BallReviews

Equipment Boards => Roto Grip => Topic started by: Ric Clint on October 15, 2008, 01:38:46 AM

Title: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Ric Clint on October 15, 2008, 01:38:46 AM

Not from me... it's from daveozio

Thoughts?


http://www.ballreviews.com/Reviews/Reviews.asp?BallID=916&ManufacterID=15&ReviewID=30065

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jkiser01 on October 15, 2008, 09:46:45 AM
I doubt very seriously that is really Dave Ozio..
--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Ric Clint on October 15, 2008, 09:52:33 AM
quote:
I doubt very seriously that is really Dave Ozio..
--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..



I highly doubt it also!

But then again... if it IS truely him, and that's the honest impression that he got from the ball, then it's good that he is being honest.

But me personally, I think the Cell Pearl will be "Ball Of The Year"!




Edited on 10/15/2008 9:56 AM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jkiser01 on October 15, 2008, 10:01:01 AM
I have 1 drilled up and another will be here tomorrow. I very rarely buy 2 of the same ball but the 1st one is so good that I want to dry a stronger drill on this 2nd one..

quote:
quote:
I doubt very seriously that is really Dave Ozio..
--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..



I highly doubt it also!

But then again... if it IS truely him, and that's the honest impression that he got from the ball, then it's good that he is being honest.

But me personally, I think the Cell Pearl will be "Ball Of The Year"!




Edited on 10/15/2008 9:56 AM

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on October 15, 2008, 11:05:42 AM
This ball can get over/under on the wrong pattern as I found out out Monday night, it like any pearl does not fare well with the following two things going on.

1-Too much oil upfront then it becomes greatly straighter, Cell Solid would be and as is a much better choice as you would think.

2-Wet/dry shot with a very defined oil line, if you leak it a few boards out from keeping it in the oil and then out boom you serious backend reaction that is overreaction.

Overall it gets a solid 9/10 on true mediums, for me it does not handle medium-heavy fresh oil it skates the first 10 feet with ease. I am thinking of 4k no polish to make it a more usable at both centers I bowl at, still a great ball will win ball of the year or at least pearl of the year.

Edited on 10/15/2008 11:11 AM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: T Brockette on October 15, 2008, 11:12:55 AM
The thing that makes me feel it is not Ozzio, is because he states he won't buy another roto-grip. I can't believe a pro would say that about company, and I think if Ozzio wanted to try a Pearl Cell, I bet Roto-Grip would not make him pay for it!
--------------------
Tracy

Bowlingchat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on October 15, 2008, 11:19:25 AM
I am sure he never pays for a ball maybe drilling but not a ball, I know of amateurs that have not payed for a ball in 15 years let alone being Ozio.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: ElectricLeftSlider on October 15, 2008, 11:49:48 AM
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: 302efi on October 15, 2008, 11:56:02 AM
Seems like a legit reveiew IMO.

If it's really from ozio, who knows, but this is not your normal "bsh" review.

The guy is just giving his opinion on the ball, nothing worng with that, that is the purpose of this site..lol
--------------------
quote:
I will head to my local pro shop. Right after I buy it online.

Sport Bowling is a F**king joke
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: T Brockette on October 15, 2008, 11:58:18 AM
quote:
Seems like a legit reveiew IMO.

If it's really from ozio, who knows, but this is not your normal "bsh" review.

The guy is just giving his opinion on the ball, nothing worng with that, that is the purpose of this site..lol
--------------------
quote:
I will head to my local pro shop. Right after I buy it online.

Sport Bowling is a F**king joke


Chad,

I agree it seems like a very unbiased review, and informative also. I was just questioning the validity of the user name is all.
--------------------
Tracy

Bowlingchat.net (http://"http://www.bowlingchat.net")
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Moon57 on October 15, 2008, 12:01:14 PM
A pro would never write such generalized review like that based off an experience with one ball.
--------------------
Moon
--------------------
So many questions, so little time but I'm having fun.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jkiser01 on October 15, 2008, 12:30:35 PM
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Mustang Guy on October 15, 2008, 12:48:22 PM
Trust me it isn't David Ozio that works for Etonic.  I've seen two negative reviews and both people created their screen name the same day as they posted the review.  Seems fishy to me and I emailed the first guy to see if he needed any help.  Due to the bashing in the first negative one and the mention of purchasing other products I had a hard time thinking it wasn't intentional.  

BUT, as everyone stated the purpose of the site is for people to share (good or bad) what they think about the ball.  Even if people are deceiving or just plain upset that is their decision to say what they want.  Since 98% of all the other reviews are positive and I'm sure the overall response will be positive I'm not too worried about it.  The ball could have been drilled improperly for the player for where he/she bowls and there are many other factors that can give someone a bad taste in their mouth about a bowling ball.

Thank you!  Now lets start talking about positives!  LOL
--------------------
Roger Noordhoek
Vice President
Business Development
Roto Grip, Inc.
888-450-6920
RogerN@rotogrip.com
www.rotogrip.com


For all your Roto Grip Logo Merchandise please visit www.rotogear.com
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: MC on October 15, 2008, 12:50:49 PM
I thought that when he said it "lost its luster" that he was saying that he lost the intrique it had. Otherwords, the honeymoon was over. just my opinion.
You could be right but I understood it another way.

Mike

quote:
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..

--------------------
"Don't Give Up...  Don't Ever Give Up."       -Jim Valvano

"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."         -Vince Lombardi

VISIONARY TEST STAFF 07/08

Tag Team Coaching success story

             www.visionarybowling.com

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: ElectricLeftSlider on October 15, 2008, 12:53:12 PM
quote:
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..


They don't call me Mr. Mirofiber for nothing. I wipe my ball before, during, and after my leagues. I didn't say the ball died, but the ball lost all it's "wow factor" .I've even hit it with 4000 grit ab. It worked a couple of games, then it went limp. My Storm Domination has more snap in the backend than my Cell. Oh well.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jkiser01 on October 15, 2008, 12:53:42 PM
MC,

After reading it again, you could be correct but after 6 games that seems kind of odd..

quote:
I thought that when he said it "lost its luster" that he was saying that he lost the intrique it had. Otherwords, the honeymoon was over. just my opinion.
You could be right but I understood it another way.

Mike

quote:
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..

--------------------
"Don't Give Up...  Don't Ever Give Up."       -Jim Valvano

"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."         -Vince Lombardi

VISIONARY TEST STAFF 07/08

Tag Team Coaching success story

             www.visionarybowling.com



--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: ElectricLeftSlider on October 15, 2008, 12:59:32 PM
That's exactly what I meant when I said "lost it's luster" or even "wow factor". It's hasn't been the monster ball that it used to be when I first bought it. I play with alot of oil on synthetic lanes. Talk about being a oil sponge soaker.

quote:
I thought that when he said it "lost its luster" that he was saying that he lost the intrique it had. Otherwords, the honeymoon was over. just my opinion.
You could be right but I understood it another way.

Mike

quote:
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..

--------------------
"Don't Give Up...  Don't Ever Give Up."       -Jim Valvano

"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."         -Vince Lombardi

VISIONARY TEST STAFF 07/08

Tag Team Coaching success story

             www.visionarybowling.com


Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on October 15, 2008, 06:21:39 PM
My 4 year old was bored today, so i spun the ball at 2k abralon no polish and off to bowling we went. Now the ball is still longer than original Cell that I have polished but outhooks it in the back easily 6-7 boards. I was able to move in the full 6 boards and the ball came alive on the same Wet/Dry it was all over the place on Monday night.

So holy Bat Man this ball flat out moves with anything made now, got rid of the skid snap nature and now just reads and hooks through the pin deck

I took off my Striker brace that is my crutch and then because of my increase of tilt, the ball even hooked more but went straighter upfront a few feet before the motion.

So there is a rating revision for me back to 9.5 on mediums and probably higher on true medium heavy oil.

Edited on 10/15/2008 6:23 PM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Ric Clint on October 15, 2008, 07:39:26 PM
quote:
My 4 year old was bored today, so i spun the ball at 2k abralon no polish and off to bowling we went. Now the ball is still longer than original Cell that I have polished but outhooks it in the back easily 6-7 boards. I was able to move in the full 6 boards and the ball came alive on the same Wet/Dry it was all over the place on Monday night.

So holy Bat Man this ball flat out moves with anything made now, got rid of the skid snap nature and now just reads and hooks through the pin deck

I took off my Striker brace that is my crutch and then because of my increase of tilt, the ball even hooked more but went straighter upfront a few feet before the motion.

So there is a rating revision for me back to 9.5 on mediums and probably higher on true medium heavy oil.

Edited on 10/15/2008 6:23 PM



What was your CELL PEARL's coverstock finish before you took it to 2k abralon?



Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: charlest on October 15, 2008, 11:59:17 PM
quote:
quote:
your the 1st person I have ever seen post something saying a ball died after 6 games.. I doubt that very much.. If you clean a ball after each use, that should not happen..

quote:
I didn't really care about the original Cell myself. It lost all it's luster after 6 games. I've seen other bowlers with the Cell pearl, and didn't see a wow factor on that too.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..


They don't call me Mr. Mirofiber for nothing. I wipe my ball before, during, and after my leagues. I didn't say the ball died, but the ball lost all it's "wow factor" .I've even hit it with 4000 grit ab. It worked a couple of games, then it went limp. My Storm Domination has more snap in the backend than my Cell. Oh well.


The Cell is not SUPPOSED to have "snap" on it. If you don't understand what a ball is, what its basic design is intended to do, then you will probably not use it on the right oil pattern nor will it be drilled correctly. Thus, it is inevitable that you will be unhappy with it.

At 4000 grit Abralon, my Cell, not Cell Pearl, hooked so much at the backend, it alsmot did snap.
--------------------
"None are so blind as those who will not see."
Unofficial Ballreviews.com FAQ (http://"http://home.mchsi.com/~s-cross-7-28-71/FAQ.htm")

Edited on 10/16/2008 0:01 AM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: stormed1 on October 16, 2008, 08:43:06 AM
Here's Daveoaio's profile from Bowlingballreviews

 
 

Profile for daveozio
Username daveozio
Name dave
City beavercreek
State/Province oh
Country us
Age 42
Years Bowling 30
Email
Favorite
Company columbia 300
Favorite Ball ti messanger pearl
Home House Lane Type Synthetic
Hand Bowled With? Right-handed
Wristguard Used? No
Axis Tilt 45-60 degree
Type of Roll High track
Bowling Style Tweeker
Ball Speed Average
Revolutions on Ball 18-20
Reviews -Needs some work (Cell Pearl)
 



Close Window
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: LuckyLefty on October 16, 2008, 09:01:51 AM
One of the problems with this site.

I thought David Ozio is in his 50s!

Unless his name really IS David Ozio(could be).  One should not be able to use a pros name and do reviews.  It just smacks of me calling myself John McCain and making outlandish posts out here about Obama.

The review.....good....until he says he wouldn't buy another RotoGrip.  The PRO Ozio I can't imagine that post from him or another pro.

For ElectricSlider.....aren't all pearls suppossed to have more "Snap" that a solid like the Cell that is known for its powerful and smooth continuation?

REgards,

Luckylefty
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: dizzyfugu on October 16, 2008, 09:16:35 AM
Well, it it really was David Ozio, he would NOT call his bwoling styl "tweeker", or...?

BTW - if it is a bowler's impression, that's fine. But using someone else's name to add... credibility(???), is IMHO lame.
--------------------
DizzyFugu (http://"http://www.putfile.com/dizzyfugu/") - Reporting from Germany

Confused by bowling?
Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom:  the unofficial FAQ section (http://"http://www.ballreviews.com/Forum/Replies.asp?TopicID=74110&ForumID=16&CategoryID=5")

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: tdub36tjt on October 16, 2008, 11:15:14 AM
I have saw 3 Cell Pearls on the lanes, all 3 are good bowlers. One of which is on the Roto-Grip Amatuer Staff and another a "Roto-Grip Pro Shop" operator. And only one of them looked even decent and it wasn't the guy who is on Staff or the Pro-shop operator. The one that looked decent was a lower rev strojer lefty. The other 2 I saw looked like terds. I was seriously considering buying one since I loved the Cell so much but after seeing them in action I probably won't buy one. I might consider getting a used one or something later down the road but would have to be the right deal. Maybe its a fluke tho too since so many people love the ball.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jkiser01 on October 16, 2008, 11:26:45 AM
I guess my question is what do you mean they looked like terds? What lane conditions where they using this ball on? How where they drilled? Where they box finish?

I think I would have to know all those things before I could say a ball looked bad in anyone's hands. There are way too many variables that could fall into place here..

There are also several very good reveiws on this ball, so I chalk it up to some people expecting way to much out of new release stuff or they just don't match up well with the ball.. Thats for sure happened to me before but that doesn't make it a bad ball, just not for me..

Remember, a ball is only as good as the driver.. LOL..

Just my 2 cents..

quote:
I have saw 3 Cell Pearls on the lanes, all 3 are good bowlers. One of which is on the Roto-Grip Amatuer Staff and another a "Roto-Grip Pro Shop" operator. And only one of them looked even decent and it wasn't the guy who is on Staff or the Pro-shop operator. The one that looked decent was a lower rev strojer lefty. The other 2 I saw looked like terds. I was seriously considering buying one since I loved the Cell so much but after seeing them in action I probably won't buy one. I might consider getting a used one or something later down the road but would have to be the right deal. Maybe its a fluke tho too since so many people love the ball.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..







Edited on 10/16/2008 11:35 AM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: tdub36tjt on October 16, 2008, 11:55:06 AM
I can't tell you the layouts, but one of the bowlers is a 235 average the other like 225. So I wouldn't say it was the bowlers not being good. I'm not gonna say the ball is garbage I'm just saying that when I have saw them it did.That doesn't mean that I don't believe everyone else saying its "ball of the year", it just makes me skeptical. The ball just didn't want to carry no matter where he put it on the lane, it was endless 10,8, or 7 pin. I don't know if it overdrives or what just wasn't impressed with how it rolled and carried. Saying it was a terd might be exaggerated but I just wasn't impressed.

quote:
I guess my question is what do you mean they looked like terds? What lane conditions where they using this ball on? How where they drilled? Where they box finish?

I think I would have to know all those things before I could say a ball looked bad in anyone's hands. There are way too many variables that could fall into place here..

There are also several very good reveiws on this ball, so I chalk it up to some people expecting way to much out of new release stuff or they just don't match up well with the ball.. Thats for sure happened to me before but that doesn't make it a bad ball, just not for me..

Remember, a ball is only as good as the driver.. LOL..

Just my 2 cents..

quote:
I have saw 3 Cell Pearls on the lanes, all 3 are good bowlers. One of which is on the Roto-Grip Amatuer Staff and another a "Roto-Grip Pro Shop" operator. And only one of them looked even decent and it wasn't the guy who is on Staff or the Pro-shop operator. The one that looked decent was a lower rev strojer lefty. The other 2 I saw looked like terds. I was seriously considering buying one since I loved the Cell so much but after seeing them in action I probably won't buy one. I might consider getting a used one or something later down the road but would have to be the right deal. Maybe its a fluke tho too since so many people love the ball.

--------------------
My first child.. Hannah Allison Kiser born 4/30/2007... My little angel..







Edited on 10/16/2008 11:35 AM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: ccrider on October 16, 2008, 05:12:25 PM
This posting seems useless. Although I have only been bowling a couple of years, I have owned a lot of balls, and do all that I can to learn and understand.

Any of you who have a basic understanding should know that lane condition, ball set up, and individual ability has more to do with the end result than how good or bad the ball is.

Take the Cell Pearl, or any other newer releases, drilled correctly for a good bowler, on the correct lane conditions and they will make the ball shine.

Put the same ball and bowler on the wrong lane condition and he may be able to score with the ball, but the ball will not look as good.

Buy the ball and try it if you can afford it, and that is what you want to do. All of the discussion about how good or bad the ball is ------ useless.

CC
--------------------
Those that can do. Those that can't complain. Pimpin ain't easy, but it's mandatory.

Most things we like, we don't need. Most things we need, we don't like. Don't confuse your likes with your needs.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on October 16, 2008, 05:14:26 PM
Rick box finish, sorry busy with work and getting school finalized. Going into bean counting with my 20 years of Business background I have a good chance at CFO or CEO jobs in about 4 years.



quote:
quote:
My 4 year old was bored today, so i spun the ball at 2k abralon no polish and off to bowling we went. Now the ball is still longer than original Cell that I have polished but outhooks it in the back easily 6-7 boards. I was able to move in the full 6 boards and the ball came alive on the same Wet/Dry it was all over the place on Monday night.

So holy Bat Man this ball flat out moves with anything made now, got rid of the skid snap nature and now just reads and hooks through the pin deck

I took off my Striker brace that is my crutch and then because of my increase of tilt, the ball even hooked more but went straighter upfront a few feet before the motion.

So there is a rating revision for me back to 9.5 on mediums and probably higher on true medium heavy oil.

Edited on 10/15/2008 6:23 PM



What was your CELL PEARL's coverstock finish before you took it to 2k abralon?






Edited on 10/16/2008 5:14 PM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Juggernaut on October 17, 2008, 08:03:40 PM
quote:
This posting seems useless. Although I have only been bowling a couple of years, I have owned a lot of balls, and do all that I can to learn and understand.

Any of you who have a basic understanding should know that lane condition, ball set up, and individual ability has more to do with the end result than how good or bad the ball is.

Take the Cell Pearl, or any other newer releases, drilled correctly for a good bowler, on the correct lane conditions and they will make the ball shine.

Put the same ball and bowler on the wrong lane condition and he may be able to score with the ball, but the ball will not look as good.

Buy the ball and try it if you can afford it, and that is what you want to do. All of the discussion about how good or bad the ball is ------ useless.

CC
--------------------
Those that can do. Those that can't complain. Pimpin ain't easy, but it's mandatory.

Most things we like, we don't need. Most things we need, we don't like. Don't confuse your likes with your needs.



CCRIDER,

 How dare you come on here talking sense, trying to be observant and judicious in your opinions of things.  Who died and gave you the right to come on here and make sense of things.

  You should know by now that, if not filled with innuendos and rhetoric, your opinion is completely worthless and in-valid.
--------------------

Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile



My Bowl.com member page (http://"http://members.bowl.com/SearchUSBC/ViewMember.aspx?prefix=2243&suffix=4831")



Edited on 10/17/2008 8:04 PM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: BBock727 on October 20, 2008, 08:47:24 PM
So whats the right lane condition for this ball?
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: ccrider on October 21, 2008, 11:38:57 AM
Jugg,

One of my few, brief moments of clarity.

I wonder how the Cell Pearl compares to the Gravity Shift.  My guess is that they roll similar. I can not imagine the Cell Pearl having more backend.  

I can use my Gravity Shift for all three games during our 5 men league, on a modified THS, with more oil outside of 5 then normal you can miss right. Just have to be careful to stay firm because of over an under on fresh shot like most pearls I have thrown. Is the Cell Pearl about the same?
--------------------
Those that can do. Those that can't complain. Pimpin ain't easy, but it's mandatory.

Most things we like, we don't need. Most things we need, we don't like. Don't confuse your likes with your needs.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on October 21, 2008, 11:52:27 AM
Nope dont roll the same in box finish, I have both but let me tell you the Cell pearl at 2k is a flipping outstanding ball. I went with the CP game 1 and right to the AZO Pure Tactics games 2 and 3.

Gravity shift is different than the CP, not huge differences enough to warrant having each ball. I dulled my CP to 2k no polish, now it picks up and handles oil like a champ before it was somewhat allergic to oil.





quote:
Jugg,

One of my few, brief moments of clarity.

I wonder how the Cell Pearl compares to the Gravity Shift.  My guess is that they roll similar. I can not imagine the Cell Pearl having more backend.  

I can use my Gravity Shift for all three games during our 5 men league, on a modified THS, with more oil outside of 5 then normal you can miss right. Just have to be careful to stay firm because of over an under on fresh shot like most pearls I have thrown. Is the Cell Pearl about the same?
--------------------
Those that can do. Those that can't complain. Pimpin ain't easy, but it's mandatory.

Most things we like, we don't need. Most things we need, we don't like. Don't confuse your likes with your needs.

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: strikealot on October 21, 2008, 12:09:16 PM
i have 2 cell pearls also...one is 5x3 with pin up, it handles oil nicely....i have the other at 6x5 pin up at 2000 with beans on it and it is my fav, i kill my house with this ball playing deep inside...they compliment each other very well for me...i ave 233 this past weekend in a doubles tourney with the 5x3 CP on wood lanes...love them both and would highly recommend this ball for anyone..
--------------------

~<:-0======"IN CG WE TRUST" i chant as i pray to the static weight God...======



Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: wkf0908 on October 22, 2008, 04:46:25 AM
No Big Deal!!

Just when ROTO-GRIP make a ball is suitable for 990 bowlers & 10 isn't!!
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: crankncrash on November 14, 2008, 10:31:04 PM
To me, I think roto would have been better served releasing a hybrid cell at 4000 grit letting it push down the lane have more bite in the backs and avoided the pearl thing all together, but thats just me.  I would take the pearl if you gave it to me, but I'd take the original at 4000 first and make it compliment my OOB cell, smoooooooooth strong, predictable, what else do you want?
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jls on November 25, 2008, 11:57:13 AM
quote:

Not from me... it's from daveozio

Thoughts?


http://www.ballreviews.com/Reviews/Reviews.asp?BallID=916&ManufacterID=15&ReviewID=30065





Just one thought on the Cell Pearl.

IT IS SELLING WELL!!!!!!   >>>>  in our area, the midwest!!!

enough said
--------------------
jls

Edited on 11/25/2008 1:04 PM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: JustRico on November 25, 2008, 12:00:53 PM
Not on the west coast...
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: jls on November 25, 2008, 12:04:09 PM
quote:
Not on the west coast...
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico



Wow,  really,  it's not doing well out west?  Here in the midwest, the ball has been a huge hit.

go figure
--------------------
jls
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: Rileybowler on November 25, 2008, 12:20:18 PM
quote:
quote:
Not on the west coast...
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico



Wow,  really,  it's not doing well out west?  Here in the midwest, the ball has been a huge hit.

go figure
--------------------
jls

_________________________________________________________
JLS I guess them guys can't get out of Starbucks long enough to buy one and try it out
--------------------
Carl
Bless the LORD o my soul and all that is within me bless his holy name
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: JustRico on November 25, 2008, 12:29:54 PM
Starbucks...funny.

Most of the shops out here, in Starbucks land, are not seeing the response from the pearl that there was for the solid. It is also a little allergic to oil. There are other pearls that out perform it also.

Glad you are selling them, we can send ours to you.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: SKIDSNAP on November 25, 2008, 12:40:02 PM
There isn't a pearl on the market that handles oil and carrydown better than the Cell Pearl.  How about you drilling one and seeing what it can do?

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: JustRico on November 25, 2008, 12:42:15 PM
I do not need to drill a ball to see what it does. Thanks for offering though.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mmcfarland300 on November 25, 2008, 02:24:58 PM
I have seen 2 Cell Pearls the Kansas City area, 1 being thrown by a lefty and the other in a Pro Shop.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on November 25, 2008, 03:01:55 PM
Selling in Vegas, i have seen 6 on ball returns in the last two weeks alone. Yes it is allergic to oil and carrydown in box also, not the worst I have seen but still a great ball.

Edited on 11/25/2008 4:04 PM
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: tdub36tjt on November 25, 2008, 03:10:44 PM
While I like mine, to say it handles oil better than any other pearl is not true from what I see. To me it is just the Total NV all over again. Nice length decent backend good carry. But I have thrown a lot of stronger pearls.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: BOWLGNUT on November 25, 2008, 03:38:03 PM
That is not the real David Ozio that gave a negative review on the Cell Pearl.The real David Ozio lives in Beaumont,Texas and his age is 54 years ago and a PBA member since 1977.Just to let some of you guys know.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: DP3 on November 25, 2008, 03:51:55 PM
Is bad shot making even accounted for anymore?  I've seen the Cell Pearl in the hands of about 30-40 different bowlers of various average ranges in many different centers with varying characteristics and oil patterns.  One thing that the ball had in common over a wide range of styles was the ability to still read strong in the oil and not squirt out of the end of the pattern when thrown well.  You can take any ball, throw it on the condition it was intended for, throw a few bad shots and have it appear to look "allergic to oil" down the lane.  Then again, what ball isn't allergic to oil down the lane?  If it sees enough it's going to squirt, esepcially if it isn't thrown well by the user.  

It's pretty frustrating reading "reviews" and hearing assertions all day about a ball's faults and characteristics and why it "isn't good for ___ type of bowlers".  You'd think from reading that every shot delivered off of everyone's hand with an opinion was labeled down to a tee without any operator error in release or lane playing strategies.
--------------------
-DJ Marshall
...The Twelve In a Row Pro Shop.  AMF Bowie Lanes -- Bowie, MD

Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: VideoBallReviews on November 25, 2008, 03:52:07 PM
I have yet to find a polished pearl that handles carrydown well...dont know what you guys are really looking for out of this ball, in my opinion it compliments the original extremely well giving you a strong motion downlane when the original cell is hooking too early...

Now knock the polish off of this thing and as Barry has said it handles oil very well...the ball is very tuneable to suit your needs
--------------------
Britton (formerly bar5003)

Owner/Operator of Videoballreviews.com (http://"http://www.videoballreviews.com")

Official Sponsors
VISE (http://"http://www.viseinserts.com")
3G Shoes (http://"http://www.900global.com")
Buddiesproshop.com (http://"http://www.buddiesproshop.com")
Virtualtournaments.com (http://"http://www.virtualtournaments.com")
Valentino Bowling...click here for 5% off your next order! (http://"http://valentinobowling.com/vbr.html")
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: VideoBallReviews on November 25, 2008, 03:55:49 PM
quote:
One thing that the ball had in common over a wide range of styles was the ability to still read strong in the oil and not squirt out of the end of the pattern when thrown well.


Boy is this ever right on...i have seen too many people throw strong polished pearl equipment or just something polished in general and the second they miss it a bit at the bottom or throw it a bit faster there is instant carrydown and the ball sucks...
--------------------
Britton (formerly bar5003)

Owner/Operator of Videoballreviews.com (http://"http://www.videoballreviews.com")

Official Sponsors
VISE (http://"http://www.viseinserts.com")
3G Shoes (http://"http://www.900global.com")
Buddiesproshop.com (http://"http://www.buddiesproshop.com")
Virtualtournaments.com (http://"http://www.virtualtournaments.com")
Valentino Bowling...click here for 5% off your next order! (http://"http://valentinobowling.com/vbr.html")
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: mrbowlingnut on November 25, 2008, 04:01:40 PM
At 2k no polish it becomes a very strong piece, I will keep the Cell Pearl not going anywhere anytime soon.

In Fact I cannot think on a single Rotogrip ball that I have that would be for sale, The Illusion was not great for me but cracked in half so I got a new ball for it anyway.

I do not think they are making a single bad product at this time, If I had the Illusion Pin over ring instead of under it would have worked much better.
Title: Re: 1st Negative Review of CELL PEARL
Post by: nowski1381 on November 25, 2008, 04:25:31 PM
I definitely DON'T like mine at all out of the box but I'm going to try to take it to 2k no polish and see if it's any better for me...