win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*  (Read 18255 times)

BrunsNick

  • Brunswick Rep
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7306
CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« on: April 08, 2007, 08:57:29 PM »
Amending Brunswick's conclusive data of CG irrelevancy for ball reaction & track flare, using Lane #1 Equipment.

Video debuting 04.16.07
edit: 04.18.07 is the new date

--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
¡Viva la nación de Brunswick!


Edited on 4/9/2007 4:57 AM

Edited on 4/9/2007 8:43 PM

Edited on 4/13/2007 4:17 PM
Nick Smith
Digital Media Manager - Brunswick Bowling
http://www.brunswickbowling.com
http://www.youtube.com/c/brunsnick

 

BrunsNick

  • Brunswick Rep
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7306
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #106 on: April 16, 2007, 12:34:49 AM »
pty, re-read what you quoted me on and respond again.
--------------------
Nick Smith ... A.K.A. Les Badderâ„¢
Brunswick -=- PBA 03-07
http://www.BrunsNick.com
http://www.BigBapparel.com
¡Viva la nación de Brunswick!


Edited on 4/16/2007 0:34 AM
Nick Smith
Digital Media Manager - Brunswick Bowling
http://www.brunswickbowling.com
http://www.youtube.com/c/brunsnick

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #107 on: April 16, 2007, 10:09:44 AM »
Bradley: as for your following statement:

 
quote:
I put it in layman's terms for the people who believe cg matters.. What's so hard to understand?


OK. You're clearly unhappy that posters seemed to ignore you explanations. So I'll humor you. Let's go back the beginning of your last post where you tried to explain things:

 
quote:
The pictures of the balls that Brunsnick ie the Lane #1 balls is using as you can see has the TW marking 3" pos and 3" neg (roughly).. Pins are in the exact same place on both balls.. Both balls will flare the same, both balls will react the same for now because there are no holes other than the finger holes and the thumb hole to alter reaction..


The premise of your analysis was faulty right off the bat. The flare patterns, while close, were not the same. Additionally, the last few shots of each ball did not react the same.

So far, I've heard these 'anomalies' blamed possibly on temperature, humidity, a slight breeze coming through the window that blew a dust particle, natural vibrations of the building, burnt heads, and coverstock oil absorption (wew!).

If you care to add others, it would at least make for amusing reading. But until we get past these mysteries in the video, the circular arguments will continue.
--------------------
"Sometimes, the best move is the one we don't make"

Doug Sterner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4395
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #108 on: April 16, 2007, 10:46:50 AM »
Guys what you all seem to be missing in this entire CG argument is the following.

The cg punch on any ball is there as an indication of how the core is oriented in the ball. When you are dealing with a symmetrical ball it gives you an idea as to how the core is sitting inside the ball. See if you can follow me here....

Take 2 symmetrical balls such as a Special Agent that have identical top weights and pin to cg distances. Drill both of these balls with a 4" pin to PAP layout. Now take one of these balls and swing the cg to 3/4oz positive side and the other with 3/4oz negative side.

The cg kicked right ball will tilt the top of the core away from the pap and therefore give it an earlier roll and the overall hook will be greater in the middle part of the lane with a smoother transition on the backend.

The cg kicked left ball will tilt the top of the core towards the PAP and thus get the ball downlane smoother and have a sharper and more angular backend reaction. This ball will get longer and turn harder out back.

Overall hook may very well be the same but the hook shapes will be drastically different. It's not about statics anymore...it's about dynamics and core orientation creates the dynamic reaction we rely on.

So.....cg itself may not matter but the effect of it's placemnt on core orientation in a symmetrical ball makes all of the difference in the world.

--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY

http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY

Proud Member of the NRA
Fighting to uphold the Constitution of the U.S.

RealBowler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #109 on: April 16, 2007, 12:40:40 PM »
quote:
Guys what you all seem to be missing in this entire CG argument is the following.

The cg punch on any ball is there as an indication of how the core is oriented in the ball. When you are dealing with a symmetrical ball it gives you an idea as to how the core is sitting inside the ball. See if you can follow me here....

Take 2 symmetrical balls such as a Special Agent that have identical top weights and pin to cg distances. Drill both of these balls with a 4" pin to PAP layout. Now take one of these balls and swing the cg to 3/4oz positive side and the other with 3/4oz negative side.

The cg kicked right ball will tilt the top of the core away from the pap and therefore give it an earlier roll and the overall hook will be greater in the middle part of the lane with a smoother transition on the backend.

The cg kicked left ball will tilt the top of the core towards the PAP and thus get the ball downlane smoother and have a sharper and more angular backend reaction. This ball will get longer and turn harder out back.

Overall hook may very well be the same but the hook shapes will be drastically different. It's not about statics anymore...it's about dynamics and core orientation creates the dynamic reaction we rely on.

So.....cg itself may not matter but the effect of it's placemnt on core orientation in a symmetrical ball makes all of the difference in the world.

--------------------
Doug Sterner
Doug's Pro Shop
Owego, NY

http://dougsproshop@aol.com
www.dougsproshop.net
Lane 1 Buzzsaw...The Official Power Tool Of Bowling



Exactly!  Thanks Doug.

So, what you are saying, is that doing what BrunsNick is doing is really not changing the core orientation?

Since he is aiming to have a ball with identically opposite side weights, the core should be sitting in the same orientation on both balls.

So, maybe what Nick is going to show is that side weights don't matter?

The best thing I can think of is the Lane #1 video "Bowling Research" where to guy built a cardboard core and is twirling it around.

http://lane1bowling.com/videos/

Somebody really needs to make one of those, mark one spot on the core as the CG and then start shifting the CG around while keeping the pin stationary.


--------------------
Haywood

**************************
I don't need a stupid
signature. This is enough.
**************************

gdsandman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #110 on: April 16, 2007, 01:04:16 PM »
Nick, what if you drill a third ball keeping the cg in a similar spot as one of the others, but moving the pin. Isn't that what they are trying to show that moving the core/pin up or down is what really modifies what the ball does down lane. Atleast that's what I'm seeing when I watch the vid. Just to let you know I appreciate the time and effort your taking to do this.

Strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6759
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #111 on: April 16, 2007, 02:04:36 PM »
Wow, six pages of people with their minds made up, and we haven't seen the video yet.  
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Special thanks to Dynothane, Visionary, and Lane#1 for donations to the Ballreviews Get Together.

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive

NateNice

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #112 on: April 16, 2007, 02:25:58 PM »
I thought its been common knowledge for awhile now that static weights create little to no practical effect on modern bowling balls due to the dynamic and strong cores and very powerful coverstocks.  These parameters simply interfere so to speak with any effect static weight (in this case CG) might have.  that is, any effect they might have isn't practical on modern balls.

The fact the USBC is focusing on this (so it appears they're doing something) is a joke.

Anyone who still thinks they are "tweaking" or changing a balls reaction for any practical purposes by moving the CG, adding positive or negative weight, etc, is fooling themselves.  You have to cut into the core to make real changes, via X-holes.

20 years ago there would be noticeable, practical effect.  Today, there is not.  The cores and coverstocks are just too dominate for this weight to make a practical difference.

I'd agree physically there would be a slight difference.  But for practical purposes, you would never benefit from anything it might grant.

The USBC would better serve the game by regulating oil patterns more strongly and by making people more aware what oil patterns are and how they effect the game.

T-GOD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2141
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #113 on: April 16, 2007, 03:13:05 PM »
Ric,
quote:
I am curious, since you refuse to give any background info on yourself, do you actually work in a pro shop or do you merely spew your BS on here and act as being a silver level coach actually means something? I am just curious how many living, breathing bowlers you have worked with, fit real bowlers hands and/or laid out bowling balls (that react correctly) for?
Can't you tell by the answers I give in all these forums, that I'm a bowler, with SOME  experience..? Does it matter if I work in a pro shop..? Maybe I drill my own equipment and did a lot of experimenting to get my knowledge.

It's too bad you think my well thought out comments, giving quality advice in all areas in this forum, is "BS being spewed on here." Steven, as well as others, respect my knowledge and my efforts to help bowlers in here, whether he knows who I am or not, because they can read and understand what they read. What I say makes sense to them, because I don't just spew bs, like others do on here.

Seeing as though you see me as "BS SPEWER" on here, it shows me you're threatened by me and my knowledge. You have to stoop to calling me ridicuous names to try to make yourself look better/smarter.

You just want everyone to believe you or Brunswick, because they have a NAME behind them. Even if you're wrong, you must be right because Brunswick says it's so..!! I'm sorry, but I don't operate like that.

Should we just throw out everything physics teaches us, because it doesn't apply to Reactive Resin and Asymmetrical cores..?  

By the way Ric, I've helped many bowlers as well as drilling balls for many top pros. I've also been on here much longer than you have, since back in the E-Teams days, not that it matters. =:^D

MegaMav

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #114 on: April 16, 2007, 03:18:14 PM »
quote:
What I say makes sense to them, because I don't just spew bs, like others do on here.


So far you've done nothing to show emperical evidence to back up your claim, besides your :eyes:, which are often only shown what only the brain wants them to see.

BTW, didn't clut leader David Koresh say something similar to the above quote?

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #115 on: April 16, 2007, 03:30:37 PM »
quote:
So far you've done nothing to show emperical evidence to back up your claim, besides your :eyes:, which are often only shown what only the brain wants them to see.


As opposed to Brunswick, that puts out a flawed video with key segments that even Ric and Nick can't explain.

Talk about about a response from the sheep..........


--------------------
"Sometimes, the best move is the one we don't make"

MegaMav

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #116 on: April 16, 2007, 03:48:52 PM »
quote:
Talk about about a response from the sheep..........


Has he? or, has he not shown any empirical evidence to back up his claim?

Edited on 4/16/2007 3:50 PM

MegaMav

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #117 on: April 16, 2007, 04:00:04 PM »
quote:
You dodge as well mega...



This topic has reached 7 pages, and I have yet to see any constructive posts from you.

Nothing new here still the same ole' L1B, armchair and cattle prod.

a_ak57

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10584
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #118 on: April 16, 2007, 04:07:36 PM »
All of you guys can go back and forth screaming "IT DOESN'T MATTER YOU BLITHERING FOOL WE HAVE, LIKE, A VIDEO AND EVERYTHING!" and "WHAT KIND OF MORON ARE YOU, PHYSICS SAYS IT DOES MATTER!" but all I know is that 99% of bowlers bowl on THS.  I also know that THS can make different bowling balls react similarly, or at least close enough that you don't have any inherent disadvantage with either one.  So I honestly fail to see how something that may make two or even three boards of reaction difference, or a foot more of length, has any massive impact.  I'm a god-awful bowler, and even I can change my ball roll enough to move more than that on the approach.

Even if seegeemaddah, THSmaddahmore.  I know, you'll say "Well what about sport conditions you dope?" to which I'd reply, "If you're good enough to be competitive on sport, you should be able to change your release to give you that extra length or whatever.  And even if you can't change it to get the same effect as a different layout, the lane conditions will probably change within 4/5 frames anyways.  Pros can go quite a few games during qualifying using the same ball.  They switch to balls with different layouts on Sundays because those 4 frames DO matter.  But, I remind you, there is only Jeff and a few others on here who don't post, that ever have to worry about that.  The rest of us bowling our wall leagues and occasional tourneys shouldn't be splitting hairs about this, because we'll probably throw enough errant shots that the potential advantage becomes almost useless or our friend the THS will cover up our silly mistakes."

Fire away.  I probably can't answer any rebuttals, since it's kind of obvious I don't really use any inherent logic to make my statements.
--------------------
- Andy

Rileybowler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3461
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #119 on: April 16, 2007, 07:23:38 PM »
Where's the video
--------------------
Carl
Carl
Bless the LORD o my soul and all that is within me bless his holy name

Steven

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7680
Re: CG NOMADDAH VIDEO *Pic Page 2*
« Reply #120 on: April 16, 2007, 08:14:18 PM »
quote:
Has he? or, has he not shown any empirical evidence to back up his claim?


Mav: To the best of my knowledge, no he hasn't. At least not for ballreviews consumption.  

I'm in his camp on this because I've done my own experimenting with a few ball over the years. The test that comes to mind was on Ebonite Stingers (picked them up cheap on closeout). Both had 3" pins and 3oz starting top weight. For drilling, both balls had the pin placed directly below the ring finger. To test differences, one ball was drilled with the CG in the center grip, and the second with the CG stacked almost directly below. The CG swing was hair above  1", the max I could go without requiring an X-Hole.

What I found was that total hook was about the same, but the respective hook shapes were slightly different. The ball that was more 'CG out' had a little more length and backend. The CG in the center grip line was more archy with slightly less backend.

The reactions weren't drastically different, but visibly different all the same. I asked a few of my practice partners to give me their honest opinion of relative movement, and I was told I was not seeing things.

Now, I don't expect anyone to believe this because they weren't there, and bowlers here are going to believe what they want to believe.

Anyway, if Brunswick can't produce a conclusive video with a Throwbot (without flaws) in the most controlled environment that can possibly be constructed, there will never be a test (other than one you construct for yourself) that will put the issue to rest.  

Good luck to Nick. It will be interesting to watch his effort.


--------------------
"Sometimes, the best move is the one we don't make"