BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: morpheus on March 19, 2016, 02:49:11 PM
-
Stumbled across this on Facebook...
https://www.change.org/p/united-states-bowling-recertify-the-jackal-and-jackal-carnage-for-usbc-play
-
You gave to listen to hear...or it won't matter
-
The USBC is likely to reverse this Jackal decision just as soon as they reverse their decision their Glenn Allison/900's decision.
The USBC is slightly right of and more conservative than the Catholic Church who took 800 years to reverse their decision about Galileo.
-
The USBC is likely to reverse this Jackal decision just as soon as they reverse their decision their Glenn Allison/900's decision.
The USBC is slightly right of and more conservative than the Catholic Church who took 800 years to reverse their decision about Galileo.
Agreed, I think they forgot who they work for...#AFutureForMembership
-
If 500,000, out of the approximately 800,000 USBC members, signed that petition, they still would make up some excuse as to why it shouldn't be done.
-
If 500,000, out of the approximately 800,000 USBC members, signed that petition, they still would make up some excuse as to why it shouldn't be done.
Very true, but I think it's important that membership speak loudly because the USBC hasn't been listening for a long time and it's time for a wake up call! #AFutureForMembership #WhoDoesUSBCWorkFor
-
I signed it cuz the whole thing is out of hand. Ya know motiv made the mistake, so who cares what happens to them.
But to make the bowlers pay the price? I got every jackal owner I know, upset, confused, asking 'how is it their fault' going on.
Most of em said screw the USBC and bowled with the ball during league...they could care less..
-
You would have a better shot at winning Powerball than that ever happening. You have to remember that it's a struggle for them to even get sanction cards out in a timely manner that bowlers pay $20 for in late August/early September.
As for them working for us, the majority could care less because it is run like some exclusive country club only for the select few.
Now, I can see the Carnage being removed, but the Jackal was a witch hunt, plain and simple. If it was six months, I could understand. But a year and a half?
-
The whole situation was a witch hunt...from the questionable start to the asinine decision
How anyone can trust or believe in the governing body astonishes me
-
The whole situation was a witch hunt...from the questionable start to the asinine decision
How anyone can trust or believe in the governing body astonishes me
You can't trust the governing body
-
A lot of people complain that USBC never does anything or ignores things. So know the have penalized the ball company a fine & probation & banned 2 Illegal bowling balls and people are know complaining they went to far. Sorry if the balls are out of spec they do not belong in competition ( an if used after 3/16/16 the game can be forfeited & a person could be & should be disqualified from a tournament for using the banned bowling balls). An this all FALLS ON THE BALL COMPANY for a lack of quality control. Especially when you flirt with the top end of the spec #.
-
Do you honestly understand the variance they're creating this over? It's less than the thickness of a piece of paper and any other form of manufacturing there is a variance of tolerance...they are non compliant due to an absolute...and its really hurting not only Motiv but the bowkers as usual...
Here's two different scenarios...any core after drilling can have the dynamics altered in drastic ways...one where the diff can be completely eliminated or one where the diff can be doubled...
And you can do more damage, by taking 80 grit to a cover than a diff that is over by a few 1000's of an inch...
This is a blatant abuse of power...many better ways this could of been dealt with
-
I agree with Rico.
It has been already been proven after drilling the P4 hole depending upon distance will increase your Diff. almost nearly triple.
You don't like this post. Then just ask your friend Phil C...... Or Mo P.
-
Rico....you have much more insight into the bowling industry as me and probably have forgotten more about bowling than I will ever know, but...as a Risk Manager at a bank, I know that you have to have limits and cutoffs and you have to stick to those numbers. If the USBC allows someone to exceed the diff, than how about the pro that goes over the foul line by 1/32 of an inch? Whether its 1/32 of an inch or 10 feet, the bowler is still over the foul line and trips the buzzer, causing a 0 for that shot. If we would allow a bowler to go past the foul line by 1/32 of an inch, then the next bowler would want it to be ok to go over by 1/16 of an inch, and so on. Once you allow a rule to be circumvented, you allow any rule open for discussion to circumvention and your rules, laws, and regulations lose credibility and are impossible to enforce.
I drilled for years, was on Track staff, Hammer staff, and MoRich staff, and from my time with Mo and Del I know and understand how little .01 diff is, especially with mass bias balls and the super advanced covers we have today, but there has to be a cutoff somewhere, arbitrary or not.
-
Do you honestly understand the variance they're creating this over? It's less than the thickness of a piece of paper and any other form of manufacturing there is a variance of tolerance...they are non compliant due to an absolute...and its really hurting not only Motiv but the bowkers as usual...
Here's two different scenarios...any core after drilling can have the dynamics altered in drastic ways...one where the diff can be completely eliminated or one where the diff can be doubled...
And you can do more damage, by taking 80 grit to a cover than a diff that is over by a few 1000's of an inch...
This is a blatant abuse of power...many better ways this could of been dealt with
BINGO!!! USBC calls Motiv and says this is what we found here is your punishment, you don't get to fix this without us dropping the hammer on you that's not good at all.
-
Rico....you have much more insight into the bowling industry as me and probably have forgotten more about bowling than I will ever know, but...as a Risk Manager at a bank, I know that you have to have limits and cutoffs and you have to stick to those numbers. If the USBC allows someone to exceed the diff, than how about the pro that goes over the foul line by 1/32 of an inch? Whether its 1/32 of an inch or 10 feet, the bowler is still over the foul line and trips the buzzer, causing a 0 for that shot. If we would allow a bowler to go past the foul line by 1/32 of an inch, then the next bowler would want it to be ok to go over by 1/16 of an inch, and so on. Once you allow a rule to be circumvented, you allow any rule open for discussion to circumvention and your rules, laws, and regulations lose credibility and are impossible to enforce.
I drilled for years, was on Track staff, Hammer staff, and MoRich staff, and from my time with Mo and Del I know and understand how little .01 diff is, especially with mass bias balls and the super advanced covers we have today, but there has to be a cutoff somewhere, arbitrary or not.
+1 rules n rules why other companies gotta play under the limit while USBC allows one company to exceed the limit. Why even have a limit let's just let everyone pass it.
If I was to offer a solution I would ban the balls from production and actually charge a decent fine not 16000 which is little IMO. But allow USBC member's who already own the ball to continue in leagues only. Basically im trying to say punish motiv hard enough to deter other companies from trying to break rules. Although I don't see anything wrong with what USBC did because naturally in society if something is illegal naturally you should ban it or enforce the rules.
-
Ken
I agree. I think there was a better way to handle the announcement and the subsequent banning of the Jackals...but regardless, the ball is past the allowed limit that all other companies (supposedly) play by. Witch hunt or not (sounds like it was), a rule is a rule regardless of how little or how much the rule is broken by.
If you go 36 in a 35 MPH zone, you can get a speeding ticket, so can the person going 45 in the same 35 zone.
If I had ball at Nationals that weighed out at 16 pounds and 1 ounce, is it overweight and illegal? YES. Does it matter? Nope, the ball either needs weight taken out or I cannot use it.
If a ball has 3.1 ounces of side weight, is it illegal? YEP. I need to remove weight.
Does anyone really think a ball that is an ounce past 16# or an ounce past 3 ounces of side weight makes any difference in ball reaction? Not for me. But yet, they are rules and I need to meet those rules.
-
Ken
I agree. I think there was a better way to handle the announcement and the subsequent banning of the Jackals...but regardless, the ball is past the allowed limit that all other companies (supposedly) play by. Witch hunt or not (sounds like it was), a rule is a rule regardless of how little or how much the rule is broken by.
If you go 36 in a 35 MPH zone, you can get a speeding ticket, so can the person going 45 in the same 35 zone.
If I had ball at Nationals that weighed out at 16 pounds and 1 ounce, is it overweight and illegal? YES. Does it matter? Nope, the ball either needs weight taken out or I cannot use it.
If a ball has 3.1 ounces of side weight, is it illegal? YEP. I need to remove weight.
Does anyone really think a ball that is an ounce past 16# or an ounce past 3 ounces of side weight makes any difference in ball reaction? Not for me. But yet, they are rules and I need to meet those rules.
Yessir glad to see reasonable people. on bowling ball exchange forum they got some MOTIV backers who claim their not bias but come on now how can any solution not punishing MOTIV be a solution
-
Ken
I agree. I think there was a better way to handle the announcement and the subsequent banning of the Jackals...but regardless, the ball is past the allowed limit that all other companies (supposedly) play by. Witch hunt or not (sounds like it was), a rule is a rule regardless of how little or how much the rule is broken by.
If you go 36 in a 35 MPH zone, you can get a speeding ticket, so can the person going 45 in the same 35 zone.
If I had ball at Nationals that weighed out at 16 pounds and 1 ounce, is it overweight and illegal? YES. Does it matter? Nope, the ball either needs weight taken out or I cannot use it.
If a ball has 3.1 ounces of side weight, is it illegal? YEP. I need to remove weight.
Does anyone really think a ball that is an ounce past 16# or an ounce past 3 ounces of side weight makes any difference in ball reaction? Not for me. But yet, they are rules and I need to meet those rules.
The difference is when your ball is over weight it CAN be removed, this issue effected a company production as well as cost them a lot of money. Not even a good comparison. When you come in and say Bam here is your punishment its not right, not good business.
-
Jammin...the weight might be able to be removed, but the end result is the same, is it not? All are rules by the USBC for bowling. The ball is illegal.
I never said I agreed with the way the USBC handled the banning...but in the end, an ounce overweight, an extra ounce of side weight, how about a ball with a low RG lower than the allowable limit (why the V2 cannot be produced anymore), a pin that is too light, you went 1/32 of an inch over the foul line...whatever it is, there is a rule in the rule book that states what you can and cannot do, regardless of whether the ball, pin, or whatever it is can be altered or not. It is very clear...an undrilled ball cannot have a diff greater than .060. The Jackal exceeded it, the ball does not meet USBC specs.
I still do not understand why so many people, regardless of how archaic or stupid the rule in reality really is, think it is ok to circumvent the rule.
If Rico ran for USBC president and had the rule removed, I would vote for him. I agree the extra diff is so small someone like me will never see the difference, but it is still a rule.
-
Motiv has already stated this will cost them about $1 million, $16,000 from USBC is possible but probably not likely since that would be an even bigger d$%k move not necessary.
The original Jackal ball had been out a year and a half. Just leave it be, and stop the Carnage from production and leave them to recall and replace it.
Now you have bowlers, who are cheap cry babies, complaining about how they are wronged because Motiv isn't reimbursing drilling charges etc. Making a bigger mess out of a bad situation that benefits no one.
Any ball ever produced with a diff of 0.060 will likely have variances the same as the original Jackal. Just to get an idea go to www.123bowl.com and in the search put 0.060
Those balls are all in use and the world of bowling managed to survive. If you think all of them listed are on point for 0.0600000 then you are living in a fantasy world. Sometimes a little common sense in problem solving goes a long way.
-
I would love to know how the Jackal core has been used in 5 balls spanning roughly 4 years and it's never been out of compliance before. Would also like to know how their field testing never caught it and how many have been field tested with this core as part of their certification process over the last 4 years. And finally, how many other manufacture's balls have been field tested and if any were found out of compliance. If it turns out some balls were anonymously sent as many have said, does field testing even occur regularly? All I ever hear from USBC leadership is how transparent they are, well something about this seems a bit off and there's no explanation coming from them that would prove all manufacturers are being monitored for compliance on a regular basis through field testing.
-
Jammin...the weight might be able to be removed, but the end result is the same, is it not? All are rules by the USBC for bowling. The ball is illegal.
I never said I agreed with the way the USBC handled the banning...but in the end, an ounce overweight, an extra ounce of side weight, how about a ball with a low RG lower than the allowable limit (why the V2 cannot be produced anymore), a pin that is too light, you went 1/32 of an inch over the foul line...whatever it is, there is a rule in the rule book that states what you can and cannot do, regardless of whether the ball, pin, or whatever it is can be altered or not. It is very clear...an undrilled ball cannot have a diff greater than .060. The Jackal exceeded it, the ball does not meet USBC specs.
I still do not understand why so many people, regardless of how archaic or stupid the rule in reality really is, think it is ok to circumvent the rule.
If Rico ran for USBC president and had the rule removed, I would vote for him. I agree the extra diff is so small someone like me will never see the difference, but it is still a rule.
You keep beating the same horse, just changing your real world reasoning. Its not as cut and dry as you make it out. Variances happen is real world manufacturing, so you think its all right to cripple a company over this? If you owned Motiv you would not like this to happen I understand its the rule but its a rule that is changed once you drill a ball you know this.
I just don't like the way they just dropped the bomb without some form of compromise and reasoning beyond the numbers..
-
Kid...I do agree. I have an AMB Centaur...the diff is greater than .060, but was produced prior to the USBC diff adjustment. I also have an Immortal, with almost a .080 diff. I am sure there are more out there than just me using these balls and others right now when a new ball cannot have that much undrilled diff.
But....the manufacturers know the rules about what the new balls can and cannot have/do. Just like how gasoline used to have lead in it...but now it doesn't. Can a car made back in the days that used lead gas still be on the road? Yes. But that does not mean it is ok for a gasoline company to start making gas with lead in it again. The rules changed and the company must meet the rules set for today, not what it was before.
I think there should be field testing of every ball from every company. Just because company X sent you a few balls that had an diff of XYZ does not mean that is what the ball will have in production. What if the company on purpose sent test balls that would pass but the subsequent balls released for consumers did not? Any company could do this knowing the USBC would not field test. Only way to stop this is random inspections/field tests of every ball from every company.
If the other ball companies have complied with the new production rules, the USBC cannot let a ball from a company to stay in production, regardless of how long it has been out. What does that tell the other manufacturers? If you produce a ball that we do not find out for a year after it has been in production is actually illegal, we will allow you to keep it in play? You can't do that.
I am not a cheap crybaby. But when I have to pay a fee, a fine, or whatever because I did something wrong, I pay it. I did nothing wrong in this situation. My pro shop did nothing wrong in this situation, so why should I or the pro shop pay to help someone else fix their mistake? Do you start a GoFundMe to help pay a speeding ticket because you feel you shouldn't have to pay it? Nope, I pay it because I screwed up. Motiv screwed up because either they had no idea the balls rolling off the line exceeded .060 diff when undrilled or they knowingly were producing balls that exceeded USBC regs. I just don't understand how Motiv could not know.
-
Wowsers we are the guys that receive a speeding ticket or w.e infraction we pay it or do w.e necessary to follow rules, while others if they receive a speeding ticket or infraction, well you know fill in the blanks haha
-
Wowsers we are the guys that receive a speeding ticket or w.e infraction we pay it or do w.e necessary to follow rules, while others if they receive a speeding ticket or infraction, well you know fill in the blanks haha
WOW, really assume much. You don't know what we all do. Just because we don't agree this makes it OK to assume that is the actions we would take..
-
Jammin...not changing my reasoning, just giving example after example of scenarios that are similar or the same.
Actually, in the world of Risk Management, it is that cut and dry. My bank has to meet rules and regs established by the OCC and other Government bodies. If the products and divisions I am responsible for do not meet a single one of those rules and regs, regardless of how big or small the infraction is, my bank is fined, and I am placed on probation.
There is a law that states when a bank runs an advertisement, if we use a billboard to publicize the advertisement, when the advertisement ends, we have 10 days to remove the advertisement from the billboard. We had one in one of our markets get removed on day 11, and would you believe that we were caught. Someone from another bank was watching to ensure we removed our billboards. We know who it was last year that did this, because in the same market, the bank was fined a few months before us for the same reason. Word leaked and was confirmed by the regulators that they did not catch it, XYZ bank did and reported us.
We were fined over $50,000. Because a billboard advertisement was up ONE day too long.
Rules are rules and have to be met, cut and dry, no exceeding the rule in any way. If we breach a control, it is a HUGE deal. Try telling any government regulator otherwise. They will be back with your fine if you try to breach the rules, and you will pay with your job if the breach occurred on your watch and breaches occur too often.
Motiv breached the diff rule. Cut and dry.
As for variances in manufacturing, yes it does happen. Either have a rigid QC in place or lower the expected diff to .058 or whatever to allow for some variance. Don't push yourself against the max. Only Motiv has to blame for that, they should know that there was no room for variance. That is why I still cannot believe they didn't have a rigid QC in place for the balls with diff that pushed the max. Boggles my mind.
-
Jammin...not changing my reasoning, just giving example after example of scenarios that are similar or the same.
Actually, in the world of Risk Management, it is that cut and dry. My bank has to meet rules and regs established by the OCC and other Government bodies. If the products and divisions I am responsible for do not meet a single one of those rules and regs, regardless of how big or small the infraction is, my bank is fined, and I am placed on probation.
There is a law that states when a bank runs an advertisement, if we use a billboard to publicize the advertisement, when the advertisement ends, we have 10 days to remove the advertisement from the billboard. We had one in one of our markets get removed on day 11, and would you believe that we were caught. Someone from another bank was watching to ensure we removed our billboards. We know who it was last year that did this, because in the same market, the bank was fined a few months before us for the same reason. Word leaked and was confirmed by the regulators that they did not catch it, XYZ bank did and reported us.
We were fined over $50,000. Because a billboard advertisement was up ONE day too long.
Rules are rules and have to be met, cut and dry, no exceeding the rule in any way. If we breach a control, it is a HUGE deal. Try telling any government regulator otherwise. They will be back with your fine if you try to breach the rules, and you will pay with your job if the breach occurred on your watch and breaches occur too often.
Motiv breached the diff rule. Cut and dry.
As for variances in manufacturing, yes it does happen. Either have a rigid QC in place or lower the expected diff to .058 or whatever to allow for some variance. Don't push yourself against the max. Only Motiv has to blame for that, they should know that there was no room for variance. That is why I still cannot believe they didn't have a rigid QC in place for the balls with diff that pushed the max. Boggles my mind.
This is not Risk management, this is manufacturing it still comes down to people doing their job. You can have all the QC in the world and if this persons is mad or doesn't want to work today ect it can all go down hill quickly. I think Motiv understands its important, I think its more of maybe too much trust of their persons doing the job and doing it right,
-
Wowsers we are the guys that receive a speeding ticket or w.e infraction we pay it or do w.e necessary to follow rules, while others if they receive a speeding ticket or infraction, well you know fill in the blanks haha
WOW, really assume much. You don't know what we all do. Just because we don't agree this makes it OK to assume that is the actions we would take..
Well was trying use sarcasm/joke but I'll explain what I'm trying to say to wowser. There 's always gonna be complaints for any issue while others clearly understand the rules. I'm not assuming anything base on your comments. I'm just cracking a joke that we will never win the debate.
-
THIS IS RISK MANAGEMENT. There is a USBC rule that says you cannot exceed .060 in diff. If a company decides to make a ball with .060 diff, you need a control in place to ensure the risk is properly mitigated.
Risk: Exceeding established USBC rules for undrilled diff in a bowling ball. If exceeded, ball will be deemed illegal
Control: QC test X number of balls per run, per weight, to ensure the diff in the tested balls is either equal to .060 diff or is less than .060 diff
If the Control is breached, you have not mitigated the Risk.
We have people in the bank pressing buttons all day long to make transfers and every other type of transaction you can imagine. We have to place out faith in the worker that they do the right thing, just as any other firm does. That is why we have a Risk Management department to ensure compliance with rules and regs. That is why Motiv should have a Risk Management team in place to know the Rules and the risks involved if the rules are not followed. That team would be responsible for establishing controls and subsequent independent testing to ensure the control is working and the risk is mitigated, whether it is in manufacturing, banking, or whatever industry we are talking about.
-
Any ball listed with a diff of 0.060 if tested across a series of product will fail. Manufacturers know this, USBC knows this. That's what makes this a bad decision by usbc.
-
No....it is a bad decision by a manufacturer to produce a product that sits on the line of max allowed and does not allow for any tolerance. If you, as a manufacturer cannot ensure that there will not be any tolerance exceeding a rule, then you should not produce whatever it is at that level. As we have all said....01 diff means what...nothing, right? Well, maybe an inch. Maybe. So if that is true, and as a Motiv owner/manager, if you know your cores can create a finished product variance of +/- .015...then shoot for a target of .058, which means the finished product could be anywhere from .0595 at a max to .0565 at a min. Then you have not exceeded the rules and regs set in place and the ball reaction diff is basically nil.
-
No....it is a bad decision by a manufacturer to produce a product that sits on the line of max allowed and does not allow for any tolerance. If you, as a manufacturer cannot ensure that there will not be any tolerance exceeding a rule, then you should not produce whatever it is at that level. As we have all said....01 diff means what...nothing, right? Well, maybe an inch. Maybe. So if that is true, and as a Motiv owner/manager, if you know your cores can create a finished product variance of +/- .015...then shoot for a target of .058, which means the finished product could be anywhere from .0595 at a max to .0565 at a min. Then you have not exceeded the rules and regs set in place and the ball reaction diff is basically nil.
Oh wow if manufacturers knew then yea should most definitely hang out in a safer number to avoid penalties.
-
If Motiv had any kind of QC department, part of the QC would be to inspect cores coming out of each mold to ensure each mold was making cores of the specified size needed for the ball. Motiv could test the largest core and smallest core from the same core type to determine upper and lower variances, and the subsequent diff each core creates in a finished ball.
-
I am with wowzers on this.
take the Americans with disabilities Act (ADA). ADA prescribes for sidewalks and sidewalk ramps maximum grade and cross slope. For example, a sidewalk ramp down to the cross walk can slope down to the cross walk at a grade not exceeding 2%.
at 2.01%, you are illegal. by federal law. no person, regardless of their physical abilities, will ever know the difference between 2% and 2.01% and about the only way to know it is with digital smart levels. 2.01% is still illegal and will be removed and the ramp replaced, as many times as it takes to meet the spec set forth.
I have no sympathy for Motiv; their lack of QA/QC in manufacturing lead to this.
I do have sympathy for the bowlers, they didn't create this mess. But banning the balls is correct decision.
if you are not going to enforce the rule, then don't have the rule.
-
Ok so first of all is the severity of this decision...
I'm not disagreeing that Motiv pushed being at the limit BUT you have taken a product that has been on the market for a year and a half...USBC canNOT seem ALL of those to be non conforming...they should have informed Motiv to cease production, not allow any more to leave distributors and move on...
The Carnage should be taken off the market as well as deem ALL of them non conforming as they've only been on the market a month or so
AND USBC dealt with this improperly...they gave Motiv ZERO notice that this decision was coming down, which screws the bowlers first & foremost and ANYONE seriously think they could've dealt with this, especially if this was one of the other manufacturers, differently? Such as possibly notify them of them issue and allow them the opportunity to rectify plus a fine...
As I stated this is a blatant abuse of power by the USBC...and all over an average of a 1/1000 of an inch....
-
USBC had no other choice. The balls were found to be out of spec by a percentage that was too large to ignore, and the balls HAD to be banned. PERIOD.
Everybody needs to understand that if the USBC failed to ban the non-conforming equipment, after being made proveably aware of both its existence AND its illegality, they open themselves up to lawsuits by the other manufacturers.
I believe that USBC's hands were tied in all this. They have a concrete rule that sets the limit for manufacturing standards. They could've made it softer by having it worded differently, but it isn't. In the rule, there is no allowance for tolerances above the absolute limit, nor are there any time limits set for it to fall into a statute of limitations type category either. Theoretically, the USBC could go back and do testing on ANY ball, from ANY time period, and revoke the certification if that ball model does not meet the specs for balls manufactured at that time.
Could they have softened the blow considerably by exploring their alternatives for enforcement? Possibly.
Were they obligated to do so? Absolutely not.
I used to be a machinist. I understand exactly how small a variance of .ooo4 and .oo16 are. I am also a practical human, and as such, realize that there are NO humans alive that are capable if discerning a difference that small by ANY purely physical/tactile means. Humans are just not that capable. Not only that, but the difference would be so negligible that the Throbot wouldn't even be able to make that much difference count, and you can tune that thing to the nth degree.
It isn't about whether .ooo4 or .oo16 makes any practical difference though, it is about a concrete rule that the manufacturer was WELL aware of, and one that they decided to push to the limit as best they could. Sadly, their best wasn't quite good enough, and the limit was breached, and the rule was broken. It didn't HAVE to be broken, but that was a risk the manufacturer took. They gambled with a product, and they lost.
The LAW is concrete. You get found in violation of the law, doesn't matter by how much, only that you were past the limit. Even ignorance of said limit is not an excuse, and MOTIV can't even claim that.
If the USBC failed to enforce their own rules against a manufacturer for creating products out of spec, and allowed continued use and manufacture of said out of spec products, they open themselves up to multiple lawsuits from every competing manufacturer in that market.
The USBC, I believe, cannot, must not, and will not change this ruling. If they were to do so, much/most of your sanction money will go to court costs, trying to defend themselves in the resulting lawsuits.
I REALLY HATE THIS FOR MOTIV. And I hate it for the people out there who have purchased this ball in good faith, and now are not able to use it "legally" in sanctioned competition, but that is the way it is, and the way it should be.
There are not now, nor will there be, any winners in this for the involved parties. The USBC will be seen as tyrannical because of its ruling, MOTIV will be seen as untrustworthy and irresponsible, and the bowlers will see themselves as the scapegoats in all of this.
The only winner/s in this are the other manufacturers, and I'm pretty sure this was brought to the light by one of them in the first place. You can call it "dirty pool" if you want to, but if I was another manufacturer and had found out about it, I would've done EXACTLY the same thing.
And so would the rest of you, and you know it. It's a cutthroat world out there, and you have to step up and take responsibility for you and your actions. Motiv's actions were lacadaisical towards their quality control, and now they must take full responsibility for that.
-
Spot on Juggs...
-
USBC had no other choice. The balls were found to be out of spec by a percentage that was too large to ignore, and the balls HAD to be banned. PERIOD.
Everybody needs to understand that if the USBC failed to ban the non-conforming equipment, after being made proveably aware of both its existence AND its illegality, they open themselves up to lawsuits by the other manufacturers.
I believe that USBC's hands were tied in all this. They have a concrete rule that sets the limit for manufacturing standards. They could've made it softer by having it worded differently, but it isn't. In the rule, there is no allowance for tolerances above the absolute limit, nor are there any time limits set for it to fall into a statute of limitations type category either. Theoretically, the USBC could go back and do testing on ANY ball, from ANY time period, and revoke the certification if that ball model does not meet the specs for balls manufactured at that time.
Could they have softened the blow considerably by exploring their alternatives for enforcement? Possibly.
Were they obligated to do so? Absolutely not.
I used to be a machinist. I understand exactly how small a variance of .ooo4 and .oo16 are. I am also a practical human, and as such, realize that there are NO humans alive that are capable if discerning a difference that small by ANY purely physical/tactile means. Humans are just not that capable. Not only that, but the difference would be so negligible that the Throbot wouldn't even be able to make that much difference count, and you can tune that thing to the nth degree.
It isn't about whether .ooo4 or .oo16 makes any practical difference though, it is about a concrete rule that the manufacturer was WELL aware of, and one that they decided to push to the limit as best they could. Sadly, their best wasn't quite good enough, and the limit was breached, and the rule was broken. It didn't HAVE to be broken, but that was a risk the manufacturer took. They gambled with a product, and they lost.
The LAW is concrete. You get found in violation of the law, doesn't matter by how much, only that you were past the limit. Even ignorance of said limit is not an excuse, and MOTIV can't even claim that.
If the USBC failed to enforce their own rules against a manufacturer for creating products out of spec, and allowed continued use and manufacture of said out of spec products, they open themselves up to multiple lawsuits from every competing manufacturer in that market.
The USBC, I believe, cannot, must not, and will not change this ruling. If they were to do so, much/most of your sanction money will go to court costs, trying to defend themselves in the resulting lawsuits.
I REALLY HATE THIS FOR MOTIV. And I hate it for the people out there who have purchased this ball in good faith, and now are not able to use it "legally" in sanctioned competition, but that is the way it is, and the way it should be.
There are not now, nor will there be, any winners in this for the involved parties. The USBC will be seen as tyrannical because of its ruling, MOTIV will be seen as untrustworthy and irresponsible, and the bowlers will see themselves as the scapegoats in all of this.
The only winner/s in this are the other manufacturers, and I'm pretty sure this was brought to the light by one of them in the first place. You can call it "dirty pool" if you want to, but if I was another manufacturer and had found out about it, I would've done EXACTLY the same thing.
And so would the rest of you, and you know it. It's a cutthroat world out there, and you have to step up and take responsibility for you and your actions. Motiv's actions were lacadaisical towards their quality control, and now they must take full responsibility for that.
In the absence of facts, people will make up their own. For me, the fundamental problem here is lack of transparency which speaks volumes about the certification and field testing process...or lack there of. Again, this core has been in production for over 4 years across different balls and the field testing process never found balls out of compliance? So now I question the integrity of the organization that took the most damaging penalty possible for their members and Motiv and has provided no quantitative facts about the process other than balls were over the limit. I do think there were other options available that would have resulted in a better outcome for membership while holding Motiv accountable, but again we don't have all the facts because the USBC is not transparent with the members it claims to serve.
-
Morph...
The reason (my opinion) people did not care about the core previously, or the balls that had the core, is because no Motiv ball won 2 consecutive PBA Majors.
2 BIG wins, draws more attention, more companies try to imitate what you are doing to be successful.
Just like Ebo did with the Track Heat in the 90s, I bet the other companies bought some Carnages to put them through a test to see what they could figure out, saw the ball exceeded USBC regs, and we are now where we are.
I would wager that if the Carnage did not win, or maybe won just one of the 2 Majors, we would still be using our Jackals today.
-
Morph...
The reason (my opinion) people did not care about the core previously, or the balls that had the core, is because no Motiv ball won 2 consecutive PBA Majors.
2 BIG wins, draws more attention, more companies try to imitate what you are doing to be successful.
Just like Ebo did with the Track Heat in the 90s, I bet the other companies bought some Carnages to put them through a test to see what they could figure out, saw the ball exceeded USBC regs, and we are now where we are.
I would wager that if the Carnage did not win, or maybe won just one of the 2 Majors, we would still be using our Jackals today.
If what you say is true, they're applying the rules selectively rather than in a uniform way across all manufacturers. So taking that to its natural conclusion, how many other balls were out of spec that were either never field tested or swept under the rug? If there aren't sufficient facts to support a fair and unbiased certification process, including field testing, then Motiv has an extremely good case in a court of law.
-
Personal opinion, we don't know how many other times other companies have complained about a ball being out of spec, but, given that no other ball has ever been removed, no company has ever been caught producing a ball out of spec after it had submitted a ball conforming to the specs.
The ONLY way to guarantee every ball conforms to USBC specs, is to field test every ball. Considering the charge is someone had to send a case (or whatever) of Jackals to the USBC to get this moving, I think we can all agree there is no field testing of any ball.
I think there needs to be field testing of every ball from every company. But, that will cost money, and are we, as sanctioned bowlers of the USBC, ready to hand over an extra $X to the USBC just to field test bowling balls?
-
Personal opinion, we don't know how many other times other companies have complained about a ball being out of spec, but, given that no other ball has ever been removed, no company has ever been caught producing a ball out of spec after it had submitted a ball conforming to the specs.
The ONLY way to guarantee every ball conforms to USBC specs, is to field test every ball. Considering the charge is someone had to send a case (or whatever) of Jackals to the USBC to get this moving, I think we can all agree there is no field testing of any ball.
I think there needs to be field testing of every ball from every company. But, that will cost money, and are we, as sanctioned bowlers of the USBC, ready to hand over an extra $X to the USBC just to field test bowling balls?
You don't have to test every ball, but there should be a documented uniform process applied to any ball within a certain range of the specifications outlined by the USBC so all manufacturers are treated fairly. If it turns out that balls anonymously arrived at their door with a note, that's an indictment of the current process which leads me to believe there is no uniform field testing process calling into question the credibility of the certification process as a whole. I'm sure Motiv is exploring it's legal options, but would likely have to go to court to discover the facts and demand records for all field testing.
-
Bowling is not a world of exacts. Everyone tries to change this to be the case, but it is not, and never will be.
Lane patterns aren't exacts, lane specifications aren't exact. Drilling layouts for reaction are not exact. Pin locations on the pin deck aren't exact. Levelness of the lanes are not exact. The pin marking the top of the core in a ball is not exact. The ball having the correct core is not always exact.
Everything about the certifications of the lanes you bowl on every year have allowed variances, along with the pin placement on the deck etc.
Bowling balls aren't exact. Pins aren't always marking the exact top of the core. The psa locator on the Storm Crux isn't always 6 3/4" from the pin like it is suppose to be. The Pin on the Brunswick Power Grooves were all wrong because the ball ended up being an asymmetric core and when spun the pin would be typically 1" to 1.5" inches further from the cg then marked.
Any ball listed with a diff of 0.060 is likely going to be over and under slightly from ball to ball......which means any ball you buy from any brand will likely not be exact on the specs given.
No matter your opinion on the Motiv situation if you assume other manufactures specs and products are exact as listed on the spec sheet you are wrong. Any Hammer ball with a gas mask core showing the diff of 0.060 in 15lbs isn't going to be exact for every ball.....which means some are illegal. Probably the reason Hammer lowered the diff a few years ago in that core which is smart.
This is an unfortunate situation for Motiv and for bowlers. Yes they are out of spec, but they are not the only ones. The next question we do not know is if the 2 balls originally sent for testing from Motiv were exactly 0.060 or if they were of say 0.0604 etc.... Because there is a good chance those balls tested by USBC were either over or under and if so puts USBC to blame as well for not saying something prior to and certifying the balls. Only when having their hands pushed by another manufacture did they choose to act.
That is a very real possibility many people are not considering.
-
Kid,
if the balls tested by USBC were slightly over the 0.060 and allowed to pass, that would have been a USBC failure.
but isn't it just as likely that the balls Motiv sent to USBC for certification were meticulously crafted and inspected to ensure they met the spec? that they were 'perfect'?
When a burger chain shows us an ad on TV for their newest offering, do any of the ones we buy look like the one on TV? The answer would be no. They take extra care making the one for the ad to showcase the burger.
-
It's wreaks of conspiracy
If it hadn't of started out by a mysterious case of balls showing up at USBC with a note - spin these - attached, it may be easier to 'accept'.
At the point of how this evolved USBC should've taken a different rode as there was never precedence of this previously...other than them grand fathering the original Game Breaker core...
USBC did have a decision to make here...I believe they choice the wrong way, in many ways, to deal with this
-
Considering the ball companies send the samples to the USBC for testing, and not the USBC randomly selects ball X and ball Y for initial certification, the ball company controls the process and the ball company can control what balls are sent, so there is a real possibility that any ball company is knowingly sending a ball that they know will pass.
I hear ya on no exacts, but show me in the USBC rule book that states a lane has to have oil from board 10 to 10, or has to have X units of oil across X number of boards. There isn't, but there is a rule about what a ball can have for an undrilled diff, a specific amount.
Just because the PSA is not 6 3/4 on every Crux does not mean that it is illegal. Just because a mass bias spot is mismarked does not make the ball illegal, or a mismarked pin, cg, or a "pro pin" or a pro cg"...but a ball with undrilled diff of .060 or greater is illegal.
-
I don't believe this is the first time a ball that was approved was moved to the unapproved list.
Wasn't the Bonanza II out on the market for several months before it was made illegal? Bowlers who had bought the ball suddenly found out that they could not use it in sanctioned competition.
-
The problem with the Bonanzas when Columbia was producing them was we found out that not every Bonanza had the same core and some had different covers. The Bonanzas were essentially balls that Columbia had extra coverstock material or extra cores laying around that was not going to be used, so they threw them on the line and poured them. No way to know what you were getting from one ball to the next. AMF Changelings were the same way.
-
If the averages stated by usbc for the jackal and carnage are correct then I have no doubt the ones usbc tested were either over or under or both. No chance of be exact.
-
The Bonanza balls were fine, it was the Bonanza II that wasn't.
The Bonanza was merely a second quality ball due to some factor, and was always the proper core/cover.
The Bonanza II was known to have mix matched core/cover combos at times that had never been approved together as a unit.
-
Probably what the usbc should have done was contact motiv and say hey this what we got. Usbc should have went to the warehouse and should have picked out any ball and checked. If out of speck they should have said produce no more until the balls are back in specs. Everything made up to that point be allowed. Instead motiv is going to be probably take a $2 million hit. The thing that sucks is usbc allows centers to have no oil outside of 10 which is not legal but is allowed. Usbc needs to do their job across the board instead of selectively.
-
From board 2 to 2 must have at least 3 units of oil an that is in the USBC Spec for certification. Sorry they have a rule for that to. Motiv screw up and know has to pay the penalty. An it would not surprise to see a few more companies get in trouble by someone sending balls to USBC.
-
From board 2 to 2 must have at least 3 units of oil an that is in the USBC Spec for certification. Sorry they have a rule for that to. Motiv screw up and know has to pay the penalty. An it would not surprise to see a few more companies get in trouble by someone sending balls to USBC.
So we depend on anonymous individuals to police our sport...tell me again what the USBC does as the governing body of bowling?
-
It's wreaks of conspiracy
If it hadn't of started out by a mysterious case of balls showing up at USBC with a note - spin these - attached, it may be easier to 'accept'.
At the point of how this evolved USBC should've taken a different rode as there was never precedence of this previously...other than them grand fathering the original Game Breaker core...
USBC did have a decision to make here...I believe they choice the wrong way, in many ways, to deal with this
Agreed
-
Without going to every ball company website, what other balls still in production have an advertised diff of or near .060?
Conspiracy: sure. Someone reported the ball exceeded allowable regulations.
Still illegal, regardless of who reported it, how they reported it, when they reported it, and how it was handled (poorly).
-
My comment references the penalty not the offense...
If it was a normal checking procedure I'd see if differently but due to the circumstances I think it's BS
-
Without going to every ball company website, what other balls still in production have an advertised diff of or near .060?
Conspiracy: sure. Someone reported the ball exceeded allowable regulations.
Still illegal, regardless of who reported it, how they reported it, when they reported it, and how it was handled (poorly).
I have never questioned the legality, there was clearly an infraction. If they are going to be the authoritative source for rules and certification then the USBC cannot appear to be biased in the way testing methodologies are applied. If you want to deal in absolutes, then there should be defined field testing criteria for all manufacturers requiring random tests. Again, you don't have to test every ball, but if a violation is found, I would expect an escalation process requiring a statistically relavant sample size. The issue for me has more to do with a uniform testing process applied equally and if that's not happening has Motiv been singled out and treated differently?
-
I guess we do not know if the USBC has treated Motiv differently. Has anyone ever sent the USBC balls before and asked them to recheck them? If yes, and the USBC found the balls to exceed the allowable diff or any other rule, then yes, Motiv has been singled out.
If no, then anyone has to ASSUME that in the future, if any illegal balls are found like this, USBC will treat that ball and that company the same as the Jackals and Motiv was treated here.
-
I think you're missing the point...if the USBC claims they do random field testing and cannot backup that claim with historical proof, then I think that's problematic because that same core had been in various balls for more than 4 years. And if the field testing isn't applied uniformly, then how can the certification process have any credibility?
-
I have never known the USBC to do field testing just because they wanted to of any ball after the USBC approved the ball. I don't remember the USBC ever claiming they do field testing anywhere. I thought that was understood..but maybe I didn't make that clear.
Field testing isn't applied uniformly in the history of the USBC. Maybe this is the tipping point that makes field testing part of the normal process.
-
I have never known the USBC to do field testing just because they wanted to of any ball after the USBC approved the ball. I don't remember the USBC ever claiming they do field testing anywhere. I thought that was understood..but maybe I didn't make that clear.
Field testing isn't applied uniformly in the history of the USBC. Maybe this is the tipping point that makes field testing part of the normal process.
I thought random field testing was part of their process, but if it isn't I don't see how there is any credibility in the certification process. I hope you're wrong about field testing because that means there likely are or have been lots of balls out of compliance in which case what's the point of the rule that's going to be policed randomly by anonymous individuals?
-
I think we all get it Morph, you don't like the USBC and the way it is run. You have made that very clear in multiple threads. I think the point that Wowzers has made is that the rules were broken. Yes maybe just slightly but still the balls were illegal according to the rules. If they did nothing about it that would not be fair either. I don't own any Motiv balls but if I did own one that was affected I wouldn't be upset with the USBC I would be disappointed in Motiv and their QC program.
-
If you're the USBC, do you really want to give people another reason to not bowl because one day your ball is legal and the next day it isn't. Whether you like the organization or not, does this make sense to you guys?
-
If you're the USBC, do you really want to give people another reason to not bowl because one day your ball is legal and the next day it isn't. Whether you like the organization or not, does this make sense to you guys?
I think reasonable people understand that if rules are broken, there have to be repercussions, even if it affects them. Most real bowlers will get the situation and continue to bowl. Others who are looking for reasons not to bowl will eventually quit anyway.
-
Morpheus, it's the USBC. They don't care about losing bowlers, they'll just raise the sanction fees. Problem solved! ;D
-
Sorry guys...any rulemaking body, regardless of whether or not the rats are fleeing the Titantic on the way down, has to uphold the set regulations and rules in place. If they don't...the ship sinks that much quicker because you have chaos because NOBODY will listen to any rule.
So we let this one ball slide, where does it stop?
Can I pass the fouline next time by .004 of an inch? Against you Morpheus? Or will you say, nah...you only passed it by .004, its ok????
How about the next rack that comes down against you in play Morpheus only has 9 pins...illegal rack, but the bowler says, hey, we allowed illegal balls, last week the guy passed the foul line, the light went off, but we said heck with it and counted it, why not racks with only 9 pins?
I am shooting a spare, ball goes into the gutter, ball pops out and I get the spare. Illegal, but since we let an illegal ball go, illegal racks, illegal tosses that went past the foul line, now we are going to count a shot that popped out of the gutter as well.
Once you let ONE rule slide, you open the doors to all your rules sliding.
Steven,
You are correct, reasonable people understand there has to be reprecussions. Problem is so many people have an ax to grind against the USBC they want to use this issue against the USBC.
RV
You are 100% correct. My total disappointment in this is not with the USBC, its that the ball company that sold me 2 balls and told me they confirmed to any and all USBC rules, in reality did not.
-
Morpheus, it's the USBC. They don't care about losing bowlers, they'll just raise the sanction fees. Problem solved! ;D
Unfortunately that's true...I think we need significant change but realize it's unlikely because most members just don't care and go along with the status quo.
-
Exactly, Morpheus. We're not going to listen to the members, we're going to do whatever we want. JUST SEND MONEY!! ;)
-
Sorry guys...any rulemaking body, regardless of whether or not the rats are fleeing the Titantic on the way down, has to uphold the set regulations and rules in place. If they don't...the ship sinks that much quicker because you have chaos because NOBODY will listen to any rule.
So we let this one ball slide, where does it stop?
Can I pass the fouline next time by .004 of an inch? Against you Morpheus? Or will you say, nah...you only passed it by .004, its ok????
How about the next rack that comes down against you in play Morpheus only has 9 pins...illegal rack, but the bowler says, hey, we allowed illegal balls, last week the guy passed the foul line, the light went off, but we said heck with it and counted it, why not racks with only 9 pins?
I am shooting a spare, ball goes into the gutter, ball pops out and I get the spare. Illegal, but since we let an illegal ball go, illegal racks, illegal tosses that went past the foul line, now we are going to count a shot that popped out of the gutter as well.
Once you let ONE rule slide, you open the doors to all your rules sliding.
Steven,
You are correct, reasonable people understand there has to be reprecussions. Problem is so many people have an ax to grind against the USBC they want to use this issue against the USBC.
RV
You are 100% correct. My total disappointment in this is not with the USBC, its that the ball company that sold me 2 balls and told me they confirmed to any and all USBC rules, in reality did not.
Again, I have always stated that Motiv should be held accountable, so please stop with the ridiculous analogies. What I fundamentally don't understand is how the governing body of bowling can stamp a product approved and never field test. So how is there any credibility in the certification process and how is that in the best interest of the sport or their members? If in fact there is not a uniform field test procedure in place, there probably should be to reduce the likelihood members are negatively impacted by products out of compliance.
By the way, there are lots of "legal" balls that are way over the .060 limit after drilling and I personally could care less if they're used against me whether it's a Jackal or any other ball. Go be mad at Motiv...I would like to see the USBC fix the process and make it better for manufacturers and members going forward.
-
^^^NAILED IT^^^
-
The usbc are a bunch of bumbling fools. Unless they "field tested" every MFS's balls, this test should be void. I'll be bowling in a Easter tournament that IS NOT usbc certified and I'll use the Jackal, just like I used it for that last year. I cant wait for the facts to be leaked to see who paid off who. Gimme a break with the "they are doing their job" If they were doing there job, this would have been detected over a year ago, NOT after 1000's have been sold and used for over a year. All of these companies pay the usbc for their stamp of approval...so they get the fee from the companies, the fee from millions of bowlers, the fees from tournaments and they are still "broke"? When is the last time they certified a lane? Oh thats right..if a house isnt certified then usbc leagues cant bowl there...and if they cant bowl there then the usbc doesnt collect sanctions...so of course EVERY house passes. And the Jackals can still be used in the UBA...nice work usbc....nice work.
-
12XSECH, BINGO!
-
Morpheus, it's the USBC. They don't care about losing bowlers, they'll just raise the sanction fees. Problem solved! ;D
Somehow, unfortunately, I think this is beginning to seem like the bottom line in this discussion.
This is so very sad for all us bowlers who care to be sanctioned and think this is an important facet of bowling. True sanctioning actually means much more than a few simple, stupid, childish awards.
-
Charlest,
I too believe sanctioned bowling is an important aspect of the game and wish there were as much importance put on increasing membership as there is on the sport of bowling. I think the USBC has it backwards, the sport of bowling was very healthy when membership was strong and all the focus on making the sport strong has/will not bring members back. All the USBC apologists will flame me for hating, but the scoreboard doesn't lie as membership has been in a free fall for more than a decade so from my perspective so try something, anything, how much more broken can it be now that we are likely under 1 million members?
-
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....
Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.
And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.
The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........
-
http://youtu.be/e9mf3Bypyk8
-
charlest, who said anything about awards? This is about USBC's ignorance and arrogance, it's unwillingness to listen or consider options or suggestions from it's members, and doing what's in the best interests of those members. They're not, if you disagree, fine. I respect your opinion as always.
-
Initially, this situation was filled with vindictiveness and frustration and readiness to blame everyone and anyone. Now it is just becoming a sad and pathetic picture of our sport and the game it is based upon.
-
charlest, who said anything about awards? This is about USBC's ignorance and arrogance, it's unwillingness to listen or consider options or suggestions from it's members, and doing what's in the best interests of those members. They're not, if you disagree, fine. I respect your opinion as always.
I did. Duh!
About 90% of the sanctioned bowlers I have seen are only concerned about the awards they used to and no longer receive. I was just pointing out the narrow view that many people have of the role of the USBC in administering our sport and our game.
-
My ridiculous analogies are only examples of a USBC rule being broken, just like how Motiv broke the rule to not produce any new balls with a diff of greater than .060.
Sorry if you don't agree. I agree with the immediate banning of the ball.
I also agree I wish that Motiv had more time to prepare for this.
I also agree I wish the USBC would have caught this on their own.
If anyone doesn't like it, and I really do not like the USBC on many attributes, you and I are free to start a new bowling organization sanctioning body. Nobody is forcing you or I to be a USBC member. You and I are choosing to bowl a USBC sanctioned league. Compel your league to not sanction with the USBC and go without sanction, or to start your own sanction in your local association next year. The only way the USBC will EVER change is when there is a distinct and real rival that can compete and possibly exceed the USBC. Until then, with no other sanctioning body, the USBC knows they are the only game in town.
Look at the NHRA, IHRA, UHRA, PDRA, and so on. Multiple different drag racing sanctioning bodies. Why? Groups of racers did not like one or more of the existing sanctioning bodies, and formed a group that eventually started a new sanctioning organization.
-
Just an FYI -
In a small local county tournament today (equivalent of the Nationals :team, singles, doubles), they had 2 printouts. One was of the Jackal and one was of the Carnage, saying that these balls have recently been removed from the USBC approval list and anyone using them would be immediately disqualified.
-
Glad they are enforcing the rules.
-
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....
Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.
And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.
The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........
As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.
-
My ridiculous analogies are only examples of a USBC rule being broken, just like how Motiv broke the rule to not produce any new balls with a diff of greater than .060.
Sorry if you don't agree. I agree with the immediate banning of the ball.
I also agree I wish that Motiv had more time to prepare for this.
I also agree I wish the USBC would have caught this on their own.
If anyone doesn't like it, and I really do not like the USBC on many attributes, you and I are free to start a new bowling organization sanctioning body. Nobody is forcing you or I to be a USBC member. You and I are choosing to bowl a USBC sanctioned league. Compel your league to not sanction with the USBC and go without sanction, or to start your own sanction in your local association next year. The only way the USBC will EVER change is when there is a distinct and real rival that can compete and possibly exceed the USBC. Until then, with no other sanctioning body, the USBC knows they are the only game in town.
Look at the NHRA, IHRA, UHRA, PDRA, and so on. Multiple different drag racing sanctioning bodies. Why? Groups of racers did not like one or more of the existing sanctioning bodies, and formed a group that eventually started a new sanctioning organization.
Here's the ridiculous analogies I was referring too quoted from your previous post...
"So we let this one ball slide, where does it stop?
Can I pass the fouline next time by .004 of an inch? Against you Morpheus? Or will you say, nah...you only passed it by .004, its ok????
How about the next rack that comes down against you in play Morpheus only has 9 pins...illegal rack, but the bowler says, hey, we allowed illegal balls, last week the guy passed the foul line, the light went off, but we said heck with it and counted it, why not racks with only 9 pins?
I am shooting a spare, ball goes into the gutter, ball pops out and I get the spare. Illegal, but since we let an illegal ball go, illegal racks, illegal tosses that went past the foul line, now we are going to count a shot that popped out of the gutter as well."
-
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....
Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.
And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.
The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........
As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.
For sure I dont disagree with having a grace period but the timing they conducted these field test sucks because of nationals. Always pros n cons if they dont ban now be easier on people. Con maybe a jackal wins the nationals and you know some guy will claim it was all ball no bowling skill. Either way the ball needed to be banned and not RE-CERTIFIED like the subject at hand.
-
OK so the argument is that USBC didn't do their job for so long thus the jackals ban should be voided? Or because they don't check up on other balls or other companies the ball should be voided??? At the end of the day the jackals are still going to be illegal.... Even if you field test other balls....
Sure USBC should inspect every company balls but I don't see why would any of us want to make an illegal ball legal.
And Morpheus brings up if do you really want to give another reason to bowlers to quit bowling if they buy a ball and can't use it the next. If we don't take it away then why have rules in the first place. Why not just make bowling so easy that bowlers will want to stay bowling. Why not give the new guy who shot a 300 in practice a 300 ring I mean it will keep that guy happy I'm sure he will stick around bowling.
The bottom line is the ball has to be banned and stop asap. If they continued to let the ball go into the market how would you feel as a regular bowler going into a pro shop buying a jackal then being told a week later the ball was suppose to be ban a week ago but usbc wanted to make sure with motiv that they are fine with the ban . USBC this n that wrong here n there that does not matter that is another topic. Them not doing their job does not justify making the jackal legal........
As I've stated many times, for a core that's been on the market for 4 years across 5 different balls, I don't think a grace period of 30 - 60 days was a horrible option to give members and/or the manufacturer time to replace these products. Not everyone has 6 balls and can just use something else so they either use a house/spare ball or don't bowl.
For sure I dont disagree with having a grace period but the timing they conducted these field test sucks because of nationals. Always pros n cons if they dont ban now be easier on people. Con maybe a jackal wins the nationals and you know some guy will claim it was all ball no bowling skill. Either way the ball needed to be banned and not RE-CERTIFIED like the subject at hand.
The Jackal has already been used at the open so all the more reason for me to define a grace period. In fact, Sweden did define a grace period but if individual organizations like the PBA want to ban immediately, that would be entirely up to what they believe is best for their members.
As for recertification, I signed the petition because I want transparency in this process and the USBC has provided no details about the "field testing" that identified the issue. If the issue was identified by an anonymous donation of balls for testing, I think it calls into question the credibility of anything approved or banned by that organization.
-
As for recertification, I signed the petition because I want transparency in this process and the USBC has provided no details about the "field testing" that identified the issue. If the issue was identified by an anonymous donation of balls for testing, I think it calls into question the credibility of anything approved or banned by that organization.
[/quote]
Exactly my point...
-
For sure i understand that part that you guys want proof. But Im just saying and few others are saying is Illegal = ban nothing wrong with it. not Illegal= its ok just let it slide. Non of us disagree that proof need to be shown I mean come on now your not guilty until proven guilty
-
I am sure I will take flak for this but:
I am sick and tired of hearing that this core was approved for x years and across y number of balls!
By saying that, you are implying that Motiv knowingly manufactured a ball out of compliance and thumbed their nose at the USBC by sending them test balls in compliance while manufacturing their illegal balls. I, for one, do not think that is the case. The core, as designed, is in compliance. Something in the manufacturing process in the not to distant past when wrong, whether it was a change in materials, a change in the mold do to overuse, or something else, we do not know. That is what caused the balls to now be out of compliance. The issue is that Motiv did not detect this and correct it. That is where the anger should be placed, if there is any at all.
Rico, someone else stated this and will again, you probably have forgotten more about this game then I will ever know. I respect your opinion and that knowledge. But, I don't understand your stance. Why is wrong that someone, whether it was a competitor or a random citizen, sent the USBC a case of balls it found to be illegal and asked them to check them? Isn't that part of competition, making sure you understand your competitors products so you can produce better ones? And do you not think that this happens in other industries? Now, the penalty part is different story. I personally feel the USBC was correct in removing the balls from competition. As far as the original Jackals go, unless you know exactly when the defect started, you can't allow any of them to be used. Potentially, every ball made after the ones tested by the USBC to approve them initially, could be illegal. Or potentially, only the last few hundred made are illegal. But there is no way to differentiate that especially since 99% of them are now drilled. It shouldn't matter if the difference found makes a true advantage or not, illegal is illegal. What if the USBC found the illegal balls, made a deal with Motiv to stop manufacturing them, correct the mistake and then start again. People would be wondering why there was a shortage of Jackals and Jackal Carnage 's in a little while and it then came out about them being illegal....where is the transparency there? If that is truly what you are concerned about then that scenario should upset you even more.
-
Not trying to speak for Rico but here are my thoughts.
If the USBC doesn't randomly field test balls from all manufacturers in a uniform fashion, how do you put any credence in the certification process because there may be lots of balls the do not conform but we'll never know until some anonymous party to decides what/when to test balls. The USBC is supposed to be an unbiased party responsible for enforcing standards, but are they really if there's no uniform field testing conducted? With field testing, maybe this could have been caught a long time ago and only impacted a small number of USBC members and limited the financial implications to Motiv.
Random thoughts...
How long have Motiv balls with this core been out of compliance? (I know this is your favorite question, but the Predator core has been in production since at least 2012)
Did the anonymous party know Jackals were out of compliance for months or even years and waited to notify the USBC to maximize the financial impact to Motiv which also negatively impacted our members.
Should this have been caught months or even years ago thus reducing impact to members and Motiv?
How many other manufacturers have produced non-conforming equipment and never got caught?
At the end of the day, if they are field testing it obviously isn't very effective and if they aren't then the "USBC Approved" certification has no credibility. If you can't understand the logic of conducting uniform field tests for all certified products to protect USBC members and the integrity of the game, then none of is going to make much sense.
-
If someone can prove to me that a ball being 1 THOUSANDTH out of tolerance on differential makes a meaningful difference, I'll agree, but I think the USBC picked the wrong fight and absolutely botched this entire process. Bottom line is it doesn't matter, ball still has to be thrown well. If someone brings in a ball with an .080 diff and a 2.30 rg and wants to bowl me for money, sure, not worried, because these aren't things that magically make the ball better. Everyone seems to be thinking because these numbers aren't legal is because they're better. That's what I'm taking issue with, that misconception. It's like saying a 5 iron is better than a 7 iron because it hits the ball further. Yeah, but if you're 150-170 yards out and you want to use your 5 iron because it hits the ball further, let's put some money down on that right now.
So WOWZERS, I also assume you go through all your leagues and make sure everyone's balls are legal? I guarantee you can go through any league in the COUNTRY, and you'll find at least a few balls illegal on weight, but nobody throws a fit about that.
-
You're right it doesn't make a difference but there is a rule in place for all the companies and motive was over the limit. Now if other companies get caught cause of this so be it.
-
I agree with Rico.
It has been already been proven after drilling the P4 hole depending upon distance will increase your Diff. almost nearly triple.
You don't like this post. Then just ask your friend Phil C...... Or Mo P.
Since we were mentioned, we have proven with our core designs and have published the after drilling numbers, our balls are capable of taking a .045 pre drilled ball and creating a .070 after drilling diff. All legal since he spec clearly says under .060 pre drilled.
We also avoid any possible glitches in manufacturing going over .060 by never targeting anything above .055 or .056 as a starting diff. This way any abnormalities will never render the ball USBC illegal.
My simple question is since they do field testing (per their response) how was a ball launched last June not discovered until March.
-
We also avoid any possible glitches in manufacturing going over .060 by never targeting anything above .055 or .056 as a starting diff. This way any abnormalities will never render the ball USBC illegal.
That's one thing in the whole fiasco that I've thought about. You'd think, since the diff can be raised w/drilling, why the hell they'd go so high. Seems most all other manufacturers don't go above that .055-.056 diff range un-drilled.
It just seems like it's giving an opportunity for something (such as the current situation) to arise.
-
ITZPS
Tough to tell a legal or illegal ball not knowing side/top/etc especially when you do not know the starting info. Further, I put my trust in pro shops and other bowlers to have done or to do the right thing, which is what the USBC did here. They found an illegal ball and outlawed it. Kudos to them.
I do agree that the problem is if they do field testing, why did they not catch it sooner...are they really that behind, that understaffed, or what exactly?
We know the Jackal is bad now.
When I was drag racing, if you have ever watched drag racing, a red light can occur because you left the line .001 too early. If you have ever watched NHRA Top Fuel or Funny Cars or Pro Stock Cars, you would know that a car leaving .001 early when they travel to the finish line at over 300 MPH, what does .001 really mean? Not much, but they left the line too early. Thus, because they left too early, regardless of what the other car did, the car leaving too early loses and the other car is the winner.
Not a direct apples to apple comparison, but similar in that .001 can mean the difference between a legal ball/illegal ball and a legal run or illegal run (because your car left the starting line too early).
Sorry that I feel the rules need followed, regardless of how arbitrary it is. The rules are there for a reason. I guess what is causing my stickler attitude toward this is my background in Risk. When we test controls, we cannot pass any threshold regardless of how small it is. In a million dollar account, if my firm calculated a yield and is a single penny off, we fail the control because we were not right on. Who is really going to miss a penny? We either gave a penny too much or a penny short, but either way, we were wrong. Well, Motiv was wrong here.
-
What Newguy said is exactly right. Why risk it? Why get so close?
-
What Newguy said is exactly right. Why risk it? Why get so close?
My guess is it's more of a marketing ploy than anything else. With specs like that they can say/promote something like "no other company has products pushing the limits like ours!" Not that I blame them of course, any little bit of an edge (perceived or real) over your competition on the market is a plus and something a growing company like Motiv needs. There are risks of such a strategy, which are obvious now, and they're paying the price for it.
That's all I got.
-
Thank you Newguy for your 2cents.
It was definitely unfortunate that Motiv found itself in this situation. At best they are stepping up to the plate by replacing those balls with a new future release.
Maybe they will start some ISO 9001 procedures to have better control of their future high diff. releases
-
CoorZero
You are 100% right, but that is why you also have to have a very stringent QC department ensuring the cores are coming out of the molds correctly and testing of balls coming off the line to ensure the balls comply with USBC specs. Where was Motiv's QC testing through this?
-
What Newguy said is exactly right. Why risk it? Why get so close?
My guess is it's more of a marketing ploy than anything else. With specs like that they can say/promote something like "no other company has products pushing the limits like ours!" Not that I blame them of course, any little bit of an edge (perceived or real) over your competition on the market is a plus and something a growing company like Motiv needs. There are risks of such a strategy, which are obvious now, and they're paying the price for it.
That's all I got.
Though I agree it could be used for marketing purposes, I don't remember Motiv ever stating such. It seems like everyone's imaginations have gone in every which way over this issue.
The facts are Motiv produced balls that exceeded the differential specification. Because of said infraction, all Jackals and Jackal Carnages were deemed non-compliant and had to be removed from competition. That was the only course of action. Notice Motiv has not come out and claimed how unfair USBC is in this. The infraction showed a manufacturing inaccuracy and Motiv will do what is necessary to not have this happen again (hopefully).
-
Wowzers, you have been beating up Motiv for the last week, I think I speak for many others, it's time to shut your damn mouth and give it a rest! Nobody gives a sh*t anymore what you have to say on this subject. You have made your feelings known over and over until everyone wants to puke. Take your replacement ball when it comes and sell it as soon as possible, that way you don't have to whine your azz off anymore about Motiv not paying for drilling it. Then , take the money and buy any ball that would make you happy. Never buy another ball by Motiv and seal your big mouth once and for all! I will continue to buy Motiv equipment and enjoy the quality products they make. Their customer service is second to none and if you don't agree, I could give a spit. Now run along, we get it, your not happy. So what? I sure you've been unhappy before in life and you will be in the future! That is life!!!
-
TD...as I have responded to others, this is a free country, and I am free to post whatever I want as long as I am not threatening anyone, and this is far from making threats. So either A) block me so you do not have to read what I write or B) if you can't stand it when someone has a different opinion but yet are still so much into whatever that you have to post a comment back, go somewhere that you can control someone else's opinion...like North Korea or China. Then everyone can post as you see fit.
I guess you must not have read the posts that I suggested a Venom Shock for a bowler (or was it 2 bowlers) as a possible arsenal ball at the USBCs...because I really like mine.
So this is life and life is dealing with those that do not agree with you. Deal with it. I am not leaving, my opinion is not changing, and I will continue to post my opinion as I see fit.
Considering I just received some PMs today about the subject in favor of what I am saying, some people still do give a $hit.
Have a nice day
-
TD...as I have responded to others, this is a free country, and I am free to post whatever I want as long as I am not threatening anyone, and this is far from making threats. So either A) block me so you do not have to read what I write or B) if you can't stand it when someone has a different opinion but yet are still so much into whatever that you have to post a comment back, go somewhere that you can control someone else's opinion...like North Korea or China. Then everyone can post as you see fit.
I guess you must not have read the posts that I suggested a Venom Shock for a bowler (or was it 2 bowlers) as a possible arsenal ball at the USBCs...because I really like mine.
So this is life and life is dealing with those that do not agree with you. Deal with it. I am not leaving, my opinion is not changing, and I will continue to post my opinion as I see fit.
Considering I just received some PMs today about the subject in favor of what I am saying, some people still do give a $hit.
Have a nice day
Now my feeling is hurt...I haven't gotten a single PM in favor of what I'm saying.
-
Sorry Morph...I have no problem with what you post, its your opinion. We just don't agree on everything.
Have a good one
-
You want free drilling wowser? Dang I thought we were on same page I don't agree with motiv covering free drilling
-
Just like it's tough to know which Jackals are over and which are legal, but they all got banned anyway. I've also had SEVERAL people tell me "well I'm not going to nationals anyway, it doesn't matter if the weights are out of spec." Also I can't exactly regulate it, if someone says drill the holes here and I don't like weight holes, that's just what I have to do, whether it makes the ball legal or not. I can advise them, I can drill the ring finger to china, I can do whatever I can to make it as close as possible, but at the end of the day, there are lots of people that buy things that never use them in sanctioned competition. Some bowl for fun, some bowl non sanctioned leagues, in no way is it my responsibility or jurisdiction to regulate that.
Very much so not even close to the same comparison. Drag racing is a TIMED sport. A higher differential doesn't make the ball automatically better. I still agree Motiv shouldn't have pushed the line, but given what newguy said about some cores allowing drilled diff to go so much higher, they could have just told them to cease production, grandfathered the old stuff in, and there would have been no issue. I get the point that illegal is illegal, and if you let one thing slide, what else do you let slide, but when you use some common sense and understand that a company lost basically a million bucks over a thousandth of a point in differential, that's so ridiculous I can't even comprehend it. All this does is reinforce bowler ignorance and misinformation. "Oh wow, the USBC hit them that hard over such a small amount, it MUST really be that big of a deal." Sends a very wrong message.
ITZPS
Tough to tell a legal or illegal ball not knowing side/top/etc especially when you do not know the starting info. Further, I put my trust in pro shops and other bowlers to have done or to do the right thing, which is what the USBC did here. They found an illegal ball and outlawed it. Kudos to them.
I do agree that the problem is if they do field testing, why did they not catch it sooner...are they really that behind, that understaffed, or what exactly?
We know the Jackal is bad now.
When I was drag racing, if you have ever watched drag racing, a red light can occur because you left the line .001 too early. If you have ever watched NHRA Top Fuel or Funny Cars or Pro Stock Cars, you would know that a car leaving .001 early when they travel to the finish line at over 300 MPH, what does .001 really mean? Not much, but they left the line too early. Thus, because they left too early, regardless of what the other car did, the car leaving too early loses and the other car is the winner.
Not a direct apples to apple comparison, but similar in that .001 can mean the difference between a legal ball/illegal ball and a legal run or illegal run (because your car left the starting line too early).
Sorry that I feel the rules need followed, regardless of how arbitrary it is. The rules are there for a reason. I guess what is causing my stickler attitude toward this is my background in Risk. When we test controls, we cannot pass any threshold regardless of how small it is. In a million dollar account, if my firm calculated a yield and is a single penny off, we fail the control because we were not right on. Who is really going to miss a penny? We either gave a penny too much or a penny short, but either way, we were wrong. Well, Motiv was wrong here.
-
Yeah Ken...my argument is we bought the Jackal or Carnage with the assumption the ball was USBC certified. We paid to drill that ball. Ball turned out NOT to be USBC certified. Why should we have to pay the replacement ball when we were sold a ball that did not comply to begin with.
Its ok to disagree. Just my opinion.
IT...racing is a timed sport, point is even an advantage of leaving .001 sooner than your opponent can leave the line is illegal and you are disqualified. Small advantage...but its past the set line.
The extra diff does not make the Carnage or original Jackal better, but it gives an option the other bowler(s) do not have.
I do get what you are saying...such a large penalty for such a SMALL infraction. And if we back up...if the original Jackal was out of spec, if the USBC did their job originally through Field testing, this issue would have been found a year ago (or more) and the loss for Motiv would have been far less as less runs of original Jackals would have occurred and there would not have been a Carnage released out of spec at all.
Motiv as just as much or more to complain about with the USBC and the way this went down as do the bowlers who had a ball or 2 or more taken out of his/her bag.
-
Just like it's tough to know which Jackals are over and which are legal, but they all got banned anyway. I've also had SEVERAL people tell me "well I'm not going to nationals anyway, it doesn't matter if the weights are out of spec." Also I can't exactly regulate it, if someone says drill the holes here and I don't like weight holes, that's just what I have to do, whether it makes the ball legal or not. I can advise them, I can drill the ring finger to china, I can do whatever I can to make it as close as possible, but at the end of the day, there are lots of people that buy things that never use them in sanctioned competition. Some bowl for fun, some bowl non sanctioned leagues, in no way is it my responsibility or jurisdiction to regulate that.
Very much so not even close to the same comparison. Drag racing is a TIMED sport. A higher differential doesn't make the ball automatically better. I still agree Motiv shouldn't have pushed the line, but given what newguy said about some cores allowing drilled diff to go so much higher, they could have just told them to cease production, grandfathered the old stuff in, and there would have been no issue. I get the point that illegal is illegal, and if you let one thing slide, what else do you let slide, but when you use some common sense and understand that a company lost basically a million bucks over a thousandth of a point in differential, that's so ridiculous I can't even comprehend it. All this does is reinforce bowler ignorance and misinformation. "Oh wow, the USBC hit them that hard over such a small amount, it MUST really be that big of a deal." Sends a very wrong message.
ITZPS
Tough to tell a legal or illegal ball not knowing side/top/etc especially when you do not know the starting info. Further, I put my trust in pro shops and other bowlers to have done or to do the right thing, which is what the USBC did here. They found an illegal ball and outlawed it. Kudos to them.
I do agree that the problem is if they do field testing, why did they not catch it sooner...are they really that behind, that understaffed, or what exactly?
We know the Jackal is bad now.
When I was drag racing, if you have ever watched drag racing, a red light can occur because you left the line .001 too early. If you have ever watched NHRA Top Fuel or Funny Cars or Pro Stock Cars, you would know that a car leaving .001 early when they travel to the finish line at over 300 MPH, what does .001 really mean? Not much, but they left the line too early. Thus, because they left too early, regardless of what the other car did, the car leaving too early loses and the other car is the winner.
Not a direct apples to apple comparison, but similar in that .001 can mean the difference between a legal ball/illegal ball and a legal run or illegal run (because your car left the starting line too early).
Sorry that I feel the rules need followed, regardless of how arbitrary it is. The rules are there for a reason. I guess what is causing my stickler attitude toward this is my background in Risk. When we test controls, we cannot pass any threshold regardless of how small it is. In a million dollar account, if my firm calculated a yield and is a single penny off, we fail the control because we were not right on. Who is really going to miss a penny? We either gave a penny too much or a penny short, but either way, we were wrong. Well, Motiv was wrong here.
I'm just curious what you mean grandfathered the old balls?
-
My contention is rather simple...
This is the first time, as far as we know, that this is happened...
And as pointed out, Motiv did NOT do this intentionally and anyone that references that is extremely way off base...so, again my contention is, there is no precidence set on this situation so USBC could have went a varying of ways to deal with a penalty and I believe, in MY opinion...this was the wrong way to defend it.
Yes the balls were non-compliant and anyone that understands manufacturing knows there is ALWAYS a variance given for tolerance...I also understand Motiv did themselves no favors by already being at the limit but the infraction is so minimal...less than the thickness of a piece of paper...so with that being said....USBC could have chosen a multitude of ways to deal with and I think they showed their arrogance by choosing this route...plain & simple
When you have a national tournament being contested and innocent competitors showing up and being notified their choice of equipment is no longer legal...they get screwed...similar to bowling on a noncompliant condition...it's not the bowlers fault but they'll get screwed when their scores are turned down
USBC could of easily said-these balls are noncompliant (Jackyls) they've been legal for 1.5 years so they are grand fathered in and they need to be retooled to be compliant...
The Carnage should've been removed from the market place and have the same done to them...retooled but don't screw the competitors...anybody that truly believes they are cheating by using these are delusional
Give Motiv a fine and place them on probation...plain & simple but AGAIN they could've chosen a different road but the one they chose really only screws the bowler as usual
So I am not defending the infraction I'm condemning the penalty...again I believe the USBC and its higher ups truly could careless abt the game and only want to sit back and say 'look I'm saving the game' and as these balls are now banned I can take a polyester bowling ball with a .020 diff and dbl the diff with a layout then hit with 80 grit....
-
About 10 years ago (maybe less) the diff max was much greater than the current .060 limit. Balls like the Lane 1 Super Carbide and the Immortal Solid had undrilled diffs of almost .080. USBC put in a rule that said all balls as of X date had to be produced at a limit of .060 diff, nothing more. Because the bowlers that had purchased the balls could still be using them, those balls certified and produced under the old rule were allowed to stay in bowlers bags. '
I can still purchase and use those balls because they are "grandfathered", but any new balls cannot be made.
USBC also gave the ball companies a date they had to stop producing those balls as well. So the companies cannot produce them any more, but they can still be sold and drilled and used in any USBC sanctioned competition today.
-
Yes, and I feel this would have been the correct way to go about it. I also have to say it's nice to have a debate without getting bitchy or pissy like has been known to happen here before, so thanks for keeping it clean, so to speak.
However, I also feel like it's inaccurate to say the Jackals offered an option other bowlers don't have. I don't think the best pros in the world find even a slight or marginal advantage with a ball at a diff of .062 as opposed to one at .056, let alone anyone else.
Case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khUITPlM5-Y
About 10 years ago (maybe less) the diff max was much greater than the current .060 limit. Balls like the Lane 1 Super Carbide and the Immortal Solid had undrilled diffs of almost .080. USBC put in a rule that said all balls as of X date had to be produced at a limit of .060 diff, nothing more. Because the bowlers that had purchased the balls could still be using them, those balls certified and produced under the old rule were allowed to stay in bowlers bags. '
I can still purchase and use those balls because they are "grandfathered", but any new balls cannot be made.
USBC also gave the ball companies a date they had to stop producing those balls as well. So the companies cannot produce them any more, but they can still be sold and drilled and used in any USBC sanctioned competition today.
-
IT...
I have said for someone like me, I will never see the difference on the lane with .0016 or .004 in extra undrilled diff.
Good luck to you and your shop. Hope you do well. Thanks for the good debates.
-
I can definitely agree to disagree with someone who "argues" fairly. Thanks.
IT...
I have said for someone like me, I will never see the difference on the lane with .0016 or .004 in extra undrilled diff.
Good luck to you and your shop. Hope you do well. Thanks for the good debates.
-
I'll add this as well. We should never be locked into an opinion. We should always be willing to change/re-evaluate given new information. :)
-
>> they could have just told them to cease production, grandfathered the old stuff in, and there would have been no issue.
There would be an issue. You now set a new precedent. I send in a ball to USBC to get approved knowing the differential is .057. Once I am approved I change the core so the differential goes to .063. People buy my ball and love the hook on heavy oil. USBC comes back six months later and says we have to have to stop production. Your ball is no longer legal. However, now the USBC has to grandfather my previously made ball, too.
Every manufacturer would do this since they would not have to replace any bowling ball previously sold. Plus, maybe they never get caught and just get to keep making these bad bowling balls. I honestly believe 100% that the USBC did the correct thing here.
And yes, between my son and I we have 3 Jackals. So no, I'm not saying this from an outsiders perspective.
-
Rico,
I was putting my thoughts together when AMFBowler300 posted. He said exactly what I was thinking. If you grandfather the Jackals, you open the door for every company to cheat and get away with it. Yes, they have been out for 1.5 years....but unless you can pinpoint exactly when the balls began to be manufactured out of tolerance....so that you can separate legal from illegal by serial number (if that is even possible), you have to ban them all. Yes, it sucks for Motiv, it sucks for the bowlers and it sucks for our sport. But what else can you do? If you say you can use them for a few months to give Motiv time to replace. What stops a company from making a ball with a .08, .09, .10 differential, then just allowing people to throw for a season or 2-3 months while it is replaced? How many tournaments could won, money could be won, medals could be won, that would otherwise go to other bowlers if people were using legal equipment. Yes, this amount may not make a difference (although I suggested a scenario in another thread that I might be realistic), but if you don't stop it here, you allow for further transgressions that will make a difference.
-
>> they could have just told them to cease production, grandfathered the old stuff in, and there would have been no issue.
There would be an issue. You now set a new precedent. I send in a ball to USBC to get approved knowing the differential is .057. Once I am approved I change the core so the differential goes to .063. People buy my ball and love the hook on heavy oil. USBC comes back six months later and says we have to have to stop production. Your ball is no longer legal. However, now the USBC has to grandfather my previously made ball, too.
Every manufacturer would do this since they would not have to replace any bowling ball previously sold. Plus, maybe they never get caught and just get to keep making these bad bowling balls. I honestly believe 100% that the USBC did the correct thing here.
And yes, between my son and I we have 3 Jackals. So no, I'm not saying this from an outsiders perspective.
This is not a good example and is not what happened with the Jackals. Motiv did not change the core after the USBC certified these two balls. What your talking about is a different situation entirely. If you submit a ball and get it approved, then change the core and begin to produce it you are not selling a ball that was approved by the USBC.
The thing I don't like about this situation is the lack of information about how all this came about. Where did the balls tested come from? How many balls were tested? Was it the USBC that collected these balls or were they sent in by someone else? A lot of this sounds fishy especially since this core has been in production for over 4 years. If you were to test lets say 20 balls, it wouldn't be hard to come across twice that many and hand pick ones to send in that would average out over the limit knowing that during the production process there is likely to be small variances that could be below or above the .06 limit.
-
Wowzers,
You failed to get what I meant. Nobody says you don't have the right to your own opinion. You and many others feel the same way about this and that's fine. It's just that you continue to spew the same opinion over and over on multiple threads. We all get it you want your drilling paid for and it ISN'T going to happen. Beat Motiv up over it all you want but nobody cares, except for a few. It's just time to give it a rest. As I said make your claim, get your new ball, sell it and and move on but stop polluting this site with the same drivel. That's not North Korea talking, that's just stating, we all get it. I understand your side completely but you have posted more than anyone on this and it just seems you are bent on hurting Motiv more than they have already been hurt. This did not happen on purpose and even if they did push the differential limit, the balls when first made passed the USBC testing. They didn't change the core later, just to cheat. Your tone has been less than understanding and you know as well as I do, if they had to pay for all the drilling of replacement balls, they more than likely would go out of business and any ruling by the USBC should never have that consequence to a company in the bowling business.
-
1/1000th is hardly cheating. Its almost not even measurable under normal conditions. The usbc are the ones who are going to pay this. I hope Motiv takes them to court because they will win.
-
What is even more incredible is the differences were .0004 and .0014, which is 4/10,000ths and 14/1,000ths. If you round .0604 to the nearest 1,000th, you still have .060. At least with .0614, if you round it you end up with .061 which is technically over, but still. The whole situation is really frustrating for all parties involved.
-
>> they could have just told them to cease production, grandfathered the old stuff in, and there would have been no issue.
There would be an issue. You now set a new precedent. I send in a ball to USBC to get approved knowing the differential is .057. Once I am approved I change the core so the differential goes to .063. People buy my ball and love the hook on heavy oil. USBC comes back six months later and says we have to have to stop production. Your ball is no longer legal. However, now the USBC has to grandfather my previously made ball, too.
Every manufacturer would do this since they would not have to replace any bowling ball previously sold. Plus, maybe they never get caught and just get to keep making these bad bowling balls. I honestly believe 100% that the USBC did the correct thing here.
And yes, between my son and I we have 3 Jackals. So no, I'm not saying this from an outsiders perspective.
I do not think that any manufacturer would change the core once there is approval because then you have a different ball. I believe that this whole thing with Motiv is truly them not understanding their own manufacturing tolerances. I have been an engineer in the manufacturing industry and understanding your manufacturability tolerances is essential. It has been said on other posts that a common tolerance for differential is +/-.004 so making a ball to send to USBC for approval at .060 is just asking for trouble. This is the very reason you don't see other balls out there with the claim that they are at a .060 differential. I have many customers that have bought these balls in question and I am hoping that this comes to a quick resolution. I also believe that USBC needs to stick to the findings as all balls, no matter the manufacturer, are tested in the same manner. It is a manner that is accepted in the industry. USBC and all the ball manufacturers use this method as far as I know. Until there is a better method this is it. Get over it and move on. Motiv will move on as well. I am sure they are just looking for ways to lessen the cost. I don't believe this will put them out of business but they will most likely need to tighten the belt a bit on spending. In the end the consumer always gets the short end of the stick.
BTW, I deal with measurements in down to the .xxxx all the time. When you do that the number does not seem as small as you think.
-
I don't see anything wrong with having a tolerance range and having equipment removed if it fell outside of those tolerances. I guess that is because in the air traffic control system, tight specs are common. We were not allowed to use equipment that fell outside of those specs. Ideally we kept equipment about midrange of the tolerances but if a component failed or changed significantly due to age or wear, and the equipment fell outside of the lower or upper limits, we had to remove the equipment from the air (transmitting).