BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Gizmo823 on November 18, 2013, 09:35:40 AM
-
Sometimes you can have too much information. I've spent the last several weeks really digging and getting super technical in an attempt to figure out some new ways to explain certain concepts to a customer who is having a lot of trouble understanding bowling in general. To his credit, he really wants a full understanding of what's going on, but he's so new to all of this that the advanced stuff is really throwing him for a loop, mostly because he's trying to go too fast, and hops on one train really quickly and runs with it. In the process however, my findings have been rather disappointing. There are so many variables to bowling, the physics of it are such that regardless of what control you think you have over the outcome of a game, lane transition, layout, etc., you're relying on an astronomical number of things to work together in your favor every time you let go of the ball.
Ball design has nowhere to go, no different than tire technology. They may find ways to alter and adjust things, but durability is about the only thing they can hope to improve on. You can reshuffle the deck as much as you'd like, but the cards will never change. You can't overcome physics.
Jayhawk's ball surface scanner has shown and proven that ball surface changes so significantly over the course of just one league set that what you think you're doing to the surface of your ball and what grit you think you're keeping it at are uncontrollably inconsistent.
Now what you think I might be saying here is actually opposite of the point I'm making. There are so many variables in the numbers and the science, that you the bowler are really the only thing that makes a difference. The amount of variables make it IMPOSSIBLE to control anything mathematically, what really matters is a bowler's intuition, vision, and ability to read ball reaction. It's literally an every single shot adjustment, even if that means not making one. Humans are simply not accurate enough to be able to realistically apply the required consistency to take advantage of the applied mathematics. All the layouts, ball design, surfaces, lane surfaces, lane oils, ball motion studies, what have you, that all doesn't really amount to anything. The person throwing the ball is literally all that matters, we might as well go back to throwing plastic balls. All this technology just adds a bunch of extra steps and confusion to something so complicated that it's reduced to simplicity due to factors that are outside reasonable control. Or in other words, there are so few things that we as humans can actually control or affect that it's literally impossible to take advantage of the endlessly complex mathematics that there are to work with. There is no spoon.
-
+1,000,000
I have a teammate that is very concerned with numbers. I told him that he didn't need to worry about new balls and numbers as much as he did with keeping his equipment clean and hitting his mark. Dude could be an easy 220 guy, but he is very inconsistent at times and refuses to move his feet left or right. He is inconsistent because he doesn't think cleaning his stuff is worth it. I showed him a belt mark in his track and he still didn't believe me.
What I'm trying to say is, most people know just enough to make themselves sound ridiculous.
K.I.S.S - Clean your balls to keep their reaction consistent, and don't be afraid to move.
-
The "science" of bowling can be staggering if you become so immersed in it. What really matters, is can a bowler read ball reaction (since it changes quickly), and can he adjust to the changing environment?
Assuming body mechanics allow one to repeat shots with some reliability, an educated set of eyes will tell you all you need to know. What we need to be able to answer for ourselves several times during a league session is "did I throw that one different, or did the lane change?" Once you decide the answer, then you should commit to it 100% so you don't start changing everything when perhaps changing one thing will suit you better.
The "numbers" actually mean very little once you get to that point. Remember that we all have nights when we are seeing things more clearly than others too. The game is challenging enough without us making it harder by having too much information swirling through the brain in any given moment.
-
It can be summed up in my line to the kids looking for the magic layout-
At some point you need to bowl.
-
You have no idea how perfectly that applies to my current situation with said customer . .
It can be summed up in my line to the kids looking for the magic layout-
At some point you need to bowl.
-
I'm not sure ball technology has nowhere to go. You probably could have had some saying that in the late 70's and 80's before 2 piece cores, urethane, resins and particles came in.
But I agree that at some point you have to throw the ball effectively. All the drilling, all the gadgets, all the cleaning, all the surface prep means nothing if the bowler doesn't perform.
-
All the information a bowler can gather is good. It's no good if you can't apply that information correctly make good choices and execute shots. Repeatable shots are what any sport is about.
-
Basing it on current technology, USBC's ball motion study, and physics, it really does have nowhere to go now . . they didn't really know much in the 70s, and now that they do, you can't make cores that do anything more than what they do, and coverstocks are exactly like tires. Or rather I should say it has nowhere relevant or significant to go. Ball motion has remained largely unchanged over the last decade or so, it's been adjusted due to certain trends going this way or that, but now look at balls like the Melee and Eruption Pro. Those are really old school reactions . .
I'm not sure ball technology has nowhere to go. You probably could have had some saying that in the late 70's and 80's before 2 piece cores, urethane, resins and particles came in.
But I agree that at some point you have to throw the ball effectively. All the drilling, all the gadgets, all the cleaning, all the surface prep means nothing if the bowler doesn't perform.
-
This is probably the most true and educational post on this page
-
Gizmo and others,
I think you are spot on in some of your assessments. The real intangible is the bowler. If you can repeat shots, make proper decisions on ball and/or surface, and react to it, learn to read what the lane is telling you, and make the proper move from that information...you will score rather well.
But I disagree with the notion that ball technology has nowhere to go. Just look at what is coming from Radical today. Looking at not what the ball weights are before drilling, but after drilling. I think this is the next step. Weight blocks will come out where the ball might be illegal sitting on the shelf, but once the hole are put in it, you will bring the ball into legal limits and create differentials well beyond what we see now. We are just beginning to understand this, and as this grows, you will see companies designing equipment to take advantage of that. JMHO
-
The ball must be legal sitting on the shelf or it doesn't get the USBC stamp. The key is AFTER they are drilled, because the only devices used to test a drilled ball are a dodo scale and a durometer.
Ball technology is at a point of diminishing returns. There are guys averaging over 250 for a season and at least one guy did it in 2 different leagues. How much better do you need to make the ball?
-
itsallaboutme beat me to it . . they're into diminishing returns. But this is the kind of thing that keeps selling balls. They're marketing this stuff as revolutionary and game changing, but it's not. Designing core placement to minimize the change from design to actual post drilled specs is a great theoretical idea, but as far as application goes? Insignificant. Just because it conceptually sounds good doesn't mean its actual application is relevant. And if they increase differentials, what difference would it make? More aggressive reactions cause as many problems as they solve. If MoRich and Radical produced such higher quality equipment, you'd see more people using them and more success with them. Again, there will be several new ideas applied, more "best ever" or "most aggressive ever" marketing put out by the ball companies, but the reality is rather ho hum. Physics and the limitations of the game have capped ball technology, and if I were these ball companies, I'd be freaking out right now. They ran out of applicable or relevant technology a decade ago, and they're about to run out of gimmicks or wool.
Gizmo and others,
I think you are spot on in some of your assessments. The real intangible is the bowler. If you can repeat shots, make proper decisions on ball and/or surface, and react to it, learn to read what the lane is telling you, and make the proper move from that information...you will score rather well.
But I disagree with the notion that ball technology has nowhere to go. Just look at what is coming from Radical today. Looking at not what the ball weights are before drilling, but after drilling. I think this is the next step. Weight blocks will come out where the ball might be illegal sitting on the shelf, but once the hole are put in it, you will bring the ball into legal limits and create differentials well beyond what we see now. We are just beginning to understand this, and as this grows, you will see companies designing equipment to take advantage of that. JMHO
-
You can say the same thing about golf equipment. If we gained 17 yards as TMAG advertises for every driver they come out with every 4 months we'd all be hitting it 300+ by now. :D
-
Exactly. But the problem that more distance solves creates another one. If you slice or draw the ball off the tee, you're in a lot more trouble than you'd have been with a shorter drive.
You can say the same thing about golf equipment. If we gained 17 yards as TMAG advertises for every driver they come out with every 4 months we'd all be hitting it 300+ by now. :D
-
If you can hit miraculous recovery shots like TW or Phil no issues but most of us hackers hit two in the bushes or top one into a bunker. lol
Exactly. But the problem that more distance solves creates another one. If you slice or draw the ball off the tee, you're in a lot more trouble than you'd have been with a shorter drive.
You can say the same thing about golf equipment. If we gained 17 yards as TMAG advertises for every driver they come out with every 4 months we'd all be hitting it 300+ by now. :D
-
As much as I may try and understand the numbers myself, I look to my PROFESSIONAL driller to truly understand them. Last time I had a ball drilled, I literally told him that another of his customer's, and my friend, equipment usually works good off my hand when I throw it, drill mine like his, but slightly less aggressive.... and I got what I was looking for (my span of course) I don't need to know the numbers beyond a range of Diff, Rg, and Cover that typically works for me.
-
Numbers of an undrilled bowling ball do not matter. Surface and the bowling balls intended purpose means everything. Find the ball designed for the condition your facing and drill the ball accordingly. That is the simple truth.
The other factor that everyone overlooks and is in our control is spares. Most of us cannot throw the ball the way a pro does, or have access to all of the bowling ball resources a pro does. We can all work on having a spare game closer to the pros which will increase our own scores overall greatly.
No manufactures advertises that because it doesn't sell $hit for them. They can sell you on balls that should strike more for you on all conditions but it is the spares that will carry your game.
I'm more impressed with a clean set then anything these days because of how hard it is to do.
-
For example next time in league write down your score as you go through the night on paper. Change all of your opens to spares and add up what your score would have been vs what you had and see how impressive spares really are.
Is it 10 pins a set? For most it is likely 50 pins or greater a set that your leaving out there.
-
For example next time in league write down your score as you go through the night on paper. Change all of your opens to spares and add up what your score would have been vs what you had and see how impressive spares really are.
Is it 10 pins a set? For most it is likely 50 pins or greater a set that your leaving out there.
I agree 100% kid. Almost everybody worries about striking or how frigging much they can hook the ball. Spares are the last thing they have on their mind.
-
The only reason the numbers of an undrilled bowling ball do not matter is because you don't use undrilled bowling balls.
The numbers of a core do not lie. Relying only on marketing material to choose your bowling ball is the reason so many people "don't match up". For the person that goes to bowl league with their double roller it doesn't matter. For the person that drills 6 or 8 balls a year it does.
-
In the words of my late grandfather, "make your spares, the strikes will come".
-
The only reason the numbers of an undrilled bowling ball do not matter is because you don't use undrilled bowling balls.
The numbers of a core do not lie. Relying only on marketing material to choose your bowling ball is the reason so many people "don't match up". For the person that goes to bowl league with their double roller it doesn't matter. For the person that drills 6 or 8 balls a year it does.
Core numbers aren't the reason they do not match up. Layout and lane condition is the reason most do not match up.
Mo in reference to the USBC ball motion study and bowling ball characteristics
"The study proved that the most important factor in determining ball motion is coverstock. Next in importance are the mass properties of the ball, followed by the least important factor, the ball’s static weight balance.
As the study showed, the coverstock of the ball has the most impact followed by the RG and the total differential of the ball. My latest research now shows that those factors have very little effect on the shape of the ball’s motion after the first transition.
The most important factor in determining the shape of a drilled ball’s motion is differential ratio. It will determine the length of the hook zone, which determines the location of the second transition on the lane, once the first transition has been determined by the ball’s coverstock, RG, and total differential.
The diff ratio affects the ability of lane friction to steer the ball and pin carry. Diff ratio affects both the bowler’s margin for error on any given lane condition and the bowler’s strike percentage.
The diff ratio of a drilled bowling ball is determined by the design of the ball and the drilling technique used. The drilling technique consists of the layout and the balance hole location and size (if one is used). In my experience, the layout created by the drilling technique is about 40 percent of ball reaction while the balance hole location and size are 60 percent of the reaction. I have also observed that a ball’s designed reaction may be reduced by as much as 29 percent or increased by as much as 55 percent by the drilling technique used on that ball.
Obviously, the coverstock is a major factor in choosing the right ball. After deciding on a cover, the next decision to be made concerns a symmetrical or asymmetrical ball. Symmetrical balls yield drilled balls with smaller differential ratios. This will produce a drilled ball with a smoother, more controllable motion when compared to an undrilled asymmetrical ball.
Varying degrees of longer transitioning (longer hook zone) ball motion can be obtained by choosing to drill a symmetrical ball. The degree of control and continuation that the drilled ball will have depends on the exact ball chosen. You’ll
need to rely on a knowledgeable ball driller to help you make that decision.
Asymmetrical balls yield drilled balls with more defined, more angular breakpoints. These balls can create more area at the breakpoint and will respond to friction at the breakpoint faster. Again, there are a wide variety of ball motions available from asymmetrical balls by choosing different covers and balls with different diff
ratios, total diffs, and RGs.
Finally, the drilling technique for the drilled ball must be chosen to guarantee the exact ball reaction for that bowler. Drilling techniques will result in the drilled ball having a wide range of diff ratios and total diffs. I refer back to a previous
statement made in this article. A designed ball’s reaction may be reduced by as much as 29 percent or increased by as much as 55 percent by the drilling technique used on that ball. That fact should emphasize the importance of choosing
the correct drilling technique."
This echo's the thought of picking the right ball for the right condition and drilling it to match the bowler for that condition. It isn't based on the core numbers, it is based on the bowling balls intended purpose.
-
design of the ball=core numbers
There is science behind it all.
-
In the words of my late grandfather, "make your spares, the strikes will come".
That is almost exactly what I tell my son. The days his scores really suffer is when he's leaving makeable spares in the deck.
-
A designed ball’s reaction may be reduced by as much as 29 percent or increased by as much as 55 percent by the drilling technique used on that ball. That fact should emphasize the importance of choosing the correct drilling technique.
Any ball will work for any bowler.
-
There is no debating you can enhance or retard a balls reaction with the layout. But you are enhancing or retarding the reaction that you are starting with. Which is based on the core of the ball, and of course the cover.
You need to read the whole article you pasted, not just the parts that support your argument.
As the study showed, the coverstock of the ball has the most impact followed by the RG and the total differential of the ball. My latest research now shows that those factors have very little effect on the shape of the ball’s motion after the first transition.
The most important factor in determining the shape of a drilled ball’s motion is differential ratio. It will determine the length of the hook zone, which determines the location of the second transition on the lane, once the first transition has been determined by the ball’s coverstock, RG, and total differential.
-
I have read. That number is arrived based on the drilling of the ball and the location of the weight hole. They can change the core numbers by a large percent. How you dri the ball determines what the ratio will be.
If you think the core matters for a bowler then do share how.
-
All the final numbers are a result of what you start with. It's that simple. You're changing the core numbers you start with by a large percentage.
The RG of a core has a direct effect on performance. Given two balls that are identical except RG, you will get less performance out of the higher RG ball. Given two balls identical except for diff, the lower diff ball will result in lower performance. These numbers matter. It is in the information you pasted as well as the Ball Motion Study.
I'm at a loss of how to explain it. Design of the ball=core numbers. Intent of the ball is marketing.
-
Everything in the original post is true. However, it was just as true 50 years ago when most of those variables were still present, and we just didn't understand them, or even know about them. The only real answer is that bowling always was and continues to be a game that proves very little in the short run. In the long run the cream comes to the top in terms of consistent execution and ability to adjust. You can only control a fraction of the variables.
For those who say it is too much about luck, I agree. However I also know that the harder I work the luckier I get
-
But all we're really talking about here is drilling creating a deviation from intended ball reaction. You can reduce or increase the ball's reaction . . but I can also do that depending on where I stand on the lane and how I adjust my speed and revs. Specific drillings pigeonhole you into a certain zone on the lane to get the intended reaction, and that's when the lanes are cooperating. Yes it can all help you out, but my point is that I'd feel really comfortable just grabbing a plastic ball and taking what the lane gave me against most people that roll in 6 balls, and I'd really like my chances. Again, there are a lot of things that sound theoretically interesting or that do or can apply . . but reactives also create just as many problems as they solve.
-
One thing I'd like to add, about those saying that you need to make your spares. While that is very true.....you still need throw strikes. If you make 100% of your spares 100% of the time but throw no strikes, you will not average over 200.
-
One thing I'd like to add, about those saying that you need to make your spares. While that is very true.....you still need throw strikes. If you make 100% of your spares 100% of the time but throw no strikes, you will not average over 200.
How many all spare games do you see? If you are that good with spares your probably mixing in your fair share of strikes. Are there going to be games where you have only a couple because of bad carry and other breaks...yes no matter your average. Being able to adjust to changing conditions by ball, hand placement, or moving your lines will be a huge roll in every bowlers game. While trying to find your line again if your not sparing your score with 2 strike and two or three opens will be far less then an all spare game.
-
All the final numbers are a result of what you start with. It's that simple. You're changing the core numbers you start with by a large percentage.
The RG of a core has a direct effect on performance. Given two balls that are identical except RG, you will get less performance out of the higher RG ball. Given two balls identical except for diff, the lower diff ball will result in lower performance. These numbers matter. It is in the information you pasted as well as the Ball Motion Study.
I'm at a loss of how to explain it. Design of the ball=core numbers. Intent of the ball is marketing.
All the final numbers are a result of what you start with. It's that simple. You're changing the core numbers you start with by a large percentage.
The RG of a core has a direct effect on performance. Given two balls that are identical except RG, you will get less performance out of the higher RG ball. Given two balls identical except for diff, the lower diff ball will result in lower performance. These numbers matter. It is in the information you pasted as well as the Ball Motion Study.
I'm at a loss of how to explain it. Design of the ball=core numbers. Intent of the ball is marketing.
Yes you have to start somewhere. If you have your first example of two bowling balls with identical covers and one has a higher RG vs one having a lower RG doesn't mean you will get less performance out of one vs the other. If one is 2.55 to start vs 2.50 with equal covers and equal diffs I'd say you can drill them to roll almost identical. You can also have the lower rg ball drilled to be less then the higher rg and visa versa.
Same for Diffs especially. It can be affected the most by pin placement and x-hole location. Because a ball has a .020 diff vs a ball with a .040 diff doesn't mean the end performance results can not be almost identical if the covers and the rgs to start are the same.
In most real world situations the balls will be different with similar intended purposes.
Strike King SK13 cover with RG 2.57 Diff .028
Karma b/g PK18 pearl cover with RG 2.52 Diff .040
Slingshot Pk17 pearl cover with RG 2.58 Diff.017
Which of these will be the bigger hooking ball if you based it off of core only?
What is the intended purpose of each of these balls?
Karma has the Lowest rg and highest diff of the 3 by a decent amount yet all three are listed for almost identical purposes.
The numbers aren't as big a deciding factor as you think.
They are part of the intended purpose of the ball. So if you buy a ball for drier conditions the core numbers aren't an issue because it is factored in the balls performance. RG, Diff will all be where the ball is needed to be for that condition. Heavy oil ball the same way. The core cover combo is going to be where it needs to be prior to drilling the ball for that condition. Your not going to buy a heavy oil ball with a RG of 2.62 and a Diff of .020
Then it is a matter of matching the drilling to the ball and the condition. I never base a ball purchase off of the core numbers. I buy based on suggested condition and where it will fit in an arsenal.
-
The only thing I know about these balls is they are lower priced Brunswick balls. Without inside information you don't even know if they use the original formulation of PK 17 & 18 or what SK13 actually is. So the only thing these balls have in common to me is price point.
I'm not saying you can't drill a stronger core weak and a weaker core stronger to get them to react close. I'm saying if the other variables are constant the 2.50 ball is going to be stronger than the 2.55 ball. So the numbers matter.
It may not matter to you, but if it didn't matter we wouldn't be limited to 2.46 .060 when making a ball.
-
"Without inside information you don't even know if they use the original formulation of PK 17 & 18 or what SK13 actually is. So the only thing these balls have in common to me is price point."
(I use Brunswick primarily so that is easiest for me to go off of)
Original or non original formula isn't the concern. What you said is. All three are there entry level/upper entry level bowling balls from the past few years. PK17 PK18 and now SK13 are all very VERY similar. They are all marketed as the same shape ball in the same lighter oil category. All three have very different cores yet all three are almost identical on the lanes. The Karma has the most aggressive core, but the Strike King is every bit the ball with a higher RG and lower diff.
I used to live and die by these core numbers a few years ago. Pick your favorite manufacture that you use and select theres and other brands biggest hooking bowling balls.
All of them have different covers, all of them have much different cores and core numbers but all are deigned for the same thing. If you picked one over the other because the RG was 2.52 vs 2.55 or the diff was .050 vs .055 and thought that was going to be the deciding factor you would be kidding yourself.
Blueprint software is a great way to compare a variety of different bowling balls, layouts cover adjustments and test them virtually on any condition. The biggest difference will be the cover and layout more so then the core.(when comparing similar bowling balls)
If comparing a Slingshot to the Mastermind in terms of core yes it is a huge difference. When comparing a Ruckus and a Mastermind not so much.
If the ball says it is for medium oil with lots of midlane it has the core factored in. You no longer have to think about it. You drill accordingly for that reaction. If you are looking at the core numbers and say that's impossible and skip the ball for that reason your fooling yourself.
-
I give up. You can buy your balls based off the marketing material. I'll sell them based off what they actually do.
If the performance of those balls is almost identical the covers aren't as similar as you are led to believe.
-
"You can buy your balls based off the marketing material. I'll sell them based off what they actually do."
If you limit your idea of what the ball will do based on core numbers then your missing out on a lot. I'd be more interested in why you would select one ball over another on core numbers when comparing one or multiple manufactures bowling balls. Since you sell I am sure you have plenty of examples to back your ideas.
-
Maybe I look at things a little differently because I know balls are marketed based on the core and cover combination, but the cover isn't always what it is marketed as. I hope that makes sense.
But once you test balls that you know are the same coverstock you see the difference in reaction between balls with different core numbers.
-
I agree marketing is based on the core and cover for the desired reaction. That is why I know longer focus on the core numbers as a factor when choosing a ball.
example
If two bowling balls both say they are for heavy oil, light oil, medium oil, hook early, hook late, heavy midlane ect I know that is factored in. It is a matter of drilling that ball accordingly for the bowler to use on that condition.
Some bowlers will argue that a ball with an RG of 2.53 or higher doesn't roll good for them, or a ball with a .030 diff will not hook for them ect. That always makes me laugh. Especially when they argue that on the exact same ball the 15lb core is 2.50 and the 14lb core is 2.53 and they will not buy it because the ball will not roll good for them because the rg is too high. For some reason thinking the manufacture is making the different weights hook and look completely different in the one ball.
If you had the exact same coverstock and 5 different cores and all were marketed for the same thing I would have no issue believing that and drilling any of them. I would not pick one over the other because of a difference in core numbers.
-
Truth be told, I have come to almost completely ignore ball specs. I watch as many videos I can of the ball being thrown and go from there. I used to be able to see and feel different core numbers, but with the differences in the combinations of core and coverstock they're using now, it's changing things up. There are several balls coming out now with higher rgs and more aggressive coverstocks, but they roll like lower rg balls of the past. So if I take my Brutal Nightmare for example, it has an average rg of 2.53, but if I didn't know that and had to guess, I'd have said something like 2.48 just because it rolls so heavy. Again, the deeper into the numbers I get, the more I realize it's needless confusion. I understand what they're trying to do, but there's too much going on to take advantage of the science and the math. If you're looking for another reason bowling has gone downhill, I'd point at that.
-
Core shell matchup is more important than any of the other specs, and there is no objective measure for those relationships. Obvious example is some really low rg cores don't matchup well with highly aggressive solid shells. Manufacturers have been guilty of doing this with many of their high end balls. Trying to satisfy customer demand for max hook, even though max hook is counterproductive to many styles and on many conditions doesn't produce the best product. Best examples recently have been balls like the Frantic, Hyroads, and Versamax. All great balls in midprice range with the strongest cores or shells.
Some examples of great core shell matchups, followed by poorer matchups in an attempt to make balls better. Original Mission. Probably one of the best tournament balls ever produced by Ebonite. Mission X and others that followed were all more aggressive, but less useful for most styles. Virtual Gravity was one of the top core shell matchups from Storm. Nanos, Nano Pearls, were both stronger, but not nearly as useful for most styles.
Another thing to remember is that THS conditions can make lots of balls look good. More demanding conditions with less swing or back end are where the cream comes to the top in terms of equipment and style.
-
I think the most important thing for a "new" bowler to understand is how to get proper "roll" on a ball at release. All of the latest and greatest balls don't mean anything if they do not have the proper roll which promotes pin carry and consistency of reaction.