go to the Radical Facebook page to see the latest comparison video with the Guru Supreme also we have a surface friction comparison chart and the impact of the lane surface on your ball. Its a real eye opener.
Phil

http://www.ballreviews.com/coverstock-preparation/awesome-video-showing-how-much-a-ball-changes-in-three-games-t289256.0.html 


This was posted here, in 2012... same test.

Great video I have re-posted several times here and elsewhere because so many people do not know this, and still don't.

The value of the Radical vid for me along with the other isn't the ball that strikes the most, hooks the most, or does whatever it is what you can see in a side by side comparison and use to make a judgement from there on something.

This video it is the affects of surface change. We can assume all bowling balls hook more prior to the total number of games bowled in the end. If I owned a shop I would love to have those other videos playing so customers can see the differences in those bowling balls at the time to try and better fit a ball in the lineup of what they are looking for.

Customers, especially higher average bowlers typically aren't looking for the next hook monster but something to fit between on what they currently have. No different then a golfer wanting a different wedge or four.

I still want a Pivot because of the previous video. If you pay attention it starts hooking sooner and will hook more then the Guru. You could easily move further left with the ball seen in the video and let it eat up the oil.......if you know what you are looking at.(same for the Sinister) As a consumer if you thought the Pivot and Deadly Aim were similar you have a video that shows that not to be the case at least at box finish.

I thought he didnt know how quickly surface changes after being used and that what ever the final grit applied was, how far removed the actual surface could be from it.


I use 1000 grit regularly as a finishing grit and people look at me like "great that guy" because apparently 1000 grit is throwing chalk today. I assure you many of them do not know, and I know a local former PBA regional guy here who is on staff with Track doesn't know, that the Paradox box finish actually scans just above 1000 grit.


He is the first guy to start mother f%*king someone for throwing surface. Little does he know he an many others are throwing more surface then they realize.

Why is that information important to me.....

A guy I drilled a Paradox for just a month or so ago LOVES the ball. Last week says it doesn't hook. Doesn't wrinkle etc etc. He tried adjusting the surface some, and baking it and still nothing. Thanks to this I have a better idea of how to help him out now because of the video and surface scanning.

I do not know what Phil may or may not know about every little thing in bowling. Honestly do not care. He has given some insight  here and there that many apparently are too hung up on other stuff to realize what they are over looking.

That is reference to surface and technology and how people get hung up on the terms solid, pearl, hybrid etc. He basically told people it was marketing and any ball no matter the looks of the coverstock can be designed to react in any way they choose. A solid coverstock that goes long and hooks etc. like a "pearlized cover". Nobody catches that and instead argues other stuff in the post when referring to the original Guru comparison vid. Another industry person on here has said the same thing, pay attention to surface not pearl, solid, hybrid marketing.

Yet you still have the same questions and post and misunderstandings... can i sand a pearlized ball, I wish they would make a hybrid version of this..., our lanes are too dry for solids, etc. It is the marketing industry in full force.

The video footage doesn't lie, only the spin marketing may play.

And the marketing led me to my question that will remain unanswered. Which ball lost the most overall hook from ball 1 to game 20. Seems like a pretty reasonable question, right?

 
It's a reasonable question if that was one of the stated objectives of the test. They've told you clearly it wasn't. Back in reply #46, Nick was clear:
 

Could we have thrown the balls on Throbot right out of the box and collected data?Sure. Did we? No. That wasn't the intent of the test, the focus was what happened to the balls after 20 games.

 
There is point where it's reasonable to let it go. It's been reached and passed.

Thank you. You guys need to band together and get that problem resolved so we can make this a great place again. The private Facebook groups will be the way and ball reviews will be a thing of the past. Start an anti Troll campaign Thanks

Hey Shill...er I mean TKK

I don't have any Radical pieces in my bags at the moment. I just appreciate the effort and the fact that someone who WANTS to help the industry continues to post here rather than have idiots like you that have an agenda to shill drive people like Phil away. So no, I won't spare you.

So once again, go back to your threads and continue to smell and shill for your Utah and Michigan glue sticks.

Constructive criticism was asking why only posting the video to Facebook. I do agree that if you do not have Facebook...sorta difficult to see the vid. I would like to see it posted to Radical's site as well, but the bottom line is the vid was made with good intentions. The only intentions you ever had was to push buttons and shill.

The video is up on the Radical YouTube page and will be added to the website Monday.

Thanks Nick, much appreciated!