I saw a post a while back complaining about how cookie cutter all the staff ball reviews seem to be, them basically being here's a bunch of technical stuff that may or may not mean a thing to you and then a more articulate version of, "oh wow, best ball ever!"  I'm about to write my reviews for the Sky Rocket and Optimus Solid, and really wanted to take those comments to heart and try to write a review that will be relevant.  However, there are also a few things the reader needs to keep in perspective:

Just because the ball is good or bad for me doesn't mean it will be the same for you.

Technical information as far as layout and surface prep are virtually useless information due to a myriad of variables without any further explanation or comparison.   

Staffers are usually people who are knowledgeable enough that they can virtually guarantee themselves a good ball reaction through layout and surface prep that works for them and fits their game.  Every review they write could be the honest truth, and let's face it, everything looks good on a house shot. 

So what are the things that you look for most in a review?  What do you consider important information, and what do you think just clutters everything up? 

I can imagine some of the work that goes into a ball review and I'm sure there are portions that I can't even think of that are a lot of work. Here are a few things that irk me the most with ball reviews:

Don't ever copy and paste anything from the manufactures website.
Don't tell me it's a ball everyone needs in there bag
If your doing multiple reviews don't tell us it's the greatest ball ever and then follow with the next review and guess what it's the greatest ever too!!
Try to avoid whatever cliché this seasons "buzz word" is i.e. hook in a box, continuation, et al.
Don't make obvious lies like telling us a heavy oil ball performs great on conditions we can see it laboring on

A few things I like to see:

Show us some shots that missed so we can see the recovery or hold
Show us a shot or two where the ball didn't strike
real comparisons vs. the ball it's meant to replace
Let us know your stats and the conditions being bowled on

If you really want to do top notch vids:

Show the ball on some sport patterns in addition to THS
Have bowlers with multiple styles throwing the ball

Most of all be Honest
If it doesn't match up for you tell us. Big part of the reason we respect Jeff Richgels is we can see if he doesn't match up he just tell you so and why. The biggest thing is just don't be one of the guys who copies the text from the manufactures web site adds greatest ball ever and then shows 5 shots of the ball striking on some random condition
 

Nothing wrong with copying and pasting some information from the website.  What I think needs to be avoided are the opinion based information you get, keep it fact based.

Technical data along with any information that may describe where it lands in the line-up will always be appreciated.  If for you it doesn't fit where the manufacturer thinks it does, then explain where you would put it and why.

As far as videos are concerned, for me, showing a game's worth of shots is irrelevant.  However, showing the ball being thrown on different parts of the lane would be beneficial.  Show the ball being thrown outside to see how it reacts in the dirt (over-reacts or smooth), the same with playing deep inside.  I will agree not every shot shown needs to be a strike. 

Also, the two games described by Bowler19525 would most like be an indication of the ability of the bowler to reproduce shots more than the consistency of the bowling ball.

In practice, "move product" > honest reviews (not for everyone but for 95%).

Which is why car commercials should show their vehicles sitting in traffic not on some obstacles course.

I will try and make a video wednesday of my Einstein I've been throwing.  A typical strike version followed by the anything goes version and see which is preferred.

There's an old saying, "one man's trash is another man's treasure".    Plus another old saying "there's a fool born every minute".

Also, the two games described by Bowler19525 would most like be an indication of the ability of the bowler to reproduce shots more than the consistency of the bowling ball.

To a degree, yes.  However it would also show the forgiveness of a ball when it is pulled inside or sent out too far.  That is more of interest to a lot of people when looking at reaction videos of new balls.  "How much will this ball let me get away with?"

If everyone had 100% accurate shots we would all be pros and throwing strike after strike   That's where the technology comes in and helps compensate for our accuracy issues.

Adding to this topic.

Other words and phrases to stay away from....

"I think this ball is going to fit well between Ball #1 and Ball #2 of my arsenal".

or

"This ball is going to be good ball along with Ball #3"

Any statements that refer to using the ball in the future is worthless. How about coming back after a few weeks of real competition, then give a review of the ball.

A review should never be written about a ball on its first journey out on the lanes. I don't care to read how your destroying the pocket during practice.

It doesn't have to be from tournaments, a review can include league play. There are plenty of league only bowlers out there that would be interested in a review based on league play.

Not asking you to take notes during competition, but after the dust settles, put some words down about your new ball before leaving the center for the night.