First of all I appreciate the response from you!! I DO regret the conflict of interest, it's a catch 22 sometimes. There are a lot of "staffers" that go through the motions to fulfill contract obligations and it's given the lot of us a bad reputation. If a ball is great for me, like this one, it's hard to reign that back, and also hard to avoid, "well of course you like it, you're a staffer." But given that I'm supposed to know this stuff better than anyone, if a ball doesn't work for me, that reflects EXTRA poorly since I should know what layouts or surfaces to go to. It is what it is though.
I do like your point . . that making "good" shots is just as subjective as "missing." The same variables apply to both, but I've got an idea how I could show misses and give context and information without just having a few random bad shots in there. "So what happens when I miss? This shot was thrown too hard, this shot was thrown too soft, this shot was right, left, overhit, didn't catch it, etc." I get what you're saying . . I've seen videos that just show like 10 straight shots and give a shot quality rating without saying what was wrong or right with the shot and just leave it up to the viewer to figure it out. However, I can see your point that there is value, quite a lot really if the misses are explained or given context . . because every ball does have different fudge room. Sure Lock, throw it too fast, might be alright, throw it too slow, not a chance. Now Hyroad Pearl, if I get a little slow or soft, probably will be ok, get too firm, nah, not a prayer.
Your last paragraph I agree with, this is why I film every video on the same condition if at all possible. I would PREFER to show each ball on the condition it was designed for because if a ball doesn't perform well on the condition it's supposed to, then there are problems, BUT having been in a pro shop for so long . . yeah, people come in and buy the ball they want and then go try to make it work on a house shot.
Thanks very much for the advice, much appreciated!!
Hey man, I asked for feedback and this qualifies lol. Yeah that's why I said I thought this one was a little over the top. However, this is an OPINION video, this wasn't my REVIEW, so lol I can say whatever I want. So first to clarify and be clear, this is specifically an opinion video or how I feel about the ball, not my actual review video. My actual review video was up last week, BUT I don't want my opinion videos to compromise my reputation. But as long as we're on the topic, here's my actual review video to critique: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqWYEKLr0-M
Now I do have a few video rules as well. Number one is no layout pictures. The layout numbers are all that matters, where my fingers go helps no one and quite possibly confuses some. Number two is no bad shots. It's completely unfair to judge a ball's capability on bad shots, I'm not going to show a shot where I miss 5 right and watch the ball miss the headpin and say it has poor recovery. I'm reviewing the ball, not myself. Number three, describe the ball based on the condition it was designed for, otherwise it would be like saying how poor a 7 iron is at putting. "Well the Sure Lock sucks on dry lanes." It's a Sure Lock . . so . . yeah. I don't feel a need to go out of my way to say something negative about a ball unless there's something negative to be said, like I felt there was with the Timeless. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOmffx9lsUs I hated that ball, it was plugged and redrilled for my wife before the release date even got here, but I had to give it a fair shake because I felt like it was going to be good for some people.
HOWEVER, this all being said, if your opinion stands, then cool because perception is reality. If it seems like I'm leaving something out or glossing over something or using some marketing angle to avoid saying something negative, then I need to address that because if you feel that way, likely there are others that feel the same. Doesn't matter what my reasons are, if it seems a certain way, then my reasons sound like excuses to cover my donkey, and I don't want that. At the same time, not going to break my video rules. Storm wants me to put layout pictures on the videos because people like seeing them, but I'm not going to do that because it can literally only cause confusion. Where my fingers are at bears zero relevance to anyone who doesn't have exactly the same PAP measurements. Don't care what the ball does on bad shots because I've seen too many videos where they show misses but aren't playing the right part of the lane for how the ball reacts in the first place, so if you're playing the wrong part of the lane and showing what happens when you miss, it's going to be different from if you miss playing the correct part of the lane, misses are completely subjective and 100% on the bowler, also bears zero relevance to the ball. Also see too many reviews that say "well it doesn't have enough traction in heavy oil and is too strong on friction so it's going to be best on medium heavy conditions." Well on the tech sheet it says it's for medium heavy conditions, so I'm also trying not to insult the viewer's intelligence. Is that fair enough, or what would you say in response? There's a happy medium here somewhere, and I would honestly appreciate a response!
On edit, I am sorry this comes across as harsh. It is honest though... Having said that, the opinion stands....
Ok wait. This is like being in Neverland... Wow. Luke, you're not the fanboy, but everyone below you sure is. I just listened to the video for the 3rd time. 9 positive comments, ZERO NEGATIVE OR EVEN "HERE'S WHERE THE BALL DOESN'T FIT" COMMENTS (Every ball is better in a certain situation). Tell me again exactly how you're honestly rating the ball with that distribution? Zero shots missed. What did you do, shoot 47 in a row?
You may have an honest intent, but show me, in even ONE spot, where you said what the ball doesn't do, or show a miss, or when to put it away. Neat trick of feigning honesty and humility while pushing the product but HOLY MACKEREL BATMAN (in honor of Adam West, who died today), this really stands out as the emperor wears no clothes. Show me, just one place in the video, just one please.
Ok, flame on, go ahead.... But you know I'm right... 
Hey Luke. Representing one of the only video reviewers that shows shots that don't make the cut, I thought it worthwhile to give you another perspective. I will start by saying I like your commentary. TamerBowling.com was pioneering this almost 10 years ago. We write full independent reviews on my site so we've been covering the actual review, whether voiceover or written, for some time. You have some conflict of interest but I think you have generally been fair. The more that people like us provide commentary, the more informed the community is.
What I wanted to say is that I disagree with your assertion that showing misses has zero value. I understand that showing a bowler missing "can be" more a commentary on the bowler but there are 2 factors in my mind. One is when the bowler doesn't actually miss, meaning the shot was a "85%" or better shot. In that case, it helps the viewer see how much forgiveness or miss room they have. And we talk about that. I mean every ball should strike if I throw it 100%. The second is truly when the bowler misses target or other significant mistake. Even in this case, there is value. Why? Because we all miss. Nobody is a machine. If I was Parker Bohn, than I have no need to see miss room :-). We actually miss on purpose sometimes to see the balls reaction. People are going to miss and I think it adds significant value to help people understand what happens to ball reaction when they miss. I realize there are a lot of factors but doing this for 10 years, I can tell you that a whole lot is transferrable, a lot more than you are implying. Showing only strikes on the same line you could say adds just as little value in your argument then, because the factors that you argue for showing only strikes are still there, e.g., the bowler, their PAP, the lane condition, the topography, temperature, rev rate, speed, you name it... Then you could literally show one single throw and call it a day.
The other thing I would like to comment on is your remarks regarding balls and their reaction on certain conditions. Most bowlers bowl only on their house shot almost exclusively. If we are more or less simulating their condition, they should know if a Sure Lock rolls like a turd or is amenable for a bowler with similar style. I mean if the Sure Lock is so condition specific, then you could argue why spend so much money on something you will never get to use...and that is a perfectly defendable logic for certain bowlers. Just saying that, that information IS information. I have been surprised many times in 10 years of reviews and 25 years of bowling with reactive equipment by the versatility of certain balls that have a specific intent from a manufacturer while at the same time disappointed by other ball reaction that should be more versatile and isn't. I can't tell you how many times I've seen another bowler absolutely kill a house shot with a super strong ball while it was simply too strong to bother for me...
Hopefully you take this commentary as healthy debate.
