I would love to see someone drill 3 balls, all with the same layout and balance holes to keep the balls as statically similar as possible. A 1 inch, 3 inch, and 5 inch pin. That way this cgnomaddah deal can be put to rest.

As long as the balls are the same weight and are drilled exactly the same with the same size and positioned weight hole.. that would be the test.. Once you start changing the position and size of the weight holes to make the balls the same statically, then you are going to be changing the dynamics of the core and changing the reaction.

There is a way to settle the argument.  If they threw a ball without holes with the throwbot, that would solve the issue. 

example.. take a symmetrical ball with no holes and set it up to throw in the "throwbot". Put the pin 5" from the pap and put the CG on the track 4 inches above the "would be" center of grip.. throw the ball.. now with the pin still at 5" from the PAP put the cg on the track 4" below the "would be" center grip.. there you would have two completely different static weights but I'm pretty sure the balls are going to react exactly the same.

  It is the holes in the ball that effects the reaction... Not the position of the static weights.  finger and thumb weight do not make a difference on the reaction.  Side weight does have some influence but according to the USBC study it doesn't have enough influence to matter for the reaction.  The covers, asymmetry in the cores and amount of flare have more of an influence and overpower any influence of the side weight.

An extreme amount of side weight may have an influence.. I shouldn't even say side weight, as this is defined by the center of the grip.. You can have the center of gravity at center grip and it would still be to the right of the track.

see below..I don't know the validity of this experiment as all of the other videos by this guy are pretty sketchy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytCt9TtTmI4

I had it punched up yesterday and will post what the reaction is.  BTW, several ball drillers told me (judging by the pin distance to cg)" This ball is no good, wont do anything.....you wasted your money."  And several others said, " Ball is fine, cg has little to NO effect.". I will let you know within a few weeks.

Ball:  Protocol
Maker:  Global!
Weight:  15.2
Me: Stroker, 230 revs, 15-16 mph
Pin is .5 inches from the cg!
Drill:  Pin and cg is 1 inch right of ring finger!  No surface change, no weight hole.  Weird looking, my track area is over much of the balls graphic labeling surface!
Price: 159 retail.....me? 68$ off of face book
Ball driller One opinion: Will never hook.  Use it as a spare ball.
Ball driller Two opinion: Worse than bad, throw it away!
Ball driller 3 opinion:  Will work, ball driller has to have some knowledge.  Should work just as normal pin ball.
Manufacturer engineer: Ball will work.  Make sure you drill pin right of ring finger or roll over finger hole might be in your future.  Ball is fine.
My thoughts:  Will graphic surface letters affect ball roll?  Will ball roll out too soon?  Will ball skate like some suggest and not hook?

Experiment 1#

Lane: Normal med/high oil house shot after 2 leagues. Carry down and lighter oil is present.  Can see some oil on ball but not much.  3 games

Result:  Ball hooks more than my pin down hyroad.  Ball seems to be controllable and hits pins hard.  Carry down has little to no effect.  If I was right of target, ball came roaring back....nice mix of pins. No skating effect. Highlights: 11 strikes in a row (over 2 games) for a 190 avg bowler.  End up going about 25 pins over average per game.  3 splits (my error  )

Thoughts: Somewhat surprising.  Ball reacted nicely and acted much like a strongly drilled high end ball.  SO far, great.

A majority of 'bad' ball reaction is due to outdated ball motion mentality...pin to CG distance merely dictates drilling options under current USBC regulations...not actual ball reaction

1" pins with low top weights I have drilled pin up. They roll just the same as anything else. The Crux hole is also an option for a flare increasing weight hole location.

Also remember the pba plastic ball layout is perfect for short pin balls like that as well.

The pin marks the top of the core. Just because the cg is located there doesn't mean the core has changed. As Rico as stated many times it only means the core is shifted a fraction of an inch to create the heavy spot.

I'm guessing that short pins might limit the type of drillings possible.  Am I correct?

Cav

Cav,

A little confused... Protocol is a 900 Global product, not Roto Grip. Could you double check the ball and company?

(I've always wanted a Protocol...)

Sorry I.D.,

You are correct.  BTW nice color on the protocol.....Tonight is league night.....Med-Heavy oil....will get more info then.

Cav

Kid,

Great.  I appreciate the answers.... They are similar to what I expected as to how to make these short pinners pin up balls.

And you found it more responsive due to the shorter Pin to Val distance than what you expected compared to its pin down twin of the same ball?

What ball was it out of curiosity?

Regards,

Luckylefty
PS I have seen the Plastic ball drilling before it might be in my bowling folder, I have not heard about Crux weighthole, however.
Is there a reason the Crux needs a different weighthole than others?  Is that the Crux of the matter?