BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: bowler100 on December 11, 2018, 12:27:22 AM
-
Seriously guys, why do I keep hearing from so many bowlers in-person (including pro shop operators who know far more about bowling than I do) and on the internet about how hook monsters from the last couple of years are so much stronger than the hook monsters from about 15 to 20 years ago? My personal experience of trying out balls from both eras tell me a completely different story.
With the same exact layout and applying a fresh maroon scotch brite pad to everything, I could accurately compare the reactions of all of my bowling balls on a fresh (FLOODED) sport pattern of 29 ml and 43 feet long (solo practice session). I am relatively heavy-handed and have a lot of axis rotation as well. I tried out my Sure lock and Jackal Rising back to back standing at the 8 board and leaking it out to the 5 board. Both balls struggled to read the midlane and hooked sharply at about 45 feet resulting in an ugly wash out respectively with each ball.
I switched to the Columbia Reaction Arc and I MISSED outside my mark by a board in the OB yet the ball grabbed up to 10 feet sooner, hooked sharply and missed the head pin on the left side :o. Keep in mind that the Arc (along with everything I tested during this session) has the same exact surface prep and layout as the Sure Lock and Jackal Rising. The Arc even has more games than the other two. I switched to the Trauma Response and it grabbed another couple of feet sooner than the ARC and crossed over past the head pin with less angle. My next ball was the Track Champ. It got down the lane slightly better than the other two with an even look but it still seemed to hook significantly earlier (and more) than the Rising and Sure Lock resulting in Brooklyn hits.
The last particle ball I tried was my newly reconditioned and resurfaced (maroon pad again) Danger Zone HPH. This ball had almost exactly the same length and hook as the Rising and Sure Lock but without the ability to continue from deeper angles. I went back to the Jackal Rising and played in the same spot as the other balls. It still got down to about 40 feet but it was actually hooking sharply to the pocket now with a bit of transition up front and in the midlane.
I continued this cycle of switching back and forth among balls (and making angular moves with my feet and target) just to see how each ball responded to the transition (it was quick with all of that surface I was throwing). The Response, Arc, and Champ where all hooking very early and crossing over after a total of two games worth of shots while the Rising and Sure Lock seemed to still get down the lane and angle to the pocket. The Danger Zone HPH still got down the lane almost as well as the Rising and Sure Lock but when it hit the dry, it would puke and start hitting like a pillow. In fact, at a certain point, the HPH would not recover at all which is fine because the HPH is naturally a hook/set type of ball.
I am not making this up; my Reaction Arc, Trauma Response, and Champ all run circles around the Sure Lock and Rising on the fresh floods and it puzzles me when I keep hearing about how these old covers are "obsolete" (meaning ineffective in this context) when they actually traction much better on the Noah's ark conditions than these new oil balls EVEN with the same exact grit.
-
I don’t even know where to start here.
-
If you bowl on real patterns with newer oils, that old shit won't work.
The end.
-
If you bowl on real patterns with newer oils, that old shit won't work.
The end.
Completely wrong, they used a Kegel Flex Machine with Fire oil. It was this year's US Open so it had a serious OB unless you had a ton of ball. The "old shit" was grabbing the lane much better on the fresh. The Rising and Sure Lock looked better only after I burned in a line. I am not buy that bullshit that the older particle covers will not work on newer oils.
-
If you bowl on real patterns with newer oils, that old shit won't work.
The end.
Completely wrong, they used a Kegel Flex Machine with Fire oil. It was this year's US Open so it had a serious OB unless you had a ton of ball. The "old shit" was grabbing the lane much better on the fresh. The Rising and Sure Lock looked better only after I burned in a line. I am not buy that bullshit that the older particle covers will not work on newer oils.
Seriously, I would have to see in person to believe.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
-
>There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Not to mention crap longevity. Its great his old school particle balls still do their job but buying 2nd hand old particle balls off the internet is an easy way to overpay for a spare ball. Will admit had zero issues with old Visionary particles so far (other than yeah they being of limited use on THS).
-
I have to disagree with some of the comments above. I still use a Yeah Baby when I am looking for something to combat over/under. I still use the ball when I go to tournaments. Honestly, it has become my benchmark ball. I do have newer balls for floods, but I only see a flood at 1 tournament I consistently go to. Most of the time I am looking for something to combat dry conditions.(Hectic, BTU Pearl and Green/Blue Centaur-thank you very much!) I started the fall season using a Trauma ER, (LOVE the smell!) and last sanctioned 300 I bowled at State was using a Mega Friction 3 years ago.
I will admit the Yeah Baby does not hook like it used to 8 years ago, but it is predictable and carries very well.
-
The majority of us bowl on patterns with so much friction and such high ratios that we quickly lose grasp of the reality of what we're bowling on. With that said, there's a very easy way to put this, "Old balls > New balls" argument to rest.
Every year there's a USBC Open Championships, usually played on the newest oils on a very tight & slick pattern. Report back with your scores & experience there with old equipment. You'll probably look like the confused guys in my challenge league who can't understand why the OG black widow and Zone Pros that they've never clean skid forever and hit like houseballs.
-
When you have free hook you don't need fresh covers...take away the friction and you'll see where your money went on that new ball.
-
Just to see this in a little different light.............OP's argument to me is, essentially........."GTGT, you don't need that new Phaze II you're getting for nationals next year BECAUSE you could just drill an old Reaction ARC or a Trauma Response (or the like) and it would be exactly the same." ?
Confirm?
-
With todays technology video goes a long way.
Some of the particle covers no longer used were by far the strongest. They literally had chunks of potters glass in the coverstock. They damaged lanes. Someone did an article about them and the before/after affects at nationals on the lanes.
Particle still exist on code names of additives etc in much smaller doses compared to the monsters from years past.
Most will never accept these things. Todays equipment hasn't changed nearly as much as what manufacturers made bowlers believe it has. Would like to find a super soaker particle ball cheap from years ago to try out a video comparison with
-
If you bowl on real patterns with newer oils, that old shit won't work.
The end.
Completely wrong, they used a Kegel Flex Machine with Fire oil. It was this year's US Open so it had a serious OB unless you had a ton of ball. The "old shit" was grabbing the lane much better on the fresh. The Rising and Sure Lock looked better only after I burned in a line. I am not buy that bullshit that the older particle covers will not work on newer oils.
The lie detector has determined this is a lie. Those older high end balls hook way too early and do nothing downlane. That’s why balls like the EPX was recently used on short patternsby Barnes and O’Neill.
-
Just to see this in a little different light.............OP's argument to me is, essentially........."GTGT, you don't need that new Phaze II you're getting for nationals next year BECAUSE you could just drill an old Reaction ARC or a Trauma Response (or the like) and it would be exactly the same." ?
Confirm?
Exactly what he’s saying.
-
If you bowl on real patterns with newer oils, that old shit won't work.
The end.
Completely wrong, they used a Kegel Flex Machine with Fire oil. It was this year's US Open so it had a serious OB unless you had a ton of ball. The "old shit" was grabbing the lane much better on the fresh. The Rising and Sure Lock looked better only after I burned in a line. I am not buy that bullshit that the older particle covers will not work on newer oils.
The lie detector has determined this is a lie. Those older high end balls hook way too early and do nothing downlane. That’s why balls like the EPX was recently used on short patternsby Barnes and O’Neill.
What is the lie? I am telling you everything straight.
-
Just to see this in a little different light.............OP's argument to me is, essentially........."GTGT, you don't need that new Phaze II you're getting for nationals next year BECAUSE you could just drill an old Reaction ARC or a Trauma Response (or the like) and it would be exactly the same." ?
Confirm?
Exactly what he’s saying.
You obviously missed my point. I explained it thoroughly in my initial posts and know-it-alls like you keep putting words in my mouth. Pay attention! I never said the older stuff is better than the newer stuff, genius. I said that contrary to the common belief that the older high end stuff is ineffective on today's oil, they absolutely can compete or even hook more than the new stuff on HEAVY sport patterns. My initial post was simply a subjective observation and I wanted to challenge this notion of the newer stuff being stronger by default that many people seem to express.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
In all seriousness 320 grit is abuse. You’re rev rate must be sub 100 rpms in conjunction with those new anvilanes being installed yesterday to justify this much surface in competition. The old balls at that grit gets you through practice at best and you better be throwing frozen ropes (no belly or tugging inside of target) or people will be very upset with you.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
The average bowler when talking about hook means what they see on the back end.
I am trying to picture the line you are playing but your standing on 8 and leaking to 5 is confusing to me. Where do you lay the ball down at?
If I stand on 8 (RH), then I am laying the ball down about the 1 board.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
In all seriousness 320 grit is abuse. You’re rev rate must be sub 100 rpms in conjunction with those new anvilanes being installed yesterday to justify this much surface in competition. The old balls at that grit gets you through practice at best and you better be throwing frozen ropes (no belly or tugging inside of target) or people will be very upset with you.
Nope, my rev rate is in the low 400s.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
The average bowler when talking about hook means what they see on the back end.
I am trying to picture the line you are playing but your standing on 8 and leaking to 5 is confusing to me. Where do you lay the ball down at?
If I stand on 8 (RH), then I am laying the ball down about the 1 board.
I figured, my idea of a strong ball is TRACTION in oil.
I would know for sure it I video taped myself but I do know that I have a habit of drifting to the left on my approach and sliding left of where I initially start. I also get the ball so close to my ankle that I have been told that I hit my pant leg on every shot.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
In all seriousness 320 grit is abuse. You’re rev rate must be sub 100 rpms in conjunction with those new anvilanes being installed yesterday to justify this much surface in competition. The old balls at that grit gets you through practice at best and you better be throwing frozen ropes (no belly or tugging inside of target) or people will be very upset with you.
Nope, my rev rate is in the low 400s.
Then something isn’t adding up.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
The average bowler when talking about hook means what they see on the back end.
I am trying to picture the line you are playing but your standing on 8 and leaking to 5 is confusing to me. Where do you lay the ball down at?
If I stand on 8 (RH), then I am laying the ball down about the 1 board.
I figured, my idea of a strong ball is TRACTION in oil.
I would know for sure it I video taped myself but I do know that I have a habit of drifting to the left on my approach and sliding left of where I initially start. I also get the ball so close to my ankle that I have been told that I hit my pant leg on every shot.
Then you have a lot of left to right in your game and it’s physically impossible for you to go up the lane, thus you need absurd surface to get the ball to “read†because you cannot go up the lane.
-
OK, let's break this down, shall we?
You took 3 symmetrical high load particle balls, and 1 assymetrical high load particle ball, and then 2 newer high end oilers (Don't think there's any particle in either of those) and hit them all with 320 grit scotch brite.
You're bowling on a 43 foot high volume condition (by yourself, I assume?) and you're trying to play a belly to 5 board?
So you're
1) Trying to play a part of the lane that shouldn't be played, WITH head belly.
2) Complaining about how the newer oilers you have in the bag aren't working as well as the older particle balls you have when playing a part of the lane that you shouldn't be playing.
LET'S START WITH THE OBVIOUS.
Move your feet. Your break point should be about 11 or 12 at the end of the pattern.
TOO MUCH SURFACE. TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH. (Let me repeat it for goodness sake) TOO MUCH. On a longer pattern, you need response, not the ball going all Hiroshima on the heads. So your idea to get the ball started as early as possible doesn't work on this situation. The newer oil patterns dictate that you use faster response on a longer pattern, slower response on a shorter pattern. 320 on a high load particle ball is just obscene.
So, instead of learning how to properly break down a pattern and make it a learning experience, you are just trying to play around 5 no matter what?
The newer oilers aren't supposed to hook at your toe, that way they're actually more useful as you have to move your feet and eyes and no one wants to beat you up outside for wrecking the shim. There IS a reason why particle fell out of favor...
Good points, modern day oilers don't hook at your toes like the older stuff so how does that make them "stronger" than the old stuff?
Some people like to see reaction at the arrows. A large majority of us like to see reaction downlane, you know, by the pins.
I bet most of those people don't bowl (or practice) on a flat, flooded pattern applied to a slick brunswick proanvilane surface. 320-400 grit is completely justified when even 1000 grit causes your ball to nearly back up downlane.
I actually agree with Impending Doom (for the most). Today's oilers are designed to allow you to open your angles better as opposed to going all nuclear in the heads and mids. I even said that during the transition, the Sure Lock and Rising gave me the best look moving in.
So apparently when people say that today's oilers are stronger than the one's from the particle era, they mean stronger on the backend, correct? I never thought of it like that to be honest.
The average bowler when talking about hook means what they see on the back end.
I am trying to picture the line you are playing but your standing on 8 and leaking to 5 is confusing to me. Where do you lay the ball down at?
If I stand on 8 (RH), then I am laying the ball down about the 1 board.
I figured, my idea of a strong ball is TRACTION in oil.
I would know for sure it I video taped myself but I do know that I have a habit of drifting to the left on my approach and sliding left of where I initially start. I also get the ball so close to my ankle that I have been told that I hit my pant leg on every shot.
Then you have a lot of left to right in your game and it’s physically impossible for you to go up the lane, thus you need absurd surface to get the ball to “read†because you cannot go up the lane.
There you go! That actually makes complete sense now that I think about it. My habit of going with a ton of surface (on flatter patterns) is a by-product of having a lot of left to right in my game. It also explains why I ALWAYS make angular adjustments with my targeting during the transition.
-
Been there, you have to get your footwork squared away or this will always be an issue.
-
"Know it alls" though.....
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
Honestly, I felt this was an imprtant topic. There are special cases when it's best to have the ball read the lane super early without pushing the oil down the lane. Especially when most bowlers equate downlane motion to ball strength. Why take someone that realizes a ball that isn't looking to use all of it's energy quickly is generally a weaker ball and look to bash/ridicule them for asking a question? If anything, it's a good time to educate. Usually when I see people asking a question regarding oilers, wveryone makes them seem stupid bg drilling the concept that the new oilers hook at their toes. I understand both sides, but this could have been handled differently.
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
I get your frustrations, but there are a couple of problems here. Mainly, as northface pointed out, you're drifting a lot (I'm going to guess around 7 to 8 boards) and that doesn't help you on a longer heavier pattern.
Another thing. Why are you insisting on trying to be able to play the OB? Just because you can do it with a piece of equipment doesn't mean you should do it. Is it a comfort thing? That's where you're used to playing on the house shot, so you're trying to force it? I don't understand.
You need to play the pattern correctly and use something that is faster response downlane. It seems backwards, but that's the truth of the matter. Lots of surface if the backend is sparking, but you need the ball to read less to actually use the 17 feet of friction downlane to your advantage.
-
He literally called Northface a "know it all" then turned around and agreed with Northface's blind, yet 100% correct assessment of his game. Then he bangs on his keyboard at me quoting his "know it all" comment because he knows "EXACTLY" what he's bowling on, but doesn't understand how he's throwing it. He learned/affirmed something from a "know it all".
Freaking dullards I swear.
Next topic: Topography.... Go!
-
He literally called Northface a "know it all" then turned around and agreed with Northface's blind, yet 100% correct assessment of his game. Then he bangs on his keyboard at me quoting his "know it all" comment because he knows "EXACTLY" what he's bowling on, but doesn't understand how he's throwing it. He learned/affirmed something from a "know it all".
Freaking dullards I swear.
Next topic: Topography.... Go!
I find the easy way to avoid topography is not be consistent enough to notice it.
-
I find the easy way to avoid topography is not be consistent enough to notice it.
This is the correct approach. LOL. I love this. Kinda like bowling on a house shot.... It's a lot easier to shoot a huge set when you spray the ball and throw it like 5 different people at 5 different spots on the lane. You can't see transition if you can't repeat a shot. :)
-
I find the easy way to avoid topography is not be consistent enough to notice it.
This is the correct approach. LOL. I love this. Kinda like bowling on a house shot.... It's a lot easier to shoot a huge set when you spray the ball and throw it like 5 different people at 5 different spots on the lane. You can't see transition if you can't repeat a shot. :)
Yep it ain't a true house hack six bagger unless at least two of them are Brooklyn.
-
I find the easy way to avoid topography is not be consistent enough to notice it.
This is the correct approach. LOL. I love this. Kinda like bowling on a house shot.... It's a lot easier to shoot a huge set when you spray the ball and throw it like 5 different people at 5 different spots on the lane. You can't see transition if you can't repeat a shot. :)
Yep it ain't a true house hack six bagger unless at least two of them are Brooklyn.
You guys are NEXT LEVEL!
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
I get your frustrations, but there are a couple of problems here. Mainly, as northface pointed out, you're drifting a lot (I'm going to guess around 7 to 8 boards) and that doesn't help you on a longer heavier pattern.
Another thing. Why are you insisting on trying to be able to play the OB? Just because you can do it with a piece of equipment doesn't mean you should do it. Is it a comfort thing? That's where you're used to playing on the house shot, so you're trying to force it? I don't understand.
You need to play the pattern correctly and use something that is faster response downlane. It seems backwards, but that's the truth of the matter. Lots of surface if the backend is sparking, but you need the ball to read less to actually use the 17 feet of friction downlane to your advantage.
Actually, it is the complete opposite on house shots for me. I use 4000 grit on entry level reactives and play the hold in the middle. I am far more comfortable on sport because I can usually play outside even when it is not ideal.
-
Are you Jesper Svensson?
-
He literally called Northface a "know it all" then turned around and agreed with Northface's blind, yet 100% correct assessment of his game. Then he bangs on his keyboard at me quoting his "know it all" comment because he knows "EXACTLY" what he's bowling on, but doesn't understand how he's throwing it. He learned/affirmed something from a "know it all".
Freaking dullards I swear.
Next topic: Topography.... Go!
You sound slightly confused my friend. He made the assumption that I was simply trying to say that older particles balls are better than the modern hook monsters. I made that clear that I do not support that view at all. Every ball has a certain level of utility for everybody. I simply added that I have a certain habit in my game which molds how I attack the lanes and gave extra feedback on that. Those are two separate topics, DP3! No, I am not Jesper! I am a rev-dominant, high rotation bowler with lower tilt (sometimes)
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
Honestly, I felt this was an imprtant topic. There are special cases when it's best to have the ball read the lane super early without pushing the oil down the lane. Especially when most bowlers equate downlane motion to ball strength. Why take someone that realizes a ball that isn't looking to use all of it's energy quickly is generally a weaker ball and look to bash/ridicule them for asking a question? If anything, it's a good time to educate. Usually when I see people asking a question regarding oilers, wveryone makes them seem stupid bg drilling the concept that the new oilers hook at their toes. I understand both sides, but this could have been handled differently.
Nope, not on the Internet. This is all too familiar. This guy said he’s standing 8 going up 5, umm, what?!?!?! This rivals the “guy†that says he’s going up 1st arrow yet you watch him stand on 10, slide 21, loop the ball through 13 out to 5 and will honestly have you believe he’s going up first arrow. So if someone can’t reasonably articulate what they are doing on the lane we are all sudden supposed to believe them when it comes reviewing balls? He most likely isn’t even sliding in the same spot so its pretty much academic he’s not hitting the same spot on the lane.
-
"Know it alls" though.....
Yeah, you are. I know EXACTLY what I was bowling on and I am tired of people trying to gaslighting me and misrepresenting what I said.
Honestly, I felt this was an imprtant topic. There are special cases when it's best to have the ball read the lane super early without pushing the oil down the lane. Especially when most bowlers equate downlane motion to ball strength. Why take someone that realizes a ball that isn't looking to use all of it's energy quickly is generally a weaker ball and look to bash/ridicule them for asking a question? If anything, it's a good time to educate. Usually when I see people asking a question regarding oilers, wveryone makes them seem stupid bg drilling the concept that the new oilers hook at their toes. I understand both sides, but this could have been handled differently.
Nope, not on the Internet. This is all too familiar. This guy said he’s standing 8 going up 5, umm, what?!?!?! This rivals the “guy†that says he’s going up 1st arrow yet you watch him stand on 10, slide 21, loop the ball through 13 out to 5 and will honestly have you believe he’s going up first arrow. So if someone can’t reasonably articulate what they are doing on the lane we are all sudden supposed to believe them when it comes reviewing balls? He most likely isn’t even sliding in the same spot so its pretty much academic he’s not hitting the same spot on the lane.
I will have to video tape myself again, I have bowled so many years in my youth being very near-sighted (virtually blind from a far) that I never paid close enough attention to the boards I was hitting numerically. With glasses now, I can get a relatively consistent trajectory and repeat shots when I am in a zone but I have to relearn to pay attention to boards on the lane I am hitting. I do visualize the trajectory of my shot very well which is a good thing but somehow that does not translate to perceiving the board that I am hitting on the lay down point.
Trust me man, I watch very carefully when my stuff enters into the hook phase. My particle stuff doesn't have prayer to get through the heads even with far less than 320 grit on most house shots. Yet on this one particular occasion, I watched my particle stuff actually skid through the heads and grab early in the midlane while the Rising and Sure Lock were skipping the mids and hooking in a very angular fashion but doing so too far down the lane on the fresh. That would only happen on a flood.
With that being said, I think the title of this thread gave you guys the wrong impression. The Rising and Sure Lock are actually far more usable on shots with less than a flood even with extra grit added the covers. They would look better for the
vast majority of bowlers on a wider variety of conditions.
My issue wasn't actually the balls themselves but the ridiculous claims from manufacturers, pro shop operators, and bowlers alike saying that balls today are so much stronger than in the particle era which in MY understanding of "stronger" made little sense based on actually subjective emperical observation. That was why I keep asking you essentially what the hell everybody was meant by "stronger" (I guess it is a highly-subjective and relative term) A much more accurate portrayal of today's oilers compared to the oilers of the past is they are much more balanced.
-
This is all simple logic; As I said earlier, SEEING IS BELIEVING!!!! Show the tape my friend, with the older, and newer pieces, and let us decide...
Problem solved!
-
I remember when I was 19, I "quit" my first legit coaching session after seeing how truly terrible I threw the ball. It was eye opening and in no way did my eyes/brain/body feel as bad as my physical game looked while I was bowling. Even with video evidence, I still refused to believe what I was seeing and it jaded me to the point that I wanted to quit.
It took 2 more years of coaching, a 4 year layoff, a comeback & more coaching, another 6 year layoff, a comeback and more coaching to be at the point where I feel and look like I have a decent, repeatable physical game. Most importantly what I look at on the lane and hit, is very close to the true pathway of the ball.
Moral of the story... it's ok to be wrong. Being Self-Aware is most important.
-
Preach, bruh!
-
This is all simple logic; As I said earlier, SEEING IS BELIEVING!!!! Show the tape my friend, with the older, and newer pieces, and let us decide...
Problem solved!
Only if they put out a pattern that heavy again! Otherwise, I would have to take up the surface to about 1000/2000 grit on everything. One thing to remember is that not all older pieces are made equal. The Sure Lock and Rising are MUCH stronger in the oil than some of the second generation particles in the Labyrinth, Matrix TPS III, and Weapon of Mass Bias. Those balls actually cleared the heads great on your medium-heavy patterns and had a much better backend than the higher load particles, but they skid too far down the lane to be used on heavy oil even with a ton of surface.
The Arc, Champ, and Response are obscenely earlier rolling than the other three particle balls mentioned above. I mean not even close! Yes, I do hoard a lot of old bowling balls. Some of them are ready to go on the chopping block!