Author Topic: Do we make the game way too complicated? (Read 10905 times)

Russell · « **on:** April 14, 2011, 10:22:25 PM »

I was reading another forum where a ball driller suggested a couple of layouts for a bowler going to nationals. On one it was like a 4 and 3/4" with a couple of degree coordinates. The other ball had the same degree coordinates but the pin distance was listed as 4 and 13/16".

Let's be real....does a 1/16" make any difference when most bowlers aren't tolerant by less than 2" at the breakpoint? I am a "KISS" (Keep It Simple Stupid) kind of guy. I have seen bowling try to go to the space age with core technology over the past few years, and what has it given us?

Most of the super cores roll like crap overall. Mo Pinell has been designing cores that are at the cutting edge of physics for 2 decades, and for the most part his balls roll like a wet turd. I can take a Tornado and sand it to 220 and make it roll like most MoRich balls...and at 1/2 the price. I'm not hating on Mo himself...he's an incredibly bright man, I just question how much technology we REALLY need.

The game is still the same...the pins are 3.5lbs, the ball is 27" around, and the lane is 60' long. Most of the BEST balls over the past years have had simple cores with good stable covers on them:

Gamebreaker

V2

Tour Power

Hyroad

Black Widow (Int Diff wasn't that high)

505C

There are plenty of others, and yes I know there are some balls that people have loved that were highly asymmetrical. Most of those balls end up being condition specific, and very sensitive to release. For example at Nationals this year, very few people seem to be having success with hook monsters, and most are throwing balls that are asymm with weaker covers or symmetrical cores altogether.

I had a fellow ball driller tell me a while back when I had a ball that was baffling me on why it wouldn't hook "oh you should have done a 4" mass bias not a 4.5"....really? 1/2" would make a ball go from hitting flush in the 3/6 pocket to high flush? Have we really convinced ourselves that this stuff matters THAT much?

Am I the only one that feels this way?

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

BowlingChat · « **Reply #46 on:** April 15, 2011, 08:37:59 PM »

Typical BR, resort to name calling.

Im not going to retaliate, if you think Mo makes turds, you obviously dont know as much as you think about asymmetrics.

Good luck.

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" alt="" />

Russell · « **Reply #47 on:** April 15, 2011, 09:07:12 PM »

Yes Morich balls are great...because you say so. Why didn't the best in the world fight over them on the truck? I asked the same question of Lane 1 a few years ago. If they're THAT good...wouldn't everyone be throwing them. I mean if my living depended on my ability to strike...wouldn't I use everything at my disposal to do it more than anyone else?

EVERY Morich ball hasn't sucked...let me make that clear. An overwhelming number of them have underperformed. This is not coming from me but from peer after peer that thinks so.

What's funny to me is that when I get around people that believe the kool aid...they lay everything out the same. I see ball after ball with the pin in the same area on the ball. They believe that numbers are more important than reality.

Yes me calling you condescending was "name calling"...lol..(if the shoe fits)..nice cop-out.

Have a nice day.

BowlingChat wrote on 4/15/2011 8:37 PM:
Typical BR, resort to name calling.

Im not going to retaliate, if you think Mo makes turds, you obviously dont know as much as you think about asymmetrics.

Good luck.

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" />

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

BowlingChat · « **Reply #48 on:** April 15, 2011, 09:36:58 PM »

Your kool aid talk is nauseating Russell, dont pin that crap on me.

Im not paid or given any products by Mo or MoRich.

I never said they were the end-all to all products.

You do realize MoRich has been a part of multiple titles on tour right?

Besides, I've been talking about asymmetrics in general during the majority of this topic.

I own 0 MoRich balls in the current lineup, but have an understanding of how hard Mo works at getting the best product out there.

And not just that, but all of the work he does with IBPSIA and communications via magazines as well as all of the research he does. He pours his heart into everything he does with this sport, including his products. You think hes just some jamoke releasing balls without any research, good or bad? Sorry, hes definitely not that guy.

He's got too much pride and emotional investment in bowling.

Just because you have peers, doesnt mean they know how to drill those products either. Im amazed by how many ball drillers treat these strong asymmetrics as any other symmetric.

You would think time after time these MoRich products arent working for you it would be some sort of indication that *possibly* its *you* not doing something right?

Who would have thought?

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" alt="" />

Juggernaut · « **Reply #49 on:** April 16, 2011, 05:19:23 AM »

BC.net,

I think what Russell is saying is that having someone like Mo designing bowling balls is like having a demolitions expert designing fire crackers. The guy is going to just continue to develop stuff FAR past what's necessary, all the while preaching the sermon of more, bigger, better because that is what HE does, making bigger and bigger, and shouting "better and better" all the time. Bigger and stronger IS NOT always better.

Mo is, undoubtedly, very smart at what he does. Thing is, he, and others like him, should be using their intelligence and resources on something people really need instead of wasting it all designing bowling equipment that is technologically developed FAR past what was EVER needed.

Back before the "Great technological Revolution", the game you saw on TV wasn't that far removed from the one you could go down and play yourself. The difference was in your ability to make the pins fall over like those guys on TV, and it was REAL EASY to see the difference with no explanation of "how much harder their shot is" or "how much better and gifted they are" being necessary.

I know you don't understand my points fully, because you can't. You weren't there to see it all happen, and I've chased it all the way from the yellow dot, to urethane, to two piece technology, to reactive resin, all the way through to today. Along the way, we went from having an easy to play/hard to master SPORT, to an overdeveloped and ridiculously hard to learn GAME, rife with complex formulas that are hard to understand, yet necessary if you really expect your $250 investment to work for all 10 games it was designed to work for, then spend even more on it just to get it to work 10 more games, keeping in mind you can only do this 5 times, then must drop another $250 to replace it.

This is good HOW?

BowlingChat · « **Reply #50 on:** April 16, 2011, 05:30:38 AM »

Jug,

I fully understand what you're saying, unfortunately we are where we are now with technology and going back to uniform equipment and coverstocks just isnt possible.

I really dont want to veer away from the original topic anymore, I think I've made it pretty clear what my points are with education of consumers and proshops necessary to ensure a product is delivered as intended.

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" alt="" />

Juggernaut · « **Reply #51 on:** April 16, 2011, 06:11:44 AM »

BC.net,

I understand. Heck, things being what they are, I even agree. I just think, as per the original subject, that yes, we have complicated things way past what was necessary.

Now that we are where we are, yea, we have to utilize all available to us to keep up. I just wish all this stuff had never happened.

You guys would've loved it, I promise. Just you and your simple ball, drilled to fit your hand (most important factor in drilling was the fit), against an unknown foe(oil conditions) and those ten white pins with the challenge of being good enough to knock over more than your technologically equal opponent.

NO worries about RG's, RA's, spin time, flare rate, oil absorption, or ANY of the concerns of many modern bowlers. Just you, a ball, a reaction, and your ability to manipulate it better than your opponent.

Man, THAT was GREAT!

BowlingChat wrote on 4/16/2011 5:30 AM:
Jug,

I fully understand what you're saying, unfortunately we are where we are now with technology and going back to uniform equipment and coverstocks just isnt possible.

I really dont want to veer away from the original topic anymore, I think I've made it pretty clear what my points are with education of consumers and proshops necessary to ensure a product is delivered as intended.

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" />

CHawk15 · « **Reply #52 on:** April 16, 2011, 09:59:16 AM »

The short answer is yes, we do make it too difficult.

Juggernaut · « **Reply #53 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:08:51 AM »

CHawk15 wrote on 4/16/2011 9:59 AM:
The short answer is yes, we do make it too difficult.

Dang CHawk15, you're taking all the fun out of it with those short, concise, and insightive answers.

RevZiLLa · « **Reply #54 on:** April 16, 2011, 10:34:09 AM »

Short answer....YES, we make things more complicated than we need to when it comes to the majority of bowlers. Take someone in the PBA who can actually repeat shots and read transitions and the edge that industry innovators can provide becomes meaningful. Example - The plastic ball tournament where 1st and 2nd place used a drilling that Mo derived using science.

Don't judge coaches by whether their students become PBA material, judge them by whether they can help someone improve within their limitations and better enjoy Bowling. Mo Pinel, Del Warren, Richie Sposato, Dale Nimeala, and other top coaches have helped me out of kindness and genuine joy in helping others and seeing them succeed. Not everyone that gets great coaching has the potential to be a great bowler, but the fact that they seek help and love our sport makes them worth the effort. Mo can not make me 19 years old gain. He can not bring back my 20/10 vision or put my diabetes into remission. He can not mend my broken elbow or make me lose weight...though he encourages it. I will never be a great bowler, but I will always love bowing and what Mo can do is give advice on my physical game and help with ball selection and drillings to compensate for my slow speed.

I am proud to call bowlers and people who care enough to help bowlers my friends.

RevZ=======================

\I/

six pack · « **Reply #55 on:** April 16, 2011, 04:37:28 PM »

Thinking about this topic as I read is throughout my years of bowling I've done my best with asymetrical equipment.

but then again,what's good for the goose may not be good for the gander.BTW,I loved the Awesome series MoRich put out.

The harder I try the harder they fall

Russell · « **Reply #56 on:** April 16, 2011, 04:44:36 PM »

Yes multiple titles....how many were by someone OTHER than Walter Ray?...who could have won titles with a Yellow Dot during that timeframe.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I know what I see....and you can assume all day, but you don't know me...or what I know...or how I drill. I remember being told the need for all of these hook monsters was to help the fudge knuckle bowlers get hook...now you're telling me that it's to help the "players"...all that I know throw weak stuff by the way.

It's like trying to discuss economics with a progressive...they talk from both sides of their mouth and never make any sense. When you catch them they just say "well you just don't understand"....and that's the catch-all rebuttal.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

AlBundy33 · « **Reply #57 on:** April 18, 2011, 04:22:21 AM »

Going back to Randy's original post, I do think we make the game more complicated than it really should be at times. After being away from the game more or less for about five years (returning in the fall), when I finally decided to get some newer stuff drilled (due to the reason that none of my old stuff fit my hand) I basically went over mentally what drillings and RGs have worked over the years.....and what hasn't worked.

As for dual angles, PAP and some of that other crap.....I was blown away with what the "supposed science of drilling" has gone on with my time away from the game. To me, it's all about if you can execute the shot or not. If you can, you will score. If not, you won't simple as that.

As for MoRich stuff, years ago I threw a buddy's Minotaur and was convinced that it was the worst hitting ball that I've ever seen in my life. The only stuff I can even can compare it to is some of the early Hammer stuff that Ebonite made when they took over from Faball.

"Pretty women make us buy beer, ugly women make us drink beer"

Russell · « **Reply #58 on:** April 18, 2011, 05:03:20 AM »

al,

That just means you don't understand, like me...most 900s have been thrown with older balls (or with older technology). The best in the world use simple layouts on simple cores...but we just don't understand.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

NoseofRI · « **Reply #59 on:** April 18, 2011, 07:23:18 AM »

BC.net,

My point had nothing regarding being obsessed with your game. You had stated in an earlier post

"Matching up is more important than you're leading on, even for league bowlers.
Does a league bowler want to average 225 or 215, you tell me.
Give him a strong asymmetric with a long pin to pap and no tilt, and I guarantee he wont be happy with the reaction, no matter how good he is."

So from that my point was simply a better matchup will not get the typical league bowler from 215 to 225, which you had clearly implied. I will agree that a guy who is at 215 may benefit from the right ball and layout to the point that maybe he gets to 220, but he's just scoring better, not actually becoming better. When it all comes down to it, there's something besides matchup that has kept this person at 215. So when I referred to you and your average, I was bacially asking how much you have improved from better layouts alone. Judging by your statement below regarding making major changes to your game, I would say the answer is not that much and my point was proven.

Because, again, my point is for people to get to that next level, they must practice and work on their game rather than relying strictly on matchup and layout.

All this is why I was in agreement with Russell in the fact that yes, we make things way to complicated. And I even took it slightly further to specifically say for 90 or so % of bowlers. I absolutely agree that with the way the game has changed, at times all this technology and knowledge is needed. But for the 160-170 bowler, why do they need some finely tuned asymetric HP bowling ball, when there's so much of the game they should be learning first?

You are right, there really aren't any bad balls made anymore, as everything has it's place on a certain condition with a certain bowler. But I will also add that besides poor layouts and uses, bad bowlers also make bad bowling balls.

BowlingChat wrote on 4/15/2011 5:33 PM:

OK,

Nowhere did I say layouts make you a 215-225 average bowler, I just made a reference to how much layouts can affect your game. Poorly executed layouts or surface prep can dip your scoring potential. It can be the difference between 215 and 225. League bowlers want to average as high as possible, you're not competitive if you done.

Why are you obsessed with me as a bowler? Im not sure that has anything to do with this conversation.

I didnt bowl league this year due to major changes in my game, you have no idea what I average now.

There are other people that work with Mo (including prominent pros) that average much higher after working with him, so im not sure what your point is here.

Dedicating yourself to the game should be the first step in becoming a good bowler, I'll never argue that, that passion goes farthest in any endeavor.

We're off track here, my original point was, dont give asymmetrics a bad rap because yourself or your ball driller do not understand them.

They are what they are, and you or your ball driller should honestly understand how they work, for the benefit of your own game, they can give you a look symmetrics cant.
Manufacturers dont make bad balls anymore, poor layouts and uses make bad balls.

NoseofRI wrote on 4/15/2011 4:34 PM:

Ok BowlingChat,

I have asked one question of you in this discussion. As your point was that all this is necessary as people want to average 225 not 215, I made a point regarding why myself or others may consistently perform better than you on the lanes when you clearly have more finely tuned layouts?

I am attempting to have a valid discussion regarding the question that Russell has asked, and my last post was basically everything from my side of the debate, so I would like to hear your responses to the things I specifically addressed.

http://www.bowlingchat.net/banner.png" />

Sunshine n Lollipops · « **Reply #60 on:** April 18, 2011, 06:46:18 PM »

Now, THIS is a funny post. True, but funny. Why does some guy from another website come on here and put BR members down. Just joined this site and from what I have read from Mr. "BowlingChat", I don't think I'll ever be checking out that site.

BTW, answer to the OP is YES, some clowns make this sport waaaaaay too complicated and are just deluding themselves into thinking a drilling is somehow going to magically transform their game from crap to gold.

Russell wrote on 4/15/2011 8:25 PM:
BC,

Talking down to me about my "lack of knowledge" is really getting you nowhere to proving a point. I'd like to know what it is in my original post that remotely told you:

- I drill everything with long pins

- I have low tilt

- I don't know how to lay out asymmetricals

- I am using antiquated drilling techniques

You're a condescending little prude that thinks you know it all. I know plenty about ball motion and layouts, and I know enough about the real world of bowling to know that the best on the planet don't complicate things this much. You're kidding yourself if you think that the truly elite players out there really give 1/2 of one s**t whether the pin is 1/8" closer to their PAP, or the spin time of the new ball that comes out.

I just don't drink your kool aid, or Mo's. If he's so great at the technical side of bowling WHY DOES MORICH RELEASE TURD AFTER TURD AFTER TURD AFTER TURD? I know Mo is a genius...but the practical application of rocket science to a simple game with some huge variables is just unnecessary.

Now go ahead and tell me how little I know. I'll go back to making my customers happy with my "old school" layouts that seem to keep working.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

Turn that frown upside down!

Author Topic: Do we make the game way too complicated? (Read 10905 times)

Russell

Do we make the game way too complicated?

BowlingChat

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Russell

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

BowlingChat

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Juggernaut

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

BowlingChat

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Juggernaut

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

CHawk15

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Juggernaut

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

RevZiLLa

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

six pack

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Russell

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

AlBundy33

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Russell

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

NoseofRI

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?

Sunshine n Lollipops

Re: Do we make the game way too complicated?