I've read who knows how many opinions on this topic over the last three years and this power point has the most useful information of any of them.  A real start at actual analysis - finally!  What a breath of fresh air.

If the full set of facts are presented clearly to the USBC they should feel the necessity to address the complete bowling game and not try to make the ball makers absorb all the intended and unintended consequences of changes in other aspects of the game.  

Let's pick some target range based on an overall metric like the scoring ratio Phil uses in his presentation and then tune the lane specs, oils, pin parameters, dressing practices, AND the few bowling ball parameters that really do affect outcomes to keep scores within that target range.  

Bowling is a pretty complex system so the continued searches for the silver bullet solution with ball regulations, simply because the light is a little brighter over there, will not get us the consistent challenging game most of us want.  We've got to get a glimpse of the whole elephant.  

Thanks, Phil.  (I hope your "notoriety" doesn't keep the right people from paying attention.)      


--------------------
Throwing rocks at sticks...Does it get any better than this?

Phil thanks for the info its nice to see data to state a case other than just bold brush statements. I guess you (manufacturers) have had it put to you as the small shots aimed at the Board seem to be in everyones (again manufacturers) replies. What do you see as a best case scenerio for the future?? How much of a hand should the USBC lend to ball manufacturers for input or advise?
 I personally agree that lane conditions are the major force behind scoring but do like seeing some restriction on equipment so that variable stays in check or at least has less noise. Sometimes technology can overpower current settings until other variables are tweaked to keep technology in check. (ie, your statements of 1998 and 1999)