win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Another question on static weights................  (Read 13294 times)

nd300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1917
Another question on static weights................
« on: December 07, 2008, 01:01:10 AM »
I was told by the current owner of the lanes I bowl at that in 2009,the USBC will rmeove all restrictions on static weight limitations.H esaid this was told to everyone at the meeting that he attended last year at the annual BPAA convention.
 I personally find it hard to believe.However,does anyone have any proof of this??Has anyone heard anything about this being true???
 Thanks for any replies in advance............
--------------------
Chris
 JTTDB---Just Throw The Damn Ball
 Don''t "think"---that ball isn''t in your bag yet..........

 

Moon57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2008, 09:16:35 AM »
All the recently released Phase II motion study said was they were looking into possibly changing the specs.
--------------------
Moon
--------------------
So many questions, so little time but I'm having fun.

J_Mac

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6778
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2008, 09:19:11 AM »
I don't see why the USBC can't make that rule change.

Ball diameter has more of a bearing on a balls reaction than side weight.  Top weight and thumb weight are towards the bottom of the variables the USBC looked at.

http://s181.photobucket.com/albums/x16/madcelt2000/?action=view¤t=ballmntstdy.jpg


Edited on 12/7/2008 10:25 AM

Moon57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2008, 11:52:41 AM »
Could be the only reason statics don't count for more is because of the specs. Eliminate them and now you could have 3 oz of side weight. I'll bet side weight would make a difference then.
--------------------
Moon
--------------------
So many questions, so little time but I'm having fun.

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2008, 12:10:29 PM »
Side weight is static weight.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

shelley

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9655
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2008, 01:51:35 PM »
quote:
Side weight is static weight.


I think he knows that, Ric. I think his point was that while 1oz of side weight or finger/thumb weight may be peanuts to ball reaction, 3oz or more may have a more pronounced reaction. With the rules as they are, it's virtually impossible to affect ball motion with static weights but remove those rules and it may be different.

Of course, you industry types probably know better than that, too.

SH

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2008, 02:11:18 PM »
3oz positive compared to 3oz negative will not have the affect that may be expected. The way cores are centered in the balls today, shifts in static weights do not create the differences one may think.
--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com

LuckyLefty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17348
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2008, 02:12:44 PM »
I've thrown balls with over 2 ounces of side weight.  Pre weighthole!

Lots of skid....big big late reaction if friction.

To me on certain league conditions I could see added hitting power from this setup.....but on most tough conditions....probably not so much...


REgards,

Luckylefty
PS a lot of tough overreactive conditions seem to like very low static weights....to even out reaction....
--------------------
Open the door...see what's possible...and just walk right on through...that's how easy success feels..
It takes Courage to have Faith, and Faith to have Courage.

James M. McCurley, New Orleans, Louisiana

J_w73

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2008, 03:42:37 PM »
but remove the restrictions and i am sure you will see cores that are only on one side of the ball.. if they do remove the restrictions it will be really interesting to see what ball manufacturers come up with and how it will change the game..
350 RPM, 17 MPH

JohnP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2008, 04:40:41 PM »
It would be a mistake to remove all static weight limits, we'd see balls with a pound or more imbalance.  If they do that they should limit the amount of top weight in the undrilled ball to 2 oz max and make balance holes illegal.  --  JohnP

JessN16

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3716
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2008, 08:54:10 PM »
Here's my question -- what about equipment already in circulation? I've got a couple of balls that have fairly large weight holes, or that started with high top weights. What of them?

Jess

Moon57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 745
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2008, 02:05:07 AM »
If it ain't broke don't fix it. The current specs are well known and all the drillers are familiar working with them. The ball makers have their production lines set up to make balls that will fit into the current specs. The only possible reason I can think of to change the specs is if the USBC wants to reduce the performance of the ball.

How is it a win-win for the bowler if 1/2 priced blems are not available anymore?
--------------------
Moon
--------------------
So many questions, so little time but I'm having fun.

Edited on 12/8/2008 3:08 AM

JoeBowler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 583
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2008, 06:47:43 AM »
The main reason so many want to get rid of this is because too many pseudo proshops either dont have a scale or dont know how to weigh a ball.

Dumb down the drilling process so any basement hack cant screw it up.

might as well throw the ball up in the air and shoot it with a shotgun to make the holes the way some measure and drill.

purduepaul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 474
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2008, 07:01:40 AM »
USBC is currently investigating static weights, however we have not made a recommendation at this time regarding the future of static weights.  We are waiting for test data to make those decisions.  

To answer some of the questions.

No, we would not take bowling balls out of your hands, we have only done this one time in history with the Sure-Ds and it is not something that we would like to do.  Just like the new surface roughness specification, the Block LT-48 would actually fail the new surface roughness specification, however that ball is being grandfathered in and if you still use it, you can keep using it.  

JohnP's assessment is absolutly true, we have a recommendation from a couple of manufacturers currently that we should have a max top weight rule, and let ball drillers drill the ball how they want.  As long as the ball has X amount of top weight it is legal.  As a rule of thumb, after we announce a specification change, we have to give at least 9-15 months of time for bowling ball manufacturers to adjust to a specification.  So that they are ready for them.  But we will not make a recommendation to change the specification until after testing is completed.

Paul
--------------------
"Oops, Looks like we are going to need another timmy."  -Dr Lizard, "Dinosaurs"
"Oops, Looks like we are going to need another timmy."  -Dr Lizard, "Dinosaurs"

JustRico

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2652
Re: Another question on static weights................
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2008, 07:04:04 AM »
"I'm not sure I would say it ain't broke.....

If all drillers are so familiar with the current specs how come so many balls are found to not meet spec at nationals every year? This will make it easier on the drillers, static weights are one less thing to worry about."

**I would put this more on the individuals that are weighing the bowling balls at USBC. I have seen balls pass one day and not the next. **

The manufacturers will not have to change their production lines, this will allow balls that they currently have to scrap or sell as seconds be sold as regular balls."

**This is happening now**

"Is it a win-win for bowlers if manufacturers, distributors and proshops keep going out of business? If this goes through it by no means indicates discounted equipment will no longer be available, maybe a little less but not eliminated."

**Inability to operate a business properly. A majority of pro shop operators do not know how to operate a business correctly, thus going out of business. Most business models, in regards to distributors, are out-dated.**

"Look at the big picture."

**Place blame where blame is deserved. The WHOLE industry is at fault from the ABC/USBC to the BPAA to ALL bowling center owners. Bowling balls are not to blame nor are lane conditions. The industries inability to attract new bowlers for over a decade and a half has eliminated a majority of bowlers.**

Static weights are an antiquated way of thinking, especially in regards to ball motion or reaction. But it is not going to bring back 7-8 million bowlers. Quit looking at bandaids.

--------------------
Formerly BrunsRico
Co-author of BowlTec's END GAMES ~ A Bowler's COMPLETE Guide to Bowling; Head Games ~ the MENTAL approach to bowling (and sports) & (r)eVolve
...where knowledge creates striking results...
BowlTEc on facebook...www.iBowlTec.com