I've been in and out of the game in the past few years and can't help but notice the shift in the releases from the past two years compared to about five-seven years ago.

Around 2005 or so, Ebonite released the One as their high performance release. For a #15 ball, the RG was 2.46, intermediate diff at .027, and total differential at .056.

In 2012/2013, Ebonite releases the Challenge as their high performance release, and the RG for a #15 ball is 2.51, intermediate differential .017, and total differential at .0.57.

The snippet of my observation from the Ebonite brand is that industry-wide, the rg's have gone up, intermediate differentials have been "lowered", and the total differentials are generally close to the same. I am learning that this trend is actually changing the way I drill recent releases compared to ones from 5-7 years ago.

Today, I find that I do not have to use extremely long pin-pap distances and "weaker" mass bias positions, like I did a handful of years ago. In fact, I find myself being more assertive with pin-pap distances and MB positions to get similar shapes I saw from those "weaker" layouts I had used for asymmetric balls I saw around 2005.

Seems like today's releases allow pro shop operators and most user groups to use layouts that are more familiar to them before the emergence of those asymmetric cores were around in the mid-late 2000s.

Am I seeing this on the same level as many of you guys are? Am I missing something? Is this a good trend? I hope to start a good discussion.

Its funny cause that's the opposite of how it is with me....i have to use much weaker drills on the newer stuff. The covers are just so much stronger that high end stuff is a waste for me on 95% of the conditions out there.

Covers are also MUCH stronger than they were 7-10 years ago.  I took just 3 years off from bowling, and when I threw a couple of new releases that was the first thing that came to mind.  Ten years ago, it was almost thought to be "impossible" to make a heavy oiler without the addition of particle.  Now there's maybe 5-6 particle balls on the market with none of them coming from any of the major brands.  Core tech has gone about as far as it can go with USBC limitations in effect.  The cores have to go a little weaker to help create the shape of these highly aggressive resins.

Quote from: DP3 on January 06, 2013, 11:28:01 AM

...
 Ten years ago, it was almost thought to be "impossible" to make a heavy oiler without the addition of particle.  Now there's maybe 5-6 particle balls on the market with none of them coming from any of the major brands.  ...

I wouldn't be too sure of that. They don't advertise them as such, but I wonder if they don't do that to some degree and I don't just mean mica in some balls.

Charlest might be right here. I think with the stigma of the past about particle balls, they just don't tell us.

IMHO, the trend in weaker intermediate diffs is making it a little easier to match up "strong" asymmetric equipment to bowlers without having to know the blood type of their unborn child.

I've noticed the trend like the IQ tour to lower rg, lower diff balls.

Of course being a fan of the Columbia ICON 2 for over 10 years while rolling on the left the transition to non particle versions of this type of ball are no surprise to me.

Who needs all that belly in their shots that stronger flare potential balls offer on many shots that don't need it.

Also, as to particle, I believe more balls are particle or a variation close to it than we realize.  Not popular to market so they don't.

In addition on the left particle balls can often work well due to our greater amount of head oil.  One of my all time favorites a Track Spell and the Icon 2 above still often in my bag!

Sitting ready for action is my Reaction Roll if I ever see a heavy volume league top hat!  Yeah!

REgards,

Luckylefty