I'm surprised that nothing has been said yet in this forum.  It really took off yesterday on the PBA website, and today on the DynoThane forum.  I'm curious as to what the reaction is from the Track staffers...

Here's the proposal, and all the following information is true, as far as I can tell-

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Letter to all ball manufacturers and Industry Partners...

The USBC believes that the proposed specification changes are appropriate because both the equipment and the bowlers have changed considerably over the years since the specifications were first implemented. The proposed new specifications reflect changes in the game.

1. Three (3) Proposed specifications;
a. All balls will be required to be manufactured with the USBC logo and year made as of 1/1/06. The USBC ball logo must be a minimum of two (2) inches in diameter and be engraved in the same manner as any other logo on the ball. The USBC ball logo will not be the same USBC logo currently used on the ball boxes. We suggest the USBC ball logo be placed on the bottom of the ball. The USBC ball logo will be e-mailed to all ball manufacturers as soon as it is available.

b. All balance holes will be eliminated in all balls manufacturered/drilled after 1/1/06. Elimination of balance holes will reduce the ability to manipulate the dynamics of the bowling ball. Bowling ball's with balance holes prior to 1/1/06 will be grandfathered and will be able to be used in certified competition up until 1/1/08.

c. All balls drilled after 1/1/06 will require the center of gravity (CG) mark to be within 1 inch of the center of grip. In conjunction with the proposed change of the balance hole specification this new specification would allow league and tournament officials to verify (as a rule of thumb) a ball is within the current specifications for static weights. Bowling ball manufacturers will need to be proficient with the marking of the CG so pro shops can properly drill balls within this proposed specification. Bowling balls manufacturered prior to 1/1/06 will be grandfathered and will be able to be used in certified competition. up until 1/1/08.

2. New Mohs' Hardness specification. Mohs' hardness is a material hardness scale that differs from the current durometer "D" hardness scale. It was developed by Fredrich Mohs' in 1812. Hardness of a material is determined by observing whether its surface is scratched by a substance of known or defined hardness. The Mohs' hardness of any material added to or included in the coverstock of a bowling ball shall not exceed 6.0 on the Mohs' hardness scales tested in accordance with the USBC approved test procedure. A standard glass sample with a Mohs' hardness of 6.0 will be used to determine if the materials in the cover stock of a bowling ball will scratch the standard glass sample. Any ball with cover stock material that is harder than 6.0 will scratch the sample and that ball will not be approved. The standard glass sample will be manufacturered by an independent contractor specifically for use in this test. The test method is very simple and can be reproduced at the ball manufacturers lab. This will be implemented by 8/1/05. The current durometer "D" specification will remain in effect.

3. Feedback on recent specification changes (RG Diff and COR). USBC will re-affirm why the changes were made and gather information on whether future changes will be needed in these areas.

We will have an open comment period on the proposed changes from 6/1/05 to 6 /30/05 in addition to the industry forum. Any comments may be forwarded to: USBC Equipment Specifications Department; 5301 South 76th Street; Greendale, WI 53129; Fax (414) 421-5860; E-mail TechComments@bowl.com

A final decision regarding all proposed specifications changes will be issued by 7/29/05.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

What do you guys think?  How does this affect Track?


--------------------
Jeff Voght
PBA Eastern Region Member


Edited on 4/28/2005 4:30 PM

Does everyone know what the one GOOD thing about the rule changes are.....? Del, Brian, and company are smart enough to overcome the changes with new cores, covers, and possibly new drilling innovations(the last one being the least likely of the three). I am confident even if the changes go through that Track will be leading the pack (no pun intended).

Clint
--------------------
Clint Daley-Owner
Lets Go Bowling Daley
Salem, Ohio 44460
TRACK ADVISORY PRO SHOP STAFF

I personally never liked weight holes but, then agian I never knew how much they could change the reaction. I talked to our local abc lane rep today and he said he is for them. He said it will bring us back to the days or urtaine. Maybe it will cause everyone to become more and more accruate who knows. I for one really wish they will not change them. Equipment is expensive and yeah my stuff will be grandfathered for a year but do i really want to go out and buy balls at 200 plus and not be able to do much with how they are drilled? I thinkt hey need to set some standards as to how the lanes are oiled. I think they are trying to do this cause scores and averages are out of the house for most. So here is my suggestion. Make the average bowler work to become more then just average. Make it standard that every league is putting out a harder house shoot. Yeah might be hard to enforce but hey why not put out a tougher shoot and then those who are not that good then the scores will show and those who are good will maybe struggle or maybe will excel who knows. Hope I do not get slamed for this post. Just my thoughts and i know I am a nobody i am just alittle more then average bowler.

I also bet they are totally against these rules (even though they might not admit it).
--------------------
Just bowl!

USBC regulations and PBA regulations are 2 different things.

ALSO, these are not set rules, they are "proposals". If you do not like the ideas then email or call USBC and voice your opinions.

-EX-
--------------------
C-G Pro Shop (owner/operator)
Youngstown Ohio

Track Intl.-Amateur/Pro Shop Staff