Question: If the USBC dropped the static weight rules.

What exactly would that allow you to do with a ball (layout, ball motion etc.) that you can't do now?


The main one I see is it would give you the option of "not" putting a weight hole in if you don't want one.

I've seen that (and even posted it myself before), but I doubt everyone that would like to see the static rules dropped are wanting to drill up balls just for that reason.

It is really a matter of degree.  Small increases above the current maximums would not be very noticeable on 15 lb balls with high density cores.  However with no limits, you could really dodo up a ball to have some huge impacts on reaction.  If you don't think so watch little kids throw 8 lb balls down the lane.  Top weights can totally take over those balls at slow speeds as the roll down the lane. 

I have talked to old timers who did those kind of things in the pot game hustler environment of the 50's and they told me you could make balls do incredible things with enough dodo weight.  Impact might be unpredictable or uncontrollable, but it would be major

Static weights haven't mattered for a long time. Balance holes can be used to influence ball roll because they actually change the shape of the core (assuming you go deep enough to hit it). If you just put one in to make the ball weigh without drilling into the core, it does nothing to influence reaction.

Let's face it with common sense, when you are dealing with cores that weigh several pounds by themselves, going over on top weight by a 1/4 ounce is like spitting in Lake Superior and issuing a flash flood warning.

Not to mention the chances increasing of damage to equipment.

Quote from: MI 2 AZ on June 25, 2015, 11:08:29 AM

We just had many bowlers come back from Nationals.  I overheard one of them complaining that his spare ball was found to be illegal at Nationals.  Apparently, one of the local drillers drilled it upside down (opposite side of label) and it had almost 6 oz of bottom weight so it had to be drilled out at Nationals.  Problem is, he is a full-roller and now it thumps going down the lane.  I am sure he would be happy if the static rule was thrown out, he could plug the ball and be rid of the thumping.

Couldn't he just have it plugged and redrilled rightside up and weighed properly. Then he most likely wouldnt need the hole.

I was replying in the spirit of the OP.  What If the USBC dropped the static wt requirements.

I really don't know what he is going to do, he is a senior bowler.  You have to remember that the expression "Bowlers are cheap" probably got started with a senior bowler.    If it costs money, it might not get done.  He would have to pay to have the ball completely plugged, including the balance hole on the bottom (or top) and to have it re-drilled correctly.  Not sure if he would want to put that money into a WD plastic ball.  Would it be cheaper to buy a new one?

I really don't know what he is going to do, he is a senior bowler.  You have to remember that the expression "Bowlers are cheap" probably got started with a senior bowler.    If it costs money, it might not get done.  He would have to pay to have the ball completely plugged, including the balance hole on the bottom (or top) and to have it re-drilled correctly.  Not sure if he would want to put that money into a WD plastic ball.  Would it be cheaper to buy a new one?

Given if it's just a White Dot, Yeah it would be better to just buy a new one.