All the complaining about USBC's various issues doesn't change the fact that Storm screwed up, and they're just making it worse by keeping the issue in the spotlight instead of moving on.
That's definitely your take on it, but you don't speak for me with those words.
What makes this a different situation than General Mills having to recall a truckload of cereal boxes is twofold, for me: One, the bowling industry isn't rich enough to have to take multimillion-dollar hits over miniscule errors in production. The companies that support this sport are not rich enough.
But the much greater problem here is a sanctioning body that will neither recognize that fact, nor take common-sense steps to find middle ground between fixing the problem and causing more problems through either shoddy testing on its own part, or a lack of transparency with its stakeholders (i.e., us, the card-carrying members).
Amazing how those people upset about Storm and this issue don't say a single thing about the FDA when it comes to that box of Cocoa Puffs, Cheerios, and Kix are recalled due to those errors in production, and they are the governing body over food, let alone the USDA.
You're trying to have it both ways in your example, but can't. Either be upset about both the General Mills and Storm, or be upset about the USBC and the FDA. If you're upset about one and not the other, then welcome to your own hypocrisy.
An earlier post talked about how Motiv fixed the Jackal problem. Well, that's half right. Motiv was nearly bankrupted over that. Moreover, Motiv didn't really have a choice, because the USBC doesn't answer to anyone, and too many of its members would give the USBC carte blanche to operate however it wishes. I see some of that attitude in this thread, including your post.
Then again, carte blanche to the FDA because of General Mills' "miniscule errors"?
The way to have fixed this was to notify Storm -- and Motiv, and Hammer -- of issues and have them fix those issues immediately in the production run and going forward, but not forcing the old equipment out, and putting the companies on the hook for millions in reparations to bowlers that most of the bowlers didn't really want to have to receive in the first place. Jeff Richgels has a fantastic article on 11thFrame right now where he interviews three guys qualified to speak about the testing from an engineering standpoint, and the overarching point is that balls out of spec by fractions don't offer enough performance advantage for it to matter in the first place. It's not like the Storm equipment was punching 60. It certainly wasn't enough of a margin to cause the fallout that it has. But there's an attitude within the USBC that they can basically do what they want and no one will hold them accountable for collateral damage so long as they get to whip out the stick and swing it around.
Yet by contrast, Ron Hickland, who not only interviewed the person that did all of the durometer testing at EBI, but is himself is experienced in the manufacturing and testing of balls from an engineering standpoint (hell, he created the gas mask core), said effectively the opposite and that the USBC was indeed correct in their decision to sin bin the balls that they binned. But Riggs is right and Hickland is wrong?
Oh wait; Riggs himself is a Storm Staffer, so there obviously isn't any bias there.
And before saying the same about Hickland, he left EBI in 2015, well before the the Purple Hammer was created, let alone the BoB buyout.
And even if people want to argue against the science and try to claim that these balls did offer clear and nefarious advantages to the bowlers, resin balls take themselves out of bags after a couple hundred games at most, anyway.
Umm... yet they get replaced with similar because of how great the ball works for the bowler that they want either the same ball again or similar. But the issue isn't what the balls do over time; the issue is what they are doing when they are at their best, and fresh out of the box. That's what they got pinged on. Going 34 weeks and 200 games down the road is irrelevant at that point.
But then again, we have a PBA bowler who complained about the same with urethane, which for all intents and purposes was 5-6 years outside of people's bags, and got it banned. Further than that, with the PBA, he got 40 years of balls banned.
Again, can't have it both ways, where urethane gets banned for being its best over the journey, while saying resin takes itself out of the bag after a couple hundred games. Hell, I went 6 years with using a Scandal, Scandal Pearl, Mission Unknown, and Maverick in my bag, and none of them lost anything in performance: no resurfacing, sock to get oil out, or anything major; the only thing used was PowerHouse finish, or Clean'n'Dull.
Assuming that the balls landed in the hands of bowlers skilled enough to actually do something with them when they were fresh, the problem would have taken care of itself. But like I just said, that would be counter to what the experts quoted in Richgels' article had to say about it.
My perspective as a bowler is that the USBC's first priority in all things is to copy a doctor's oath: "First, do no harm." They objectively failed that test here miserably. And Storm is not "making it worse" -- if anything, if Storm is able to pressure the USBC to think twice before going down this road again in the future, then go Storm, go.
Then you would agree that the Purple Hammer shouldn't have been banned, nor a 2-year rolling urethane ban in the PBA, the Jackal should be back in, the Gamebreaker should be back in, everyone's robot arm gear should be back in, soakers should be back in, and everyone should not have any problem with it whatsoever, despite their complaining about it.
Then also consider this; if the KPBA, JPBA, and the WTBA come up with the same results as the USBC, then what is Storm's recourse? Bully them into submission because Storm is too big to fail? We see where that got us with Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, MCI/Worldcom, Arthur Andersen, Enron, and Tyco.
But I digress.
BL.
