Author Topic: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered (Read 1549 times)

bowlingmytmouse · « **on:** August 03, 2004, 11:44:35 AM »

I say no. read on.

Tonight I was bowling and a guy that was looking on said that he believed that the Original Inferno hooked more than the Ultimate Inferno. I was like No way!!

So I told a friend of Mine DP3 and he started laughing, so to get everyone's opinion I would like to see how all of you equate hook.

Now I understand that the balls being compared are for 2 different conditions and that the Original Infderno would cover more boards that an Ultimate on let's say a 32 foot pattern(which it should its pearl). But on a flood its easy to say that the Ultimate would cover more boards than the Original Inferno. So wouldn't the fact that the Ultimate hooks more in oil make it that it outhooks the original Inferno even though the difference between boards covered on each condition lean towards the Original? I think that it does, but thats just my opinon.

BMM
--------------------
June 3, 2003 First 600 Series(208,258,170)!!!!!!

P1atinumGQ · « **Reply #1 on:** August 04, 2004, 02:51:23 AM »

Columbia has a hook rating for both oil and dry. I can take the Full Throttle and compare it to the Detour. Yes, the Detour does hook more when there's a fresh backend, but dull balls react better when there's oil and a long pattern, where a polished ball would just slide and not pick up due to not enough friction. If you combine the boards covered in both dry and oily conditions, the Ultimate would hook more than the Inferno. And that's how I would rate a ball.

Re-Evolution · « **Reply #2 on:** August 04, 2004, 02:58:39 AM »

I agree with you, but why be concerned with the amount of boards a ball covers.
When you get down to it, it is all about entry angle and power at the pocket to drive through the head pin to get the 5 and kick out the corners.
My reasoning for the statement:
Med/Hvy pattern which is a pattern that both can handle.
The Ultimate is played 20 at arrows to 5 at break point.
The Original is played 12 at arrows 5 at break piont.
Both strike so why does it matter.

The lines are hypothetical as I have not used either but the point is still made
--------------------
STORMIN1

P1atinumGQ · « **Reply #3 on:** August 04, 2004, 03:15:19 AM »

Good point stormin. What matters is the speed you are able to throw a ball and how much friction is puts on the lanes and energy retention at the pocket. I can guarantee u if u threw the ultimate fast on a heavy pattern and the inferno fast, the ultimate will always hit harder and better. If u threw slow and let the inferno grab on the dry boards, of course it's going to change directions harder due to a shinier coverstock.

Edited on 8/4/2004 3:09 AM

charlest · « **Reply #4 on:** August 04, 2004, 03:41:10 AM »

Discussing which ball hooks more is legitimate, when you're talking the same type of ball (resin pearls, solid resins, particle pearls, particle solids, etc) used on the same general oil pattern. Example: compare the Inferno to the Storm Triple X Factor or the Columbia Wired. Compare the Ulitmate Inferno to the Triple Xtreme or the Full Throttle.

Even comparing playing the Inferno straight on a medium heavy oil pattern to playing the Ultimate Inferno with more of a swing shot is ONLY applicable on a nice blend or an easy house shot. On a wet/dry it would make no sense to use an Inferno unless it were sanded. You'd have significantly less margin for error than you would with an Ultimate or similar oil ball.

Compare apples and apples, not apples and oranges.
--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."

DP3 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:29:39 AM »

Exactly Charlest. What my friemd BMM failed to mention was that I said the Inferno could cover more boards than the Ultimate. That's because with a surface as dull and aggressive as the Ultimate, it's impossible to cover as many boards as you can with a ball like the Inferno without catching burn-out. BMM then said

quote:
Well it may cover more boards, but that doesn't mean it hooks more

Covering more boards has always equaled more hook since the beginning of time. But agreed, you can't really compare the two balls on the same condition because they aren't intended for the same shot.
--------------------
-DJ Marshall
You're not Bowling if you're not using "B"runswick
Scratchbowling.com

bowlingmytmouse · « **Reply #6 on:** August 04, 2004, 08:32:49 AM »

Phirex- I don't care if a ball only hooks 3 boards, if I can get it to hit I don't care.`

Stormin1- The only reason I bring this topic up is because I was shocked when my friend just automatically equated boards covered to hook.

Charlest- You are absoloutly correct, I am comparing apples and oranges, but point isn't about what balls I am comparing, its about how bowlers see hook.
--------------------
June 3, 2003 First 600 Series(208,258,170)!!!!!!

charlest · « **Reply #7 on:** August 04, 2004, 09:42:53 AM »

quote:

Charlest- You are absoloutly correct, I am comparing apples and oranges, but point isn't about what balls I am comparing, its about how bowlers see hook.
--------------------

I have to believe that most bowlers see "hook" as total boards covered.

The problem with that is most still believe that every ball can be used on any condition. Thus, they do not talk about ball for heavy oil or balls for medium oil or light oil. All they refer to is absolute "hook" or their fgamous quote, "which ball hooks more"?

I have admittedly been preaching the opposite, just trying to get some of th enewer and less experienced readers here to realize how to look at a ball to get the best use of it. Sorry, if my "preaching" offends anyone.
--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."

bowlingmytmouse · « **Reply #8 on:** August 04, 2004, 07:31:22 PM »

I guess that its different from bowler to bowler, as well as company to company. because, if my mind serves me correctly, when the Ultimate came out Brunswick rated it above their current rating scale. Having said that I guess I equate Hook to how a ball performs with oil when 2 balls as different as these are compared. Just the fact that the Ultimate works that much harder on oil to get to the pocket would make me believe that it hooks more. But thats just me, I guess all and all you just can't compare balls that are so contrasting. But I still say the Ultimat Inferno hooks more than the Inferno/

BMM

Thanks everyone for your replies
--------------------
June 3, 2003 First 600 Series(208,258,170)!!!!!!

da Shiv · « **Reply #9 on:** August 04, 2004, 10:11:28 PM »

Back when Bob Summerville was still with us and was running BTM (and doing most if not all of the ball reviews) there was some confusion about what BTM meant by hook and by backend.

Here's how he described their use of the terms. He said hook meant total boards covered. If the ball was started out on the 20 board and went out to the 5 board at it's furthest out and came back to the pocket at the 17 board (give or take a half board or so), then the ball went out 15 boards and returned 12 boards for a total hook of 27 boards.

For backend, he said that was gauged by how many boards the ball covered on it's way back to the pocket from the breakpoint. This is where the confusion was, and to a great extent still is. If the breakpoint was reached at the 10 board at 35 feet, or the the breakpoint was reached at the 10 board at 45 feet, those two balls would be ranked the same for backend, since they both covered the same number of boards from breakpoint to pocket. Obviously, the ball that reached the breakpoint at 45 feet turned much sharper to reach the pocket than the ball that reached the breakpoint at 35 feet; but the backend rating would be the same. The only numerical statistic that could be used to distinguish the obvious and important difference was "core torque." The core torque statistic is a vague general measure of a ball's "flippiness." While the two balls mentioned above would rank the same for backend, the one that reached the breakpoint at 45 feet would most likely have a higher number on the core torque scale. This system is an admittedly imperfect way to quantify ball reaction for purposes of a review.

The wide differences of opinion that we see around this site about different balls expose the imperfection of this system, or any system that anyone has come up with yet. Lots of reading, watching, and personal experimentation still results in most of us buying ineffective equipment on a fairly regular basis. This explains the huge amount of activity in the "For Sale or Trade" forum. That, and the irresistible urge many seem to have to try out everything that everybody makes.

Shiv
--------------------
Listening to the monotonous staccato of rain on my desk top

Author Topic: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered (Read 1549 times)

bowlingmytmouse

BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

P1atinumGQ

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

Re-Evolution

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

P1atinumGQ

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

charlest

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

DP3

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

bowlingmytmouse

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

charlest

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

bowlingmytmouse

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered

da Shiv

Re: BR Poll: Does Hook = Boards covered