someone with a good knowledge of motion put a P1 hole in it to decrease flare. This could make the ball change direction a little harder, but should make it go further down the lane.
-
Dude you obviously have no clue what goes into creating proper ball motion....you obviously thinks its just buy a ball and it'll fix all! And when it doesn't roll like you think it should, it's the balls fault, the ball drillers fault or the lanes suck....
jesus christ I'm not going to obsesses over where they place a couple of big dots on the ball. god damn crybabies.
No, you are just going to obsess over your lack of understanding as to why your modern marvel doesn't seem like a strong ball, or any of the other seven threads you started that asked the same basic question.
You are either an obvious idiot, or just someone out to ruffle feathers. EITHER WAY, I can join charlest by now letting you join the members on my ignore list.
-
As noted you are getting yourself all twisted trying to seperate the fly speck from the pepper. You have a former Brunswick Ball Rep telling you that it isn't going to matter. Let it go. Go roll your ball and enjoy or tell your driller you didnt get what you asked for and please drill me a new ball. I am sure he will then show you why you are worried about diddly and you can roll your ball with confidence
I am a righty with speed around 17-19 MPH with a pretty decent Rev rate. I prefer down and in anywhere from first to third arrow. I wanted this balled drilled a bit weaker than my fire road which is pin above the RF with the cg swung out right. This ball is basically a mirror image of the fire road. Now the problem I have is what do I do with the eraser banshee that I was going to put between the tropical breeze and the two fast? Was gonna go pin under ring withcg stacked. Not sure now.
-
Just curious. Who drilled the ball? The local shop or one in Birmingham.
-
Well lets compare apples to apples and see what happens
Pic 01 Outburst with 3.5" pin and 2.5oz top weight
-
Now the drilled
65 X 5.5" X 30
and
80 X 5.5" X 30
-
Now the charts in same order
65 X 5.5 X 30
then
80 X 5.5 X 30
-
Now track flare same order
65 x 5.5 X 30
then
80 X 5.5 X 30
-
kidlost2000--Which symmetrical ball are you basing these facts off of? Where is the x hole on the gradient line on the 65*x5.5"x30* and where is the PSA? I assume the 80*x5.5"x30* does not have an x hole on the gradient line?
-
Its an outburst with the PAP 5.5" straight across from the center gripline. There is no weight hole because the original post gave no information on a weight hole. He simply stated he wanted the pin above the ring finger with the cg stacked. So this shows what he wanted vs what he got on a symmetric core ball
-
So, you changed the drilling angle adjusting the CG?
Its an outburst with the psa 5.5" straight across from the center gripline. There is no weight hole because the original post gave no information on a weight hole. He simply stated he wanted the pin above the ring finger with the cg stacked. So this shows what he wanted vs what he got on a symmetric core ball
-
Sorry on my phone had to correct previous post changing PSA to PAP. The drilling angle on a symmetric only shifts the CG because the ball doesnt have a MB. If you look at the redline in the thumb hole of both balls that does mark the PSA after drlling.
-
IMO this whole thread is full of holes. In the first place if the driller does not have the skill, ability and correct tools to drill a symmetrical to shift cg to correct position and measure PSA before x hole on gradient line and after x hole and placement P1, P2, P3, P4 or no x hole this whole supposition about how the ball should be drilled for said bowler is much ado about nothing. Driller needs a DeTerminator to determine PSA. Everything else is conjecture for the most part.
So, I will agree with those that said whether the cg is stacked or mid grip means little if the driller can not give the drilling angle and VAL angle plus the pin to PAP distance the bowlers requires for the lane condition and the measure where the PSA winds up with a DeTerminator , bowlers stats. and what the bower is looking for out of the ball along with any necessary surface adjustments.
What I have brought up I realise is way beyond the novice but is substantially what will give correct ball motion in symmetricals.
-
If you want to find the PSA on a pin up symmetric you dont need a determinator. Its going to be in the thumb. The x-hole is the only thing that will shift the PSA out from the thumb hole.
-
My guess why the driller shifted the cg is simply so it wouldnt need an x-hole and to make sure the statics were legal. Ask him and see what he says.
-
Incorrect.......example Frantic 80*x5"x43* no x hole PSA left of thumb enough to make a difference when making adjustments/tweaks to get better ball motion. Though surface rules I agree.
The issue should be the OP should be going to a driller that can drill/layout symmetric's correctly to get his dual angles best for him. This is beyond the average Joe Hack Driller.
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi132.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq29%2Fscotts33%2FBowling%2520Equipment%2FStormFrantic.jpg&hash=e283145773c542e312e9edbec524f3d257276655)
After x hole 60*x5"x43* x hole P2
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi132.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq29%2Fscotts33%2FBowling%2520Equipment%2FStormFrantic-1.jpg&hash=bbfd12facdd35104f8d0b74481dae74181d6c336)
If you want to find the PSA on a pin up symmetric you dont need a determinator. Its going to be in the thumb. The x-hole is the only thing that will shift the PSA out from the thumb hole.
-
Holy Jesus I need you guys to tell me how to drill/throw everything and I'll just do the part where I let the ball go.
-
Too many relying on semantics instead of trying to be a better bowler, where the equipment would actually benefit them
-
Scott if you draw a line from the pin 6 3/4" through the thumb does the psa end up with in a 1/2" of that libe? Prior to the x-hole
-
Closer to 7/8". I get your point kl. Images give a better idea than words and it's not semantics. These two layouts gave vastly different results.
-
Just a question to the OP... what kind of condition are you bowling on, and what's your average?
-
Justrico you know from being around bowlers and any local shops that there are many people that live and die by their beliefs on what they think they know no matter how untrue it is and if you show them other wise. It falls under religion and government topics. Practice and bowlers skill set doesnt matter because the magic bowling ball and misunderstandings about ball dynamics would carry the corner pin everytime which would take those 9 open frames to strikes and negate needing to work on spares. lol
-
My only point to the op is if your upset because you think the cg location effects the roll of the ball you really have no reason to be upset. The cg location does not make the ball stronger or weaker.
If your upset because the driller didn't drill the ball exactly as you asked then that is valid.
-
Also since I had a minute before bed here are three plots just for fun.
Blue is the first ball with the CG under the ring finger (65x5.5x30)
Red is with the cg on the center grip line (80x5.5x30)
Green is the cg under the left finger (95.5.5x30)
-
Great work Scott and KL. You guys have done exceptional work to show the facts.
-
I think kl's plot show there is little difference until you put in a x hole on the gradient line. I think that's kl's point....yes? That's my point also. Once you do ball motion can be changed depending on how deep the hole into the core, core density and placement.
-
Using the dual angle method the first line on a symmetric is through the pin and the cg. Are you guys saying that the placement of the cg does not matter assuming that the drill angle is the same?
-
Otherwise changing the placement of the cg will or at least could change the drill angle.
-
Using the dual angle method the first line on a symmetric is through the pin and the cg. Are you guys saying that the placement of the cg does not matter assuming that the drill angle is the same?
Theoretically it makes no difference on a symmetric ball. The reason is the CG is the heavy spot, and has no dynamic significance. It is created by the weight block being a little off center in the bowling ball. From my understanding a ball with a 4" pin has about 1/8" of offset in the weight block. This makes its movement so minute as far as actual effect.
From a physics standpoint, it matters because a variable is changed...but from a "real" standpoint...it's such a small fraction that a bowler can't tell. We miss by a few inches shot to shot, if a ball being drilled with the CG in 1/2" different place makes 1/4" difference at the pins....it's not actually any different. The difference in you shooting 163 and 289 is not 1/4" more or less overall hook.
-
Good post Russell
-
The cg mark is not 100% accurate by any means and you need to weight the ball yourself to find the actual cg is you're really worried about it!! If you use the DeTerminator to find the psa and you weigh the ball you may find that the cg mark is not accurate. I don't worry so much about dual angle layout for a symmetrical ball, but only worry about the cg for my weight hole placement, if I want to use one!!
-
So on a symmetric, using the dual angle method, the pin to PAP,VAL and weight hole placement control ball movement? (along with surface)
That certainly does not seem to be consistent with what Mo Pinel says.
-
OK to answer a couple of questions. Ccrider, the ball was drilled in bham. Regarding what I bowl on. Some very old worn out would lanes that should have been replaced 20 years ago. And yes the main reason I am upset is that the ball was drilled wrong. I realize that worse case scenario this will just be less jumpy on the backend. That said I am more than likely going to sell the ball. Every time I look at it I'm reminded its wrong and I just get upset all over again
-
Have you tried throwing the ball yet to see exactly what it will do?
-
Haven't been able to. Been sick with the flu. Did call my driller earlier to let him know what happened. He didn't know he had drilled it wrong. I figured that much. He said what most of you have been saying that the reaction should still be relatively the same. He said with the pin up drill it should still have a strong backend reaction, especially with my higher Rev rate. We will find out.
-
What part of "it isn't going to make any difference" are you not understanding?
I mean there are some pretty knowledgeable people telling you this may make 1/2" difference in overall hook...and even blueprint, which exaggerates the crap out of everything says it makes almost no difference.
Get over it...yes it's not exactly what you asked for...but it WON'T MATTER!!!
-
If you honestly think it is less jumpy on the backend according to the plots from the blueprint software on a symmetric ball your correct. If you zoom in and look at the 52' to the headpin the 3 lines separate from each other by less then the width of the line. The positive side weight ball is almost half the lines width stronger then the cg in the palm, and the cg in the palm is half the lines width stronger then the cg under the middle finger.
The exact numbers are for the graph above
.............................................cg kicked out...............cg in palm
Pocket entry angle degree............3.16..............................3.03
Pocket position board number........15.90............................15.42
So this will give you an idea of about half a board difference at the pocket.
-
ccrider--The ones that are saying it doesn't make a difference which I agree with by the way....Russell, Kidlost, Justrico are all saying that is not with the x hole on the gradient line just a CG shift. The x hole on the gradient line does MAKE a difference otherwise without the x hole not it does not make a difference very infinitesimally...we are talking two different issues here and it isn't being made known. Clear?
If the OP wanted the ball laid out with a x hole or to add an x hole at some point in the future to change ball motion then yes he would have a gripe.
Two issues here and not being discussed with same factors known. Most are staying with the original premise which is fine others like myself who added to it take the whole issue to task.
So on a symmetric, using the dual angle method, the pin to PAP,VAL and weight hole placement control ball movement? (along with surface)
That certainly does not seem to be consistent with what Mo Pinel says.
-
OK guys last comment on the issue. "It doesn't matter". I get it. I believe you. I know there are plenty of ppl with far more knowledge than I have on this issue which is why I posted the topic in the first place. But perhaps if I had the resources available to me I wouldn't need to ask such questions. I have a passion for Bowling and am simply trying to gain knowledge with each passing day. I would love to learn all the ins and outs of ball physics and drilling but like I said the resources aren't available. If I throw the ball and don't like the reaction then I guess that would be the time to worry as a few of you already stated. The real underlying factor in my reaction to the misdrilling is that I'm a bit neurotic nd a bit ocd. Thanks for all the posts on the topic. I am moving on. I will throw the ball and let the pins fall where they may. Thx again guys.
-
I've read every post by the OP and he never mentions wanting to add an x-hole anywhere. You can easily increase or decrease the balls core dynamics to effect the shape of the ball by adding a x-hole.
As far as trying to figure out where your other ball will fit inline with this and others....who knows. If you don't like the reaction of your new ball after 10 games my suggestion is to adjust the surface. As stated and with what I've tried showing with the graphs the difference in the two cg locations is a half board difference in the last few feet of the lane. You can easily over come that with surface adjustments as well to be stronger or weaker.
If you just flat out hate the ball it isn't the cg, it is going to be surface and the ball in general not matching up. Hopefully the info provided from others does help. Hopefully none of it maters and the ball rolls great anyways.
As far as being OCD goes and wanting what you asked for vs what you got that makes sense. Hopefully you can put that behind you when you go to throw the ball and look at it with a clear mind. Good luck
-
Correct KL! I brought that up and this is where the OP might want to get more information and find a driller that can do this for him. There are more issues than what was originally posted.
Your input shows without an x hole there is little difference well done.
I've read every post by the OP and he never mentions wanting to add an x-hole anywhere. You can easily increase or decrease the balls core dynamics to effect the shape of the ball by adding a x-hole.
-
Good idea stormdamage...I can assure you the best in the world are not where they are because they know core dynamics, physics, and how to match up surfaces to lane conditions.
As stated above, I have a multi PBA titleholder helping in my shop and he knows next to nothing about cores or anything other than repeating shots...he's just pretty good at the latter.
-
ccrider--The ones that are saying it doesn't make a difference which I agree with by the way....Russell, Kidlost, Justrico are all saying that is not with the x hole on the gradient line just a CG shift. The x hole on the gradient line does MAKE a difference otherwise without the x hole not it does not make a difference very infinitesimally...we are talking two different issues here and it isn't being made known. Clear?
Yes. Thanks for the clarification.
-
I have a passion for Bowling and am simply trying to gain knowledge with each passing day. I would love to learn all the ins and outs of ball physics and drilling but like I said the resources aren't available.
If you really are willing to invest some time in learning more, the wiki at bowlingchat.net is a great place to start. The link to the index page is below. -- JohnP
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
-
There was a pretty good bowler named Randy Pederson who I ran into around 2000 or 2001.
As he said while in the pro shop having some stuff prepped.
"Label leverage drilling? Whatever happened to that?"
So if you think about it, if it makes no difference how come it is almost never used on the pro tour where midlane is king? Food for thought?
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS I have seen a ball that used it in the last 10 years, I believe it was the Pin under tornado solid? that Mika used to shoot a 300 with on ?Cheetah? On TV? Hmm? Why? Hmm?
-
Because "label leverage" usually provides too much flare nowadays. Unless you're dealing with a lower diff ball, it's too much. That's why you hardly see anyone (Other than Duke and WRWJR) going less than 4.5 inches from pap.
-
Because it's not 2001?......
I mean by that logic let's all bust out our bleeders and make run at the tour...screw knowledge :)
-
Mika used a low flare stinger when he shot 300 on tv and yes you are correct the cores of today's are too strong to be using leverage
-
By the way, stormdamage... I don't know how to say this without sounding mean, so please don't take it that way...
If all it takes to throw you into a mental downward spiral is your "Stacked" drilling not being "Stacked", and by that, I mean by a half inch, maybe your next ball purchase should be put off, and maybe work with someone on the mental side of your game.
I know, I know. "I didn't get EXACTLY what I asked for, so I am going to sell it." kind of makes you sound like a whiny brat. Who knows, you may shoot the lights out with it. CG placement on a symmetrical is maybe 1-2% of ball reaction. Extra hole placement is a larger part, and as always, the biggest part is surface.
That's my thoughts on it. Flame away if you feel the need.
-
Even label skip the leverage, just hardly ever seen on tour with the type of drilling Stormdamage is talking about. CG back towards grip?
Why? Why not? It should roll the same right?
(What do I expect in reply). A bunch of piling on). Think, have you seen these? Except at your house? Playing your house shot?
Note in his reply JustRico never discussed the drilling? Why?
Why did someone want his cg right on or near his grip center to play cheetah (IF it doesn't make any difference)?
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS I await the piling on....
-
So there was no need for an extra hole? *shrug*
-
Even label skip the leverage, just hardly ever seen on tour with the type of drilling Stormdamage is talking about. CG back towards grip?
Why? Why not? It should roll the same right?
(What do I expect in reply). A bunch of piling on). Think, have you seen these? Except at your house? Playing your house shot?
Note in his reply JustRico never discussed the drilling? Why?
Why did someone want his cg right on or near his grip center to play cheetah (IF it doesn't make any difference)?
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS I await the piling on....
It's very simple. It's because "label" is not a drilling.
It's what the manufacturer puts on the ball to identify it.
-
LL....are you just trying to pick a fight?
I mean I explained in detail WHY the CG placement doesn't matter....which was backed up by a former ball rep....
Blueprint...which exaggerates the **** out of everything only shows 1/2" difference at the pins...
and you're best defense is a guy using a ball that has almost ZERO core dynamics and a diff under .035 as a good reason why this debate needs to drag on?....come on..
-
"It's very simple. It's because "label" is not a drilling.
It's what the manufacturer puts on the ball to identify it."
Exactly Charlest. It really says a lot but will be missed by many.
Stacked, label, rev leverage, negative, are all very vague terms in many cases used to describe pin and cg locations on a bowling ball many times with out ever going off of someones PAP. Many bowlers, proshops, ect have become far more educated on what the effects are on drilling a bowling ball and how things will shift once holes are added to the ball. Also how that is important when measured off of a bowlers PAP not just putting holes over a label and saying its "label" or doing that and kicking the cg out with a weight hole and saying its label leverage ect ect.
-
Last time negative had anything to do with anything was when you were drilling anything with a pancake weight block.
-
Many bowlers and others think that if the pin is on the opposite side of the center grip line from their ring finger it is "negative".
-
Impending Doom...I'll give something to think about...
When you look at a pancake or 3-piece ball, we all assume it is a low diff low dynamic core; if you at it from a different angle, it is a large 2-piece core with one density piece on top of lighter density piece....yes it's a low diff core but it can still show similar characteristics as one of today's cores...i.e. if you add a weight hole you can increase the diff and can lower the RG as well as increase flare....I no longer at those types of cores as nothing less as a low diff core and deal with accordingly.
-
Let's switch the subject.
No referral back to the drilling of Mika's ball and on to a new discussion.
Why no discussion of Mika's pin under ring and cg under grip center drilling by Just Rico. Who would know better than the knowledgeable JustRico who knows the ball used.
Ask yourself, why would a pro choose this drilling on a symmetric drill ball, if it doesn't matter? Why is this pattern almost never used on the pro tour, but was used on that pattern?
Think about why this discussion is being avoided. Why?
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Let's switch the subject.
No referral back to the drilling of Mika's ball and on to a new discussion.
Why no discussion of Mika's pin under ring and cg under grip center drilling by Just Rico. Who would know better than the knowledgeable JustRico who knows the ball used.
Ask yourself, why would a pro choose this drilling on a symmetric drill ball, if it doesn't matter? Why is this pattern almost never used on the pro tour, but was used on that pattern?
Think about why this discussion is being avoided. Why?
Regards,
Luckylefty
Is this a joke?
Because they didn't want to put a hole in it...but wanted it to flare?
They also realized the core was not very dynamic...?
-
I;d suggest starting a new thread rather than clutter this one up LL. This subject that the OP posted has been dealt with JMO.
Let's switch the subject.
No referral back to the drilling of Mika's ball and on to a new discussion.
Why no discussion of Mika's pin under ring and cg under grip center drilling by Just Rico. Who would know better than the knowledgeable JustRico who knows the ball used.
Ask yourself, why would a pro choose this drilling on a symmetric drill ball, if it doesn't matter? Why is this pattern almost never used on the pro tour, but was used on that pattern?
Think about why this discussion is being avoided. Why?
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Russell,
I went back and reread everyone of your posts on this subject in this thread. While addressing the beliefs of the CG No maddeh cult which exists out here, I guess I can say, I don't understand how they have added to the science or should I say pseudo science of the Brunswick video regarding same pin and different cg positions video.
I have many questions(several) about these videos which are intentionally not being answered out here.
I have found some documents out here sent to me or posted by Kidlost2000 and Scott33 to advance the science of core orientation and also I believe to backup my ideas and visuals of what I am seeing the ball doing on the lanes.
Again, to answer my question and I'll add another for you Russell.
1. Why do you almost never see the described drilling Mika used that day on Cheetah used on the pro tour on the majority of other conditions?
2nd question and while my previous post was intended for Just Rico this question is particularly for you Russell.
2. If you were going to compete in a tournament would you used the above referenced Mika drilling on a Strong symmetric to play deep on a late league shot inside the 4th area? or on Shark pattern? Or a slight variation if you need it to make it realistic, move the pin up but leave the CG on the grip center would you choose this drilling to win while executing on this this angle of play? Or if you wouldn't use a symmetric would you put your mass bias on your track?
Thanks,
Luckylefty
PS, Scott I believe we were joint posting, I will create a new thread on these areas...
-
So LL your asking why Mika had a ball with the pin under the ring finger and the cg on the center grip line and not have the cg kicked out?
-
Keep in mind also having the pin down the ball will flare less and be less aggressive on the backend vs having the pin up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih45VXg8tP8
-
Kid,
I actually asked JustRico that question and also Russell that and the other question regarding playing deep. However, I find your input to always be helpful insightful and measured.
Of the tapes on you tube you highlighted which are the key ones to watch? There were quite a few.
Thanks,
Luckylefty
-
Corrected link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih45VXg8tP8
Just trying to make sure I understood the question you were asking about Mika. Those other guys would be better suited for the answers.
-
1. Why do you almost never see the described drilling Mika used that day on Cheetah used on the pro tour on the majority of other conditions?
To be blunt....it's because the guys are averaging 250 with other stuff. I guess in a more detailed sense because he happened to have a matchup that day with that ball. Keep in mind that they used to get 30 minutes to break down the pair for TV, Mika may have come up with a strategy to try and play towards a ball with a weaker core.
With all of the knowledge on the tour between the reps, if that was the best way to attack that pattern....guys would be doing it more often.
From my experience that pattern gets very over/under very fast if you use a ball with a core that mild. It can get you a good matchup for a short period of time, but when it goes you're going to give away a lot of pins in a hurry with some 2/10s and big 4s because the ball is going to be more sensitive to oil. Keep in mind that short patterns generally have high volumes of oil...and weak balls can tend to hydroplane a little too much.
2. If you were going to compete in a tournament would you used the above referenced Mika drilling on a Strong symmetric to play deep on a late league shot inside the 4th area? or on Shark pattern? Or a slight variation if you need it to make it realistic, move the pin up but leave the CG on the grip center would you choose this drilling to win while executing on this this angle of play? Or if you wouldn't use a symmetric would you put your mass bias on your track?
Again the cg has no bearing on the motion, it is about adding a hole to change the core dynamics....so I'll be as specific as I can when answering this....
- Would I throw a ball playing deep inside with a strong pin and no hole (something close to label leverage)? Probably not....when you keep the flare potential that high and don't have a hole, the ball will take longer to lose its axis and find a roll. If you're giving the head pin away this can lead to a lot of corner pins as the ball can have a hard time picking up a roll before getting to the pins. On top of that it will have almost maximum flare, so it will be using energy up very early.....this is a recipe for a carry nightmare (in many cases).
I would tend to use a weaker (longer) pin to reduce the flare. Now whether I would have a hole or not would depend on the individual ball and shape desired. I have a Lucid with no hole and a 5" pin (5" mass bias), and a Crossroad with at 5" pin and a p3 hole. Both work well playing deep inside angles, it just depends on the situation.
Would I use this drilling on a long pattern? Most likely not ever....with rare exception. On a long pattern it is imperative to get the ball to lose its axis quickly. As stated above strong pins and no holes (mass bias near track) drillings make the ball early and a little lazy downlane, which in my experience is the exact opposite of what you want. To me medium or long pins with large holes usually are what you want to start with, and then switching to less flare and roll as the track breaks down.
I hope that answers your questions....you just have to keep in mind that what you see on TV is nowhere close to what they bowled on during the week. It has been groomed for a few minutes to suit each bowler's strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes they have a gameplan to create a certain look that they know will give them an advantage over the competitors, that may have been Mika's strategy that day.
-
Russell,
Thank you for giving some measured answers. Note the pin was not that strong for Mika just under the ring finger. CG in grip.
This is an almost never used drilling on the tour, Even with a weaker pin. And yet similar pin positions are used with cg out, WHY? I think you touched on it with your answer.
I did appreciate your answer on long patterns. I'm curious the orientation of the mass bias on your lucid in relation to your pin.
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
I like that video, but remember, the whole thing that they're talking about only applies to balls with a intermediate diff of over .008.
Also, Russell, you are totally correct. There is a train of thought that says drill a ball with a strong (max flare) pin to pap to be able to play straighter. That doesn't sound right to the untrained mind, because you think stronger = more hook. I will use a Clutch with a 4 inch pin to pap, with the MB (.008) under my thumb to create a straighter look on a pattern because of it's slow response to friction, but it's still flaring enough to handle a oily THS. Slower response off the friction means I can pitch it into the adult bumpers without fearing for my life, and the higher amount of flare means that I don't have to worry when the pattern starts to carry down.
So, in real world dual angle terminology, my Clutch is 85x4x65. Unless there is a massive amount of friction right of 10, I would never dream of moving left of 20 with it. Would either 5-7-10 with it if I got it in a little bit, or go through the face if I got it right early.
Now, on a condition like that, take my Clutch Pearl. Drilled 60x4.5x30, it has a much more defined move than the solid, and I would be more comfortable moving way left with it because of it's much quicker response to friction.
-
Thank you for giving some measured answers. Note the pin was not that strong for Mika just under the ring finger. CG in grip.
That is a strong position for most tour players. Most tour players don't have long horizontal PAP coordinates. My PAP is 4 and 1/2" over so under the ring is a 4" pin. You rarely see balls drilled for patterns with strong pins and no holes, simply because they have a hard time losing axis rotation.
As far as my Lucid...it's a 5" pin AND mass bias to PAP...I don't use Dual Angle I use the Storm system so it's a 5" x 5" x 3"...maybe 3.5"...don't remember. This puts the pin just over my bridge and the mb just right of my thumb.
-
From both of the last two posts by Impending or Russell. Always an orientation of cg out or MB out towards the positive side for inside lines.
I almost never see drill angles on angles(in dual angle terminology) of 75 or 80 (cg ending up almost on grip center) anymore when playing inside angles....hmmmmm??
Yet CG no matter....huh? Drilling orientation on symmetrics yet no one ever uses it anymore except for one situation hmmmm? You've almost described it Russell above in describing the Cheetah Mika was on, or lane managed to his 300.
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
CG does madda...but only in relation to determining the desired extra hole placement and size. There are balls with drill angles of 75+ degrees, if I map my Lucid backwards it is probably an 80* second angle, but only when the pin is a little weaker. If I drilled a ball with a 4" pin and large angle, it would labor to make the corner and probably give some trouble carrying back row pins.
This is not a universal rule....also keep in mind most tour players have much higher revrates.
-
I actually have Mika's Pap somewhere and I am pretty sure it is around 5. or 5 plus.
I know the exact source just have to find it.
Note the trajectory here in Mika's 300 game on Cheetah, the cg on the grip center.
http://www.topendsports.com/videos/54/sports/tenpin/300-bowling-game-by-mika-koivuniemi/
Refer back to KidLost chart on where ball finishes in the pocket, describe the midlane of the ball in your own mind. Prominent midlane? Yes no?
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Dude...it was one game....I'm not sure what you're grabbing at at this point....
I recall Belmo throwing a clear plastic ball on Viper and winning...don't try to make the exception the rule. He matched up well that day...that was it. I'm sure someone somewhere has done it as well...but it's not the rule.
-
Let's switch the subject...we are getting too close....
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Impending Doom...I'll give something to think about...
When you look at a pancake or 3-piece ball, we all assume it is a low diff low dynamic core; if you at it from a different angle, it is a large 2-piece core with one density piece on top of lighter density piece....yes it's a low diff core but it can still show similar characteristics as one of today's cores...i.e. if you add a weight hole you can increase the diff and can lower the RG as well as increase flare....I no longer at those types of cores as nothing less as a low diff core and deal with accordingly.
Ric,
I can see where you're coming from. You wouldn't look at it as a pin in and treat the layout as such? I know that Mo (or someone along those lines) came up with the plastic ball drillings for the PBA plastic ball tournaments, to allow for motion not thought possible with a plastic ball before, and those drilling do manage to raise the diff to a decent level for a pancake, but in my mind, with the top heavy model of a 3 piece traditional pancake, there wouldn't be justification for me to look at it as anything else, due to the lack of dynamics built in.
Just saying. But it is something to think about if you were facing a condition where that weight block would make sense.
-
We were/are getting uncomfortably close, I fear....
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS to have a ball drilled with the pin over the bridge and mass bias to the LEFT(correction I was thinking LEFT handed) of the thumb, yes that would labor around the corner. TO drill a symmetric with pin up and over ring finger at 5 and cg on grip center how deep would you be able to get? Yes it would labor around the corner? WHY, cg no matter?
-
We were/are getting uncomfortably close, I fear....
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS to have a ball drilled with the pin over the bridge and mass bias to the right of the thumb, yes that would labor around the corner. TO drill a symmetric with pin up and over ring finger at 5 and cg on grip center how deep would you be able to get? Yes it would labor around the corner? WHY, cg no matter?
The reason CG no madda is 2 fold:
- The CG is not a dynamic point on the ball..it merely is a heavy spot created by a fraction of an inch of offset inside of the ball.
- The Mass Bias on a symmetrical ball becomes the thumbhole when it is drilled....so the mass bias placement doesn't matter. When you drill an asymmetrical ball 4" by 6" it tends to labor around the corner....and for most bowlers putting the mass bias in the thumb with a strong pin placement is not a very effective layout.
Again this all depends on pin placement....I'm not saying that not having a hole makes the ball lazy...merely that a strong pin and no hole can be lazy because the MB is so far away.
-
We were/are getting uncomfortably close, I fear....
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS to have a ball drilled with the pin over the bridge and mass bias to the right of the thumb, yes that would labor around the corner. TO drill a symmetric with pin up and over ring finger at 5 and cg on grip center how deep would you be able to get? Yes it would labor around the corner? WHY, cg no matter?
The reason CG no madda is 2 fold:
- The CG is not a dynamic point on the ball..it merely is a heavy spot created by a fraction of an inch of offset inside of the ball.
- The Mass Bias on a symmetrical ball becomes the thumbhole when it is drilled....so the mass bias placement doesn't matter. When you drill an asymmetrical ball 4" by 6" it tends to labor around the corner....and for most bowlers putting the mass bias in the thumb with a strong pin placement is not a very effective layout.
Again this all depends on pin placement....I'm not saying that not having a hole makes the ball lazy...merely that a strong pin and no hole can be lazy because the MB is so far away.
+1 with Russell. Pin and weighthole placement (drilling wise) will be the most important aspect of ball reaction. The CG can be spun around the ball 360 and it wouldnt make a difference. CG is only important to manipulating flare with a weighthole.
-
What have I done? It appears I have opened a rather large can of worms. My bad guys.
-
Lets try this for cg, weight hole location, and dual angle effects.
Bowlers PAP will be 5.5" straight across as in previous graphs used.
Lets take two layouts using the dual angle method and see how it shifts after drilling.
One will be 50x5.5x30(cg kicked out 2") the other 75x5.5x30.(cg in)
Very obvious at first is the difference in side weight for each ball. The first ball we see has exactly 1oz positive side weight, and the second ball has .24oz positive side weight.
Now at each ball you will see a red line coming from the thumb hole area. That marks the bowling balls PSA after drilling. On ball one(2" pos) we see the PSA is on the edge of the right edge of the thumb hole. On ball two we see that shifting the CG towards the center grip line almost 2" shifts the PSA after drilling is towards the middle of the thumb hole. Maybe 1/2" difference at most.
If you measure the dual angle after drilling you see that the PSA for both is going to be in the thumb and the actual dual angle numbers/drill angle would be in the ball park of 70 x 5.5" x 30 to 75 x 5.5" x 30.
Shifting the CG 2" positive or back to center grip line has a very minimal effect. It is only shifting the density of the core very slightly, that after drilling CAN have an effect on the end numbers. (we have seen in previous graphs earlier, there is a 1/2" in reaction difference down lane in the last 6-8" this can have) So we can argue if you can see a 1/2" difference in bowling all day, but it does exist.
Now the point about the weight hole and why having the CG kicked out can matter. Lets add a 1" x 3.5" weight hole on the bowlers VAL and down 2.5"s and see how that effects the PSA. Clearly it shifts it over from the thumb past the CG towards the bowlers VAL and PAP changing the end drill angle by a significant amount. Much closer to 45 x 5.5 x 30. Moving the PSA approx 2"
Yes it changes the pin to PAP distance as well as the VAL angle in all drillings no matter what but since at this time were focusing on the drilling angle and not the Val angle or end result of the low Rg axis lets just go with it.
Enjoy the pics.
-
Both pins are equally weak(to not flare too much early). And yet it sounds like if given the choice no one would use the cg over grip center to try to carry from the inside? CG no maddah?
Oh weight I am misconstruing, the reason one cg position is not chosen is because it does not lead to drilling a weighthole, not the CG orientation.
Wait, why did Brunswick originally do this study, what was the purpose?
What rule changes were the USBC considering at the time? Affecting cg position and weight hole rules proposed..?
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS science always reveals it's control elements and assumptions! Not in this case...hidden in the mind of former Brunswick employees never to be revealed again.
-
Kidlost2000,
I would like to thank you for your charts, analysis, video's etc on this topic.
You are measured and even and I appreciate that. I've been very interested in the drilling on the Outburst and I was curious about what the assumptions were in creating the charts that showed the 1/2 inch difference in the pocket. If different assumption are entered for this bowler.
ie rev rate, speed off hand or at the pocket, axis rotation, axis tilt for the bowler that went into creating that 1/2 inch difference when run on the blueprint software?
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS former Brunswick representatives when discussing the famous cg no maddeh video (which I have watched a bunch of times) for some reason have "forgotten" or choosen not to disclose those assumptions requested above. What scientist disclosing objective data all of a sudden becomes so quiet when asked to disclose the assumptions behind their data. Reason?
-
I try. It is hard to tell on your previous post if your being sarcastic or not.
The bowler info can be entered manually or used the info they allow you to choose based on bowlers skill level. For all charts I used the bowlers specs given for a 220 average bowler.
Is there a specific thing you would like charted with the software to compare cg placement based on a bowlers style and the said results?
Additional info on ball studies can be found here
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index.php?title=Ridenour_Center_Of_Gravity
The picture shows the bowling info used on all charts posted along with what info is needed if trying to chart for a specific bowler or style.
-
Kidlost2000,
I think the above test is very significant and should be looked at by any of the CG no Maddeh advocates! 2 inches of difference? Who wouldn't want 2 inches of extra recovery?
Two things not provided or missed by me were the axis rotation and tilt of Harry the test bowler(machine) for this test. The second was the board position in the pocket for each layout? Are these both there?
I do note they were creating a slightly rev dominant bowler for this test. Good we are the ones affected more by layout differences as documented by other charts you have provided.
http://www.blueprintbowling.com/Blog/Posts/blueprint-testing-by-earl-and-supercats.aspx
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
Lucky, also realize both balls in that study that produced 2-inches of recovery difference were illegal in the positive and negative weights. Two bowling balls drilled "leally" would in theory produce less of a difference.
-
SPM,
Those statements argue against CG no matter,,,don't they?
REgards,
Luckylefty
-
No one is saying it has zero effect. They are saying the effects are not enough to base a balls success solely on whether or not the CG is in the palm or 1-inch to the right. There are other factors which give the bowler more room to adjust reaction for what they are trying to achieve.
I would be more worried if my abralon pad was used 2 times versus 4 times then where my CG is located. But that is me.
-
At LLs request we have 3 different cg positions. The ball is the Outburst with 2.5 ozs of top weight. The Three CG locations are
2" positive from the bowlers center grip line(CGL)
On the bowlers CGL
2" negative from the bowlers CGL
The pin to cg distance for the first 2 bowling balls was 4.25" and for the negative ball 4.85". This was to keep the CG on the bowlers CGL from one side to the next with the exact same pin location for all three drillings. So you can literally draw a line across the bowlers CGL and all three balls will have the CG land on that spot.
The 3 layouts to achieve this for a bowler with the PAP of 5.5" straight across were
51 X 5.5" X 30
80 X 5.5" X 30
108 X 5.5" X 30
Below will fall the charts two at a time going in order listed. The first will show the bowling balls specs. The second will be the bowling ball charted on the lanes.
-
ON CGL
-
2" neg graphs below.
Some of the End comparison results for all 3 CG placements
Pocket position (board#): Ball pos 17.80, ball neu 17.49, ball neg 16.77
Pocket entry angle: Ball pos 6.10, ball neu 6.06, ball neg 5.77
Total hook (boards): Ball pos 28.81, ball neu 28.49, ball neg 27.77
-
Kidlost2000,
I would like to thank you for your effort, time, and patience with me.
I note about an inch in difference in pocket position, a degree difference in attack angle.
In this link posted above I note 2 inches difference in pocket position right from the USBC's own test. Or as the researcher stated about a 10% difference in ball reaction.
reposted link of USBC test..
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index.php?title=Ridenour_Center_Of_Gravity.
When we own the pocket and are trying to carry, by moving left or right, up, tucking our pinkie finger etc. How many of us wish for an extra 1/2 inch in the pocket or inch to kick that corner pin out!
According to the USBC test above it looks like CG adds up to almost 10% in their tests! What competitive bowler is willing to give up 1% to his competitors!?
I guess then "CG Maddeh" that is why we have no tournament winners posting in my other post "Around the corner tournament winners". This post is looking on Ballreviews (a worldwide site) out here that have won tournaments playing inside with the cg's in a negative position while playing deeper than the 4th arrow. Not yet!
Do I think it is conceivable that someone could show up and post there? Yes, but I maintain that it is only because the guy is 10% better than his competitors and or the lanes were scorched in the mids so bad the friction of the lane supplied the midlane, not the ball core!
REgards,
Luckylefty
It's conclusive! Thanks guys! CG DO MADDEH!
PS notice the poor rev dominant axis rotation strong bowler above, almost 28 boards of hook versus 14 boards of hook for the 30 degree axis rotation top pro player with less axis rotation and more speed! Easier to control I'd bet. But for the soft high axis rotation player I bet you it is exciting when it works!
-
I can wheel a ball with a negative cg placement deeper than 4th arrow!
-
I can wheel a ball with a negative cg placement deeper than 4th arrow!
That's cause you're a beast, bro.
-
Also, Lefty, nothing but mad respect for you, but are you losing your marbles?
-
That's cause you're a beast, bro.
actually, its because I've mastered the art of suitcasing the ball
-
I can wheel a ball with a negative cg placement deeper than 4th arrow!
That's cause you're a beast, bro.
I think he's a ninja bowler...
Gonna have to figure a layout for that Nuts Pearl... Pin up or down... CG in palm or get it kicked out... Doh!! Seriously though... Should be fun to see what that ball will do.
Now back to your topic... & LL's questions er observations... :P
-
Also, Lefty, nothing but mad respect for you, but are you losing your marbles?
he likes playing the devils advocate part. which is fine, cause both sides get to see the point. but in reality, a good foundation of form and release is more important than that 10 percent of cg, which I am NOT relying on, because I cannot make the 100 percent exact shot everytime and neither can anyone else except throwbot.
I will continue to use the cg for dynamic purposes
-
I can wheel a ball with a negative cg placement deeper than 4th arrow!
That's cause you're a beast, bro.
I think he's a ninja bowler...
Gonna have to figure a layout for that Nuts Pearl... Pin up or down... CG in palm or get it kicked out... Doh!! Seriously though... Should be fun to see what that ball will do.
Now back to your topic... & LL's questions er observations... :P
Mass bias, bro! Come on, Pike! There's a mass bias! Really, CG NO MATTAH
-
I think he's a ninja bowler...
I am, and read my shirt.....
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi47.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff199%2F04_MACH_1%2FDSC04438.jpg&hash=33662a6498f44dc2b39243faa999f357f1de44f4)
-
What I have noticed is very rarely if ever does someone have the CG placed on the negative side of the ball to start. The rare situations would be if the ball was an x-out.
But, many bowling balls have negative side weight due to weight holes being added. That is extremely common. The bigger increase in the effects of the ball are going to be due to the weight hole location and not because of the shift in side weight.
Typically most bowlers deal with CGs that are either out positive for weight hole purposes or on there center grip line. That shows a difference of approx. 1/2 board in the last few feet of the lanes before the ball hits the pins. I think most will argue you can not see that when bowling and can't use that as a noticeable difference between two bowling ball layouts. When you look at this when charted out the lines overlap so much you really have to zoom in to see where they finally start to split.
Yes there is a proven difference between having 1 oz side weight, no side weight, or 1 oz negative side weight. (Almost 1 board.) Just not enough to make a rule saying how close the CG should be to the bowlers center grip line, or to be upset about the effects it will have on a bowling ball to say it is either stronger or weaker then the next.
-
If CG no maddeh we would see 50% of the tournaments won with cg on the negative side of the ball.
Not one strong bowler saying he can wheel from the 4th arrow with negative CG, remember the Ballreviews universe is large, the whole planet! I believe it I've seen his videos. But can he carry as good as with the ball positive CG?
1 board, 2 boards(from the USBC test) is more than enough to affect carry(we spend most of our league time trying to repeat and carry one board higher in the pocket while still owning it! To kick out those pesky corners!
The reason bowlers don't do it!? It puts them at a disadvantage!
Regards,
Luckylefty
-
I think he's a ninja bowler...
I am, and read my shirt.....
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi47.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff199%2F04_MACH_1%2FDSC04438.jpg&hash=33662a6498f44dc2b39243faa999f357f1de44f4)
Did it ALWAYS say that??
-
If CG no maddeh we would see 50% of the tournaments won with cg on the negative side of the ball.
Not one strong bowler saying he can wheel from the 4th arrow with negative CG, remember the Ballreviews universe is large, the whole planet! I believe it I've seen his videos. But can he carry as good as with the ball positive CG?
1 board, 2 boards(from the USBC test) is more than enough to affect carry(we spend most of our league time trying to repeat and carry one board higher in the pocket while still owning it! To kick out those pesky corners!
The reason bowlers don't do it!? It puts them at a disadvantage!
Regards,
Luckylefty
This 1 or 2 board adjustment is easily achieved by changing hand positions. A slight change to have more tilt would fix this. It's as simple as moving your hand and wrist an inch. But, we want to say "Forget the inch that it would take to get this to get back flush, let's move the cg, which makes MINIMAL difference, an inch to get deeper in the pocket."
Am I wrong in saying that? You start leaving corners with a ball, and the first thing you do is change balls?
I don't know if I would like to be your pro shop guy or not. On one hand, you would be good business, but on the other hand, you might want to make me drink heavily at the end of the day.
-
I think he's a ninja bowler...
I am, and read my shirt.....
(https://www.ballreviews.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi47.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff199%2F04_MACH_1%2FDSC04438.jpg&hash=33662a6498f44dc2b39243faa999f357f1de44f4)
LoL!!
Couldn't help but notice the Bruce Lee photo behind you though... Chuck Norris would eat his lunch before Bruce could even get it out of the bag... ;)
-
I'd like to interject that it's hilarious this topic blew up and has 9 pages of back and forth about the importance of 2 oz of weight in comparison with the dynamic physics of a ball and the coverstock. :)
-
I think it was absolutely great, tremendous data exchanged, the right conclusion reached, and a logical non emotional discussion from most of the participants.
Rocker, if I were you I would read every one of the 9 pages, every thread! I'm going to.
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS, for my friend Impending Doom, remember and you will see I noted that "we" the collective set of bowlers who own the pocket for periods of our league spend our time, moving up, tucking pinky fingers, moving outside, all those things to get those corners out. I am part of that "we", but getting high enough in the pocket is not a typical problem with a person with my axis rotation! It's an exciting roll and an adventure nearly every night! I just wouldn't handicap myself with a negative CG. I bet our proshop guys like both of us!
PS yah positive CG! And the weightholes it spawns!
-
OK, Lefty, meeting you has been put on my bucket list. Congrats, buddy. :)
-
Ok here is the part where I'd have to say your splitting hairs on the CG and the weight. The CG marks the additional weight in the ball added so when the balls is drilled the weight difference between the top half of the ball and the bottom half of the ball stay legal/not lop sided.
The CG holds no magical properties other then marking this additional weight/filler added to this specific location in the ball. That weight can be shifted and manipulated.
What is the difference in a ball with 1oz positive side weight and a ball with 3/4" negative side weight and a weight hole? Most bowling balls with weight holes of any size end up shifting the side weight to the negative side of the ball.
Does the ball still carry corners and enable bowlers to play deep inside angles even with 3/4 oz of negative side weight? Easily
In this video the ball starts with no x-hole and 5/8 oz positive side weight and after the first weight hole shifts to 1/8 oz negative side weight and then finishes with 3/4 oz of negative side weight. Is there any issue playing deep inside angles with negative side weight? No
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgDL0xqaodk
-
Ok here is the part where I'd have to say your splitting hairs on the CG and the weight. The CG marks the additional weight in the ball added so when the balls is drilled the weight difference between the top half of the ball and the bottom half of the ball stay legal/not lop sided.
The CG holds no magical properties other then marking this additional weight/filler added to this specific location in the ball. That weight can be shifted and manipulated.
I thought that top weight could be created during manufacturing if the core was a bit closer to the surface of the ball? I know that some balls had a weight block added to create the top weight but not all balls do, do they?
-
Oh, and by the way, this topic and a few of the others recently created here have been very interesting and informational to read, so thanks to all the participants.
-
Some will have weight blocks like the Taboo for one, others I'm not really sure. I figured it has something to do with the density of the material and how it was positioned. I'm honestly not sure how it is done most commonly.
As posted earlier by Russel
"Theoretically it makes no difference on a symmetric ball. The reason is the CG is the heavy spot, and has no dynamic significance. It is created by the weight block being a little off center in the bowling ball. From my understanding a ball with a 4" pin has about 1/8" of offset in the weight block. This makes its movement so minute as far as actual effect.
From a physics standpoint, it matters because a variable is changed...but from a "real" standpoint...it's such a small fraction that a bowler can't tell. We miss by a few inches shot to shot, if a ball being drilled with the CG in 1/2" different place makes 1/4" difference at the pins....it's not actually any different. The difference in you shooting 163 and 289 is not 1/4" more or less overall hook.
-
Also, allow me to throw something else into the mix...
The cg isn't always marked properly, so technically, it could be the same spot, heavy spot wise, but the engraving could be off.
And no, I will not accept anyone telling me that that doesn't happen anymore. I found out the hard way that my plastic ball (Which I never weighed, because I drilled it right over the "CG") had an ounce of side weight.
But the CG was in the right spot, right?
Let's get another 3 pages out of that subject!
-
That sucks, even worst when the plastic starts cracking out from the fingers and thumb in less then a year.
-
I want to comment on the video by Kidlost above.
It is tough to comment on all the various variations of board reached at the ultimate projection point. (Starting near 10/9 and then getting out near 6) in the later versions. Increasing friction as the condition morphed, and increasing axis rotation as he went deeper
A very dominant midlane bowling ball with almost no pure backend. That is what I find when I drill weightholes like that. But too many variations to be really science with controls.
Very good bowler though! With a real feel how to play the lanes and make strikes, when he wants to.
REgards,
Luckylefty
PS I've also had some very nice success with very non dynamic statics and get a similar all midlane hook and roll look, LOVE it!
-
That sucks, even worst when the plastic starts cracking out from the fingers and thumb in less then a year.
My Bam is going on 6 years, and no cracking at all. And I have no bevel in my fingers!
-
I would like to comment on this thread, it was conducted in general in a factual and informative way.
I have learned a lot about weighholes and refamiliarized myself with Mo Pinel's Gradient line balance holes and just set up a ball for just that! I would like to commend Scott33, Impending Doom, and Kidlost(one of the most amazing guys on this site) for making significant efforts to inform, advise and stay above the emotion of this topic.
Also, I would like to acknowledge that many are saying that many bowlers only want a positive CG to use a reaction minimizing, stabilizing, or enhancing weighthole. I get it! I drill nearly everything positive also. Because it gives, me what I want for most conditions, midlane and backend which strikes!
Inherent in getting to that point of drilling weightholes are drill angles of between 30 to 65 typically which I believe help to supply those things. Midlane always present. Delivered from the ball.
THe only time I go to bigger drill angles of 75 to 130 is very specialized situations usually involving more lane friction earlier Midlane supplied not by the ball but by the friction in the lane. In these situation I am rewarded with what I expect often also. I'll post separate on that subject.
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS Thanks to all particularly those noted above.
-
People that get emotional about physics are weird...
Thank you for the kind words, Lefty. I just try to tell it like it is.
-
For those who don't believe I believe in the significance of weightholes. Of all the BrunsNick videos, this is my favorite.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c93ZRsWbF7U
I have been a big user of Weightholes deep in PAP, for midlane and backed off backend. Holes down for midlane. I have also used 9 inch weightholes out from grip center for nice inside recovery on mid diff balls.
I am looking forward to applying some of Mo's concepts of Gradient Line weightholes.
Regards,
Luckylefty