Author Topic: short pin to pap vs RICO (Read 9067 times)

J_w73 · « **on:** March 23, 2009, 06:41:27 AM »

What differences / benefits would there be on a short pin to pap (1 - 2"), vs a rico drill. My rico would be 5.5 inches pin to pap.

I have never really had a ball with the pin shorter than leverage. I am considering this drill for a really smooth medium oil ball..
will this smooth oil wet/dry? Is this good for sport shots?
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 3, High Series 782
Book Average 215 / 205,PBA Xperience ave180

pin-chaser · « **Reply #1 on:** March 23, 2009, 03:25:50 PM »

I have two Rico Layouts and they react more like my balls did in the 70's, smoother arc'ing and not aggressive off the backend. I LIKE IT ALOT but I do sacrifice some entry angle and on the fresh that is cool...it still strikes. But when the oil is pushing down, I really loose hit albeit I live in the pocket. I dont have a RICO punched into a "super ball" (ie. a VG or Cell Rogue but I am thinking about it).

Short pin to pap will give you less flare and an earlier hook albeit not jumpy off of the dry as would a longer pin. What you gain is more axis rotation (for a longer time down the lane). (This produce more hold for me on the lane since the ball is spinning longer down the lane in sacrfice of some send)

As for this difference I hope the above helps.

Juggernaut · « **Reply #2 on:** March 23, 2009, 03:30:56 PM »

For me, short pin-to-pap balls are weaker on the backend than RICO drills. I can use RICO drills on fresh shots and short pin-to-pap balls with flying backends.

Both tend to be smooth through the fronts for me.
--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

J_w73 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 23, 2009, 04:18:47 PM »

quote:
For me, short pin-to-pap balls are weaker on the backend than RICO drills. I can use RICO drills on fresh shots and short pin-to-pap balls with flying backends.

Both tend to be smooth through the fronts for me.
--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

that is what I was thinking.. I have a rico'd mammoth and the thing is super smooth but it will have a big backend if the lane has fresh oil and fresh backends..

so you would say that short pin to pap balls are for down and in shots or straight up the arrows with a consistant hook/roll throughout the length of the lane??
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 3, High Series 782
Book Average 215 / 205,PBA Xperience ave180

Edited on 3/23/2009 4:20 PM

Juggernaut · « **Reply #4 on:** March 23, 2009, 04:33:46 PM »

quote:
so you would say that short pin to pap balls are for down and in shots or straight up the arrows with a consistant hook/roll throughout the length of the lane??

Not exactly, but that's close. For me, short pin-to-pap balls are overall smoother than RICO drills. Whether you can play down-and-in depends a lot on oil pattern and ball surface/cover strength.

You can still cover quite a few boards with a short pin-to-pap ball, but its OVERALL reaction would be smoother than the same ball with a RICO.

I like shorter pin-to-pap balls when there is plenty of oil in the fronts but crazy, flying backends or bone dry outsides that have to be bumped. They help me blend out the wet/dry, over/under you get on drastic lane conditions and get consistent, dependable reads.

If I had two identical balls, one drilled RICO and the other drilled 2 X 2, I would use the RICO if the 2 X 2 wouldn't turn the corner/finish/carry and use the 2 X 2 if the RICO was finishing a bit too hard, leaving fours, nines,and wrap tens.
--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

J_w73 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 23, 2009, 05:07:53 PM »

quote:
quote:
so you would say that short pin to pap balls are for down and in shots or straight up the arrows with a consistant hook/roll throughout the length of the lane??

Not exactly, but that's close. For me, short pin-to-pap balls are overall smoother than RICO drills. Whether you can play down-and-in depends a lot on oil pattern and ball surface/cover strength.

You can still cover quite a few boards with a short pin-to-pap ball, but its OVERALL reaction would be smoother than the same ball with a RICO.

I like shorter pin-to-pap balls when there is plenty of oil in the fronts but crazy, flying backends or bone dry outsides that have to be bumped. They help me blend out the wet/dry, over/under you get on drastic lane conditions and get consistent, dependable reads.

If I had two identical balls, one drilled RICO and the other drilled 2 X 2, I would use the RICO if the 2 X 2 wouldn't turn the corner/finish/carry and use the 2 X 2 if the RICO was finishing a bit too hard, leaving fours, nines,and wrap tens.
--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

got it.. cool..
thank you
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 3, High Series 782
Book Average 215 / 205,PBA Xperience ave180

Edited on 3/23/2009 5:38 PM

J_w73 · « **Reply #6 on:** March 23, 2009, 05:54:17 PM »

In your opinion what determines the hook and shape in a short pin to pap ball.

Is it just the low rg value , the cover, and of course the release and revs??
basically .. Can you turn any ball into a controlled smooth roll with a short pin to pap drill??
--------------------
16-17 mph,350 rpm,PAP 5 1/2 x 3/8up, HighGame 300 x 3, High Series 782
Book Average 215 / 205,PBA Xperience ave180

Jay · « **Reply #7 on:** March 23, 2009, 10:10:55 PM »

quote:
Can you turn any ball into a controlled smooth roll with a short pin to pap drill??

I don't think so. My Avalanche is drilled 2.5" and has a pretty strong move off the dry. Assume it's OOB.
--------------------
The Arsenal:

Rival
Counter Strike
Avalanche Solid
Maxim

jbruno6 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 23, 2009, 10:33:45 PM »

just wanted to let you guys know that this is a great thread, more info in 5 posts than my entire "Lastest posts" list.
--------------------

bluerrpilot · « **Reply #9 on:** March 23, 2009, 11:35:20 PM »

For me the difference is where I want my breakpoint. A 2" PtoP will have a breakpoint much closer to the arrows than my Rico ball.

I would use surface and cover strength to determine amount of hook on either ball.
--------------------
"USBC is concerned that technology has overtaken player skill in determining success in the sport of bowling"

n00dlejester · « **Reply #10 on:** March 23, 2009, 11:42:43 PM »

quote:
just wanted to let you guys know that this is a great thread, more info in 5 posts than my entire "Lastest posts" list.
--------------------

+1
--------------------
Proud Supporter of Rob Stone
Obviously, you aren't a golfer.
Some stayed in the foothills, some washed logs like teeth.

n00dlejester · « **Reply #11 on:** March 23, 2009, 11:43:26 PM »

Would one say a 1 or 2 inch pin to PAP would result in a hook/set reaction?
--------------------
Proud Supporter of Rob Stone
Obviously, you aren't a golfer.
Some stayed in the foothills, some washed logs like teeth.

JustRico · « **Reply #12 on:** March 24, 2009, 08:52:29 AM »

Here are a few explanations of pin to PAP distances as well as some more info on the 'Rico' layout.

The reason why the 'Rico' layout tends to be stronger in the back part of the lane is the placement of the weight hole. By placing the weight hole at 6 3/4" from the pin, creates the strongest amount of asymmetry in the ball. Asymmetry in the ball can help create continuity in the back end.

Pin to PAP placements are as such (devoid of surface prep and a weight hole):

Placing the pin at leverage or 3 3/8" from the PAP allows the highest amount of flare potential in the core. Flare potential is dependant on core strength or RG differential. Leverage or 3 3/8" pin placements generally will create more overall hook, front to back, more so than side to side. A leverage or 3 3/8" pin placement does not tend to create an angular reaction, as most think due to this being considered the strongest layout.
Any deviation from leverage, changes flare potential, as well as reaction shape.
Placing the pin closer to PAP, decreases flare potential and creates an earlier reaction on the lane and a smoother back end reaction.
Placing the pin farther from the PAP and closer to the track, decreases the flare potential and creates a later reaction and a smoother back end reaction.

Hope this makes sense and clears up questions that have been asked.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico

Juggernaut · « **Reply #13 on:** March 24, 2009, 09:53:24 AM »

quote:
In your opinion what determines the hook and shape in a short pin to pap ball.

There is no one mitigating factor that you can point your finger at and say "this is the reason". Surface finish and lane condition play major roles in ball reaction.

quote:
Is it just the low rg value , the cover, and of course the release and revs??

Like I said, it is not any ONE of these, but ALL of these working in conjunction that builds your total reaction.

quote:
basically .. Can you turn any ball into a controlled smooth roll with a short pin to pap drill??

NO, but you CAN make any ball smoother and more controlled than IT would have been. A low RG drilling ( short pin-to-pap ) will be smoother and more controlled than a high RG drilling ( longer pin-to-pap ), given all other factors are the same. You can smooth out a pearl cover ball more than it would have been by drilling it short pin-to-pap, but the pearl will still read the dry more "suddenly" than a solid and may still appear to have more reaction, depending on the lane condition and the drilling on the other ball.

As justrico said, 3 3/8 is the maximum leverage point, creating the most flare and reaction. Moving the pin away from that in EITHER DIRECTION decreases the flare potential and the overall reaction shape of the ball with shorter pin-to-pap's being earlier/smoother and longer pin-to-pap's creating lengthier reaction points.

To me, shorter pin-to-pap's are good on conditions where there isn't lots of "free hook" and you don't want to "go away from the pocket" with your launch angle ( as long as the heads hold up ) while longer pin-to-pap's will let me move in and wheel it a bit when conditions call for it, using surface finishes to compensate for oil amounts ( dull/solid for heavy, shiny/pearl for light )

--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

Edited on 3/24/2009 9:55 AM

Juggernaut · « **Reply #14 on:** March 24, 2009, 10:12:14 AM »

quote:
Would one say a 1 or 2 inch pin to PAP would result in a hook/set reaction?
--------------------
Proud Supporter of Rob Stone
Obviously, you aren't a golfer.
Some stayed in the foothills, some washed logs like teeth.

NO. Just having a short pin-to-pap WILL NOT guarantee a hook/set reaction. From what I have experienced, a "hook/set" reaction is a function of a matchup between a bowler, a ball, a drilling, and a lane condition.

I, personally, have NEVER been able to create a "hook/set" type reaction ( on purpose at least ) with my release. My natural release is reasonably strong and creates continuity and when I try to create the "hook/set" reaction, all I accomplish is creating a "hook/rollout" that is D.O.A. in the pocket.

The best way I can describe what I call a "hook/set" reaction is when a players rotation is just strong enough to turn the ball at the proper angle into the pocket at the breakpoint, then let the ball continue through the pins at its own momentum. My release isn't that balanced and tends to make the ball drive too hard at times. I tend to leave too many solid 9's and wrap 10's when "hook/set" guys are blowing racks up.
--------------------
Norm Duke was right

Good transactions list in my profile

My Bowl.com member page

Author Topic: short pin to pap vs RICO (Read 9067 times)

J_w73

short pin to pap vs RICO

pin-chaser

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

Juggernaut

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

J_w73

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

Juggernaut

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

J_w73

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

J_w73

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

Jay

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

jbruno6

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

bluerrpilot

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

n00dlejester

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

n00dlejester

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

JustRico

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

Juggernaut

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO

Juggernaut

Re: short pin to pap vs RICO