Author Topic: Proposed USBC changes are not enough! (Read 1190 times)

9andaWiggle · « **on:** April 28, 2005, 04:55:32 AM »

After reading about 10 pages of resposes on various boards regarding the proposed USBC revisions, I have started thinking and come to this conclusion: they are not doing enough if their aim is to restore integrity.

1) Ball technology needs to be limited. I think they need to look closer at the coverstocks than what they are. What good are tougher oiling restrictions if a few guys with supersoakers can create a wall anyway?

2) Lane conditions/oiling patterns need to be regulated more than has been done in the recent past. Walls are bumpers for crybabies - real bowlers don't need them. Also, gutter depths and kickboards need to be scrutinized as well.

3) We've covered the balls and the lanes, we cannot forget about the pins. We need voids removed and a lower cg on the pins to make them harder to knock over. Where the balance falls as to how much void to fill, what weight to make the pin - basically how hard to make it to knock over- will take some testing to achieve the right balance, but it can be done.

In conclusion, the game IMO needs to be reworked from front to back. But the sad truth is that most so-called "bowlers" today have no sac and want easier and easier conditions and stronger equipment to boost their delicate egos. Therefore, one of two things will happen: Either the USBC restores integrity and risks losing 3/4 of the "bowlers", or they cave in to the flood of tears and let everyone have their cake and eat it too. They will do what they have to do to survive, and I'll shoe up either way to face my opponent. Personally, I'd rather it be a bit more challenging, so that maybe one day bowling will be recognized again as a sport. Until there is integrity in the rules and guidelines that require dedication, practice and skill to excel, bowling will be seen as little more than just a game.

--------------------
9~

iommifan · « **Reply #1 on:** April 28, 2005, 01:02:13 PM »

I almost agree accept that bowling isn't a very lucrative industry for the bowling house proprietor. If even 20% (which I think might be high) as aposed to the 75% you say might leave it would spell disaster for the local houses. Remember bowling is nickle and dime and when upgrades or repairs are needed they are very expensive. If 75% of your league leaves you won't have a house to bowl in. I agree with you in theory 9, but in terms of cash it's a very dangerous situation.

stanski · « **Reply #2 on:** April 28, 2005, 02:30:02 PM »

I agree! these changes are not even close to enough!
--------------------
stanski

Ragnar · « **Reply #3 on:** April 28, 2005, 02:34:01 PM »

If nothing else at least mandate that patterns be flat and eliminate particles in coverstocks. I don't really care how much oil is out there (well, I'd like some at least) or how it's spread around (though I'd like to see reasonable ratios) but making flatter patterns would at least go part of the way to tearing down the walls, especially if combined with eliminating the snow tires we now allow.
--------------------
"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)

stanski · « **Reply #4 on:** April 28, 2005, 02:36:49 PM »

quote:
If nothing else at least mandate that patterns be flat and eliminate particles in coverstocks. I don't really care how much oil is out there (well, I'd like some at least) or how it's spread around (though I'd like to see reasonable ratios) but making flatter patterns would at least go part of the way to tearing down the walls, especially if combined with eliminating the snow tires we now allow.
--------------------
"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)

To go a little bit further, we should probably also get rid of any equipment sanded below 800 grit. Don't know how you'd measure this, but theres got to be a way.
--------------------
stanski

Ragnar · « **Reply #5 on:** April 28, 2005, 02:41:54 PM »

Stanski, the trouble with the 800 grit thing (though I agree with you) is that if you use a ball enough it will eventually naturaly devolve to 600 grit - or so I've heard. So you'd be mandating constant refinishing which may not be doable.
--------------------
"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)

DanH78 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 28, 2005, 02:47:08 PM »

First, I'm going to agree that more has to be done and I like the ideas posted above.

BUT, who is to say the USBC is going to stop there? Changes have to be made in stages. Look at the uproar now, and all they are talking about are changes to bowling balls. Can you imagine what would happen if the USBC announced all the changes above at ONE time? I think they are starting with the smallest and easiest thing to regulate. Implementing some of those other changes, such as changing the physical lanes, would take years to and $$$$$.

Considering the USBC has only been in existance for 5 months, they are making huge leaps forward.

And a question for all those that are bad mouthing their efforts, or lack there of, how many of you are involved in your State and Local associations are directors/officers? How many of you are trying to become involved with the USBC? Are you willing to sacrifice your free time to do all this? Don't forget, most involved at ANY level, are volunteers and don't recieve a salary.
--------------------
The clock on the wall says 3 O'Clock...last call...for Alcohol!
"I love a martini -- but two at the most. Three Iâ€™m under the table; Four, Iâ€™m under the host." Dorothy Parker

twister · « **Reply #7 on:** April 28, 2005, 09:17:41 PM »

this is the e-mail I sent the USBC today:

Dear USBC,

Iâ€™m curious if the USBC is going to reimburse me for having to buy all new equipment after 01/01/08 to replace the $1800.00 worth of bowling balls I use for tournament and PBA regional events, of which all but one has a balance hole and all have the cg shifted more than the proposed â€œone inchâ€. Ball companies will just pour balls with longer pins to get the same reaction without moving the cg. I think youâ€™d be better off tightening the guidelines for ball manufacturers because if the ball is limited in its dynamics before drilling it, shifting the cg and/or adding balance holes basically will have little or no effect on the ball. Lowering the differential of the ball is a good start, but you could also limit the width and height of the core of the ball, densities of the core, and even limit the friction coefficients of the coverstocks. Limiting the placement of the cg and not allowing balance holes is like having no NBA players over 6â€0 so no one can dunk, it makes the game easy for those who can shoot, and unfair to those who canâ€™t. And then the game becomes boring and you membership will decline even more than it has already just like the fans who came to see the dunks, not the jump shots.

Sincerely,

Scott Merritt
ABC/USBC Member for 20 years

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #8 on:** April 29, 2005, 10:43:01 AM »

Twister, I don't understand your reference to the NBA... I don't see the challenge in a 7 foot tall man dunking the ball on a 10 ft rim. Many basketball enthusiasts bemoan the fact that shooting has/can be replaced by tall men walking up and dropping the ball in the net instead of having to hone the skills to shoot the ball.

Also, I have a hard time believing that anyone who drops $1800 on gear for regional play doesn't replace and updgrade pieces in their arsenal on a regular basis. In the 2 year grace period you would probably rotate out your older stuff for newer equipment a time or two anyway, so I see no need for USBC to compensate you to replace your gear since you'd be doing that anyway. I could be wrong... maybe all of your stuff is 2-5 years old, but if so you're probably in the minority.

--------------------
9~

Traumatize · « **Reply #9 on:** April 29, 2005, 10:59:24 AM »

IF YOU WANT A CHALLENGE, GO BOWL A SPORT LEAGUE!!!!!!!!!!! Let league play continue, and let people have fun with scoring well. All i'm reading is how people think the game has gotten easy now. If its so easy, then why aren't you out bowling on tour??? The fact is that you, me , or any others for that matter are not good enough to bowl with the pro's because: 1) they are absolutely phenominal bowlers who can do anything and 2) we aren't accurate or consistent enough to bowl on those patterns. So stop whining about easy house patterns that bring all the money into the sport, and go bowl tournaments or leagues with tough shots. If you hate lague bowling so much and hate seeing high scores, THEN DON'T BOWL HOUSE LEAGUES ANYMORE. Don't penalize the people who want to have fun one night a week, and especially don't penalize the ball companies who have works numerous hours developing and testing new technology. Let the sport continue how it is. Scores can only get so high...

Matt Limardi
--------------------
*Erie Community College bowling*

Buffalo bowlers are the best all around in the country.

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #10 on:** April 29, 2005, 11:18:39 AM »

quote:
IF YOU WANT A CHALLENGE, GO BOWL A SPORT LEAGUE!!!!!!!!!!!

Believe me, I would if there were any to bowl in that weren't an hour away...

And, I know I'm not good enough to be on tour, but I also know my average is inflated. Besides, I'd welcome the challenge of different patterns throughout the league rather than one pattern all year long - regardless of what it is. Part of my problem is the fact that week in and week out it's the same, never different. I stand here, throw there and know pretty much what the ball's going to do before the lights even come on. I also think tougher patterns would force me to quit being lazy and would help me focus on execution a bit more.

Actually, I've been thinking about going old school and finding a 16lb Black Beauty to drill up and use only that ball for a whole season next year on one league. Then compare my results at the end of the year to another league in which I use all my newer stuff and see how much of a difference it actually makes.

--------------------
9~

nd300 · « **Reply #11 on:** April 29, 2005, 11:41:16 AM »

After talking with the assistant manager of the lanes where I bowl, we agreed that the ball changes are TOO MUCH!!!!!!!!! What this will do is allow those who can rev the ball to score by having the ability to crerate angle,whereas those who are rev challenged will not be able to create enough angle to score.
Secondly,with these proposed changes pro shop operators will have to learn all new drilling techniques. By eliminating balance holes there are some bowlers who the pro shop operator will have to tell that when they want a ball to do this or that reaction wise that with the limitation on Cg placement and differential that he won't be able to give them the reaction they are looking for.
Thirdly,by adding the mandatory USBC logo, an extra step is added to production/labor cost. Guess who gets to absorb that cost?? You and I at the buying end of the chain. And with having to eliminate all grandfathered equipment in a few years,we'll be paying more to get new balls.
I'd personally like to see more oil so that I could use the Colossus Supreme that I bought for heavy oil two years ago that has MAYBE 12 games on it due to not enough oil to throw it. Crown every oil pattern---that'll toughen things up. Or as Rags suggested,flatten every oil pattern.
--------------------
Chris
Lane#1--nothing else hits like 'em.

Author Topic: Proposed USBC changes are not enough! (Read 1190 times)

9andaWiggle

Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

iommifan

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

stanski

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

Ragnar

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

stanski

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

Ragnar

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

DanH78

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

twister

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

9andaWiggle

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

Traumatize

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

9andaWiggle

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!

nd300

Re: Proposed USBC changes are not enough!