How do you define a “fluffer”?  

Is it someone who simply has fewer revs on the ball than you? If so then someone else probably considers you a “fluffer” as well.

If it is a lower rev rate, what number is low?

Why are so many concerned about their performance?

How is their choice of balls any different than yours? Don’t you both pick the ball you think will help your game the most?

Maybe it is my perspective, the lanes I bowl on and the bowlers I primarily bowl with, but bowlers I would classify as “fluffers” do not dominate. Yes they may shoot an occasional score but in real competition over the long haul they come up woefully short. I’ve never seen a “fluffer” dominate or even lead in scratch league.

I would not call anyone in the top 25 (probably not in the top 100) in the city a “fluffer”, in fact I don’t know if I would call any flingers as well. A flinger did win bowler of the year in 2004 but his name never comes up as one of the top bowlers in town.

Many of these in the top 25 do not cover a lot of boards and would not be considered high rev players and as such I guess the crankers may consider them “fluffers” but not in my definition. I’m sure there are bowlers in town that consider me to be a “fluffer”.

If you truly have superior skills in release and accuracy over the long haul of a season a true “fluffer” will have no chance. Get over the few times a year that one has their night and shoots a big set.

I have to agree with you all about the main object of the game... knock as many down as possible... and the term "fluffer" is quite ambiguous.  But from a logical point of view, the more stuff (power, revs, speed, or in general energy) a person can impart on the ball, then the greater amount of energy that the ball can transfer to the pins.  One would have to believe that more energy at the pins would result in more falling over.  

SO, when a bowler uses sub-par stuff (power, revs, speed, or in general energy), personally I believe and I think that in general it is accepted that the likelyhood of pins falling over is less, assuming all else equal.  

This is where the dislike or disbelief or whatever you would like to call it comes into play.  When the sub-par "stuff" bowled shoots higher scores than the above-par "stuff" bowler, then based on the above description, the only reasonable explaination is blind luck (of course we all know that no two people throw the same so there is actually explaination).  But regardless, no bowler who feels they have superior stuff likes to get beat by bowlers with inferior stuff due to lucky breaks ;-)

Just a quick thought!

S^2
--------------------
Profile is updated for summer!  Check it out