I deleted the other topic.

What is the purpose of a full armswing?

I went to the bowling center last night. I watched the last game being bowled across the lanes.

The thing I noticed most was at least 70% of the league bowlers had a very short back swings.

The other ting I noticed was the other bowlers that had higher back swings (parallel to the floor) a very large percentage of them put less revs on the ball than those with shorter back swings. Only a small percentage of the high back swing bowlers had high revs.

What was interesting with these short back swings, I would see these guys putting the ball down their mark. Stringing 4 to 6 strikes in a row. Speed varied amongst these bowlers too.

So it got me question things. To have a good armswing and release, is it neccessary to have that high back swing we see in the articles and manuals?

OR

Is there something to this short swing?

First, I would take issue with your observation on high back swings and lack of revs.  High back swings promote more ball speed, but at the highest level of competition, most of those guys also have lots of revs.   With the amount of friction available today, it takes revs and ball speed to best carry.  Most guys with low backswings don't get the amount of leverage necessary for good ball speed, although they may match up well on house shots where you can often get away with lower speed, and lower revs.  Don't confuse the amount of hook with higher rev rates.  You can hook the lane a lot with axis rotation and low ball speed without a high rev rate.  I think this is what you are seeing from the low backswings.   

A bowlers swing length is illusionary and predicated on many factors, plus leverage is created by the bowlers legs as well as ball speed...not always length or height of swing