win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference  (Read 10297 times)

Bowl_Freak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1216
Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« on: July 06, 2018, 01:13:34 PM »
With having this rule in effect this coming season, is the new rule gonna give any particular style and advantage with the added side weight allowance? Will it make a noticeable difference in reaction and/or pin carry? Asking for a friend... ;) ;) ;)

 

BowlingForDonuts

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2018, 11:11:15 AM »
I will do a post later this week using blueprint to simulate some different results using side weight….. Just a preview for all you old school pancake weight block guys from back in the day when "static weights mattered".

Testing a plastic ball with 2ozs positive side weight vs 2.3 ozs negative side weight had a hooking difference of just over 1 board in total hook on a 15lb ball.

Also keep in mind on a pancake weight block the cg is the low rg axis.  So when creating these differences in static weight also created big shifts in the pin location. The positive side weight ball had a 2" pin to pap and the negative side weight ball was roughly 6.5" pin to pap.

Will be able to try using the Spare+ which has a core to keep the pin/mb the same and only change the statics with the cg vs a pancake weight block and see the simulated results.

Looking forward to this Ignite.  Have same feeling you do that static weight in the end doesn't matter that much which makes it bat sh1t crazy why it was only 1 oz side in the first place.  Nothing like "solutions" causing lots of unintended consequences that have to be "fixed" later.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2018, 11:37:24 AM by BowlingForDonuts »
Here today.  Gone tomorrow.

DP3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6093
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2018, 11:41:51 AM »
My only gripe with Blueprint testing is that the factors aren't indicative of real lane play. Often there will be "tests" that show "no visible" or minimal difference in reaction. These tests don't have the factor of 9 other bowlers on a league night creating transition. Especially houses that have older surfaces, use older oils, or mixed league bowlers that see 3-4 bowlers a night that use plastic down the middle of the lane. I highly doubt that static weights will have any noticeable difference in a blueprint test, but other tests... especially those regarding track flare I feel produce inconclusive results because the test environment is too controlled to mimic real time adjustments/reaction in a competitive setting.

It would be a bear of an experiment to do with 10 league bowlers and 1 being the control for a Blueprint experiment, but I would love to see if any of the results change, especially in one ball-multiple layout testing.

spmcgivern

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2079
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2018, 01:19:28 PM »
My only gripe with Blueprint testing is that the factors aren't indicative of real lane play. Often there will be "tests" that show "no visible" or minimal difference in reaction. These tests don't have the factor of 9 other bowlers on a league night creating transition. Especially houses that have older surfaces, use older oils, or mixed league bowlers that see 3-4 bowlers a night that use plastic down the middle of the lane. I highly doubt that static weights will have any noticeable difference in a blueprint test, but other tests... especially those regarding track flare I feel produce inconclusive results because the test environment is too controlled to mimic real time adjustments/reaction in a competitive setting.

It would be a bear of an experiment to do with 10 league bowlers and 1 being the control for a Blueprint experiment, but I would love to see if any of the results change, especially in one ball-multiple layout testing.
Should it matter how many balls are thrown on a shot?  A Blueprint study will show the difference between two balls on the SAME shot.  That is what matters, not the difference between the first shot on fresh of one ball and the last shot on burn of another.  You need identical environments for the study to have any credibility.

batbowler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2018, 02:19:20 PM »
I guess the one's that will enforce no over handed releases would be the bowling centers!! lol
Bruce Campbell
Coaches aren't born, they are made!
USBC Silver Certified Coach
          
www.rotogrip.com
www.stormbowling.com
www.radicalbowling.com
www.damngoodbowling.com

Changing bowling, one bowler at a time!

DP3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6093
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2018, 02:35:38 PM »
My only gripe with Blueprint testing is that the factors aren't indicative of real lane play. Often there will be "tests" that show "no visible" or minimal difference in reaction. These tests don't have the factor of 9 other bowlers on a league night creating transition. Especially houses that have older surfaces, use older oils, or mixed league bowlers that see 3-4 bowlers a night that use plastic down the middle of the lane. I highly doubt that static weights will have any noticeable difference in a blueprint test, but other tests... especially those regarding track flare I feel produce inconclusive results because the test environment is too controlled to mimic real time adjustments/reaction in a competitive setting.

It would be a bear of an experiment to do with 10 league bowlers and 1 being the control for a Blueprint experiment, but I would love to see if any of the results change, especially in one ball-multiple layout testing.
Should it matter how many balls are thrown on a shot?  A Blueprint study will show the difference between two balls on the SAME shot.  That is what matters, not the difference between the first shot on fresh of one ball and the last shot on burn of another.  You need identical environments for the study to have any credibility.

You kinda made my point. The game isn't played in one static condition on one shot. Yes it's good to know the shape through the lane of that one given shot. These studies with just the proof of the testing environment tell you about the ball path on that one shot. How can you take that information from these tests and apply it to a real scoring environment? This game can get all kinds of screwy and nonsensical once USBC starts making rules that affect everyone's bottom line ($) built out of a robotics test when the benefit or reaction in the test environment means nothing.

RG, Diff, Side-Weight, Track Flare and the scoring pace are mutually exclusive. The tests aren't creating bylaws to level a playing field or setting a benchmark for a scoring pace.

spmcgivern

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2079
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #21 on: July 09, 2018, 04:04:45 PM »
My only gripe with Blueprint testing is that the factors aren't indicative of real lane play. Often there will be "tests" that show "no visible" or minimal difference in reaction. These tests don't have the factor of 9 other bowlers on a league night creating transition. Especially houses that have older surfaces, use older oils, or mixed league bowlers that see 3-4 bowlers a night that use plastic down the middle of the lane. I highly doubt that static weights will have any noticeable difference in a blueprint test, but other tests... especially those regarding track flare I feel produce inconclusive results because the test environment is too controlled to mimic real time adjustments/reaction in a competitive setting.

It would be a bear of an experiment to do with 10 league bowlers and 1 being the control for a Blueprint experiment, but I would love to see if any of the results change, especially in one ball-multiple layout testing.
Should it matter how many balls are thrown on a shot?  A Blueprint study will show the difference between two balls on the SAME shot.  That is what matters, not the difference between the first shot on fresh of one ball and the last shot on burn of another.  You need identical environments for the study to have any credibility.

You kinda made my point. The game isn't played in one static condition on one shot. Yes it's good to know the shape through the lane of that one given shot. These studies with just the proof of the testing environment tell you about the ball path on that one shot. How can you take that information from these tests and apply it to a real scoring environment? This game can get all kinds of screwy and nonsensical once USBC starts making rules that affect everyone's bottom line ($) built out of a robotics test when the benefit or reaction in the test environment means nothing.

RG, Diff, Side-Weight, Track Flare and the scoring pace are mutually exclusive. The tests aren't creating bylaws to level a playing field or setting a benchmark for a scoring pace.

I look at like this.  A bowler throws a ball on a shot (any shot) and assuming the bowler does not know which ball is in his hand what would be the difference between the two balls?  If he stands 20 hits 10 with the same release with both balls, what would be the difference?  If you want variety, you can repeat the same experiment on burned up lanes.  This is how I view the importance of Blueprint.  To show the difference between two different balls thrown identically on the exact same condition. 

If you want to bring in pattern degradation along with a smorgasbord of other conditions, then you will have to bring in bowler accuracy and repeatability.  Blueprint can somewhat simulate bowler ability but it can't simulate pattern degradation.  I guess you can try to input a "pattern" that represents a used pattern.

Either way, if you use real people, no one will believe any of the conclusions probably anyway.  I feel people view results based on this hierarchy: #1 Blueprint, #2 Throwbot & #3 Pro Bowler, #4 random Joe.  You see this in the responses to the random Joe video review.

ignitebowling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 982
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #22 on: July 09, 2018, 04:44:04 PM »
Keep in mind my only point is to show differences between the two bowling balls with all things being equal.

Can also show the difference on different patterns such as long, short, and "house" conditions. As someone else was saying, if the difference in said plastic ball is 1.3 boards more or less hook then bowlers from years ago who thought these things mattered then only have perception of what they thought they saw versus what is likely the actual case. After all, this is a plastic ball with no core.

To create large static imbalances with a pancake weight block also means to shift the low rg axis a large amount towards or away from the bowlers pap. In the end these results are minimal. When applied to the real world will likely be the same. It is a plastic ball. Even static imbalances mean little in ball reaction.
Ignite your game, and set the lanes on fire. www.facebook.com/ignitebowling  or @ignite_bowling

DP3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6093
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #23 on: July 09, 2018, 07:16:07 PM »
I agree. Without the hole there's not going to be much of a difference in a pancake core with huge side weight imbalances.

Bowler19525

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 879
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #24 on: July 09, 2018, 08:36:10 PM »
The biggest issue with the new specs will be with no thumb bowlers, and bowlers who don't use all finger holes all the time.  There have already been words between bowlers at the local center.   The no thumb guys think they will still be allowed "performance holes", and don't understand they cannot have anything other than finger holes.  The bowlers that only put one finger in their ball to pick up spares don't get they cannot do that anymore either. 

The local association has already started spreading the word, and the local center said they will be watching bowlers closely in the fall of 2020 to ensure compliance.  They also said with 2 years notice there will be no excuse for sanctioned bowlers to not be in compliance.  There will also be heavy reliance on PSOs to drill new equipment under the new rules and explain to customers what can and cannot be done.

Why would the bowling center care what the USBC rules are for extra holes?  The center should not be the enforcer of the rules.  Is the center going to tell open play hot shots who throw house balls with two-fingers they have to put their thumb in the finger sized thumb hole?  Of course not. 

It is up to the league members and league officers to enforce the new rules. 

House balls are exempt from the new guidelines.  No thumb bowlers can use a house ball all day long,  even during sanctioned competition,  and it is not illegal under the new rules.

Our house acts as the secretary for several of the sanctioned leagues,  so they have a vested interest in enforcing the rules.   Additionally,  center management is also on the local USBC association board of directors so there is another layer of enforcement of the rules.

Somebody needs to make an effort to enforce the new rules.   Relying on bowlers to self govern themselves and use the honor system doesn't always yield the best results.  I have personally witnessed way too many shouting matches over rules while the league officers sip their beers and look the other way.  If the bowling center wants to step in and take on the much needed role of referee,  that is fine with me.

ignitebowling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 982
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2018, 09:03:53 PM »
Here are the plastic ball comparisons with the Track 100P pancake weight block and the Track Spare Plus asymmetric core plastic ball.

With the 100P I am limited to only 3ozs top weight and shifting the cg/pin closer or further from the center grip line in order to get 2.8 ozs positive or negative side weight. This also moves the pin towards or away form the PAP when trying to get the static weights desired. The CG marks the low RG axis/pin for the pancake weight block.

With the Spare Plus I can change the cg location in relation to the MB and the pin along with the top weight. This allowed me to keep the exact same layout and shift the pin to create 3ozs positive and negative side weight.

Here are the total boards hook for each on the list lane conditions......

Track spare Plus

drilled 50 x 4 x 30

3ozs positive side

house 12.97
short  16.50
long    08.22

50 x 4 x 30

3ozs negative side

house 12.51
short  15.52
long   07.40


Track P100

2.8 positive side weight 0" pin to pap

house 06.97
short  11.96
long   06.30

2.8 negative side weight 10.5" pin to pap

house 09.80
short  15.65
long   08.84
« Last Edit: July 09, 2018, 09:06:43 PM by ignitebowling »
Ignite your game, and set the lanes on fire. www.facebook.com/ignitebowling  or @ignite_bowling

avabob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2777
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2018, 11:35:18 PM »
First, the elimination of weight holes was aimed at perceived abuses by 2 handers.  The new 3 oz limit is very liberal and may yield some interesting reactions as guys experiment.   Kloempkon said as much in the latest BJ.

spmcgivern

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2079
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2018, 08:09:49 AM »
House balls are exempt from the new guidelines.  No thumb bowlers can use a house ball all day long,  even during sanctioned competition,  and it is not illegal under the new rules.

Our house acts as the secretary for several of the sanctioned leagues,  so they have a vested interest in enforcing the rules.   Additionally,  center management is also on the local USBC association board of directors so there is another layer of enforcement of the rules.

Somebody needs to make an effort to enforce the new rules.   Relying on bowlers to self govern themselves and use the honor system doesn't always yield the best results.  I have personally witnessed way too many shouting matches over rules while the league officers sip their beers and look the other way.  If the bowling center wants to step in and take on the much needed role of referee,  that is fine with me.

Not all centers have house balls as defined by the new rule.  Some have left over equipment that bowlers have left on the rack.  I assume someone claiming an old Roto Grip Cell left on the rack as a house ball and not having to conform to the rule would be incorrect.

Also, Secretary and Treasurer duties don't include rule enforcement.  That is the job of the President and possibly a Vice President and Sergeant at Arms.  So if your center acting as the Secretary also has to act as the rules enforcer, then you need a new President.  Plus I would think even if the center performed some of the duties of Secretary or Treasurer, you still have a person from the league assigned to that position. 

You are correct though, someone has to enforce the rules.  It has to be the bowlers though, not the bowling center.  Rule enforcement of a league should only be done by members of the league.  I can't imagine having a third party (center employee) doing it.  Then again, USBC and BPAA are pretty tight so maybe I am wrong.

Bowler19525

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 879
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2018, 08:31:07 AM »
House balls are exempt from the new guidelines.  No thumb bowlers can use a house ball all day long,  even during sanctioned competition,  and it is not illegal under the new rules.

Our house acts as the secretary for several of the sanctioned leagues,  so they have a vested interest in enforcing the rules.   Additionally,  center management is also on the local USBC association board of directors so there is another layer of enforcement of the rules.

Somebody needs to make an effort to enforce the new rules.   Relying on bowlers to self govern themselves and use the honor system doesn't always yield the best results.  I have personally witnessed way too many shouting matches over rules while the league officers sip their beers and look the other way.  If the bowling center wants to step in and take on the much needed role of referee,  that is fine with me.

Not all centers have house balls as defined by the new rule.  Some have left over equipment that bowlers have left on the rack.  I assume someone claiming an old Roto Grip Cell left on the rack as a house ball and not having to conform to the rule would be incorrect.

Also, Secretary and Treasurer duties don't include rule enforcement.  That is the job of the President and possibly a Vice President and Sergeant at Arms.  So if your center acting as the Secretary also has to act as the rules enforcer, then you need a new President.  Plus I would think even if the center performed some of the duties of Secretary or Treasurer, you still have a person from the league assigned to that position. 

You are correct though, someone has to enforce the rules.  It has to be the bowlers though, not the bowling center.  Rule enforcement of a league should only be done by members of the league.  I can't imagine having a third party (center employee) doing it.  Then again, USBC and BPAA are pretty tight so maybe I am wrong.

The house ball exemption applies to polyester or traditional urethane balls with a differential less than 0.025 and not custom drilled to fit the bowler using it.  Old resin or other performance balls left on the rack are not considered house balls under the new rules.

Unfortunately league presidents tend to do nothing.  When approached for assistance they "don't want to get involved" or they want to "watch the situation and see if it handles itself".  Bowlers themselves don't self govern themselves effectively.  The path of least resistance is to avoid confrontation, so they tend to let infractions go.  I could literally call out 3 or 4 rule infractions every league night but don't just because I don't want to be "that guy".  Even when showing people the rule in the book, the typical response is "whatever.  I have done this before so it is ok.  Mind your own business (insert derogatory name here)!"  The new ball rules will be impossible to enforce and will create huge problems.

BowlingForDonuts

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1120
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2018, 09:35:03 AM »
Thanks Ignite for the data.  Hmm Scout with finger and side weight might be something to look at for kicks but as others said for real cores nothingburger.

>urethane balls with a differential less than 0.025

Oh look at this Tank Rampage just sitting on the rack (funny wasn't here yesterday before the tournament) that the no thumbers can turn either way.  How convenient.  Money can make people act like idiots but have to start somewhere I  suppose.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2018, 09:43:31 AM by BowlingForDonuts »
Here today.  Gone tomorrow.

DP3

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6093
Re: Side/Top/Finger weight rule...much difference
« Reply #30 on: July 10, 2018, 10:50:30 AM »
Here are the plastic ball comparisons with the Track 100P pancake weight block and the Track Spare Plus asymmetric core plastic ball.

With the 100P I am limited to only 3ozs top weight and shifting the cg/pin closer or further from the center grip line in order to get 2.8 ozs positive or negative side weight. This also moves the pin towards or away form the PAP when trying to get the static weights desired. The CG marks the low RG axis/pin for the pancake weight block.

With the Spare Plus I can change the cg location in relation to the MB and the pin along with the top weight. This allowed me to keep the exact same layout and shift the pin to create 3ozs positive and negative side weight.

Here are the total boards hook for each on the list lane conditions......

Track spare Plus

drilled 50 x 4 x 30

3ozs positive side

house 12.97
short  16.50
long    08.22

50 x 4 x 30

3ozs negative side

house 12.51
short  15.52
long   07.40


Track P100

2.8 positive side weight 0" pin to pap

house 06.97
short  11.96
long   06.30

2.8 negative side weight 10.5" pin to pap

house 09.80
short  15.65
long   08.84

Was there any noticable difference in the entry angle? I think the majority of bowlers would be under the impression that a plastic ball with a core is going to spin faster than a pancake counterpart and "hit harder". I don't subscribe to the "plastic w/ core = hit harder" theory as I believe entry angle is what creates carry, not the core.