No word why yet. More to come.

No, baseball and hockey are not the same. Everyone on the team has access to the baseball during a game in one way or another. Same with Hockey, it's a common element of the game used by all players.

Now in Golf, the equipment used by a PGA member is for his exclusive use. He should be held responsible for it. The PGA member isn't responsible for the course conditions, but he should be the single most concerned entity that his equipment isn't going to be outside the regulations.


PBA and PGA members can and should hold the equipment manufacturers responsible for providing them with tools that are legal for use.

Quote from: milorafferty on March 15, 2022, 02:43:29 PM

No, baseball and hockey are not the same. Everyone on the team has access to the baseball during a game in one way or another. Same with Hockey, it's a common element of the game used by all players.

Now in Golf, the equipment used by a PGA member is for his exclusive use. He should be held responsible for it. The PGA member isn't responsible for the course conditions, but he should be the single most concerned entity that his equipment isn't going to be outside the regulations.

Keep trying to justify your ignorance it’s very entertaining
PBA and PGA members can and should hold the equipment manufacturers responsible for providing them with tools that are legal for use.

I'm not justifying anything, just expressing an opinion on how to correct the problem.

If your opinion is different, as amazing as you may find it, I will be able to live with that.

Milo - they don't use one baseball per game in the big leagues. How many dozens of balls are used every game? I have seen one batter go through a half dozen balls from foul balls etc during one at bat. How would anyone outside of the pitcher and catcher during that time know if a ball was not quite right? What if one box of balls were bad somehow and the others were fine?

I think we will need to agree to disagree on this one.

No worries, but doesn't your statement enforce my argument?

The pros cannot and should not be expected to have a durometer in their bag, access to a Determinator, an RG Swing, a COR ramp, and a ball sled and a profilometer.  They should not have to scientifically test their own equipment.

I agree that what the pros (and retail consumers) really need is trust that the equipment being provided/sold to them is being manufactured to the correct standards.  This all falls on the manufacturer and the USBC.  If a pro is found to have a non-compliant ball, the pro should go back to the manufacturer and have then make good on it, but the pro should not be penalized by the PBA (other than confiscation of the equipment) for a non-compliance that cannot be seen, heard, or felt.

The pros cannot and should not be expected to have a durometer in their bag, access to a Determinator, an RG Swing, a COR ramp, and a ball sled and a profilometer.  They should not have to scientifically test their own equipment.

I agree that what the pros (and retail consumers) really need is trust that the equipment being provided/sold to them is being manufactured to the correct standards.  This all falls on the manufacturer and the USBC.  If a pro is found to have a non-compliant ball, the pro should go back to the manufacturer and have then make good on it, but the pro should not be penalized by the PBA (other than confiscation of the equipment) for a non-compliance that cannot be seen, heard, or felt.

That would be one huge bag...not that anything was said about the bowlers having all that stuff on their person.

Your wrong about golf equipment and bowling balls.  I have been out of the ball business for a while but there were definitely balls made for tour guys only that came out of San Antonio.  And golfers definitely have equipment specially made and built for them.

The only way to hold the bowler responsible is if you go back to the old way and have every ball checked after it is drilled and before it's used.  But the PBA doesn't want to have enough personnel at each tournament to do the ball check in.

Do random checks at each event. Like drug screening, it's too expensive to do everyone, but easy to set up a process to make a few random checks at each tournament. Then maybe the top five or so money winners in the top tournaments.

Quote from: milorafferty on March 15, 2022, 03:13:20 PM

Quote from: Bowler19525 on March 15, 2022, 03:01:52 PM

The pros cannot and should not be expected to have a durometer in their bag, access to a Determinator, an RG Swing, a COR ramp, and a ball sled and a profilometer.  They should not have to scientifically test their own equipment.

I agree that what the pros (and retail consumers) really need is trust that the equipment being provided/sold to them is being manufactured to the correct standards.  This all falls on the manufacturer and the USBC.  If a pro is found to have a non-compliant ball, the pro should go back to the manufacturer and have then make good on it, but the pro should not be penalized by the PBA (other than confiscation of the equipment) for a non-compliance that cannot be seen, heard, or felt.

That would be one huge bag...not that anything was said about the bowlers having all that stuff on their person.

The response in post #59 alludes to that with a statement such as "the bowler is the final check."

The bowler wouldn't have to "own" the equipment for the checks to ensure compliance.