Author Topic: Tried a newer Meanstreak (Read 5739 times)

rattlesnake · « **on:** March 04, 2013, 08:23:24 AM »

Tried a newer Meanstreak for the first time and wow! Seemed to really react quickly when it hit any friction. Tried it at 2 different houses, same reaction.

Long Gone Daddy · « **Reply #1 on:** March 04, 2013, 07:40:13 PM »

What an informative and concise ball review. NOT!

PaulDennis · « **Reply #2 on:** March 04, 2013, 07:59:57 PM »

To all: Long Gone Daddy is nothing but a stalker, his latest target being this rattlesnake guy, belittling everything he posts.

Please ignore Long Gone Daddy. He has been banned here 10x already for this behavior which does nothing but hurt this site.

DOWNTOWN · « **Reply #3 on:** March 04, 2013, 08:55:59 PM »

Quote from: PaulDennis on March 04, 2013, 07:59:57 PM

To all: Long Gone Daddy is nothing but a stalker, his latest target being this rattlesnake guy, belittling everything he posts.

Please ignore Long Gone Daddy. He has been banned here 10x already for this behavior which does nothing but hurt this site.

It seams you are his stalker to. What information on layout or anything else for that matter did rattlesnake mention. Wow when encountered friction it moved hard, most balls do.

sevenpin63 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 04, 2013, 09:07:11 PM »

Rattlesnake did you think this ball was skid flippy or more of a arching ball, what kind of oil pattern where you bowling on?

rattlesnake · « **Reply #5 on:** March 05, 2013, 05:35:15 AM »

What's the deal going on here? You guys dislike me posting about big Hess that much that your now going to quiz me? I believe it was a shark.

I'm more of a power player so I usually start out around the 4th arrow but when the pattern breaks down a bit I move deeper inside. My buddy the other day told me to change to a weaker ball when the oil seemed to be breaking down but I wasn't about to stop throwing this new Meanstreak. It's awesome.

What's with this skid flippy question? I use more power in the front of the lane so I don't get a lot of skid flip. I also don't particularly like dry lanes for this very reason. Again, this Meanstreak worked great even after the oil pattern broke down. I'm pretty darn sure because we were there rolling for hours.

What else can I say? Big B does it again, baby! This new Meanstreak like big Hess, rocks!

Long Gone Daddy · « **Reply #6 on:** March 05, 2013, 06:11:23 AM »

"I use more power in the front of the lane" HUH? You want to write a ball review, than do it in the ball review section following the format that is there. You don't give your rev rate, your axis tilt, your PAP, how ball was drilled, you can't even say for sure what the pattern was let alone what the lane surface was.

rattlesnake · « **Reply #7 on:** March 05, 2013, 06:34:27 AM »

Obviously your intentions aren't pure when you ask a question. Just a big Hess hater.

I don't want to write a ball review. You and your cronies are quizzing me obviously in a failed attempt to make me look bad. I'm happy to just stick to saying I like this ball. No explanation necessary. And I will continue to do so because it makes you so happy!

Front of the lane means I get in the bad habit of overthrowing the ball rather than allowing it to do its job. Never said I was a professional, I guess you have perfect technique, right? And I believe I answered the other poster's question with a shark oil pattern.

Can't stand getting torched constantly in the unmodulated forum, clown, so you follow me around the bowling threads trying to make yourself sound knowledgeable and important? How pathetic.

Quote from: Long Gone Daddy on March 05, 2013, 06:11:23 AM

"I use more power in the front of the lane" HUH? You want to write a ball review, than do it in the ball review section following the format that is there. You don't give your rev rate, your axis tilt, your PAP, how ball was drilled, you can't even say for sure what the pattern was let alone what the lane surface was.

spmcgivern · « **Reply #8 on:** March 05, 2013, 06:48:54 AM »

Yes, the bickering is a bit childish. But LGD has a point. If I see a thread that insinuates a ball review like this one, I expect to see a ball review to see if perhaps the Meanstreak is a ball I would like to get. Unfortunately, the information provided was lacking. Does it have to be in the official format? No. But simple threads about how one simply likes a ball with no perceived value added is a waste of time. Not just to me since I was expecting better on this site and in this thread, but also a waste of time to you. You now feel obligated to defend everything you say and that shouldn't be the case.

In otherwords, read between the lines. A poster felt your ball review was lacking information. Either provide the information or simply state you aren't sure.

PaulDennis · « **Reply #9 on:** March 05, 2013, 07:38:09 AM »

Sir, you make valid points but you're not close to what is really going on here.

You certainly have the right to critique a post and your reply reflects your reasonable nature. However, there is nothing to read between the lines with regarding LGD's post. He doesn't care at all about reading a ball review from this guy. His sole purpose here is to hassle this guy, something he has done time and again with him and other posters he develops a dislike for. Simply read other threads in other forums, it is obvious.

I'm not trying to act as moderator with the exception of watching this guy's act. Hopefully rattlesnake will heed your advice. Coming from a reasonable poster like you, I'd say your opinion should likely be respected. As far as childish bickering, you are right on the mark. I'll gladly shut my yap if Long Gone Daddy stops stalking guys like this and hijacking threads. But I'm not holding my breath.

Quote from: spmcgivern on March 05, 2013, 06:48:54 AM

Yes, the bickering is a bit childish. But LGD has a point. If I see a thread that insinuates a ball review like this one, I expect to see a ball review to see if perhaps the Meanstreak is a ball I would like to get. Unfortunately, the information provided was lacking. Does it have to be in the official format? No. But simple threads about how one simply likes a ball with no perceived value added is a waste of time. Not just to me since I was expecting better on this site and in this thread, but also a waste of time to you. You now feel obligated to defend everything you say and that shouldn't be the case.

In otherwords, read between the lines. A poster felt your ball review was lacking information. Either provide the information or simply state you aren't sure.

spmcgivern · « **Reply #10 on:** March 05, 2013, 07:42:07 AM »

Unfortunately, I have read too much of the back and forth between the parties here. I will only say, if you don't like the comments by LGD, the simply ignore him. Responding to comments only keeps them coming.

Quote from: PaulDennis on March 05, 2013, 07:38:09 AM

Sir, you make valid points but you're not close to what is really going on here.

You certainly have the right to critique a post and your reply reflects your reasonable nature. However, there is nothing to read between the lines with regarding LGD's post. He doesn't care at all about reading a ball review from this guy. His sole purpose here is to hassle this guy, something he has done time and again with him and other posters he develops a dislike for. Simply read other threads in other forums, it is obvious.

I'm not trying to act as moderator with the exception of watching this guy's act. Hopefully rattlesnake will heed your advice. Coming from a reasonable poster like you, I'd say your opinion should likely be respected. As far as childish bickering, you are right on the mark. I'll gladly shut my yap if Long Gone Daddy stops stalking guys like this and hijacking threads. But I'm not holding my breath.

Quote from: spmcgivern on March 05, 2013, 06:48:54 AM
Yes, the bickering is a bit childish. But LGD has a point. If I see a thread that insinuates a ball review like this one, I expect to see a ball review to see if perhaps the Meanstreak is a ball I would like to get. Unfortunately, the information provided was lacking. Does it have to be in the official format? No. But simple threads about how one simply likes a ball with no perceived value added is a waste of time. Not just to me since I was expecting better on this site and in this thread, but also a waste of time to you. You now feel obligated to defend everything you say and that shouldn't be the case.

In otherwords, read between the lines. A poster felt your ball review was lacking information. Either provide the information or simply state you aren't sure.

Long Gone Daddy · « **Reply #11 on:** March 05, 2013, 08:06:31 AM »

First of all, I don't have to explain a thing to the troll known as PaulDennis. As far as anybody can tell, he doesn't even bowl.

Now, as far as the "review" of the Meanstreak, does he mean the original or the Brawler when he says "new". I am trying to decide whether to go with a Paranormal Aura or a Meanstreak Brawler. I want information not opinion pieces. Brawler quite frankly looks more impressive in the hands of the pros. I am far from being a pro but what they do with a particular ball does matter to me.

Bill Thomas · « **Reply #12 on:** March 05, 2013, 12:58:33 PM »

I don't think I would put much stock in most of the ball "reviews" on the internet. Many come from players who are on the ball company staffs and who rarely if ever say anything negative about one of the company's balls. Many come from bowlers who most of us have little if any idea of what their expertise is. If I am looking to decide between one piece of equipment or another, I would much rather deal with my pro shop guy whom I know knows what he is talking about and knows my game (or lack thereof) and can give me valuable advice. So most of the above is just pissing in the wind.

Long Gone Daddy · « **Reply #13 on:** March 05, 2013, 01:05:27 PM »

Well and good for you. I, on the other hand, respect the opinion of a couple of the staffers here.

Author Topic: Tried a newer Meanstreak (Read 5739 times)

rattlesnake

Tried a newer Meanstreak

Long Gone Daddy

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

PaulDennis

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

DOWNTOWN

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

sevenpin63

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

rattlesnake

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

Long Gone Daddy

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

rattlesnake

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

spmcgivern

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

PaulDennis

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

spmcgivern

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

Long Gone Daddy

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

Bill Thomas

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak

Long Gone Daddy

Re: Tried a newer Meanstreak