win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Do we really need reactive?  (Read 4678 times)

trash heap

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2648
Do we really need reactive?
« on: August 29, 2016, 08:08:33 PM »
avabobs reply in another topic got me thinking.

Quote from: avabob on August 22, 2016, 04:51:24 PM
Actually a point of clarification.  The ABC did not relax the rules in 1977.  They actually tightened them in 1976, requiring essentially even oil to be applied gutter to gutter.  The rule was referred to as amendment 4.  This rule was very unpopular and not consistently enforced partly due to lack of accurate measuring devices and partly due to variations in interpretation by local secretaries.  It was under this rule that Glenn Allisons famous 900 was disallowed.  The rule was not changed until approximately 1985 when the limited distance dressing rule was introduced.  It allowed oil to applied in any manner but could not be applied our buffed past 28 ( later 24 ) feet. The limited distance dressing rule was changed under the so called system of bowling in 1989.  It allowed long oil, but required at least 3 units of oil to applied out to the gutter.  That is still the rule we have today. 


If USBC would go back to a shorter pattern. Would there be a need for reactive equipment. I would think today's players with a urethane or even plastic ball could score very high on those short conditions. Might be able to extend the length a little further. 

I am sure a THS pattern could be figured out that would work for everyone and we would see the same results we see with reactive in leagues today.

It just seems now days its like a never ending loop. New Ball too good on heavy oil, make new oil that defeats new ball, so another new ball comes out to defeat new oil......and on and on.
 
Do we really need it?
Logged
Talkin' Trash!

 

milorafferty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11188
  • I have a name, therefore no preferred pronouns.
Re: Do we really need reactive?
« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2016, 06:19:51 PM »
Perhaps one of the major reasons for the decline isn't the balls, nor the easy scoring conditions.

The new style "Family Entertainment Centers" in my area are all booming with open play. Families schedule their kids birthday parties and local companies will have company sponsored events for their employees. Young people get together with their dates on Friday and Saturday night for "Glow Bowling" and drinks and generally have a fun time.

But the old school houses that are dumps with water stains on the acoustic ceiling tiles, stained/worn carpet, bathrooms that look like hell and smell like urine, an overall faint odor of stale grease/sweat and walls that are covered with cheesy looking banners from local advertising attempts to squeeze in a few more bucks.

But yea, it's the modern reactive balls and easy scoring conditions that are killing bowling.
Logged
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"

"If you don't stand for our flag, then don't expect me to give a damn about your feelings."

milorafferty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11188
  • I have a name, therefore no preferred pronouns.
Re: Do we really need reactive?
« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2016, 06:21:35 PM »
Yep, my post was off topic...somewhat but it's the same idea of "what's wrong with bowling".
Logged
"If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?"

"If you don't stand for our flag, then don't expect me to give a damn about your feelings."

ignitebowling

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: Do we really need reactive?
« Reply #18 on: August 30, 2016, 07:16:05 PM »
Quote from: milorafferty on August 30, 2016, 06:21:35 PM
Yep, my post was off topic...somewhat but it's the same idea of "what's wrong with bowling".


Agreed, too many were not updated and fell further and further behind the times. Many bowling alleys back in the day were smoked filled bars for adults. Not family oriented. That is not conducive with most people today.
Logged
Ignite your game, and set the lanes on fire. www.facebook.com/ignitebowling  or @ignite_bowling

spmcgivern

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2079
Re: Do we really need reactive?
« Reply #19 on: August 31, 2016, 07:28:28 AM »
Quote from: ignitebowling on August 30, 2016, 07:16:05 PM
Quote from: milorafferty on August 30, 2016, 06:21:35 PM
Yep, my post was off topic...somewhat but it's the same idea of "what's wrong with bowling".


Agreed, too many were not updated and fell further and further behind the times. Many bowling alleys back in the day were smoked filled bars for adults. Not family oriented. That is not conducive with most people today.

Totally agree.   And the costs of updating have gone so high, the local mom and pop centers cannot compete.  They eventually get left behind as relics.

I also feel the conditions and equipment do not have as big an impact as others want you to think.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »