Post by: mumzie on June 26, 2003, 03:09:46 AM
An old friend of mine told me that the ABC/WIBC is considering banning particle equipment, and that this might happen as soon as a year or so from now. This friend is on the certification committee for the stadium, and I guess this subject comes up for discussion every now and then.
Anyway - the rationale is that the microscopic particles are, over time, too abrasive on the lanes. On one hand, it makes sense. On the other - you've got to be kidding...
Comments???
--------------------
Bowling? Of course it's a sport.
Post by: Aristotle on June 26, 2003, 06:29:38 PM
Post by: NevadaBowl on June 26, 2003, 06:36:02 PM
Ball companies....this is good... A whole new market opening up for us to exploit with the new line of RevFreakZoneIcon reactive technology.
Seriously I hope they can give us a little warning so we don't wind up purchasing something that is suddenly illegal.
Post by: TwoFourEightNineNine on June 26, 2003, 07:07:05 PM
The lanes there are approximately 10 years old, and compared to a mainstream bowling facility- like Showboat or Orleans in Las Vegas, they have a lot less lineage.
Lane #1 is the testing lane out at Kegel Training Center out in Sebring. It is probably the cleanest lane in the world- as well at the same time the least bowled on lane out of the 16 lanes that are in the center. With the minimal amount of lineage on that lane, when stripped, there are just tons and tons of scratches on the lanes due to damage by our extremely abrasive bowling balls. And these kinds of scratches on the heads, especially, I was told were not that bad.
Imagine that on a lane that gets about 20-30 games of lineage every DAY!
My opinion is that I feel that ball tech will continue to go on, and lane advancements will go on. My opinion is that ProAnvilane by Brunswick is the best lane out there, but something better than that has yet to come to save the Proprietors some slack from the damage we make.
It's the risk that the bowling center owners take when opening a center- is the normal wear and tear made by the customers.
Oh well, just something i had to say about the subject.
--------------------
-Jeremy Vitug
BallReviews.com Burning Sensations Bowling Team
Post by: Phillip Marlowe on June 26, 2003, 07:19:52 PM
--------------------
"It's just a carry contest."
Post by: B Pirnie on June 26, 2003, 09:04:00 PM
Long ago in an alley far far away the lane was wood the finish was lacquer and the balls were hard rubber and there was worn area of the lane from to much play in a small area.
I wonder if there is a center that still sprays the lanes and doesn't have a wall to direct the play. Would such a center show less wear due to play being spread over the lane?
I also wonder. 320grit= snow tires 1200grit= racing slicks what causes more damage to the lane ? I can see the 320 trying to dig into the lane early and spend its energy in the oil. But the 1200 saves its energy until it is off the oil the uses it all on an unprotected surface.
Makes me no difference if particles are banned or if surfaces are limited in some fashion. I will still be playing.
Post by: charlee323 on June 26, 2003, 09:24:26 PM
Post by: baiki on June 26, 2003, 09:29:18 PM
It'd be hard for ABC/WIBC to enforce and police.
Particle are known oil soakers and removes oil as it goes, but crankers with high revs and lofters do just as much damage. Not counting those with 220/320 grit sanded balls.
--------------------
baiki
Post by: MrH on June 26, 2003, 09:43:40 PM
Post by: Bjaardker on June 26, 2003, 10:30:31 PM
Look at what the ladies are throwing. CDB, Liz johnson, Wendy Mac, all of them are throwing particles almost exclusively on the show. Even some of the higher rev players are throwing them.
Myself.. I'll probably just kill one of my urethanes back down to 100 grit again
Post by: 10 In The Pit on June 27, 2003, 12:41:55 AM
Since the particle balls give those urethane lovers a needed edge over the reactive resin balls, I'd have to say that if the ABC bans particle balls, they should also ban reactive resin balls as well, in order to level the playing field. Banning only the particle balls will again give an unfair advantage to a portion of the bowlers, where the current reactive and particle choices give virtually all bowlers a level field. If you recall, when the reactive resin balls hit the market, only PART of the Pros could compete with the given choices of equipment.....when the particles were introduced, then the urethane ball Pros had a chance to compete head to head with the reactive lovers.
I think that banning the particle balls would be a huge blow to the bowling public, especially considering how many particle balls have been sold and how some bowlers have come to rely on them. The newest reactive resin ball that I own was made back in 1995, and I hardly ever even carry it with me. However, I probably have 10 particle balls in my arsenal, with several of them being freshly drilled and only test fired a few times on the lanes.....if I find a model that I really like, I'll grab up a couple of spares before they go out of production and stash them back for future use.
I'm afraid that I'd have to scream loudly if the ABC decides to ban particle balls. And, I'd also scream for a ban on reactives at the same time. Then the houses could get rid of the ridiculous amounts of oil that they've been putting out on the lanes, at least in my area.
Post by: HamPster on June 27, 2003, 12:58:04 AM
--------------------
I know Kung Fu!
I am the one, the one that will bring balance. All the pins shall be destroyed!
Post by: 10 In The Pit on June 27, 2003, 01:01:59 AM
In wood houses, you already have routine resurfacing which needs to be done every 2 years or so. So, my guess is that the screaming is about synthetic lanes. I see no reason NOT to expect wear on synthetic lanes too, since they too are subject to the properties of friction, whether the ball be plastic, urethane, reactive resin, or particle composition. So, it seems to me that the likely fix in this situation would be to come up with a way to resurface the synthetic surfaces, somewhat similar to how wood lanes are already resurfaced. Of course, in the case of resurfacing synthetic lanes, the primary function of resurfacing would be to sand and repolish the synthetic surface. If the designers of synthetic lanes expected them to last indefinitely without some type of repolishing, then they were just barking up a tree and not looking ahead at all.
In this case, it is up to the designers of the synthetic lane surfaces to come up with a method of repolishing the lane surfaces, so that they can be periodically smoothed down to like new condition. Hello, is there anybody home in the engineering departments of the lane manufacturers?....and if so, did you overlook the basic properties of FRICTION?
Post by: Bjaardker on June 27, 2003, 01:13:12 AM
Has anybody though that the reason lanes are wearing quicker now is because we are using more oil? Thus people are using more surface on the balls?
10inthepit, you nailed my #1 concern with getting rid of particles. I'm a urethane lover & I was lost until particles came out.
Post by: Re-Evolution on June 27, 2003, 01:30:17 AM
--------------------
STORMIN1
F5 TORNADO IS COMING THROUGH, WILL THE 10 PIN SURVIVE AGAIN!
Post by: HamPster on June 27, 2003, 01:41:29 AM
--------------------
I know Kung Fu!
I am the one, the one that will bring balance. All the pins shall be destroyed!
Post by: Brickguy221 on June 27, 2003, 01:48:47 AM
Post by: charlest on June 27, 2003, 07:37:03 AM
For any ball banning to work as a means for preventing wear and tear on a lane surface, the ban would have to be placed in effect by the BPAA, Bowling Proprietor's Association, not the ABC.
Post by: Pinbuster on June 27, 2003, 08:08:39 AM
Do particle balls hurt lane beds? – Because they are resurfaced I don’t believe that wood lanes are effected too much by particles. I have heard of the synthetics but I don’t know if that is simply the learning curve of how long synthetic lanes last or the particle balls actually doing damage. Logic would dictate that because of the increased amount of friction that they would cause some additional wear.
What came first particle balls or more lane conditioner? - The big hooking balls came out first. Then the proprietors put more lane conditioner down to protect the lane and to quell the complaints (by the buyers of the hook monsters) that the lanes hooked too much. It gets to be a vicious circle.
The ABC could make all this a mute point by dictating a set of lane patterns and a maximum amount of lane conditioner on the lanes. These patterns could be set up where the hook monster balls are rendered useless and everyone would go to balls made of material with lower friction properties.
Post by: AdrianS on June 27, 2003, 12:16:11 PM
--------------------
Do you want some of THIS!!!
www.totalbowling.com.au/www/live/2002australianopen/multimedia/adrian_shelton.MPG
Post by: tburky on June 27, 2003, 02:08:32 PM
Edited on 6/27/2003 2:20 PM