BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Luke Rosdahl on July 06, 2017, 11:12:53 AM
-
Had a short video idea, wanted to run it by the brains here. Surfaces have always fit in two categories for me, traction grits and shape grits. Traction grits are 2000 and below, or I feel like 2000 is the surface you have to use or go below to start getting more than just a smoother shape, but to actually start to increase traction significantly. Shape grits are 3000 and 4000, strong enough to start reading in the buff enough and reducing surface area contact between ball and lane enough to smooth wet/dry transition, but not enough to affect traction virtually at all before the end of the pattern.
Was going to explain it and break it down from there, but can anyone else see it this way, is making a video even necessary or helpful, or are there any flaws in what I'm saying or thinking? Thanks.
-
Sounds like you nailed it what I see too.Video showing the differences could be helpful to some.
-
I'll preface this with: I'm not the brains here. :P :P :P
That being said I really just try and focus on getting the ball to slow down properly. 2000, for me, IS somewhat of a benchmark grit and one I use the most. Maybe this is the reason I prefer used 2000 pads on house patterns (primarily on synthetic surfaces) because it's right on the border you're attempting to define so I'm getting some traction and shape (by "shape" I mean angle off the spot). Rarely do I use more surface texture than a fresh 2000 (USBC Open and some PBAX patterns being one of the few exceptions).
I think a short video of the different surfaces highlighting the slowing down of the ball would be interesting.
Thanks for taking the time on all this stuff too. I'm sure it's a thankless job to an extent but your efforts are appreciated.
-
Luke this is crazy, because I just have come to these very conclusions myself as to shapes and tractions by the varying grits, and have decided (based on my game and style) to go smoother with all of my finishes (until I bowl difficult patterns). It's crazy how some of us are on the same page with these topics.
Absolutely address this issue with the masses, very informative, and important factor in the modern game today. I made my decision weeks ago( thanks for bringing this up.
-
I realize that every grit is a both a traction and shape grit, because when you change the surface, you change both of those things, but traction is the primary benefit/reason you use 2000 or under, shape is the primary benefit/reason of going higher.
I will TRY to get video to illustrate my point, it's just a challenge and a lot more work involved putting all that together. Also trying to keep it short and sweet, most people don't want to sit through a minimum 15 minute video and that's what most of my ideas lend themselves towards. I realize sometimes there aren't any shortcuts, but finding the time becomes difficult at some point. I've been ready to make another Beer Frame video for two months now, just haven't gotten schedules to work out yet.
-
We appreciate all of your hard work and effort, always remember that Luke.
-
Realize that 2000 for one isn't the same as 2000 for another. I like the idea of explaining the effects of grit on the reaction/shape, but to be aimed at the "masses" the use of more than one style would be preferred.
I know this throws a wrench in the idea perhaps, but for most people, they believe what they see and not the theory. You could have the best explanation and demonstration with yourself, but until the typical senior, woman, low/high rev or low/speed bowler sees someone like him/her demonstrate the theory, they will not completely understand.
At least this doesn't necessarily cost additional equipment to show different reactions by different people. Each bowler could bring their benchmark ball to show the effects.
But any information is still better than no information and your idea Luke is a great one. The more I think about it, the more of a DB I sound like considering the level of information you already provide. You do provide a valued product and I personally watch all your videos.
-
I realize that every grit is a both a traction and shape grit, because when you change the surface, you change both of those things, but traction is the primary benefit/reason you use 2000 or under, shape is the primary benefit/reason of going higher.
For my 2 cents plain, yes, 2000 is a rational beginning for those who are rev/speed matched, to get both a potential benchmark or the start of a shape to deal with heavier oils.
Keep in mind that apparently the vast majority of new, Young crankers are very speed dominant and often need the help of incredibly dull surfaces to deal with oil heavier than true medium. (Unfortunately, these are the kinds of people who, in my opinion, need the help of Mo Pinel to get any ball into a roll.)
I will TRY to get video to illustrate my point, it's just a challenge and a lot more work involved putting all that together. Also trying to keep it short and sweet, most people don't want to sit through a minimum 15 minute video and that's what most of my ideas lend themselves towards. I realize sometimes there aren't any shortcuts, but finding the time becomes difficult at some point. I've been ready to make another Beer Frame video for two months now, just haven't gotten schedules to work out yet.
:)
Luke, you need to take a break from trying to educate the unappreciative world.
-
On a side note, 3000 or 4000 grit can do similar things that 2000 grit does, for normal/average (rev/speed matched), for strong, grabbier coverstock/Strong cores.
In my view, anything from 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 can be benchmarks or ball reaction shaping grits, depending on both the strength of the bowler's delivery and the strength of the coverstock. It always involves all the factors and their interrelationships. The factors are too tightly bound up with one another to separate them.
2000 grit can be your dividing line depending on the strength of your delivery and the ball you are using, or it can be 1000 grit or it an be 4000 grit. You cannot and should not put an arbitrary dividing line at 2000 grit. It is too restrictive.
-
This is exactly why I asked you to call me a few months ago to help me with complications like these; makes a world of difference.
-
Well and I realize and appreciate that. I'm past the whole pride or flattery thing though, if you say it's a terrible idea, I'm not going to be the least bit hurt, I'm just not going to make the video. Trying to make sure I've got a good perspective here, because just because I think it would make for good or productive video doesn't mean I've fully thought everything out, trying not to be that ignorant or egotistical anymore. There's a lot that goes into this topic like you said, or it's not super universal, a lot of context is needed to fully explain it or to interpret it for your game and conditions. Sounds like if I'm going to do it, I really do need a visual to drive the concept home.
Realize that 2000 for one isn't the same as 2000 for another. I like the idea of explaining the effects of grit on the reaction/shape, but to be aimed at the "masses" the use of more than one style would be preferred.
I know this throws a wrench in the idea perhaps, but for most people, they believe what they see and not the theory. You could have the best explanation and demonstration with yourself, but until the typical senior, woman, low/high rev or low/speed bowler sees someone like him/her demonstrate the theory, they will not completely understand.
At least this doesn't necessarily cost additional equipment to show different reactions by different people. Each bowler could bring their benchmark ball to show the effects.
But any information is still better than no information and your idea Luke is a great one. The more I think about it, the more of a DB I sound like considering the level of information you already provide. You do provide a valued product and I personally watch all your videos.
-
Yeah, that's the kind of stuff I'm after. Tons of variables that could move it all over the place depending on how involved I want to get with this. A lot of ideas I have for videos come from the perspective of regular league bowlers on an average house shot. Lot of variables there too. This will require more thought.
On a side note, 3000 or 4000 grit can do similar things that 2000 grit does, for normal/average (rev/speed matched), for strong, grabbier coverstock/Strong cores.
In my view, anything from 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 can be benchmarks or ball reaction shaping grits, depending on both the strength of the bowler's delivery and the strength of the coverstock. It always involves all the factors and their interrelationships. The factors are too tightly bound up with one another to separate them.
2000 grit can be your dividing line depending on the strength of your delivery and the ball you are using, or it can be 1000 grit or it an be 4000 grit. You cannot and should not put an arbitrary dividing line at 2000 grit. It is too restrictive.
-
Yes, please make the video. Would love to see it :)
-
Realize that 2000 for one isn't the same as 2000 for another. I like the idea of explaining the effects of grit on the reaction/shape, but to be aimed at the "masses" the use of more than one style would be preferred.
I know this throws a wrench in the idea perhaps, but for most people, they believe what they see and not the theory. You could have the best explanation and demonstration with yourself, but until the typical senior, woman, low/high rev or low/speed bowler sees someone like him/her demonstrate the theory, they will not completely understand.
At least this doesn't necessarily cost additional equipment to show different reactions by different people. Each bowler could bring their benchmark ball to show the effects.
But any information is still better than no information and your idea Luke is a great one. The more I think about it, the more of a DB I sound like considering the level of information you already provide. You do provide a valued product and I personally watch all your videos.
^^
-
I hope I didn't poopoo on the idea. I love the idea of a video and anything is better than nothing even if it is just for you on whatever shot you use. You have the gift of gab and I feel you could give a well thought out explanation of the theories to reach a wide audience.
Like let keyboard pounders like myself deter you from producing something you feel your constituents would find value in.
-
Nah, I'm still gonna do it, just wanted to make sure I did it right. Might be difficult to do, but some benefit is better than no benefit. Even if I just explain the concept and make sure I say that everyone will have to adjust it to fit their situation, from my experience in a pro shop, if people don't like the ball as is, they just say it sucks and get rid of it before ever adjusting surface or adding a hole or trying anything. If nothing else this helps me cover more bases.
I hope I didn't poopoo on the idea. I love the idea of a video and anything is better than nothing even if it is just for you on whatever shot you use. You have the gift of gab and I feel you could give a well thought out explanation of the theories to reach a wide audience.
Like let keyboard pounders like myself deter you from producing something you feel your constituents would find value in.
-
Nah, I'm still gonna do it, just wanted to make sure I did it right. Might be difficult to do, but some benefit is better than no benefit. Even if I just explain the concept and make sure I say that everyone will have to adjust it to fit their situation, from my experience in a pro shop, if people don't like the ball as is, they just say it sucks and get rid of it before ever adjusting surface or adding a hole or trying anything. If nothing else this helps me cover more bases.
I hope I didn't poopoo on the idea. I love the idea of a video and anything is better than nothing even if it is just for you on whatever shot you use. You have the gift of gab and I feel you could give a well thought out explanation of the theories to reach a wide audience.
Like let keyboard pounders like myself deter you from producing something you feel your constituents would find value in.
If I might further expound on my beliefs ...
I think it can all be covered by the factor of rev rate to ball speed ratio.
Those,
- highly speed dominant,
- speed dominant,
- matched,
- rev dominant, and
- highly rev dominant,
are the "dividing lines" that determine where in the surface range of roughly 500 - 1000 - 2000 - 4000, you need to be for some given base line of coverstock strength.
-
Sure everyone knows but its also amazing how fast balls spike to 3000 to 4000 grit regardless of initial surface grit (often in as little as 3 games, which is why trying to maintain 2000 grit and less surface without a spinner is blister filled insanity). I tend to keep a lot of my stuff around 3000 (with or without polish) both because I have a Trizact pad that will last forever at that grit and to reduce amount of surface work I need to do (exception for tournaments of course). That said I do find myself using the ass end off my Maroon Scotch Brite pads (work great with my spinner as well) as they last forever and correspond roughly to 500 grit abralon. I tend to use them as a base for my 20 game light resurfaces and also to keep my urethane and psuedo urethane balls near factory grit (they leave lines but actually prefer that to see how the surface is doing easily). Mostly with my arsenal my go to balls are all either high grit and or polished (spare, light oil, or pearls for transition) or low grit urethane like (THS). Only ball I keep near the middle is a nEat psuedo factory finish on my Stealth Bomber oiler which I rarely use.
-
^^ I also keep all of my pieces at 3000/4000, no longer worth the hassle to maintain a rougher finish every time after a couple games ( not to mention don't need much surface in a THS anyway).
-
Luke how do you feel about sanding pearls? I have a no rules pearl and dare devil trick. Right now, my NRP is just a bit stronger than the DDT, maybe 3-5 boards, plus a different shape. In order to cover more, I was considering polishing the DDT and maybe hitting the NRP with 2000 grit. Both are currently at OOB
-
Personally I keep my Scandal Pearl at 3000 unpolished for maximum versatility and because that ball naturally has length for days. I keep my BVP Rampage at 4000 grit polished because that is more my medium light heads fried option. For desert conditions heads fried (and for spare ball) I also keep my Blue Hammer at 4000 polished. Technically that ball is not a pearl but it sure acts like a very weak one.
-
Luke how do you feel about sanding pearls? I have a no rules pearl and dare devil trick. Right now, my NRP is just a bit stronger than the DDT, maybe 3-5 boards, plus a different shape. In order to cover more, I was considering polishing the DDT and maybe hitting the NRP with 2000 grit. Both are currently at OOB
Sanding a pearl might be one of the best things ever. Most pearls I've kept with surface are monsters.
-
My exact experience with pearls, especially at 2000 grit.
-
Luke how do you feel about sanding pearls? I have a no rules pearl and dare devil trick. Right now, my NRP is just a bit stronger than the DDT, maybe 3-5 boards, plus a different shape. In order to cover more, I was considering polishing the DDT and maybe hitting the NRP with 2000 grit. Both are currently at OOB
Sanding a pearl might be one of the best things ever. Most pearls I've kept with surface are monsters.
Something about those additives work wonders with surface
-
Not to poop on the idea but doesn't USBC have a vid out displaying the differences in surface changes? Are you looking to expand upon that? If so, then great.
-
Charlest, as usual, you nailed it buddy...
-
There are a lot of videos out about surface changes, but I had a different wrinkle in mind I suppose. Was going to try to be more common sense with it, some videos get so produced that they don't really get the point across or they assume everyone has a ton of bowling knowledge, or you end up with more questions at the end of the video than answers. So yes, was looking to clarify/expand, what have you, etc.
Not to poop on the idea but doesn't USBC have a vid out displaying the differences in surface changes? Are you looking to expand upon that? If so, then great.
-
There are a lot of videos out about surface changes, but I had a different wrinkle in mind I suppose. Was going to try to be more common sense with it, some videos get so produced that they don't really get the point across or they assume everyone has a ton of bowling knowledge, or you end up with more questions at the end of the video than answers. So yes, was looking to clarify/expand, what have you, etc.
Yes please. I would love something like that to show my bowling buddies. Easier to grasp without all the technical bowling jargon most don't truly grasp unless you're really into this kind of stuff.
It's hard to convince the more casual (yet still wanting to be competitive) bowlers about the importance of surface and I don't think the overproduced videos like you mentioned get the job done. They're just too much.
-
Charlest, as usual, you nailed it buddy...
Thanks. (didn't see this til recently)