win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4

Author Topic: Lane 1 and the PBA  (Read 8857 times)

Gixer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
Lane 1 and the PBA
« on: March 30, 2009, 07:34:44 AM »
A thought occured to me while watching the PBA show yesterday. Why haven't I seen any Lane 1 stuff on TV? I've seen practically everything else even Elite but no Lane 1. I'm not trying to start anything here just curious thats all..
Logged

 

bowlerdawg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2009, 03:55:54 PM »
my take is that the " larger " manufactures offer deals and incentives, whereas L1 does not.

if you make the show using one of the " larger " mfg' they give you XXXX amount of dollars.

the " larger " companies offer big bucks to their staffers

so imo, it boils down to dollars, and that's why you haven't seen any L1 ball on tv recently
--------------------
I'm your huckleberry
Logged

Cobalt Bomb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2053
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2009, 04:00:33 PM »
I bowled the PTQ at a couple of stops this year, and at least at those stops, Lane#1 had the HIGHEST posted payout for using one of their balls on TV and winning, I believe 5k. It must be some other reason.
Logged

bowlerdawg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2009, 04:29:19 PM »

i stand corrected
--------------------
I'm your huckleberry
Logged

JessN16

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2009, 04:36:04 PM »
It doesn't help that this company tends to lean towards having the reputation of a more heavy-rolling roll characteristic. Storm/Roto has dominated TV all year and is considered, by and large, to be more angular at the back and cleaner through the fronts. Brunswick and MoRich's exposure has been down, too, for that same reason.

I'm also surprised I haven't seen an AMF/900Global ball on the show this year. Haugen has been hurt but I figured someone else would have picked up the slack.

Jess
Logged

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2009, 05:17:27 PM »
quote:
Despite the many howling of the lane one fateful, the fact of the matter is the large majority of the PBA's finest, don't match up with their equipment.


Inverted is making a reach here, and he's ignoring some of the realities of how the better PBA players, starting at the regional level, choose their equipment.

The bigger companies have local reps who know the landscape of the up and coming bowlers. Many of those bowlers are offered amateur staff contracts to use and showcase that manufacturers equipment.

If a bowler goes many years getting used to a few different lines through contracts, he/she will tend to continue using those lines. There isn't any magic to this -- we're all creatures of habit and go with what's familiar.

I suspect there is much more of the above than free agents actually trying Lane#1 and deciding they 'don't match up'.
Logged

T-GOD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2141
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2009, 07:28:21 PM »
Lane #1 doesn't have a rep out there to my knowledge, or a staff bowler. When they did, i.e. Rudy Revs, they made the show twice with Chris Lochetter. I believe there's more to it than just having the highest incentives, as Steven has pointed out, unless they're ridiculously high. =:^D
Logged

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2009, 10:16:47 AM »
quote:

My point being, if they did what they claimed every bowler on tour would use them.


Again, you're ignoring the realities of how PBA caliber players acquire equipment. If you're offered a ball contract from one of the majors, you're usually going to take it. Why are you going to turn down a minimum 8-10 free balls per year (plus lots of free 'hands on' tech support from a rep) just to prove you've tried all brands available? That's not reasonable.  

 
quote:
Yes, there has been some success with L#1 at the regional levels, but not on the pro tour. The last time I saw an L#! ball used on tour during the finals, it looked and reacted like sht.
 


How many players besides Walter Ray use Morich on tour? According to your overall logic, other players should be flocking to Morich because he's tearing up the tour using their equipment. It hasn't happened. Why is that?

If Walter didn't sign with Morich, you could make the same argument about their equipment that you're making about Lane#1. I suspect that you'd still see Walter Ray or Norm Duke on TV if they were paid to throw a Dynamo.
Logged

JessN16

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2009, 11:15:52 AM »
Jack Jurek uses MoRich. Other than that, I can't think of any.

Jess
Logged

jbruno6

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1303
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2009, 11:37:21 AM »
Jess, I saw Jurek throwing Morich and Rotogrip last thurs in LI.  He was throwing a Neptune. Is he a free agent now?
--------------------
Logged

JessN16

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2009, 11:56:36 AM »
quote:
Jess, I saw Jurek throwing Morich and Rotogrip last thurs in LI.  He was throwing a Neptune. Is he a free agent now?
--------------------


I don't know the specifics of their contracts. I just know he's been throwing MoRich virtually every time he's made a show recently.

Jess
Logged

Uncle Crusty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 506
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2009, 11:57:11 AM »
This really isn't even debatable. Inverted is 100% correct. At the end of the day, free agents on Tour are going to throw whatever equipment gives them the best chance to win. Period.

As has been mentioned earlier, I'm sure if a free agent whacked 'em all week with a Lane#1 ball and made the show on Sunday, Richie would throw a nice chunk of change their way (comparable to bonuses paid to free agents by big-name companies) to wear the logo and throw the Saw. But since it happens so rarely (Loschetter and Haugen being the only two guys in the last decade that I can remember throwing Lane#1 on the tube), the only logical explanation is that no one on Tour matches up with Lane#1's equipment.

And using lane conditions to justify the absence of Lane#1 on TV is nothing more than an excuse. Lane conditions have changed drastically over the last decade on Tour. House shots, very tight sport patterns, the named patterns of last year and before, the newly revamped named patterns, etc. These guys have bowled on anything and everything in the last 10 years out there, and yet, no one seems to *ever* match up with Lane#1.

That being said, the only explanation is the equipment can't live up to the massive hype, at least not on bowling's biggest stage. These guys do this for a living. It's how they support their families and make ends meet. So rest assured that if Lane#1 equipment gave them an edge on the lanes and upped their odds of winning, they'd be throwing it. End of story.
--------------------
"Nobody in the game of football should be called a genius. A genius is somebody like Norman Einstein."

-Broadcasting Extraordinaire and Mensa Member Joe Theismann

Edited on 3/31/2009 12:06 PM
Logged

Marc822

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2009, 12:06:17 PM »
quote:
It doesn't help that this company tends to lean towards having the reputation of a more heavy-rolling roll characteristic. Storm/Roto has dominated TV all year and is considered, by and large, to be more angular at the back and cleaner through the fronts. Brunswick and MoRich's exposure has been down, too, for that same reason.

I'm also surprised I haven't seen an AMF/900Global ball on the show this year. Haugen has been hurt but I figured someone else would have picked up the slack.

Jess


Chris Loshetter (dont know how to spell it) threw the Break S75 on tv and Jaros made the show at the World Championsip
Logged

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2009, 12:27:05 PM »
quote:
What you're missing here is that I'm agreeing with when it comes to someone who has a contract with a ball maufacture. The value of the contract is probably worth more than the actual title itself when they win. so, if a bowler is under contract with Morich, then he's going to throw Morich, no question.
 


Inverted: I'm thinking more in terms of the Regional/Amateur contracts I see. They don't include any real compensation -- just equipment. I suspect there are lots of them around for the better players. For instance, look at Mason Sherman in the West Region. He had a ball contract with Hammer, but recently changed over to Roto Grip. I'm guessing he gets roughly 8 balls a year, plus first hand access to company reps. He has a shot a making it to the next level. So why would he take the time (and money) to experiment outside the major manufacturers who are happy to provide him equipment?

You didn't answer my question regarding Morich. WRW is having lots of success with their equipment. According to your logic, the other free agents should be taking notice and running to Morich. Why hasn't that happened?
Logged

JessN16

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Lane 1 and the PBA
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2009, 12:53:24 PM »
quote:


And using lane conditions to justify the absence of Lane#1 on TV is nothing more than an excuse. Lane conditions have changed drastically over the last decade on Tour. House shots, very tight sport patterns, the named patterns of last year and before, the newly revamped named patterns, etc. These guys have bowled on anything and everything in the last 10 years out there, and yet, no one seems to *ever* match up with Lane#1.


Well, if it's an excuse, it's one that everyone besides Storm/Roto is making this year. That company has dominated telecasts.

Last year and prior, when balls that reacted more like Brunswick (for lack of a better way to explain it) were the better matchup, there were more free agents throwing MoRich, Brunswick and then you had Loschetter making two shows with Lane #1. So it obviously worked for him if it got him to the show.

I'll give you that Storm/Roto is a better matchup for people this year, because the evidence bears that out.

I think I've proved sufficiently that I'm not an apologist for any single company, both through my own insistence on throwing multiple companies' stuff and my willingness to take the company to task when it made something I couldn't use, so I have no problem saying the following: Anyone who says "Lane #1 is junk" and ascribing it to the entire product line is either stirring or is confusing their own matchup issues with actual quality. For various reasons, this company is a lightning rod for criticism but that doesn't make haters right.

Jess
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
« previous next »