BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: icon on December 11, 2013, 06:16:57 PM
-
This article was pretty interesting and well written, so i thought you guys might find it an interesting read also. Back to Bowling Basics (http://www.epicbowling.com/bowling-tips/bowling-tips-back-to-basics)
-
Thanks for the link---good article. I have a problem with this sentence:
"Bowling consistency and bowler accuracy has absolutely Zero to do with the pins all falling down."
A tad strong? Zero? Not even 10%? LOL
-
Thanks for the link---good article. I have a problem with this sentence:
"Bowling consistency and bowler accuracy has absolutely Zero to do with the pins all falling down."
A tad strong? Zero? Not even 10%? LOL
The full sentence:
"Bowler consistency and bowler accuracy has absolutely zero to do with the pins all falling down, it has to do with physics behaving."
-
It's a strong statement meant to draw attention to the physics part, because if physics don't cooperate, the pins aren't going down even if you split boards every shot. A later statement is made saying that there's a lot you can do to improve the probability of a strike, and bowling is set up to make the physics behave as consistently as possible. It's a really backwards way of looking at it, but it's meant to drive the point home. I don't know how many times I've thrown the perfect shot and left something ridiculous, or made a horrific shot and splashed stuff everywhere. Physics is the gateway, it's like having a pane of glass in front of a dartboard. Unless you move that pane of glass, you aren't hitting a thing no matter how accurate you are. So if physics cooperate, consistency and accuracy have everything to do with the pins going down, but if they don't, you can't throw it good enough to overcome them. It's an equation in parenthesis, it's gotta be done first before you can get anywhere else, so logic therefore dictates that physics is 100% responsible regardless of other factors. Or in other words, it's a completely logical statement, but it sounds off if you're thinking rationally. Obviously you can't get a strike if you throw it in the gutter, nothing physics can do there. But assuming an absolutely flawless shot, you can still leave a stone 8 or 9.
-
Sorry, but if you have thrown an "an absolutely flawless shot", you will NOT leave a "stone 8 or 9".
-
So a bit of track burn can't make the ball "stand up" or "roll out?" Pins can't be off spot? Can't be any carrydown? An absolutely flawless shot off your hand can be an absolute catastrophe at the pins. If flawless shots equalled strikes, EARL would never miss. Again, physics dominate regardless. A flawless shot doesn't equal flawless results. Gotta adjust perspective.
Sorry, but if you have thrown an "an absolutely flawless shot", you will NOT leave a "stone 8 or 9".
-
The "perspective" is that it wasn't a perfect shot.
If you didn't adjust for track burn, it's not a perfect shot. (Because it didn't burn out since the LAST shot you threw, right? It is a gradual process, pay attention and adjust)
If you didn't adjust for carrydown, it's not a perfect shot.
If you didn't check the pins for correct placement and reset them, it's not a perfect shot. (And a pin being 1/4" off doesn't make that much difference anyway. Maybe if they were 1/2" or more off, but you should be able to spot that and reset the pins)
Something YOU did caused the 8 and or 9 pin to be left standing.
And by the way, Earl missed shots just like everyone else.
So a bit of track burn can't make the ball "stand up" or "roll out?" Pins can't be off spot? Can't be any carrydown? An absolutely flawless shot off your hand can be an absolute catastrophe at the pins. If flawless shots equalled strikes, EARL would never miss. Again, physics dominate regardless. A flawless shot doesn't equal flawless results. Gotta adjust perspective.
Sorry, but if you have thrown an "an absolutely flawless shot", you will NOT leave a "stone 8 or 9".
-
That's also another point though, you can't realistically adjust for all that. Even if you inspected all the pins right up on the deck before throwing the shot, took a magnifying glass to the lanes to see exactly where the oil was at, got a reading of the exact volume of every inch of the line you intend on throwing, obtained a map of the lane topography, the probability of you literally throwing a perfect shot is so astronomical it's laughable. Even then, the pins have to all make contact with each other perfectly, and the ball has to deflect perfectly to split the 8 and the 9. I was exaggerating for the sake of a point, the flawless shot is a literal impossibility, and even a flawless shot relies on physics "behaving," which requires an incalculable amount of things to happen "correctly" due to the shape of the pins, their spacing, density, surface integrity, thickness and bonding of the coating, etc.
If you're bowling 5 man teams, it's entirely possible for burn or carrydown to set in enough to cause a difference in your shot.
A pin being 1/4 off can make all the difference in the world when it comes to physics equations.
So if you are responsible for leaving an 8 or a 9, you would also have to be responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. These are purely logical and mathematical statements.
-
You are making my point though, you ARE responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. Although I would like to see you repeat THAT shot. ;D Same thing with a Brooklyn strike.
Every pin that falls is a result of something YOU did, it wasn't fate, it wasn't that you "got robbed", it wasn't a fluke, it was a "flaw" in your process.
The fact is, bowling pins are top heavy and unstable to begin with, so anytime you leave one standing, it's on you.
-
Lol and you're consequently making mine. You're not responsible for any of it, physics is. Because being perfectly consistent is a literal impossibility, physics becomes completely responsible.
You are making my point though, you ARE responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. Although I would like to see you repeat THAT shot. ;D Same thing with a Brooklyn strike.
Every pin that falls is a result of something YOU did, it wasn't fate, it wasn't that you "got robbed", it wasn't a fluke, it was a "flaw" in your process.
The fact is, bowling pins are top heavy and unstable to begin with, so anytime you leave one standing, it's on you.
-
Sorry, but the laws of physics doesn't change to screw you out of a strike. If the pins didn't go down, you didn't throw a "flawless" shot. By definition, the shot had to be flawed. Otherwise, you are just making excuses.
So, when you aren't blaming physics, do you blame the laneman? ;D ;D
Lol and you're consequently making mine. You're not responsible for any of it, physics is. Because being perfectly consistent is a literal impossibility, physics becomes completely responsible.
You are making my point though, you ARE responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. Although I would like to see you repeat THAT shot. ;D Same thing with a Brooklyn strike.
Every pin that falls is a result of something YOU did, it wasn't fate, it wasn't that you "got robbed", it wasn't a fluke, it was a "flaw" in your process.
The fact is, bowling pins are top heavy and unstable to begin with, so anytime you leave one standing, it's on you.
-
So physics behave the exact same 100% of the time? That's basically what you're saying. http://wiki.croomphysics.com/index.php?title=The_Physics_of_Bowling
Sorry, but the laws of physics doesn't change to screw you out of a strike. If the pins didn't go down, you didn't throw a "flawless" shot. By definition, the shot had to be flawed. Otherwise, you are just making excuses.
So, when you aren't blaming physics, do you blame the laneman? ;D ;D
Lol and you're consequently making mine. You're not responsible for any of it, physics is. Because being perfectly consistent is a literal impossibility, physics becomes completely responsible.
You are making my point though, you ARE responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. Although I would like to see you repeat THAT shot. ;D Same thing with a Brooklyn strike.
Every pin that falls is a result of something YOU did, it wasn't fate, it wasn't that you "got robbed", it wasn't a fluke, it was a "flaw" in your process.
The fact is, bowling pins are top heavy and unstable to begin with, so anytime you leave one standing, it's on you.
-
The Laws of Physics are based on Constants.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/constant (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/constant)
By definition they don't change. You have to change when the conditions change. If you don't, you have not delivered a "flawless" shot.
But you can look at it however you wish, I'm done with this. ;D 8)
So physics behave the exact same 100% of the time? That's basically what you're saying. http://wiki.croomphysics.com/index.php?title=The_Physics_of_Bowling
Sorry, but the laws of physics doesn't change to screw you out of a strike. If the pins didn't go down, you didn't throw a "flawless" shot. By definition, the shot had to be flawed. Otherwise, you are just making excuses.
So, when you aren't blaming physics, do you blame the laneman? ;D ;D
Lol and you're consequently making mine. You're not responsible for any of it, physics is. Because being perfectly consistent is a literal impossibility, physics becomes completely responsible.
You are making my point though, you ARE responsible for tripping the 1-2-4 from behind. Although I would like to see you repeat THAT shot. ;D Same thing with a Brooklyn strike.
Every pin that falls is a result of something YOU did, it wasn't fate, it wasn't that you "got robbed", it wasn't a fluke, it was a "flaw" in your process.
The fact is, bowling pins are top heavy and unstable to begin with, so anytime you leave one standing, it's on you.
-
Physics will react the same 100% of the time given that 100% of the constants are the same. The shot to shot constants of things outside the bowler's control or ability to perceive are nowhere near 100%, resulting in physics being the deciding factor, even if bowler consistency is 100%. The change in constants changes the physics, requiring every shot adjustments by the bowler to match up to the new constants. This is impossible. If you throw a dart, then you are blindfolded, and the dartboard moved, the critical factor here is the dartboard being moved, not the skill of the bowler, making the physics of those adjusted constants beyond control or perception the primary factor.
What you're talking about is a secondary factor, relying on a complete 100% consistency of other constants. Assuming a 100% consistency of all other factors, the bowler would then become 100% responsible for what happens.
-
By definition, a constant is a constant. But nothing in bowling is perfectly constant, therefore making this facet of it irrelevant. The outstanding point of this article is to show that there are too many things outside your control, and there's a point where being too technical gets out of hand and can hurt you more than help you, or completely distract you from the bare essentials of what is important. It's attempting to point you in the direction of giving the most attention to the things that are most important or that you have the most control over.
-
How many strikes have you gotten hitting the 10 pin?? Of course ability and accuracy count! There just aren't any guarantees that a "perfect" pocket hit scores a strike although the percentages are much higher.
-
That's the point, and that's why I said there are plenty of things you can do to increase your chances, but scientifically, logically, and mathematically, you're dependant on certain prerequisites. The angle I was trying to work must be too abstract, because nobody is getting it. You have zero control over how the pins bounce around, therefore you have zero control over the results. There are a lot of things you can do to improve your chances, but improving your chances and having control over something are totally different. Just like poker, you can have aces vs kings, but is that any guarantee you will win the hand? Yeah, the percentages are in your favor, but you aren't in CONTROL of the cards that come out. If you were in control of the cards coming out, meaning you were choosing them, you could ensure you'd win. Since you aren't, you simply do your best to make your chances the best you can make them. You are either in control or not in control, you are 100% responsible or 0% responsible. It's not a discussion of influence, because that is a secondary factor. If you were in control of the pins falling down, they would all fall on every single shot, but you aren't, so you are in 0% control. Your probability may be 99.9% success, but again is secondary to control.
I would hope you don't think I'm so inept that I think the bowler has absolutely zero to do with the outcome and that you can chuck a ball down the lane and then things magically happen. You think I'm so dumb I don't realize that throwing the ball at the 10 pin wouldn't result in a strike? I wish people would try to figure out what angles somebody is working or what they mean before assuming something so simplistic. OBVIOUSLY the bowler has a significant amount of influence, but they have ZERO control by hard and fast definition.
How many strikes have you gotten hitting the 10 pin?? Of course ability and accuracy count! There just aren't any guarantees that a "perfect" pocket hit scores a strike although the percentages are much higher.
-
While watching the PBA last week, I could have swore I saw Ryan Cimenelli uttering something about physics when he left that 7-10 that cost him the title....I even read Chuck Gardner's lips when he said "damn physics just cost us that one"
-
Obviously you still need to make good shots, the bowlers accuracy does play a part of it, but it doesn't matter how well you throw it if the physics going on aren't working.
I'm getting the feeling alot of what is getting argued is words. You can stand on the lanes, have a perfect release with perfect timing, and all of that good stuff and it all doesn't matter if something between point A and point B has changed with the physics of it.
I get what you are saying Gizmo, lots of things can change that the bowler himself just simply can't see or feel that can change the physics side. Most of the list would sound like some crazy excuse list and we would all point and laugh at anyone that tried to use it as an excuse. Mathematically speaking though, any slight change does change the sum and could possibly change the outcome.
I see it really as two different things, all that stuff we do before the ball hits the lane ( for me thats the actual shot) and then everything else. The most accurate bowler we know of is that robot they use to test balls. It throws a perfect " shot " indefinitely, however it doesn't adjust for the physics part of it therefore it can't throw a perfect game.
I may be wrong but I'm guessing that is what you are arguing Gizmo. You could have someone that could replicate the same footwork, timing, release, and hit the same spot every single time but they still won't always strike. We as bowlers are really doing two different things at the same time, trying to replicate prefection and adjusting for the physics involved. We are human so generally its the first part that causes the problem, but on occasion the physics will get in the way.
-
And by the way, Earl missed shots just like everyone else.
So a bit of track burn can't make the ball "stand up" or "roll out?" Pins can't be off spot? Can't be any carrydown? An absolutely flawless shot off your hand can be an absolute catastrophe at the pins. If flawless shots equalled strikes, EARL would never miss. Again, physics dominate regardless. A flawless shot doesn't equal flawless results. Gotta adjust perspective.
Sorry, but if you have thrown an "an absolutely flawless shot", you will NOT leave a "stone 8 or 9".
I think he meant E.A.R.L. not Earl like in Earl Anthony.
http://www.bowl.com/Equipment_Specs/Equipment_Specs_Home/E_A_R_L__the_Robot/
-
I thought you guys would find this topic interesting and get in a discussion. excellent points
-
The 7/10 that Ciminelli left was the result of a bad pitch. How one throws the ball has everything to do with how the pins are knocked around.
I agree that sometimes you get bad breaks. I agree that feel of the game is important. I just get tired of people making excuses for their failure to execute.
-
Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Yes, it may be splitting hairs to a degree, but that's the point. When you make a bold statement like that, and it's either startling, or even confusing, it gets people to really engage their heads or invest a lot more thought in the article or topic rather than just passively reading. And yes, I would hope that people realize and understand that how you throw the ball definitely matters . . but that physics are still in control. It speaks to me specifically, because a few months ago before I started diving this deep, I always thought that I had a lot more control than that. This all has changed my perspective, so I'm throwing the ball a lot easier now and scoring a lot better because I'm not trying to control everything.
Obviously you still need to make good shots, the bowlers accuracy does play a part of it, but it doesn't matter how well you throw it if the physics going on aren't working.
I'm getting the feeling alot of what is getting argued is words. You can stand on the lanes, have a perfect release with perfect timing, and all of that good stuff and it all doesn't matter if something between point A and point B has changed with the physics of it.
I get what you are saying Gizmo, lots of things can change that the bowler himself just simply can't see or feel that can change the physics side. Most of the list would sound like some crazy excuse list and we would all point and laugh at anyone that tried to use it as an excuse. Mathematically speaking though, any slight change does change the sum and could possibly change the outcome.
I see it really as two different things, all that stuff we do before the ball hits the lane ( for me thats the actual shot) and then everything else. The most accurate bowler we know of is that robot they use to test balls. It throws a perfect " shot " indefinitely, however it doesn't adjust for the physics part of it therefore it can't throw a perfect game.
I may be wrong but I'm guessing that is what you are arguing Gizmo. You could have someone that could replicate the same footwork, timing, release, and hit the same spot every single time but they still won't always strike. We as bowlers are really doing two different things at the same time, trying to replicate prefection and adjusting for the physics involved. We are human so generally its the first part that causes the problem, but on occasion the physics will get in the way.
-
It has a lot to do with how the pins are knocked around, but not everything. If Ciminelli throws that exact same ball 10 more times, I guarantee he doesn't leave the 7-10 every time. Now it's going to be an ugly leave every single time, but it could have just as easily been a 3 pin, an easy spare, and a title. But above all, you're right, it was a bad shot. His result was completely unfortunate, but sometimes you pay the price and sometimes you don't, but he definitely opened himself up to that one.
The 7/10 that Ciminelli left was the result of a bad pitch. How one throws the ball has everything to do with how the pins are knocked around.
I agree that sometimes you get bad breaks. I agree that feel of the game is important. I just get tired of people making excuses for their failure to execute.
-
I agree with Gizmo, after games of 226-213 was shooting at a possible 268 in the 8th frame left the 7-10 on what seems to be pretty good ball ended up striking out 9th and 10th frames for 235 did not change anything on the lane I left the 7-10.
-
Leaving interesting great shot splits is getting more exciting these days, you release the ball get to the pocket, and just hope nothing goes wrong that you cant see.
-
Please don't take this the wrong way. But the article's topic is "Back to the Basics". Yet I see nothing in the article that mentions what these basics in bowling are?
Okay read. Just needs more direction and specifics. Yoda touch is nice. But again...what is it that we bowlers "must unlearn that we have learned".
-
Conceptually and realistically, it's about getting back to a basic perspective. You're right, I should have made that more clear. Lol I got ramble-typing and it got away from me . . but no, I didn't mean specific basic fundamentals or anything. Everybody has gotten so into balls, surfaces, layouts, etc., that a lot of people have confused themselves about a lot of things. It's still really just about paying attention and throwing it down there.
The unlearning part is all the complication and confusion about things that don't matter near as much as they've been built up to mean. So a lot of people have "learned" a lot of technical jibberish, but have lost or missed the point or concept of it all.
Please don't take this the wrong way. But the article's topic is "Back to the Basics". Yet I see nothing in the article that mentions what these basics in bowling are?
Okay read. Just needs more direction and specifics. Yoda touch is nice. But again...what is it that we bowlers "must unlearn that we have learned".