Author Topic: Pro's using close Pin to Pap? (Read 28607 times)

don coyote · « **on:** May 18, 2021, 02:25:35 PM »

How come I never see the professional bowlers using close(1.5 to 2") Pin to Pap on tour? What do they know that apparently we don't?

One of the local pro shop's I frequent does not recommend urethane but close Pin to Pap instead?

Strider · « **Reply #46 on:** August 14, 2021, 03:01:59 PM »

Thanks for the links. I had already watched the one from JR before. My problem is just like when he first moves in and before he fires it way right. If I had obvious burn to the right all the time the ball would at least be more useful, but I have other equipment that doesn't need that dry to the right and still reacts better. Plus with my slower ball speed, I have to be very careful to not get it right too early. Even a smooth ball like the C4 will over react if you give it enough time. Jamming it to the right isn't something I have much need for. Like you said earlier, maybe on over walled house shots where there is a lot of oil in, but too much (normally) dry to the right. I have nothing to lose, so I guess I'll try smoother before polish. Every step I've made in that direction has been better. Normally I skip some pads on the way to 4000, but I don't think I'll do that here.

Strider · « **Reply #47 on:** September 01, 2021, 07:33:27 AM »

OK, 2 weeks into winter and I'm seeing a bit of a pattern with the two balls.

I had to get my spare ball thumb plugged and redrilled (chipping all the way around) so I practiced a good bit with it and an old Visionary Blue/Green Centaur. I created quite a bit of carry down. The short pin Ringer was too much ball early (leftovers after a senior league), but when the Centaur started wiggling down lane, I could finally move right of where I started with the Ringer and the ball looked great. When I could finally go pretty straight up the boards instead of a lot of left to right, the ball reacted exactly as I would have expected. Smooth and continuous.

Last night on Tungsten (39', 25.6 mL, 6.25/1 ratio) I started pretty close to the gutter with my Lane #1 Tsunami H2O. Of course my team mate threw a purple Hammer pretty much on top of me. This guy loves his urethane and will be using it a LOT this year. Anyway, I got a good game out of the H2O. Fished around a lot the second game. I could hit the pocket, but didn't carry for squat. After a few more frames of struggling the last game I figured I had nothing to lose, moved back right where the H2O squirted in the carry down and threw 7 out of 8 strikes with the Ringer. The moral of the story seems to be that if I can throw it pretty straight through the heads, I love the reaction. I would have thought carry down would kill a near pin axis ball, but this one seems to love it. I thought the Ringer had a pretty mellow cover, but I'm almost tempted to try the same drilling on a much older/weaker ball.

While I was fishing around the second game I also threw the newly polished (1000/2000/3000/4000/Snake Oil) Ordnance C4 quite a bit. I did get a better ball motion than I was seeing before (actually got hook down lane), but it was a 10 pin magnet. I was further inside of where the urethane was being used, so I don't think that was a big factor. This ball has big a major disappointment for me. I've yet to find a lane condition where it was my best option. I may just have to cut my loses and get rid of it.

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #48 on:** September 01, 2021, 11:26:10 AM »

Quote from: Strider on September 01, 2021, 07:33:27 AM

OK, 2 weeks into winter and I'm seeing a bit of a pattern with the two balls.

I had to get my spare ball thumb plugged and redrilled (chipping all the way around) so I practiced a good bit with it and an old Visionary Blue/Green Centaur. I created quite a bit of carry down. The short pin Ringer was too much ball early (leftovers after a senior league), but when the Centaur started wiggling down lane, I could finally move right of where I started with the Ringer and the ball looked great. When I could finally go pretty straight up the boards instead of a lot of left to right, the ball reacted exactly as I would have expected. Smooth and continuous.

Last night on Tungsten (39', 25.6 mL, 6.25/1 ratio) I started pretty close to the gutter with my Lane #1 Tsunami H2O. Of course my team mate threw a purple Hammer pretty much on top of me. This guy loves his urethane and will be using it a LOT this year. Anyway, I got a good game out of the H2O. Fished around a lot the second game. I could hit the pocket, but didn't carry for squat. After a few more frames of struggling the last game I figured I had nothing to lose, moved back right where the H2O squirted in the carry down and threw 7 out of 8 strikes with the Ringer. The moral of the story seems to be that if I can throw it pretty straight through the heads, I love the reaction. I would have thought carry down would kill a near pin axis ball, but this one seems to love it. I thought the Ringer had a pretty mellow cover, but I'm almost tempted to try the same drilling on a much older/weaker ball.

While I was fishing around the second game I also threw the newly polished (1000/2000/3000/4000/Snake Oil) Ordnance C4 quite a bit. I did get a better ball motion than I was seeing before (actually got hook down lane), but it was a 10 pin magnet. I was further inside of where the urethane was being used, so I don't think that was a big factor. This ball has big a major disappointment for me. I've yet to find a lane condition where it was my best option. I may just have to cut my loses and get rid of it.

Glad to hear you were able to have some success with the Ringer. Regarding the C4; your lack of tilt and ball speed probably dont match up to that ball very well. Sounds like you would need to add some axis rotation to get the ball to backend more to help with carry? My opinion watching the C4 go down the lane, is guys with higher ball speed and higher rev rates (two handers especially) would love the C4 because they can get the ball to push and create the down lane motion. With you, I am thinking more like a Burner Solid or Black Raw Hammer as a benchmark ball. They are symmetric solids but the core numbers would favor you more as the rg is higher which should help the ball give you push through the fronts to save energy for down lane without being flippy. Consider that if you are a slower ball speed, rev dominate person, your benchmark ball is not going to be the same as another guy who has faster ball speed and more rev matched or you would have to go with a longer pin to PAP (5.25 - 5.5 inches). My thought though is something like a 30 by 4.5 layout on something like a Burner or Black Raw Hammer.

Strider · « **Reply #49 on:** December 01, 2021, 08:32:47 PM »

OK, we transitioned off the first third using medium length patterns and started short a few weeks ago. For three weeks (Boardwalk II, Radium, and Broadway II) I'm averaging 219 using a 50/50 mix of the short pin Ringer and my Tsunami. I've slowly brought the Ringer down to a somewhat worn 1000 abralon pad. Although I've seen plenty of urethane being thrown all around me (one of my teammates throws a Purple Hammer about 80% of the time), the short pin Ringer is an absolute winner for my game. With the shorter patterns I've been able to move right and float the ball down the gutter (as opposed to when I was having to swing the ball a fair amount when thrown on the "wrong" conditions). It just effortlessly glides through the front part of the lane and goes into a hard roll to the pocket and through the pins. It really keeps you out of trouble since it doesn't have the defined sharper move of a normal drilling. It definitely needs to see the dry though. Pull it into the oil and it will really struggle to do much on the back end. Deflection is not an issue whatsoever; it's finished right over the 8 pin many times. Half pocket hits are just like a half pocket hit with urethane - look for a flat 10. Also because of the extended roll I don't get many messengers. I'm not a power player so I don't get a bunch anyway, but I'd say my chance for them is diminished with the short pin drilling. But considering how many really solid pocket shots I've thrown the past few weeks, it's nothing to complain about. I'm looking forward for the rest of this third.

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #50 on:** December 02, 2021, 12:26:00 PM »

Quote from: Strider on December 01, 2021, 08:32:47 PM

OK, we transitioned off the first third using medium length patterns and started short a few weeks ago. For three weeks (Boardwalk II, Radium, and Broadway II) I'm averaging 219 using a 50/50 mix of the short pin Ringer and my Tsunami. I've slowly brought the Ringer down to a somewhat worn 1000 abralon pad. Although I've seen plenty of urethane being thrown all around me (one of my teammates throws a Purple Hammer about 80% of the time), the short pin Ringer is an absolute winner for my game. With the shorter patterns I've been able to move right and float the ball down the gutter (as opposed to when I was having to swing the ball a fair amount when thrown on the "wrong" conditions). It just effortlessly glides through the front part of the lane and goes into a hard roll to the pocket and through the pins. It really keeps you out of trouble since it doesn't have the defined sharper move of a normal drilling. It definitely needs to see the dry though. Pull it into the oil and it will really struggle to do much on the back end. Deflection is not an issue whatsoever; it's finished right over the 8 pin many times. Half pocket hits are just like a half pocket hit with urethane - look for a flat 10. Also because of the extended roll I don't get many messengers. I'm not a power player so I don't get a bunch anyway, but I'd say my chance for them is diminished with the short pin drilling. But considering how many really solid pocket shots I've thrown the past few weeks, it's nothing to complain about. I'm looking forward for the rest of this third.

Thanks for the update. There is always a place for short pin balls and happy to hear you found the right condition for yours. Have you considered another option for a benchmark ball since the C4 didnt really work for you?

Strider · « **Reply #51 on:** December 02, 2021, 02:53:30 PM »

No, that turd is still clinging to the rim.

Super polished it looked OK on some medium shots, but something else always looked better. I'll try it again in the 1500-3000 abralon range on some longer patterns and see what happens. I just bought a Roto Grip Rubicon UC2 more for opening up medium+ patterns during/after the breakdown. With a touch of surface it might be a decent benchmark ball for me. I'll just have to see how much length/back end I get out of it. It's supposed to be delivered today so I'll throw it on a house shot on Saturday to check the fit and see what it can do.

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #52 on:** December 02, 2021, 05:59:50 PM »

Quote from: Strider on December 02, 2021, 02:53:30 PM

No, that turd is still clinging to the rim. Super polished it looked OK on some medium shots, but something else always looked better. I'll try it again in the 1500-3000 abralon range on some longer patterns and see what happens. I just bought a Roto Grip Rubicon UC2 more for opening up medium+ patterns during/after the breakdown. With a touch of surface it might be a decent benchmark ball for me. I'll just have to see how much length/back end I get out of it. It's supposed to be delivered today so I'll throw it on a house shot on Saturday to check the fit and see what it can do.

Still clinging to the rim huh? LOL!!!! I just bought a Scorpion and put a 30 x 4.5 in it and left it at box finish. Even though it is a hybrid; it is my benchmark right now simply because it comes at 2000 and gives me a really good look at what the lanes are doing. It still clears the fronts pretty well and then just revs up and goes at it exits the pattern without being angular. I believe this could be a good option for you as well for the reasons I just listed not to mention the RG is a little higher to help the ball from reading the front too quickly.

Strider · « **Reply #53 on:** February 09, 2022, 06:48:37 AM »

Since I've kind of commandeered this post...

I finally tried a new surface on the C4. 500 abralon + polish (Snake Oil). Looks like a sheen instead of glossy. Threw it for a game and a half last night on Gateway Arch (42'). So far I like the look. Got pretty easy length and it actually made a nice move at the break point. As the night went on and I had to move deeper I rang of bunch of 10 pins, but at least on the fresh (medium patterns) it looks like something I can use. Next week is Yellow Brick Road (41') - whatever the heck that is, couldn't find it with a quick search.

Bowler19525 · « **Reply #54 on:** February 09, 2022, 07:57:05 AM »

A family member had a PSO that suggested a pin-on-pap layout on an entry level reactive to try and combat slow ball speed. The layout certainly killed any reaction the ball had, but ultimately didn't work very well.

They went to a new PSO that saw the layout and cringed. That PSO plugged the ball and went to a simpler, more traditional "label leverage" type of layout. That layout transformed the ball and made it way more usable.

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #55 on:** February 09, 2022, 09:08:15 AM »

Quote from: Bowler19525 on February 09, 2022, 07:57:05 AM

A family member had a PSO that suggested a pin-on-pap layout on an entry level reactive to try and combat slow ball speed. The layout certainly killed any reaction the ball had, but ultimately didn't work very well.

They went to a new PSO that saw the layout and cringed. That PSO plugged the ball and went to a simpler, more traditional "label leverage" type of layout. That layout transformed the ball and made it way more usable.

As a former PSO; what I would have done in that case is put the pin farther away (more like 6+ inches) from the PAP as opposed to near the PAP. I get what he may have been thinking (take the core out of play and just let the coverstock do all the work?). He still could have done a low flaring layout. The PSO just went the wrong direction.

Bowler19525 · « **Reply #56 on:** February 09, 2022, 10:09:34 AM »

Quote from: TWOHAND834 on February 09, 2022, 09:08:15 AM

Quote from: Bowler19525 on February 09, 2022, 07:57:05 AM
A family member had a PSO that suggested a pin-on-pap layout on an entry level reactive to try and combat slow ball speed. The layout certainly killed any reaction the ball had, but ultimately didn't work very well.

They went to a new PSO that saw the layout and cringed. That PSO plugged the ball and went to a simpler, more traditional "label leverage" type of layout. That layout transformed the ball and made it way more usable.

As a former PSO; what I would have done in that case is put the pin farther away (more like 6+ inches) from the PAP as opposed to near the PAP. I get what he may have been thinking (take the core out of play and just let the coverstock do all the work?). He still could have done a low flaring layout. The PSO just went the wrong direction.

It's always tough, and it seems every PSO has different methodologies. I reached out to Storm's Technical group via email with the specs for this same family member since they will soon be getting a Storm HR Pearl drilled. The Storm Technical group responded and suggested a 4x4x2 layout. Their rationale was the the HR Pearl goes longer by design and wouldn't need to be coupled with a longer pin drilling. Still, 4x4x2 seems like a very strong layout to me for someone with a ball speed of 10mph (measured at the pins.)?

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #57 on:** February 09, 2022, 11:34:19 AM »

Quote from: Bowler19525 on February 09, 2022, 10:09:34 AM

Quote from: TWOHAND834 on February 09, 2022, 09:08:15 AM
Quote from: Bowler19525 on February 09, 2022, 07:57:05 AM
A family member had a PSO that suggested a pin-on-pap layout on an entry level reactive to try and combat slow ball speed. The layout certainly killed any reaction the ball had, but ultimately didn't work very well.

They went to a new PSO that saw the layout and cringed. That PSO plugged the ball and went to a simpler, more traditional "label leverage" type of layout. That layout transformed the ball and made it way more usable.

As a former PSO; what I would have done in that case is put the pin farther away (more like 6+ inches) from the PAP as opposed to near the PAP. I get what he may have been thinking (take the core out of play and just let the coverstock do all the work?). He still could have done a low flaring layout. The PSO just went the wrong direction.

It's always tough, and it seems every PSO has different methodologies. I reached out to Storm's Technical group via email with the specs for this same family member since they will soon be getting a Storm HR Pearl drilled. The Storm Technical group responded and suggested a 4x4x2 layout. Their rationale was the the HR Pearl goes longer by design and wouldn't need to be coupled with a longer pin drilling. Still, 4x4x2 seems like a very strong layout to me for someone with a ball speed of 10mph (measured at the pins.)?

So if this person is using a resin ball and measured at 10mph at the pins, then they must be around 12-13 at release? I agree with you. IMO, a 4 inch pin on a Hyroad for someone with low ball speed is pretty strong. However, how high is that person's rev rate? They could be at 180 or 350 and that makes a huge difference in what layout you would go with when matching up someone with ball speed that low. Plus, factor in that the core is a pretty high RG. R2S with high RG equates to easy length. So yeah. The mindset is the ball by design already gets down the lane pretty easily and they want to at least give them some help with the layout they chose. If it were me, I would still go 5 inches to play it safe simply because the cover can be adjusted to help bring the breakpoint closer to them. If you put the core in a stronger position and the ball already comes at 4000 plus polish, how would you get more length by cover adjustment if the ball is rolling too quickly?

Author Topic: Pro's using close Pin to Pap? (Read 28607 times)

don coyote

Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Strider

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Strider

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

TWOHAND834

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Strider

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

TWOHAND834

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Strider

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

TWOHAND834

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Strider

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Bowler19525

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

TWOHAND834

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

Bowler19525

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?

TWOHAND834

Re: Pro's using close Pin to Pap?