Author Topic: Was Bill Taylor right? (Read 3665 times)

Juggernaut · « **on:** July 05, 2009, 01:55:45 PM »

Since the notice of his death, I've been reading up on him, AND his theories on bowling/scoring.

It would seem that, even as early as the 1950's, that he was already talking about technological advancements in bowling allowing higher and higher scoring while requiring less and less from the participants in order to reach those scores.

He was called a nut, a crackpot, and a fool full of useless, baseless theories with no proof. The A.B.C. looked at him more as a nuisance than a benefactor, and continually downplayed the role "modernization" was playing in artificially inflating the scores. From pins, to lane surfaces, to ball technology, he warned them to limit these factors frm the very beginning.

Now we have lighter, double voided pins with higher centers of gravity and more resilient coatings, making them livlier and easier to knock over than ever before. We have lanes designed to have a "perfect" surface, and oils designed to maximize that surface, along with "legal" oiling patterns that make it easier to hit the pocket. And, when you do hit the pocket these days, it is usually with a reactive resin BOMB, which hits the pins MUCH harder than any RUBBER or PLASTIC ball EVER did.

As an example, I use myself. Back in March, I had a job change which precludes me bowling on a league. I finished my last league up in early May and haven't touched a ball in almost two SOLID MONTHS.

I went bowling today, shooting 6 games in a recreational, open play setting, using 14lb equipment. With NO PRACTICE, and WITHOUT BOWLING IN TWO MONTHS, I proceeded to shoot 700 for the first three games, them 646 fr the last three.

There is NO WAY I should've been able to do that. I'm pretty decent, but I'm pretty rusty as well. Bad shots that had NO BUSINESS carrying, struck with almost predictability. Wall shots, messengers, pins bouncing off walls, rolling around the deck and taking out everything. Yet, I could tell I wasn't throwing it all that good and that my timing is off.

I love to score well, but this was ridiculous and far too easy. All I had to do was just get it close and watch the BOMBS explode, BOMBS that thirty years ago wouldn't have even been firecrackers, much less BOMBS.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we should've listened a little more closely.
--------------------
Good transactions list in my profile

"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

BWDavy · « **Reply #16 on:** July 08, 2009, 10:14:59 AM »

Juggernaut is right, but then so is JessN16

Juggernaut is right in that the ABC should have listened to Taylor when he first started to expouse the theory behind the technology and the effect on scoring and its eventual effect on participant numbers.

However, JessN16 is right as well, purely because of the lack of action all those years ago, the technology horse has bolted. Any attempt to back trqack bowling technology would result in the loss of all those bowlers who have become so accustomed to the soft environment and who are unwilling or unable to adjust to tougher scoring environments
--------------------
www.900global.com

If life is like a box of chocolates, what do you do if you don't like chocolate?

Edited on 7/8/2009 10:17 AM

Gonz · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2009, 09:02:48 PM »

Nothing more to add as many varied and outstanding points have been made.

Great thread!!

Gonz-

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #18 on:** July 10, 2009, 10:04:42 PM »

It must help to bowl some where decent. The equipment makes the world, but so do advancements in drilling said equipment and bowlers ability.

The PBA plastic ball challenge had inflated scores to an extant. Notice every ball these guys were throwing had the pin above or below the fingers, a pin distance of 2-4 inches from the cg(which use to not exist till what the 80s or later)and that CG was kicked positive and had a weight hole on or around their PAP to get more hook and earlier roll.

I mention this to paint a picture. More and more younger and older people in the sport are (wanting, and doing) putting a lot more revs on the ball. This equals power, area, and more carry.

This also leads to more scores. Just like we have much bigger, stronger, athletes in all sports we have a bit of the same for bowling. This to must be taken into account for scores. People want more hook. Some need a lot of help from the equipment some don't. This isn't just here but every where in bowling.(global, just check youtube)

Back to the other tech advances with lanes, pins, oil patterns and balls. They have a big effect as well. But I bowl in a newer house that can't keep the same oil pattern more then a few weeks.(after 5+ years) It always changes and not because they try to which is very sad.

I say that because even though you haven't bowlerd in awhile and apparently sprayed the lane to shoot what you did, what do you normally shoot during leagues? How often have you come in throwing the ball great and never catch a break to shoot 630? The difference between most bowlers who average 190-220 is spares. Those bowlers who average higher do strike a lot but they also rarely open. If you shoot 700-646 you have to strike but you also have to make a lot of spares. That comes with skill, and being able to repeat.

Now your due to keep practicing and the first week of league shoot 600-630 because of single pins and no carry all night. For me the bowling Gods will give, and they will take away. Some nights you carry the world throwing junk,other nights you are zoned in and never get the carry you think you should. It is a sick and twisted sport that way.

Good post juggernaut.
--------------------
" hand, don't step on the lanes without some "

JohnP · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2009, 10:44:31 AM »

quote:
I mention this to paint a picture. More and more younger and older people in the sport are (wanting, and doing) putting a lot more revs on the ball. This equals power, area, and more carry.

In the rubber/plastic ball days there were a lot of crankers. But the great majority of them weren't accurage enough to hit the pocket regularly. With today's lane patterns (blocks) you don't have to be accurate, regardless of what the coverstock is. Stand left, pitch it right, hit the wall and crush the pocket. Put a flat or slightly crowned pattern, with no dry boards, back out and you'll see these bowlers drop from the 220's to the 170's where they belong, and accuracy will again rule. Of course, I'm just daydreaming, this "ain't gonna happen". -- JohnP

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #20 on:** July 11, 2009, 03:52:33 PM »

Maybe there were some but it couldn't be much because it wasn't till people like Marshall Holman and Mark Roth that it appeared to become popular. How many people were throwing the ball like them on tv at that time?

Their rev rate is still far less then pros like Tommy Jones and Wess Marlott.
I say that to mean that there are, in my opinion far more bowlers in this time able to generate more revs then there where back at that time.

You are also dreaming to say that their weren't Christmas tree shots back then as well. That didn't just happen recently. I've talk with those who have been around the game for a long time in my area and held previous state records and they where great bowlers who were very accurate but they had area too.

I asked them where was the shot to play and they would all say off the gutter. The lanes didn't change nearly as much and you would have to play off the gutter and slowly move in.

I've heard plenty of stories of guys swinging the ball out to the one board and bringing it back. Now they weren't doing it way left of center as some do today but they were still able to cover boards and have some area.

Equipment has made a difference there is no ifs ands of buts. I also think that things weren't as hard as everyone remembers. I also think bowling alleys have improved in quality as well to help with scoring. Newer, better maintained equipment compared to no telling what back in the day. Their are too many factors to say it is all equipment and equipment only. In general we are more knowledgeable(bowlers,and pro shop personal) and that makes a difference as well.

Where I bowl when it is consistent it is flooded out side of 5 to the gutters. 12 to 5 is medium oil, in the middle is the heaviest. Decent length pattern with a little backends. This is when they get it right. You can not play this shot with any kind of ball speed because it will not finish. You can not miss right of 7 and get better then a seven count.(buy the 3rd game you can play around 7-5 because the lanes open up some) Bowlers still score well here and average well here.

The biggest concern is always the approaches. Are they waxed or not?(furniture wax) Yeah not fun to deal with week in and week out.

--------------------
" hand, don't step on the lanes without some "

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #21 on:** July 11, 2009, 06:29:00 PM »

quote:
In my city in 1986 there was one guy averaging 225. The next year when they went to short oil, there were 35 guys averaging 225 or better. By 1990 there were 15 or so guys averaging 230.

I think it really boils down to oil, oil, oil. After a while if there is no oil, people use plastic or urethane. If there is way too much oil, resin does not even make a difference.

Urethane hooks. Even with oil, it will hook/arch. Not skid snap. Lots of dry or longer oil would lower scores some.

I've seen guys in Texas at TCBA on burnt lanes with the biggest hooking equipment that can find hooking the whole lane withplenty of speed and scoring 220+. It's all in what you are use to.

With flooded lanes like at nationals you get some guys with grit to burn a line to score off of that. There is always a way. Thats why I say part of it is our knowledge as well. We have evolved a lot as bowlers.
--------------------
" hand, don't step on the lanes without some "

justdale · « **Reply #22 on:** July 11, 2009, 06:42:14 PM »

The proprietor isn't going to bend over backward anymore to get his/her leagues filled, not when they can have open play at $4+ per game, plus he could care less about oiling for open play.

Also, lets not forget about those annoying birthday parties, a proprietor would rather rape his open play customer than have to listen to a bunch of league bowlers complain about how they didn't score as well as they should've.
--------------------
Dale Williams
Columbia 300 Utah Amateur Staff

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2009, 10:26:22 PM »

I second that.
--------------------
" hand, don't step on the lanes without some "

Author Topic: Was Bill Taylor right? (Read 3665 times)

Juggernaut

Was Bill Taylor right?

BWDavy

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

Gonz

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

kidlost2000

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

JohnP

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

kidlost2000

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

kidlost2000

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

justdale

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?

kidlost2000

Re: Was Bill Taylor right?