Good read but I'm curious. Is a Pearl really a Pearl???
Back in the early 90s every body would release a solid version of ball X, followed by the pearlized version. The pearlized version had the distinct difference in swirl and appearance in coverstock from the original.
Skip ahead to the 2000s when companies started releasing bowling balls with the same pearl look but It was a solid coverstock. Same for pearlized balls that were dull or looked more solid but distinctly advertised as pearlized.
So my question is. Is the pearlized look of the ball strictly at one time used for distinguishing a difference between the solid counter part? Brunswick made tour versions of different balls like the Danger Zone which used the balls pin color to tell the difference. You had the original, one made for drier lanes ect ect. Same core different covers, same ball color and logo so it looked like people were using the same ball for almost every condition.
So is it really pearlized or is that just the term used for the desired reaction. Is it just a harder cover made to give the ball more length?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
