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

Author Topic: a more realisitic usbc proposal  (Read 2066 times)

kayoung08

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 659
a more realisitic usbc proposal
« on: May 16, 2005, 11:59:03 PM »
Instead of trying to go after the ball makers couldnt they just take a smaller step? if they are that hell bent on bringing scoring down: come up with a standard oil pattern. make it so that a league is not sanctioned unless they put out that shot.

go to the use of the pba gold pins. make a heavier pin that may not be as lively as the current lightweight pins.

is this just as asinine as the current proposals?
--------------------
im an adult who likes adult movies,
the kiddie porn is for the kids

how does a right hander leave the 3-6-7-8?



Edited on 5/17/2005 8:03 AM
Logged

 

Ragnar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14084
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2005, 09:47:45 AM »
Add to the above regulating coverstocks - limiting size or eliminating particles altogether; not allowing a finish below 600 grit.
--------------------
"To plunder, to slaughter, to steal, these things they misname empire; and where they make a wilderness, they call it peace."  (Tacitus)
"If one tells the truth, one is sure sooner or later to be found out. " (Wilde)
Logged
Wyrd bið ful aræd!
(Thought to be a member of something called the PMS club by some.)

HamPster

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5584
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2005, 09:54:25 AM »
It's just the reality of getting a house to actually put down the condition.  Yeah, it's as simple as that, but they've realized for a long time that lane conditions are something they can't control.  Probably 90% of the house shots in the country right now aren't legal by current standards.  There's no way of enforcing it, but other than that, yeah, it's the simplest solution.
--------------------
Hey, I am NOT Michael Jackson.  I like little GIRLS, not little boys . .

Rock on kitty.
Logged

Overhand

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1053
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2005, 09:58:11 AM »
...remember that any solution has to be more easily verifiable than abc's loose and fast rules (i.e. when was the last time your ball was checked).

1.  the heavier pins would be easy to monitor; too much additional cost to the center to keep a set of light pins (put the heavy pins in the rack when the inspector comes.)
2.  lane conditions are hard to monitor cause then can be changed every night.  Impractical to check every night but spot checking (random, once a week) with a significant penalty might keep them to a higher standard.
3.  ball surface would be very difficult to check.  seems subjective when you get close to limit.  600 grit passes but would 550?  who makes the call?
4.  outlawing particles would be easy by simply non-approving the ball as they do now.  how about limiting particles to label drillings?


--------------------
"And their kids were hippie chicks all hypocrites
Because fashion is smashin' the true meaning of it"
Logged

Bjaardker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2387
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2005, 11:42:55 AM »
I guess I don't understand the outrage against particles.

I prefer particles just because they give me the same look on the lane that I used to have with urethanes. Is that really an unfair advantage?

I do agree that putting diamonds in a coverstock is ridiculous, but banning particles all together is just as absurd IMHO.
Logged

Aristotle

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2005, 11:50:54 AM »
quote:
It's just the reality of getting a house to actually put down the condition.  Yeah, it's as simple as that, but they've realized for a long time that lane conditions are something they can't control.  Probably 90% of the house shots in the country right now aren't legal by current standards.  There's no way of enforcing it, but other than that, yeah, it's the simplest solution.
--------------------
Hey, I am NOT Michael Jackson.  I like little GIRLS, not little boys . .

Rock on kitty.


Actually, that's entirely untrue. I remember back in the 80's and I believe even into the early 90's, if an honor score was shot, the ball and the lanes were tested. The center was required to close off the lanes to any more play after league and an ABC official had to come in to tape the lanes and weigh out the ball. I'm sure that this was done away with because it was a hassle for the association officers to do, but that was their job and it's basically what they signed up for.

What it comes down to is the USBC barking up the wrong tree here. Instead of regulating the balls, go after the lanes. That's where the scores are inflated beyond belief. Go back to a tighter restriction on oil. Flatten it out. Make the centers accountable for the condition that is out there. Start honor score testing again. That's where the problem started to begin with. That's where it needs to end.
Logged

frockc

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2005, 11:52:27 AM »
The whole idea of bringing down scores is the problem... If anything they should make scoring easier... Hardly does any quit because they are bowling to good... But plenty quit because they can not bowl well... Make scoring easier not harder if u want more people bowling...
--------------------

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frockc/album?.dir=dc57&.src=ph&store=&prodid=&.done=http%3a//pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/frockc/my_photos
Logged

DanH78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3913
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2005, 12:53:17 PM »
quote:
I guess I don't understand the outrage against particles.

I prefer particles just because they give me the same look on the lane that I used to have with urethanes. Is that really an unfair advantage?

I do agree that putting diamonds in a coverstock is ridiculous, but banning particles all together is just as absurd IMHO.


It's not about the reaction you get from Particle equipment.  It has to due with the amount of damage the ultra abrasive coverstocks do to the lanes.  Imagine driving down the street in the middle of summer with chains on your tires.
--------------------
The clock on the wall says 3 O'Clock...last call...for Alcohol!
"I love a martini -- but two at the most. Three I’m under the table; Four, I’m under the host."  Dorothy Parker
Logged
#10

kayoung08

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 659
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2005, 12:59:25 PM »
damage to the lane is immaterial in a synthetic house though right? particles are not the problem.
--------------------
im an adult who likes adult movies,
the kiddie porn is for the kids

how does a right hander leave the 3-6-7-8?

Logged

DanH78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3913
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2005, 01:13:41 PM »
quote:
damage to the lane is immaterial in a synthetic house though right? particles are not the problem.
--------------------
im an adult who likes adult movies,
the kiddie porn is for the kids

how does a right hander leave the 3-6-7-8?



It may take a little longer on synthetics vs. wood, but the high load particle balls still do quite a bit of damage to synthetic lanes.  Going in to the last ABC tournament in Reno, the lane surface was absolutly horrendous.  And that was in part caused by the fact that the majority of all games thrown there were using highly aggressive coverstocks.

HB, the reason 600 is the target is that no matter how high you polish a ball, or how low you sand it, without continuous maintenance, the surface of the ball will migrate towards 600.
--------------------
The clock on the wall says 3 O'Clock...last call...for Alcohol!
"I love a martini -- but two at the most. Three I’m under the table; Four, I’m under the host."  Dorothy Parker
Logged
#10

LuckyLefty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17348
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2005, 01:14:32 PM »
How much damage do particles do to the lanes with oil on them.

Maybe the lane owners could try that!

In general particles are a much lower load these days than initially.

Often 2s and 3 percent levels are used on a lot of balls today.

REgards,

Luckylefty
Logged
It takes Courage to have Faith, and Faith to have Courage.

James M. McCurley, New Orleans, Louisiana

DanH78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3913
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2005, 01:23:19 PM »
quote:
How much damage do particles do to the lanes with oil on them.

Maybe the lane owners could try that!

In general particles are a much lower load these days than initially.

Often 2s and 3 percent levels are used on a lot of balls today.

REgards,

Luckylefty


Or bowlers could try not throwing dull particle equipment on dry lanes.

What happens when you increase the minimum # of units of oil?  Bowlers will complain about the ball not hooking, then the ball manufacturers will come out with more aggressive coverstocks.  

If we want some integrity to return to the game, we can't just focus on lane conditions, or bowling balls, or the pins, or the sidewalls, or the gutters.  There has to be a combination of changes made.  Just limiting one factor can easily be counteracted by enhancing a different factor.
--------------------
The clock on the wall says 3 O'Clock...last call...for Alcohol!
"I love a martini -- but two at the most. Three I’m under the table; Four, I’m under the host."  Dorothy Parker

Edited on 5/17/2005 3:17 PM
Logged
#10

HamPster

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5584
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2005, 03:21:34 PM »
Make scoring easier?  You're at the wrong site to be talking like that, buddy.
--------------------
Hey, I am NOT Michael Jackson.  I like little GIRLS, not little boys . .

Rock on kitty.
Logged

Bjaardker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2387
Re: a more realisitic usbc proposal
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2005, 03:46:11 PM »
This WHOLE thing is dumb in my opinion.

They've already created an option where the integrity of the sport is being held high. It's called sport bowling.

Announce that you will no longer be giving out rings for regularly sanctioned 300s, then give the really nice rings again for sanctioned sport league 300s.

Make sport bowling the focus, give people a reason to try a sport league & make regularly sanctioned leagues the fun "go get drunk" leagues.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »