BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Aloarjr810 on March 05, 2018, 10:39:25 AM
-
The 11th Frame: Guest column: Veteran pro shop owner Rob Bailey on USBC’s latest proposed ball specifications
https://www.11thframe.com/news/article/10116/Guest-column-Veteran-pro-shop-owner-Rob-Bailey-on-USBCs-latest-proposed (https://www.11thframe.com/news/article/10116/Guest-column-Veteran-pro-shop-owner-Rob-Bailey-on-USBCs-latest-proposed)
-
Pretty good article. I could quibble with some points, but I think the most important point he made was how much bowlers have improved skill wise since I was young. That seems to be something that very few people want to acknowledge.
-
Pretty good article. I could quibble with some points, but I think the most important point he made was how much bowlers have improved skill wise since I was young. That seems to be something that very few people want to acknowledge.
Especially that fat retard named Chad {Chud] over @ USBC. They do this & there WILL be fallout!
-
As many discussions as we’ve had in the past, and as many times as I’ve been “blown up†for my opinions, I’m going to say this:
BULLSHIT!
A pro shop guy, talking like a pro shop guy, speaks of gloom and doom to be caused by the new regulations. He also looks to place the blame elsewhere by claiming it isn’t the balls, or the drilling’s that are at fault, it’s those crazy easy shots people are putting out.
Look, I get it. People are fearful and resist change, but in truth, the proposed changes are, in reality, pretty minimal.
You can still “swing the cg out positiveâ€, drill it to “go long and flipâ€, and many other things without having to utilize a balance hole to somewhat circumvent the limitation rules put in place to help control ball reactions in the first place.
Trust me, a “modern†ball with a “modern†cover on it is geometrically stronger than even the best balls from 25 years ago.
People have been shooting 300’s and 800’s for decades. Modern lanes, conditioners, and oiling machines make it easier than ever before, and even the most basic reactive resin ball is superior to the old u-dots, thunderbolts, angles, and hammers of yesteryear.
Point being, stop complaining about how “bad†it might be, and start realizing just how good it actually is.
You give me a scout reactive with a pancake weightblock, pin in with about 4oz topweight before drilling, allow me to drill it with an ounce of finger and three ounces sideweight and adjust the surface, and I can make your head spin like the exorcist, especially on most THS.
-
As many discussions as we’ve had in the past, and as many times as I’ve been “blown up†for my opinions, I’m going to say this:
BULLSHIT!
A pro shop guy, talking like a pro shop guy, speaks of gloom and doom to be caused by the new regulations. He also looks to place the blame elsewhere by claiming it isn’t the balls, or the drilling’s that are at fault, it’s those crazy easy shots people are putting out.
Look, I get it. People are fearful and resist change, but in truth, the proposed changes are, in reality, pretty minimal.
You can still “swing the cg out positiveâ€, drill it to “go long and flipâ€, and many other things without having to utilize a balance hole to somewhat circumvent the limitation rules put in place to help control ball reactions in the first place.
Trust me, a “modern†ball with a “modern†cover on it is geometrically stronger than even the best balls from 25 years ago.
People have been shooting 300’s and 800’s for decades. Modern lanes, conditioners, and oiling machines make it easier than ever before, and even the most basic reactive resin ball is superior to the old u-dots, thunderbolts, angles, and hammers of yesteryear.
Point being, stop complaining about how “bad†it might be, and start realizing just how good it actually is.
You give me a scout reactive with a pancake weightblock, pin in with about 4oz topweight before drilling, allow me to drill it with an ounce of finger and three ounces sideweight and adjust the surface, and I can make your head spin like the exorcist, especially on most THS.
3 0z side is illegal right now. AND ....."on most THS" ... Then you fully agree w/ the author there?????? WHAT?
-
3 0z side is illegal right now. AND ....."on most THS" ... Then you fully agree w/ the author there?????? WHAT?
No,
I do not agree with him. He is just another “chicken littleâ€, running around screaming the sky is falling.
And no, 3oz is not legal NOW, but in the future, if the feared rules change passes, it will be, and that is what I’m talking about.
I’m in the same boat as most of the rest of the people here. I’ve got several pretty good balls with balance holes in them, but even if the rules do change, it isn’t the end of the world.
The good, dedicated bowlers will adjust and persevere. The others will cry, whine, make empty threats, point fingers, and quit.
-
Trust me, a “modern†ball with a “modern†cover on it is geometrically stronger than even the best balls from 25 years ago.
I hate when people use the phrase "Trust me". It makes me not trust you - even if I happen to agree with what you have said.
-
Does anyone have the proposed changes suggested by USBC that were sent to the manufactures they can copy/paste on here?
It was in a previous story you have to pay to see.
I use to use weight holes a lot. Now not as much. Typically only on the Rico layout which is a personal favorite of mine. The others I like to use now are for reducing and controlling flare after drilling. As mentioned it can help dial in the balls reaction. Everyone always assumes it is about more, but often times it is about less that is just as important for getting a good ball reaction.
Lowering the diff will change nothing but if it makes people believe that bowling has regained integrity I guess that is fine.
Also curious if older equipment like before will still be allowed for use after the changed go into affect.
-
Rob Bailey makes very good points, especially this:
High scoring factors include 1) more uniform and repeatable oiling conditions than before (thanks to higher end lane machines and strippers such as Kegel and Brunswick). 2) much better lane surfaces than ever before. Replacing wood with synthetic has eliminated finish breakdown, oil absorbing into the heads, and the idiosyncrasies and sanding, screening, and finishing. 3) players with a stronger physical game, 4) the drive for high scores by proprietors who want to keep happy bowlers around their centers, 5) a lack of checking lanes for legal oiling conditions, 6) Junior bowling programs and all of the training videos, bronze, silver and gold coaches, high school programs, and college programs. There is no comparison with the talent level today as opposed to 30 or 40 years ago. These kids are good and throw the ball so much better. And now you have the 2-handers who can get polyester to cover 30 boards. I would be willing to bet that the non-equipment factors in this paragraph have far more to do with improved performance over and above ball improvements.
It's not just the balls...
-
The friction of the modern resin ball has dramaticly increased carry potential, but it has also made it more difficult to stay in the pocket with the dramatic transitions in oil patterns caused by the balls. Prior to resin I use to get a 300 every 2 or three years. After resin I started getting 2 or 3 per year but my average only went up about 5 pins. Even if I stayed in the pocket during the transitions my carry would be very volatile. I can't count the number if you times I shot 300 but left 3 or 4 tens either preceding or after the big gane
-
The friction of the modern resin ball has dramaticly increased carry potential, but it has also made it more difficult to stay in the pocket with the dramatic transitions in oil patterns caused by the balls. Prior to resin I use to get a 300 every 2 or three years. After resin I started getting 2 or 3 per year but my average only went up about 5 pins. Even if I stayed in the pocket during the transitions my carry would be very volatile. I can't count the number if you times I shot 300 but left 3 or 4 tens either preceding or after the big gane
Wow very well said. Explains a whole lot seen off and on in my somewhat shorter life as well.
-
So if there's this argument about Transitions coming faster and having to be able to adjust quicker, why are old timers unable to admit that the modern elite bowler is *better* than those elite bowlers of the plastic/urethane era? Ask them all and they'll admit that you rarely had to move once you found the pocket. Not to mention you could get the job done with a Hammer and a White/Yellow Dot for just about everything.
-
So if there's this argument about Transitions coming faster and having to be able to adjust quicker, why are old timers unable to admit that the modern elite bowler is *better* than those elite bowlers of the plastic/urethane era?
Because they astronomically less accurate.
Ask them all and they'll admit that you rarely had to move once you found the pocket. Not to mention you could get the job done with a Hammer and a White/Yellow Dot for just about everything.
That's inaccurate; you always had to move. Always. The ones who said you didn't were fantasizing or remembering very badly.
-
Your average league bowler is "astronomically less accurate". The elite pros aren't. Kegel has recorded multi-hour sessions that prove the modern day PBA's bowler's accuracy. Much like the old wise tales of "not having to move", the same could be said about how accurate the bowlers of years past, *not at the elite level*, were.
The top 1% is always the top 1%, but from a physical game point of view, the modern elite player is just as, if not more accurate with a much more advanced physical game.
-
Your average league bowler is "astronomically less accurate". The elite pros aren't. Kegel has recorded multi-hour sessions that prove the modern day PBA's bowler's accuracy. Much like the old wise tales of "not having to move", the same could be said about how accurate the bowlers of years past, *not at the elite level*, were.
The top 1% is always the top 1%, but from a physical game point of view, the modern elite player is just as, if not more accurate with a much more advanced physical game.
You didn't say "Elite" so I didn't address elite. I addressed the common league 210-230 average bowler.
Current elite bowlers adjust just like they did back then. They didn't have to make the huge adjustments they do now due to resin. If you're saying the elite bowlers of "back then" couldn't make the same adjustments as do the Elite of today, I believe that is incorrect. They didn't make them because they didn't have to.
-
Adjustments got tricky when urethane lane finish came in because of the carrydiwn factor. On lacquer lanes started click, and the trsckopened up relatively quick causing us to make small moves in with both feet and target. Usually only 3 or 4 boards during league, but easily 5 -10 boards over the course of a 12 game tournament which by the way was much more common back then.
-
Most league bowlers averaging over 210 are pretty accurate. Their weakness is in the versatility to make adjustments that take them outside their comfirt zone. Such adjustments aren't as necessary on league patterns that font very in length from week to week
-
The one difference I might argue between eras is like Mark Baker says you have two types who cash on tour. Stone cold shot makers who probably are the most alike era to era (PDW immediately coming to mind, across different eras) and people who can do things physically nobody else can which probably was more common in the past with limited equipment and styles but less common today. That is probably the biggest difference in eras.
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
Based on the report, it will allow proprietors to put out less oil thus saving them money. Imagine that.... a USBC rule change that benefits BPAA. Who woulda thunk it.
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
Based on the report, it will allow proprietors to put out less oil thus saving them money. Imagine that.... a USBC rule change that benefits BPAA. Who woulda thunk it.
Houses can do that already and eliminate the ability for bowlers to use high end equipment. The center I bowl in has done that to try and save money. There's even "short patterns" that eliminate the middle of the lane and force bowlers to ball down. Everyone always assumes you need more volume to combat the new bowling equipment when it's easier to do with far less.
So every center has the ability to dry up the condition why would we need equipment regulations to then allow the centers to do it?
-
The center I bowl league at went to not stripping and reoiling the lanes at all before league. There's a 15ft head shot over whatever's been there since the night before and averages are down 10-15 pins across the board. There no amount of balls that you can buy to *trick* the shot. It's the few teams that have shotmakers that are at the top of the heap.
And people need to stop throwing out the term "shotmakers" when it comes to the first ball only. The real shot makers are making all their spares, and making 70% of their wash out combinations. 2-10, 2-4-10 split..... Easy spare for a shotmaker. You show off on your first ball, you make money over the long term on your 2nd shot.
There's this stigma going around that only the low rev guys can be shotmakers. That's simply not true.
-
All they need to do is enforce the rules they already have to get the scoring pace where they want it. They have proven that at Nationals since 2014. USBC is on record saying they weren't happy with the scoring pace that year so they started to figure out how to tighten it up through lane patterns. The scoring pace has come down to a point where they (USBC) are comfortable.
The same thing can be done with the scoring pace in general if they simply enforced their own rules rather than mandating new specifications on equipment. Lower the volumes and flatten the patterns, scoring pace comes down (IMO) and the economics make more sense for the proprietors. The problem can be solved organically. I'm not advocating leagues use a "Nationals" type pattern. That would be a disaster. All I am saying is that the inaction governing lane conditions over the past decade or two created the current situation.
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
It's no benefit to the league bowler. The proposed rule changes are an attempt to control and lower the scoring pace of bowling at the higher levels while having the least effect on regular league bowling.
Regardless of anyone's opinion if it belongs in bowling or not, every proprietor cringes when the youtube videos of the 40 foot launches over the left gutter show up from tournaments like the Masters.
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
Based on the report, it will allow proprietors to put out less oil thus saving them money. Imagine that.... a USBC rule change that benefits BPAA. Who woulda thunk it.
Houses can do that already and eliminate the ability for bowlers to use high end equipment. The center I bowl in has done that to try and save money. There's even "short patterns" that eliminate the middle of the lane and force bowlers to ball down. Everyone always assumes you need more volume to combat the new bowling equipment when it's easier to do with far less.
So every center has the ability to dry up the condition why would we need equipment regulations to then allow the centers to do it?
Sure houses can do that, and they do. But it doesn't stop the bowlers from throwing charcoal on the lane and thus destroying the lane bed.
I bowl in such a house. I am a bit of a cranker but not overly so. I am forced to use an OG Purple Rhino Pro due to that lack of oil. Only the extremely speed dominant bowler succeeds in this house.
Every center around me has a more conducive shot for a wide variety of bowling styles to succeed. I would never want the shot to be catered directly to me, but this house is ridiculous.
And by lowering the strength of the covers (in the report) and the core (in the report) bowling balls will naturally become weaker. This will force centers to cater to their bowlers and put out less oil than currently applied. Yeah, cheaper oiling costs. And if they don't change their patterns, then they will longer life from their lane beds. Another win for the proprietor.
The scores will not change. The league bowler will dictate the pattern with either complaints or their wallet. The house with the highest scores will still get the business.
-
whoa..... what's up with bowling balls and golf balls these days....
-
What benefit is anything possibly being proposed by USBC going to do for your typical league bowlers? How does it increase membership? How likely is it to bring down honor scores or perfect series?
It won't stop the in flux of new equipment. It won't lower the cost of equipment. It won't slow down the manufactures from working around the guidelines to continue and give consumers what they have seen in recent years. According to USBC the last coverstock advancement was in 2005, (technically 1997) and the last core advancement was in 2001. So the USBC is over a decade behind the manufactures.
Based on the report, it will allow proprietors to put out less oil thus saving them money. Imagine that.... a USBC rule change that benefits BPAA. Who woulda thunk it.
Houses can do that already and eliminate the ability for bowlers to use high end equipment. The center I bowl in has done that to try and save money. There's even "short patterns" that eliminate the middle of the lane and force bowlers to ball down. Everyone always assumes you need more volume to combat the new bowling equipment when it's easier to do with far less.
So every center has the ability to dry up the condition why would we need equipment regulations to then allow the centers to do it?
The problem with this is you cant erase "surface + high end balls = hook" mindset. When Joe Bowler sees his Sure Lock stop at 27 feet and go forward he will either rough it up more and go grab another ball thats even stronger.
-
The problem with this is you cant erase "surface + high end balls = hook" mindset. When Joe Bowler sees his Sure Lock stop at 27 feet and go forward he will either rough it up more and go grab another ball thats even stronger.
So much truth here. Joe Bowler doesn't always have a high bowling IQ (or have the "want to") or an understanding of bowling theory with regard to ball motion.
-
The problem with this is you cant erase "surface + high end balls = hook" mindset. When Joe Bowler sees his Sure Lock stop at 27 feet and go forward he will either rough it up more and go grab another ball thats even stronger.
So much truth here. Joe Bowler doesn't always have a high bowling IQ (or have the "want to") or an understanding of bowling theory with regard to ball motion.
I don't know if I completely agree with this. My definition of Joe Bowler is someone who doesn't understand or even use surface for coverstock management. To me, Joe Bowler is someone who buys the new ball of the month/year, stands on the big dot, and throws it right, somewhere near 2nd arrow.
-
The problem with this is you cant erase "surface + high end balls = hook" mindset. When Joe Bowler sees his Sure Lock stop at 27 feet and go forward he will either rough it up more and go grab another ball thats even stronger.
So much truth here. Joe Bowler doesn't always have a high bowling IQ (or have the "want to") or an understanding of bowling theory with regard to ball motion.
I don't know if I completely agree with this. My definition of Joe Bowler is someone who doesn't understand or even use surface for coverstock management. To me, Joe Bowler is someone who buys the new ball of the month/year, stands on the big dot, and throws it right, somewhere near 2nd arrow.
This is my point, his feet are bolted on the big dot never moving left or right of it. He will pitch his Sure Lock out to the dry and it "wont hook". He will go to his PSO and say "my ball isnt hooking, theyre flooded tonight". Said PSO will not argue or try to educate this donkey, instead he will take down in grit even lower. Rinse, wash, repeat.
-
Houses can do that already and eliminate the ability for bowlers to use high end equipment. The center I bowl in has done that to try and save money. There's even "short patterns" that eliminate the middle of the lane and force bowlers to ball down. Everyone always assumes you need more volume to combat the new bowling equipment when it's easier to do with far less.
So every center has the ability to dry up the condition why would we need equipment regulations to then allow the centers to do it?
Yea, I'm seeing this in my primary house. We're second shift THS, and I'm using a lower end Ebonite Turbo/R almost all the time. With the lower volumes, I'm able to score at the same pace as I do with higher end equipment and more volume.
I'm really trying to understand what the USBC is trying to accomplish with all this. Unless they get oil conditions under control, it doesn't matter what they try to do with equipment.
-
>I'm really trying to understand what the USBC is trying to accomplish with all this.
Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic?
-
The USBC is made up of bowlers. It's been well established for the past 35 years that bowlers aren't very forward thinking, that's why this game is in the state that it's in. Instead of hiring sound, marketing driven, forward thinkers, they've always hired on a Boys Club (and their significant others) system that isn't always the best for the future. If anyone who was a true visionary and had a clear plan of action for future growth of the sport, they wouldn't even interview them unless they had 40+ honor scores and have 20+ connections already inside the industry.
How would they be able to fix anything? Their fraternity/sorority work culture has cannibalized the industry from within, while those that may have the vision or talent move on to real corporate jobs that are paying 3-4x more than what the USBC could offer.
They don't want change, they want to work with their buddies and pass of the mess to the next person that takes their position once they find a gig that pays better.
-
So we established no matter the condition Joe Bowler will throw the biggest hooking ball.
If the USBC restricts coverstocks on the same scale as cores (diff .060 to .045) then nothing will have changed. Still not using less oil or using less oil and still having bowlers ruin the lane beds. The solution is no solution, lip service. Just going to watch and see.
-
Can't believe I am defending the USBC here (or anywhere) but that oil absorption test is super long over due. Ball diff is a red herring but the USBC absolutely needs to at the very least prevent cover stocks from getting any more absorbent. The rest of this is all about the ego of a single man being who is being paid way more than his education or abilities should allow on a power trip to look like he is doing something.
-
What about Power House Adrenaline wipes that make any ball absorb oil at a much higher rate? It's scary how that stuff works. Oil absorption is also what leads to equipment losing it's reaction and requiring more maintenance.
-
Ah, good ole Adrenaline Wipes! Another Ron Hickland creation. People who use them say they work but people will still demonize the man for creating an accessory brand in a free Enterprise market.
It was a precursor to the Hook Juice. ...OMG, I said the HJ word!!!
:Runs: :-)
-
Ron may or many not be grifter but unlike Chad at least he isn't going to force me to have plug any balls so Chad is still 100x worse.
-
Ron may or many not be grifter but unlike Chad at least he isn't going to force me to have plug any balls so Chad is still 100x worse.
Hell Hack, you shoulda drilled em right to begin with. :o ??? ;D ;)
-
Ron may or many not be grifter but unlike Chad at least he isn't going to force me to have plug any balls so Chad is still 100x worse.
Hell Hack, you shoulda drilled em right to begin with. :o ??? ;D ;)
I blame Mo Pinel. Oh well that's what I get for someday thinking of giving the USBC any money. Can't wait to help pay for Chad's salary.
-
Can't believe I am defending the USBC here (or anywhere) but that oil absorption test is super long over due. Ball diff is a red herring but the USBC absolutely needs to at the very least prevent cover stocks from getting any more absorbent. The rest of this is all about the ego of a single man being who is being paid way more than his education or abilities should allow on a power trip to look like he is doing something.
Agreed, but you give them a limit, and they will get around it. Bring back particle, do some sort of chemistry magic, make the Soaker cover popular again.
-
Can't believe I am defending the USBC here (or anywhere) but that oil absorption test is super long over due. Ball diff is a red herring but the USBC absolutely needs to at the very least prevent cover stocks from getting any more absorbent. The rest of this is all about the ego of a single man being who is being paid way more than his education or abilities should allow on a power trip to look like he is doing something.
Agreed, but you give them a limit, and they will get around it. Bring back particle, do some sort of chemistry magic, make the Soaker cover popular again.
The funny part is USBC and their band of apes in a conference room really think they are smarter than the ball companies. USBC is playing catch up ball. The ball companies will come up with something USBC has not even considered. USBC has proven time and time again they are incredibly short-sighted and they will "fix" this "issue" while completely missing something else.
-
They have always been behind the technological curve going clear back to when lacquer finish was replaced with epoxy urethane. Biggest blunder was the short oil mandate of the 80's. Can't really blame them on resin additives. Nobody really understood the the chemistry or implications ofbthst breakthrough
-
I'm really trying to understand what the USBC is trying to accomplish with all this. Unless they get oil conditions under control, it doesn't matter what they try to do with equipment.
Exactly. Two 900's were shot; one with an IQ Tour gold (.029 diff), and a Hustle Ink (.030 diff).
Again, the USBC keeps scratching their "knee", when it is the "elbow" that itches.
-
I agree with Charlest 100%.
Because they astronomically less accurate.
Watch ANY show today of these high rev rate guys, and they "miss" their break-point by more boards than what the yester-year bowler ever covered from laydown to pins.
Today's bowlers are FAR less accurate than yester-year, even at the top level. You give up accuracy in an attempt to create more revolutions and higher ball speed.
[/quote]
-
How do we really know if it's a miss though? I talked to Bill O'Neill a few years back and he said on TV you're moving about 1/2 board every shot due to the rapid transition from the heat of the lights. Once these guys don't strike, they're looking to bend better angles into the pocket. I was at the US Open the year Frankie Lavoie shot the 300 and he told me he made 4 adjustments that game, including on the last ball in the 300 game because was seeing his ball transition from the hook->roll phase differently every other shot after the 5th frame. If you didn't have that information, it's easy to say to yourself "Wow! He got so lucky, he missed his mark 4 times and shot 300!" ....But how do you know he missed his mark? You don't have the same information they do in the heat of competition.
Everyone is going to miss, but yesteryear you had way more friction in the plastic/urethane era. How are you going to miss the breakpoint when your plastic ball is check-rolling up at 33 feet? Your major adjustments back then were speed & release based.
If strikes came automatically for hitting your mark then this would be a different sport completely. The modern game is about shaping the right angle through the pins. The modern pro sees transition 5x faster than back in the day. They know this and many are able to adjust accordingly. It's a much different game now. You can't just blanket high rev guys as "not being accurate". Their ability to average 240+ on their patterns speak for itself. You can't sniff par on what they bowl on, just crowbar-ing on it. That's not how it works.
Every touring player is in the top 1% of "hitting a mark". But that's just the start of things. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, just trying to get people past level 1 thinking (which seems pretty difficult for the USBC).
-
How do we really know if it's a miss though? I talked to Bill O'Neill a few years back and he said on TV you're moving about 1/2 board every shot due to the rapid transition from the heat of the lights. Once these guys don't strike, they're looking to bend better angles into the pocket. I was at the US Open the year Frankie Lavoie shot the 300 and he told me he made 4 adjustments that game, including on the last ball in the 300 game because was seeing his ball transition from the hook->roll phase differently every other shot after the 5th frame. If you didn't have that information, it's easy to say to yourself "Wow! He got so lucky, he missed his mark 4 times and shot 300!" ....But how do you know he missed his mark? You don't have the same information they do in the heat of competition.
Everyone is going to miss, but yesteryear you had way more friction in the plastic/urethane era. How are you going to miss the breakpoint when your plastic ball is check-rolling up at 33 feet? Your major adjustments back then were speed & release based.
If strikes came automatically for hitting your mark then this would be a different sport completely. The modern game is about shaping the right angle through the pins. The modern pro sees transition 5x faster than back in the day. They know this and many are able to adjust accordingly. It's a much different game now. You can't just blanket high rev guys as "not being accurate". Their ability to average 240+ on their patterns speak for itself. You can't sniff par on what they bowl on, just crowbar-ing on it. That's not how it works.
Every touring player is in the top 1% of "hitting a mark". But that's just the start of things. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, just trying to get people past level 1 thinking (which seems pretty difficult for the USBC).
Just watch the Keven Williams match, and watch the break-point. Any where from 4 to 10. He was throwing it all over the lane, and scoring. The 7th frame that left only a 6 pin, was in to 12 at the break-point. Sorry, it's just the reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGK9e8JMJC8&t=2s
-
Go spend a few days watching top level bowling in person. What you get on TV in a 20 minute match is not a complete representation of how good those guys are.
-
How do we really know if it's a miss though? I talked to Bill O'Neill a few years back and he said on TV you're moving about 1/2 board every shot due to the rapid transition from the heat of the lights. Once these guys don't strike, they're looking to bend better angles into the pocket. I was at the US Open the year Frankie Lavoie shot the 300 and he told me he made 4 adjustments that game, including on the last ball in the 300 game because was seeing his ball transition from the hook->roll phase differently every other shot after the 5th frame. If you didn't have that information, it's easy to say to yourself "Wow! He got so lucky, he missed his mark 4 times and shot 300!" ....But how do you know he missed his mark? You don't have the same information they do in the heat of competition.
Everyone is going to miss, but yesteryear you had way more friction in the plastic/urethane era. How are you going to miss the breakpoint when your plastic ball is check-rolling up at 33 feet? Your major adjustments back then were speed & release based.
If strikes came automatically for hitting your mark then this would be a different sport completely. The modern game is about shaping the right angle through the pins. The modern pro sees transition 5x faster than back in the day. They know this and many are able to adjust accordingly. It's a much different game now. You can't just blanket high rev guys as "not being accurate". Their ability to average 240+ on their patterns speak for itself. You can't sniff par on what they bowl on, just crowbar-ing on it. That's not how it works.
Every touring player is in the top 1% of "hitting a mark". But that's just the start of things. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here, just trying to get people past level 1 thinking (which seems pretty difficult for the USBC).
Just watch the Keven Williams match, and watch the break-point. Any where from 4 to 10. He was throwing it all over the lane, and scoring. Sorry, it's just the reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGK9e8JMJC8&t=2s
Kevin Williams is a great amatuer just turned Pro Bowler. He's not representative of the EJ Tackett, Sean Rash, Don Barrett, Bill O'Neill, Jason Belmonte, Jason Sterner, Wes Malott types that can get 500rpms on it and split boards & angles any day of the week.
But I your argument is valid if you insist on basing it with the low hanging fruit. Any other examples from guys who have made more than 1 show? It's super easy to dissect 4 or 5 shots out of someone's 30+ games that week to get them to TV.
......level 1 thinking
-
Kevin Williams is a great amatuer just turned Pro Bowler. He's not representative of the EJ Tackett, Sean Rash, Don Barrett, Bill O'Neill, Jason Belmonte, Jason Sterner, Wes Malott types that can get 500rpms on it and split boards & angles any day of the week.
But I your argument is valid if you insist on basing it with the low hanging fruit. Any other examples from guys who have made more than 1 show? It's super easy to dissect 4 or 5 shots out of someone's 30+ games that week to get them to TV.
......level 1 thinking
Jason Sterner, Wes Malott, Bill O'Neil and Dom Barrett do NOT have a 500 rev rate. Sean Rash may have when he was young, but not anymore.
Jason Sterner is today's version of David Ozio. The hands down best game on tour today (with John Szerbinski a very close second), but because of the rev rate, doesn't get the breaks that Tackett and Belmo get, on missed shots.
EJ Tackett and Belmo do NOT split boards, either. They generates miss area that enables them to strike alot, and not HAVE to split boards.
Don't be disingenuous and condescending to reality. There is a reason for the high rev rates, and it's called NOT having to split boards.
You are trying to compare apples and oranges with your "level 1" thinking.
-
Go spend a few days watching top level bowling in person. What you get on TV in a 20 minute match is not a complete representation of how good those guys are.
Maybe you should try bowling against them, and get an even closer up front view.
-
Been there, done that, bro
-
Ah, good ole Adrenaline Wipes! Another Ron Hickland creation. People who use them say they work but people will still demonize the man for creating an accessory brand in a free Enterprise market.
It was a precursor to the Hook Juice. ...OMG, I said the HJ word!!!
:Runs: :-)
The difference is, Adrenaline wipes don't cost fu(king $50 to use every-single-time if you follow the instructions. You also don't have to use Adrenaline wipes on every-single-shot.
Sorry, I forget which silly-ass product Hook Juice is, the "$50 per use" or "wipe after every thrown ball", but the concept still applies.
-
Been there, done that, bro
So have I.
-
It's the $50 rip off for one use.....
http://hookjuice.com/
C'mon man it HookJuice, It's HookJuice :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
sorry couldn't resist
Ah, good ole Adrenaline Wipes! Another Ron Hickland creation. People who use them say they work but people will still demonize the man for creating an accessory brand in a free Enterprise market.
It was a precursor to the Hook Juice. ...OMG, I said the HJ word!!!
:Runs: :-)
The difference is, Adrenaline wipes don't cost fu(king $50 to use every-single-time if you follow the instructions. You also don't have to use Adrenaline wipes on every-single-shot.
Sorry, I forget which silly-ass product Hook Juice is, the "$50 per use" or "wipe after every thrown ball", but the concept still applies.
-
Whenever I think about the old days I picture Marshal Holman still sliding after releasing the ball (lots of wasted energy). Yes he is one the best ever. Yes he at any point in his life could crush me even including today but just hard to square that with perfect technique. Maybe Belmo is not as accurate but you watch just how fluid and smooth that guy is with zero wasted energy and hard to say these guys today aren't in the same league or whatever.
-
Whenever I think about the old days I picture Marshal Holman sliding after releasing the ball. Yes he is one the best ever. Yes he at any point in his life could crush me even including today but just hard to square that with perfect technique. Maybe Belmo is not as accurate but you watch just how fluid and smooth that guy is with zero wasted energy and hard to say these guys today aren't in same league or whatever.
I'm not debating that they aren't doing what needs to be done to compete. That's a completely different argument.
The game has changed, that's just the reality. Rev rate and ball speed has surpassed accuracy when it comes to importance in scoring.
It's just completely disingenuous for people to suggest that today's ultra high rev rate bowlers are THAT much more accurate than what Tommy Jones, Tim Mack, and before him, Robert Smith was. It's just untrue. They paid the penalty for their misses (today, not as much), because they didn't have the hold area down lane that today's guys have.
Can you imagine how many tournaments Robert Smith would have won had he had 6 boards at his break-point??
It is what it is, but at least people should be honest about what it is.
-
6 boards at the breakpoint LOL. Now you guys are just being ridiculous.
No wonder why just about anyone with any legitimate knowledge and experience in the game won't even bother to log into this site. Facts and logic have no place here. It's just the same 20 guys talking about what to add to their *ARSENAL* for a bunch of meaningless league nights instead of furthering intelligent discussion of what needs to be done to improve the game.
It's just a bunch of monday morning quarterbacking. The same guys probably crosspost to football forums with the "Tom Brady is terrible compared to Johnny Unitas. These new players don't have half the skills as the guys from 50 years ago!"
You win, I'm outta this place... for another 5 years. There's just zero value in what this site has become.
P.S. You can email Kegel and get recorded PDF's of said PBA players practice sessions and see just exactly how accurate they are. For free.
-
P.S. You can email Kegel and get recorded PDF's of said PBA players practice sessions and see just exactly how accurate they are. For free.
Practice sessions, LOL!!
Here, these may help:
https://www.amazon.com/Rainbow-Symphony-Colored-Glasses-Package/dp/B00KVVGLAQ/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1520617408&sr=8-14&keywords=rose+colored+glasses
-
Awww, don't go away mad... ::)
-
............You win, I'm outta this place... for another 5 years. There's just zero value in what this site has become...............
Awwww just take your ball & go home..................Oh why not make it 10 yrs. ...........I'm sure nothing will have changed! Bubye's
-
Come on you didn't even have a pack of Storm humping trolls razzing you like I seem to attract (even though own like 5 Storm and Roto balls now). Other than that only other thing I have against this site is it makes me want to buy balls I don't need lol.
-
...what the hell is the world coming too? People coming to a site called "Ball Reviews" to talk about the new bowling balls they want to buy? ::) :o ;D