Author Topic: Easier shot? (Read 1780 times)

gsback · « **on:** January 21, 2010, 06:50:54 AM »

Since pumpkinA went ahead and ruined Jim's post congratulating Bill on his 899 series.....AND hasn't done what I and many other have suggested, then I will.

I bowled in the 70s as a kid and quit probably around around '77 or so as I would have been heading into High School and there were too many things going on to keep bowling going for me.

Plain and simply put.....I don't remember it. So I am asking many of you old timers that played in that era. I remember many people talking about the track and how people knew where the track was and that when found it made getting to pocket easier, etc.

Granted ball technology didn't hit urethane until sometime after that (I believe), how do those of you that have bowled for that many years compare it?

In Jim's thread, the following struck me:

quote:
I've been bowling since the mid to late 60's and technology has changed, but I still see a lot of people leaving single pins on relatively awesome shots! I left corner pins in the 70's and I'm leaving corner pins 30+ years later! I give Bill credit for 35 of 36 strikes and it's an awesome feat no matter what year!

I guess in the end, what's really changed?
--------------------
BR.com.....going down the toilet one nugget at a time!!

g thing is back....with a vengeance!!

www.visionarybowling.com - Accept no substitute for the very best there is!!

Pinbuster · « **Reply #1 on:** January 21, 2010, 04:01:02 PM »

First I think the modern lane machines and synthetic lanes provide a more consistent surface. While there were many houses with easy shots there were also many brickyards out there.

Two is league formats. Today most leagues are 3 and 4 person. In the 1970''s most were 5 person classic leagues. Fewer bowlers mean less transition and a faster pace of play.

But for the most part it is about carry percentage and what styles can produce a higher percentage of carry.

Today for the most part any style can buy a ball and put a drill on it that will carry a high percentage of strikes. This means a wide variety of bowlers on most conditions can strike at higher rate, thus producing much higher scores.

Edited on 1/21/2010 5:01 PM

JohnP · « **Reply #2 on:** January 21, 2010, 07:55:44 PM »

The combination of resin balls and an easier shot make it simple to hit the pocket. Before, the accurate player was the one rewarded, now the high rev cranker that can throw the ball within a 5 board area is the one rewarded. -- JohnP

rvmark · « **Reply #3 on:** January 22, 2010, 05:19:01 AM »

quote:
The combination of resin balls and an easier shot make it simple to hit the pocket. Before, the accurate player was the one rewarded, now the high rev cranker that can throw the ball within a 5 board area is the one rewarded. -- JohnP

John,

I would agree with you to a point, and that would depend upon the lane conditions. The center that I bowl in this year decided to go to a short, low volume pattern with the outside 8 boards a desert. Unless the high rev crankers in our house can throw 22+ they are struggling to hold pocket as their is not enough oil for them to do their thing.

Mark

Juggernaut · « **Reply #4 on:** January 22, 2010, 10:08:56 AM »

While I picked up bowling in the mid 70's, I do have some insight into the differences between the "then" and the "now", because the center here had tracked out wooden lanes and low tech balls, but in the ensuing years has gone to full synthetics.

In the "old" days, the shot here was put out manually with an old "line-a-duster" and oil soaked rags cut to reach from 10-to-10 and dragged down 33 feet. Stripping the lanes was also a manual operation, using that same old "line-a-duster" and a soapy degreasing agent followed by a clean towel.

There was an obvious track area worn into the wooden lanes, going directly across the second arrow. The pocket wasn't hard to hit, but that track area was mre forgiving. Put the ball into the track area, and a higher percentage of lesser quality shots ended up hitting the 1-3. For what it's worth, it seemd to mildly guide weak shots to the pocket, but also seemed to hold stronger shots there as well. With balls too weak to overcome the track, putting a ball into it pretty much meant at least hitting the pocket.

Carrying? Now that's a whole different issue. Even with the best balls available AND using the track, you still couldn't generate nearly the angle you can today, especially if you got your feet very deep. Even with the drier area outside, the balls just wouldn't turn like they will now, and everybody knows entry angle increases carry percentage, right?

O.K., fast forward to now and do a comparison:

1. 1970's rubber and plastic balls VS todays reactive missiles with gyroscopic weightblocks. Many times the friction and ability to "self-correct" without nearly the deflection through the pin deck.

2. 1950's tracked up, low friction wooden lanes VS todays modern, high-friction synthetic surfaces that wear very slowly, giving the bowlers playing deeper the friction needed to "turn-the-corner" without needing a track to help.

3. Phenolic pin decks and high C.O.R. kick backs with raised flat gutters which may even be spring loaded.

4. High grade, lower weighted pins, full of voids that lower their center of gravity and coated with high impact synthetic coatings which maximize whatever impact has been imparted to them.

So, what's changed? EVERYTHING. From the way the sport was played to the mindset of the players. From the fact that bowling was a very SIMPLE sport that was HARD to excel at, to a very COMPLICATED game that many more than ever before can reach the benchmark of a 200 average.

--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile

ILLEGITIMI, NON-CARBORUNDUM!

gsback · « **Reply #5 on:** January 24, 2010, 05:49:00 AM »

Juggernaut,
Thanks for a well thought out reply!! When I made the post I was hoping someone would put something down a little more complete and comprehensive.

--------------------
BR.com.....going down the toilet one nugget at a time!!

g thing is back....with a vengeance!!

www.visionarybowling.com - Accept no substitute for the very best there is!!

completebowler · « **Reply #6 on:** January 25, 2010, 07:34:50 AM »

quote:
i apologized that i posted my feelings in the wrong forum,and after thinking about it it was indeed in the wrong forum.however it apears that most people agree with what i said,atleast the people in this forum do.the only reason i got defensive in that post is because nobody would admit how easy the game has become.it seems people are to quick to pound their chest when they mention their scores instead of looking at why they score the way they do.like i said in the other thread i shot 300 last wednesday i had an easy ten board area,along with carrying the last shot brooklyn.when i finished that game my head wasa bowed in disgrace,i kissed my wife and remarked how terrible that game was.
--------------------
KING OF THE WALLED UP HOUSE SHOT 300!!!!!!

For all of the issues you and others talk about being easier there are reasons things have become harder.

As explained in the aftermath of the red, white, and blue patterns evaluation walled up house shots often create a wet/dry look for upper end players. I see this all the time.

Technology in balls can hurt if you do not understand layouts and matchup. Take a pin low VG that tears up a blended decent volume pattern and throw it on a wall shot with friction up front and you will be locked out.

Pins are more active due to composition and ball power but I have seen (heard) more broken pins in the last few years than the twenty before combined. Most centers will leave those in service for as long as they can.

Now...I agree that many of the things that make the game easier are very prevalent....USBC is actively trying to find a nice balance to these issues. But to discount accomplishments due to advancements is to a degree a slap in the face.

I know I would be the same caliber bowler no matter what era, technology, pattern, house, etc. that you put me in.

It is all relative.

--------------------

Juggernaut · « **Reply #7 on:** January 25, 2010, 08:33:08 AM »

quote:
Juggernaut,
Thanks for a well thought out reply!! When I made the post I was hoping someone would put something down a little more complete and comprehensive.

--------------------
BR.com.....going down the toilet one nugget at a time!!

g thing is back....with a vengeance!!

www.visionarybowling.com - Accept no substitute for the very best there is!!

Not a problem, but to tell you the truth, I only hit the high points. To go into an indepth reply would take lots of time and become almost unreadable.

I like to refer to it as an easily pictured graphic I call the "window of oppotunity to strike". In the old days, the parameters that allowed you to strike were very limited, so the oppotunity to strike would be represented as a very small window, barely large enough to get the ball through and very hard to do properly. Nowdays, technology has expanded the window by a factor of at least 10. Like going from a 12 inch TV to a 120 incher. Much easier to hit a big target than a small one.

That's why there are so many more 300 games and 900 series. Not because bowlers have changed, but because bowling itself has changed. Balls hook more, pins fly around more, and oils are applied in readable patterns. These things didn't make the sport easier, they made SCORING easier by opening the "window of oppotunity" to strike. So, for the USBC to try to make the SPORT harder to decrease scoring is dumb. The SPORT was already hard enough, the problem is that SCORING has been made too easy.

Hitting your target over and over with a heavy object at the same trajectory and speed isn't easy, but when you make targets bigger ( 4 boards instead of 2 ), and trajectory less critical ( by applying "helpful" oil patterns ) and multiply those by balls that roll truer ( because of gyroscopic weightblocks ) and "hit" harder ( due to added friction and COR of both balls AND pins ), what do you think is going to happen?

But the Jin is out of the bottle, and how do you put it back? You can't really, so you make the best of things. The USBC has come in and made small, sanctimonious changes in ball, pin, and oiling specs, but with much criticism from many. Its like giving a poor man a large sum of money, then asking him to give it back. He isn't going to want to give it back without a fight, and you aren't going to be able to get scoring back to what it was either.

Wow, just realized how long this was getting, and how I was beginning to rant, so I better just stop.

--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile

ILLEGITIMI, NON-CARBORUNDUM!

BowlingWolf · « **Reply #8 on:** January 25, 2010, 09:31:02 AM »

quote:
do you think you would average the same on a sport pattern as you do on a THS?

Bingo!

For proof, just look up any bowler that averages 220+ and that has bowled on a sport compliant shot, and the averages are never at the same level, they're always 20 to 50 pins lower on the sport shot.

Ironically, those that complain about the scores being thru the roof are the ones that never lace up on a sport shot, because of ego.

However, I believe that both "easy" and "hard" shots are good for the game, as the easier conditions tend to program the bowler with a loose armswing, and the harder conditions educate and discipline the bowler about such principles as shot selection and fundamental physical execution on a consistent basis.

As far as I remember, bowlers have always had some kind of gripe about conditions, and I don't see that ever changing, for it is human nature to continually complain.

--------------------
If it is to be, it is up to me.

ralphiejantz · « **Reply #9 on:** January 25, 2010, 12:13:17 PM »

Well said about the Sport shots
for anyone reading this if you want to excel at this sport you simply have to start playing on sport patterns
I just went to a local tournament yesterday with my brother who has upped his average almost 30 pins since last year (since Ive been working with him)

I averaged about 208 for the qualifying rounds which was up there in the field, I usually average around the 220 mark on THS league shot in my league

My brother didnt break 140 for 1 single game

he couldnt understand that there was an out of bounds block outside of 8,
and that you had to play a tight swing on the inner part of the lane to score
(he throws a bigger hook most of the time than I do because if he misses right it normally comes back to the pocket for him on a THS)
He threw about 4 or 5 balls right in the gutter during the tournament
After I was done bowling match play we got in the car and he couldnt believe how hard the shot was,
he finally started to come around the last few frames of the last game
he just called me before to see if I can go practice with him because he wants to now work on hitting his mark within a 2 board radius (something he was never interested before)
so he wants to get better and more competitive and bowl on these sport conditions

the problem is that the guys that average 220-230 in THS shot leagues have no interest in bowling in these sport leagues, PBA experience leagues etc.
and thats ridiculous
these guys think they are outstanding bowlers because of their scores
but most of them quickly shy away from tournaments that put out a sport shot or similar because they are lucky if they can average 180 on them and it brings them back to reality (which is something they dont like)

Ive seen countless times people shoot 300 and hit the same mark maybe 2-3 times the whole entire game
Ive seen people shoot 700's without hitting the same mark more than 2 times for a whole 3 game set

You guys that think you are better bowlers you have to get yourselves in sport leagues
it will only help the sport grow and make you better at the game

n00dlejester · « **Reply #10 on:** January 25, 2010, 12:57:39 PM »

I find the term "scoring pace" more appropriate for bowling than comparing everything as apples to apples. Scoring pace puts certain patterns/centers into perspective. Take the same oil machine, and the same pattern, at two different houses and the cut for a tournament could be -45 after 3 games, or +120.

1960's THS = lower average scoring pace
THS = higher average scoring pace
Sport pattern = not as high average scoring pace
US Open = I can't score pace

But comparing then to now is silly, because the game is moving forward not backward. I think it would do the bowling world some good if everybody realized, as completebowler said, everything is relative in this sport.

And the USBC is at least trying with the Red/White/Blue patterns. The pros tore it up because, well, they do this for a living. But I think that us mere mortals will see a difference on the White/Blue patterns and hopefully averages do lower a bit more, and premiums are put on repetition and spare shooting. Only time shall tell.
--------------------
Proud Supporter of Rob Stone
Obviously, you aren't a golfer.
Some stayed in the foothills, some washed logs like teeth.

renaissanceman517kak · « **Reply #11 on:** January 25, 2010, 01:16:24 PM »

quote:
the only reason i got defensive in that post is because nobody would admit how easy the game has become

There wasn't anyone who didn't admit the game was easier...not one person said otherwise...what everyone said, and what you finally admitted to, is that it wasn't the time and place for your comments. That's all anyone was saying. Unfortunately, you can't even make that admission without trying to turn it around and put it on everyone else...

And if you're so miserable about the easier game today, to the point that you would bow your head in shame over a 300, then why the heck are you even still bowling?

gsback · « **Reply #12 on:** January 25, 2010, 02:01:15 PM »

pumpkinA,

Glad you see what was being talked about in the other topic.

As for bowling itself, I question it because of what I think and what I see. There's a person that bowled on my team, older guy, late 60s if I remember correctly. Any time someone shot good, he reminded me of you and the statements about how the game was so much harder when there was a premium put on shot making. Fine.....I can understand that.

As time went on, he decided at the end of the year to hang it up. Why? Because his shot making was there, but the ball and the pins didn't cooperate with what he was doing and the adjustments he was making.

Oh....really? That's all I could say.

Point is that yes, it might be easier to get to the pocket, but (a) you have to carry and (b) you still have to spare.

Adjustments are needed for the person that's averaging 220 and above. It's not always a 'grip it and rip it' or 'stand left and heave it right' attitude. When the lanes change, you have to make small adjustments and for those ripping the ball.....quite a bit bigger adjustments.

But I do agree with what's been said about going forward....that's what technology does. But we, as bowlers, still have to understand it. I still see poeple stuck in the 180s because they don't understand the ball dynamics and the lanes and how they interect. I don't believe that was something big in the equation back then.

--------------------
BR.com.....going down the toilet one nugget at a time!!

g thing is back....with a vengeance!!

www.visionarybowling.com - Accept no substitute for the very best there is!!

completebowler · « **Reply #13 on:** January 25, 2010, 03:28:13 PM »

quote:
quote:
quote:
i apologized that i posted my feelings in the wrong forum,and after thinking about it it was indeed in the wrong forum.however it apears that most people agree with what i said,atleast the people in this forum do.the only reason i got defensive in that post is because nobody would admit how easy the game has become.it seems people are to quick to pound their chest when they mention their scores instead of looking at why they score the way they do.like i said in the other thread i shot 300 last wednesday i had an easy ten board area,along with carrying the last shot brooklyn.when i finished that game my head wasa bowed in disgrace,i kissed my wife and remarked how terrible that game was.
--------------------
KING OF THE WALLED UP HOUSE SHOT 300!!!!!!

For all of the issues you and others talk about being easier there are reasons things have become harder.

As explained in the aftermath of the red, white, and blue patterns evaluation walled up house shots often create a wet/dry look for upper end players. I see this all the time.

Technology in balls can hurt if you do not understand layouts and matchup. Take a pin low VG that tears up a blended decent volume pattern and throw it on a wall shot with friction up front and you will be locked out.

Pins are more active due to composition and ball power but I have seen (heard) more broken pins in the last few years than the twenty before combined. Most centers will leave those in service for as long as they can.

Now...I agree that many of the things that make the game easier are very prevalent....USBC is actively trying to find a nice balance to these issues. But to discount accomplishments due to advancements is to a degree a slap in the face.

I know I would be the same caliber bowler no matter what era, technology, pattern, house, etc. that you put me in.

It is all relative.

--------------------

do you think you would average the same on a sport pattern as you do on a THS?
--------------------
KING OF THE WALLED UP HOUSE SHOT 300!!!!!!

No I wouldn''t. But I know I would be around 205-210 which was an upper end player back in the day. I carry high 220 most places now so I think I would still be one of the better bowlers.

If USBC wants to fix things then combat what is at issue....the power of the ball itself. Instead of creating patterns with no area (cause I can tell you I had area in the urethane days) simply put longer, wider and flatter patterns out and increase pin weight.

These things would decrease the energy that the ball hits the pins with.

On edit....the patterns I suggest would also decrease angle entry which would effect carry. Carry is the difference in todays game. It wasn''t hard to get to the pocket back in the day....it was harder to carry. Now we see sport patterns where there is a premium on ''shotmaking''. Why? Why not combat the issues that effect the scoring pace...ball dynamics.

--------------------

Edited on 1/25/2010 5:15 PM

BowlingWolf · « **Reply #14 on:** January 25, 2010, 04:13:56 PM »

quote:
No I wouldn't. But I know I would be around 205-210 which was an upper end player back in the day. I carry high 220 most places now so I think I would still be one of the better bowlers.

Not trying to stir the pot or get you all riled up, but I've seen many a high average bowler (excellent bowlers who average quite a bit higher than you anywhere they bowl on a THS), and when they have joined tough sport pattern leagues, they have averaged quite lower than the average you believe you would attain under such conditions.

I'm not saying you might not be able to hit your lofty goal, but the only sure way for you to know is for you to stop kidding yourself, join a sport/PBAX complant type league, and find out--otherwise you're just stroking your own ego.

--------------------
If it is to be, it is up to me.

Author Topic: Easier shot? (Read 1780 times)

gsback

Easier shot?

Pinbuster

Re: Easier shot?

JohnP

Re: Easier shot?

rvmark

Re: Easier shot?

Juggernaut

Re: Easier shot?

gsback

Re: Easier shot?

completebowler

Re: Easier shot?

Juggernaut

Re: Easier shot?

BowlingWolf

Re: Easier shot?

ralphiejantz

Re: Easier shot?

n00dlejester

Re: Easier shot?

renaissanceman517kak

Re: Easier shot?

gsback

Re: Easier shot?

completebowler

Re: Easier shot?

BowlingWolf

Re: Easier shot?