These two just showed up on the PBA website.  No specs given.

In regards to the tour, it is the highest level of professionalism in our sport. So the most dominant company on said tour must be doing something right. You can have the best bow shooter in the world, but if his arrows are warped, it won't matter how good of a shot he is. So why not use the best arrows available?

Perception has a lot to do with marketing. These types of conversations about which company is berter or not is cyclical. Back 35 years ago, everyone was filling their double bags with Ebonite Gyro series equipment, Brunswick LT-48s, and the Columbia dot series. Then everyone had Hammer, AMF Angles and Columbia 300 (any of the dots series) 30 years ago. Twenty-five years ago, everyone had Hammer equipment or Brunswick Rhino equipment with a smattering of Columbia. Twenty years ago, it was Track equipment and Brunswick Zone equipment . . . Now it's Storm this, Roto Grip that, sprinkled in with Motiv else . . . . you get my drift?

That said, Phil Cardinale mentioned it's all about getting bowlers to believe they've got to get the latest and greatest. That's why stuff's being introduced to the marketplace twice, even three times a year. If you find something that's good, trust me, you can still use it decades later. Find something that works for you and do your best avoiding the hype.







 

The problem is that there really is no break through technology out there is terms of either shell or core.  It has been 20 years since there has been a major technological shift in balls or lane surfaces.  That is historically unprecedented. 

Example, somebody mentioned that the low rg, low diff core is simply resurrecting what Storm did with the IQ two years ago.  Very true.  However that was also resurrecting what Storm itself did in 2002 with a low reg low diff core wrapped in an accutread shell.   

That is historically unprecedented. 

Check to see how long rubber balls ruled before plastic ones came out.  --  JohnP

True, I ignored the lane finish factor and I'm not sure how long the rubber ball/shellac finish combo ruled.  I've heard from good sources that the switch from lacquer to urethane finish was driven by insurance companies because of the increased fire safety during finishing the lanes.  I've seen the result of a bowling alley fire and it wasn't pretty.  --  JohnP

Hence, avabob, the ol' term track house from the lacquer era and early urethane finish era.

Wasn't this post about the mastermind intellect and brute?