Selecting a Ball to Suit New Lanes

[HeroesFall]

Hello all, my first post to this forum. For a bit of background before the main breadth of the post, I'm still young in my bowling "career" which is of an extracurricular nature. Currently acting as a sub on one of my company's bowling league teams. Was told they want to recruit me however once a spot opens up. Learned to bowl from my father, who throws a rather large hook. Reason being, he (and I) throw with only two fingers in the ball - thumbless. I know this is sacrilege to the truly dedicated bowler, and that as a thumbless bowler we are analytically less consistent, but its a style we both enjoy, and hasn't limited my father's average when he bowls consistently (185'ish not bad for normal league play). This "style" however is probably the primary cause for my opportunity (see positive spin on issue). I have 0 idea if I'm a cranker, tweener, or the third one (sorry), but self-evaluation has me more towards cranker. I keep a short backswing, but drive through on the follow through / forward swing of my delivery. Not a particularly fast approach, and I typically bowl from the left gutter pitching over the middle or third from the right arrow.

On to the crux of my message. I bought a Roto Grip Disturbed (designed for medium-heavy oil) a couple years back after researching many balls on bowlingball.com. It had a reaction I really enjoyed. Went and had it drilled at my local pro shop. I spent some time overseas which prevented my being able to consistently bowl, and haven't really picked it up prior to this past weekend. League bowling this past week, I found that the ball was hooking WAY too early for the lanes - which supposedly are a heavy oil house pattern - per all the consistent league bowlers in comparison to surrounding areas. Adjusting my approach speed, moving closer to start from, right on the lanes, etc. still yielded a similar result. Essentially, I would have had to muscle the ball down the lane to push it far enough to actually hook close to its target (still off). I swapped to a house ball - a Brunswick Strike Zone - and my scores sky-rocketed, gaining 60 pins between game 1 and 2, and another 25 from game 2 to 3. The result was consistent strikes, pin action on the lane, and really just a need to re-work my spare ball with a plastic (also was told I'm the most entertaining bowler to watch in the league, heh). My take-away, the Disturbed is just too aggressive for these lanes, even though its designed for medium - heavy, perhaps my stronger hook, creates an additional "dynamic" making it insufficient for these lanes. My conclusion, I need a new ball for these lanes.

I spent some hours trying to research the Strike Zone to find that it was released in 2005 and is now obselete. Here is the spec sheet from Brunswick:
http://www.bowlwithbrunswick.com/downloads/info-sheets/Zone-Asymmetric-Strike-Zone.pdf

My next step was, well, lets check out some comparison's on bowlingball.com and see what is similar. My Disturbed's specs just for reference:
Disturbed Specs
Product ID 10676 Brand Roto Grip
Perfect Scale 196.9 RG 2.50
Finish Sanded Lane Condition Medium-Heavy
Coverstock Reactive Resin Ball Mfg Part # RDI
Ball Quality First Quality Factory Finish 2000-Grit Abralon
Coverstock Name 66MH Solid Reactive Core Name Middle Roll 70
Differential 0.043 Durometer 73-75 on D-Scale
Flare Potential 6+" (Medium-High) Core Type Symmetric
Performance High Performance[8] Roto Grip Product Line HP3
Release Date 01/08/2013

Biggest difference is the Strike Zone is Asymmetric, the differential, and the finish (potentially, I know there's a spread sheet trying to compare them all here, but I would love an industry standard like I operate in during my day-to-day work). So off to asymmetric balls I go. I looked at a couple - though I'd like to stay with Roto Grip. No other reason than I'm a bit OCD and would like to be consistent with my branding. I'm open to good options though.

Hyper Cell Skid:
http://www.bowlingball.com/products/bowling-balls/roto-grip/11806/hyper-cell-skid.html
Seems like a possibility. In a review, even stated as a "more mild" ball for when the others in your bag hook too soon.

Mastermind Intellect:
http://www.bowlwithbrunswick.com/balls/detail/mastermind-intellect/
Very similar stats to the Strike Zone. Outside of "my" branding, but I can make an exception if it gives me the ball I need to fit my style and the lanes. Core looks similar to Strike Zone.

Storm Crux Pearl:
http://www.bowlingball.com/products/bowling-balls/storm/11867/crux-pearl.html
Root beer scented.. confusing to me, but hey, who doesn't like Root beet?? I imagine a polished ball will "break" later and have a smaller hook than a reactive ball. Maybe a polished ball is what I need? Specs again are similar for Differential, RG, and asymmetry.



There are other balls as well obviously that are asymmetrical and similar in stats. My problems are as follows:
1. I have no way of trying all of these balls out to see how they will fit my style, and if they'll be what I need.
2. The Strike Zone I bowled with that was a house ball, is NOT a Strike Zone out of the box. I doubt its ever been cleaned, and has had years of oil absoption. Essentially, its not the same ball. So what ball do I actually need to conquer these lanes?
3. I could "alter" my Disturbed on finish, hole pattern, etc. but to me, I would rather have a ball to suit the situation, than force a situation upon a ball. It can be done, but that's not the "spirit" of the ball.

So my idea is to talk to a pro shop guy, see if he can give me input based on what I provide him, but I figured this forum has plenty of pro shop'ers, experienced bowlers, and "been there done that'ers". I will admit I don't know 100% of the bowling terminology, I'm still learning. My goals honestly are to be around a 180 - 190 average bowler eventually. Right now though, I just want to locate a ball that will allow me to connect with the pins in a similar manner to what I did in my final game Wednesday night. After that, its all about hitting my mark, making my spares, and better learning my style.


Thanks for the time, hopefully the long read is at least broken down in a clean / concise manner. Hopefully, I can get some help with a ball choice. I'll be bowling again tomorrow (different lanes) for more practice. Its a great past time and something my entire family enjoys.

[Bradski9]

After skimming the post, the first thing I would do is go to my pro shop and ask for the disturbed to be polished/ask them What they can do to either reduce hook or delay it. since this option is cheaper than getting a new ball.

[Amyers]

I realize the ball you were having some success with was asymmetrical but all of the balls you have listed here will hook as much or more than your disturbed

I have some friends who are thumbless bowlers and super strong equipment just doesn't fit thier game I would suggest looking at hysteria, uproar, or outcry if you want a new ball

You could also try changing the surface of your disturbed to 4000 would make it go a little longer. The disturbed is a pretty strong ball and dosent clear the heads real easy at it out of the box surface

[HeroesFall]

Hello, thank you both for responding. So polishing the ball is what will delay or lessen the hook and my suspicions that the years of oil absorption of the house ball is what gave me that lesser hook, not the design of the ball itself.

Would the Disturbed essentially be a useless ball for me because of its strong reaction?

Are the balls mentioned - hysteria, uproar, and outcry all less pronounced hooking balls?

I assume the 4000 sanding would essentially polish it. Would that be sufficient and would it ruin the ball? I assume you can always revert back to a previous finish.

Thanks again and it's the weekend, cause for celebration.

[Amyers]

Well here is where things get complex. Adding polish or putting a higher grit surface on your ball will make it hook more just later down the lane but often that's what you actually need. It will also keep the ball from hooking in the head of the lane as much which the Disturbed can do.

The hysteria is a polished high Rg solid it will go much deeper on the lane than the disturbed before hooking and I mean a lot deeper. Total opposite shot shape. I would say total hook wise they are similar. The hysteria is made for medium oil.

The uproar will hook slightly less than the hysteria will also be much deeper on the lane before it hooks. It is made for medium medium-light oil

The outcry is more similar to the disturbed than the other two balls it will be deeper than the disturbed but not as deep as the hysteria or the uproar. It is also more of a medium medium-light oil ball

I'm not a big believer that balls themselves hook a lot more or less than another it's more of where they hook. I'm not saying there aren't diffrences just that they are smaller than most bowlers think. The amount of hook you have is as much a matter of ball speed, revs, and where you are playing on the lanes as it is the ball.

[HeroesFall]

Hello Amyers, thank you again for responding. I went quiet for a while as I wanted to do some research on the balls you mentioned and make a decision.

I ordered the Hysteria last night (as well as a spare ball). Hopefully it will be a great complement to my Disturbed for when the ball starts to hook too early.


As far as drilling the ball... I know this can have as much impact on the ball's motion as the design itself. The pro shop guy who drilled my Disturbed will be the same one drilling these 2 new balls. Do I just describe to him what I'm looking for, just have him drill it the same as my Disturned and "let the ball do the work"? Any advice is appreciated.

Thanks again! Pretty excited and hope the ball works out for me.

[Amyers]

Best advice on layouts is talk to the PSO about what you want the ball to do. Hope it works out great for you from what I have seen it will be a great combination.

[HeroesFall]

Thanks! I'll be sure to provide the update as soon as I throw a series on my league lanes. One for closeout on the topic and two, never know it may my help someone else.

[larry mc]

go with something weaker , like a brunswick lt48

[RobLV1]

go with something weaker , like a brunswick lt48

Perfect timing! Sean Rash just shot 300 on TV using the LT 48. It is obviously not a "weak" ball. I does get further down the lane, retaining energy to demolish the pins. If we could just get away from the "weak" or "strong" terminology and simply refer to early roll or late roll, I think that a whole lot of bowlers would actually end up with the right ball in their hands rather than the "strong" ball which is often the wrong ball.

[larry mc]

Perfect timing! Sean Rash just shot 300 on TV using the LT 48. It is obviously not a "weak" ball. I does get further down the lane, retaining energy to demolish the pins. If we could just get away from the "weak" or "strong" terminology and simply refer to early roll or late roll, I think that a whole lot of bowlers would actually end up with the right ball in their hands rather than the "strong" ball which is often the wrong ball.

it is a weak ball , check brunswicks site on it and ive seen it many times in person , u can shoot 300 with any ball if the conditions match up right, a strong late ball would be something like a hyper cell skid

[RobLV1]

it is a weak ball , check brunswicks site on it and ive seen it many times in person , u can shoot 300 with any ball if the conditions match up right, a strong late ball would be something like a hyper cell skid

I'm not referring to the actual characteristics of the LT 48, but to the terminology of "weak" vs. "strong" that is commonly used to describe bowling balls. Think about our modern society. Don't we revere things that are "strong" and show distain for things that are "weak"? This cultural mindset often carries over to new bowlers who automatically assume that a "strong" ball is better for them, when in fact, something that is less aggressive and goes longer would be a much better match for them. I was not challenging your statement, only the misleading terminology that you, like so many bowlers (even Randy Pedersen on the PBA telecasts) choose to use.

[Amyers]

I'm not referring to the actual characteristics of the LT 48, but to the terminology of "weak" vs. "strong" that is commonly used to describe bowling balls. Think about our modern society. Don't we revere things that are "strong" and show distain for things that are "weak"? This cultural mindset often carries over to new bowlers who automatically assume that a "strong" ball is better for them, when in fact, something that is less aggressive and goes longer would be a much better match for them. I was not challenging your statement, only the misleading terminology that you, like so many bowlers (even Randy Pedersen on the PBA telecasts) choose to use.

I get where you are going with this but it is only a descriptive term and yes I agree that "weak" does have a negative connotation in our society. The bowler who is picking out a ball due to its being strong is just as likely to purchase because they like the color or smell though instead. Those of us who are in the know understand that it is how the ball matches up to the conditions and our bowling style that matters.

[RobLV1]

I get where you are going with this but it is only a descriptive term and yes I agree that "weak" does have a negative connotation in our society. The bowler who is picking out a ball due to its being strong is just as likely to purchase because they like the color or smell though instead. Those of us who are in the know understand that it is how the ball matches up to the conditions and our bowling style that matters.

That is exactly what I'm trying to get accross. Many of the posters on this site are not "in the know," they are just starting out and I'm trying to help them to get started in the right direction. Describing balls as "weak" or "strong" is only confusing to them.

[Perrin]

I just wish we could get the ball companies to release information about their coverstocks like they do the cores.

it would allow us to actually compare balls from different manufacturers scientifically instead of generic Storm coverstocks go longer....

[Mark O]

That is exactly what I'm trying to get accross. Many of the posters on this site are not "in the know," they are just starting out and I'm trying to help them to get started in the right direction. Describing balls as "weak" or "strong" is only confusing to them.

I completely agree and dropping those descriptions is a great way to get someone started in the right direction. I mean if you're brand new to the game why would you ever want a ball that was considered to be "weak". The strongest ball you can possibly have is a ball that knocks all 10 pins down consistently and that ball can be any ball in your bag that day depending on the conditions and how you throw it. You wouldn't use a sledge hammer to tap in a nail in order to hang a picture frame, the same can be said about selecting the right tool for the job on the lanes. It's just unfortunate because any advertisements you see always seem to be trying to sell "the most hooking ball to date" and some PSOs just want to add to their bottom line by selling you the ball with the biggest price tag. Best thing I think anyone can do is to find a quality PSO that will look to get the right ball in your hand and one that will also get that ball to perfectly fit on your hand. Makes a world of difference!

[Amyers]

That is exactly what I'm trying to get accross. Many of the posters on this site are not "in the know," they are just starting out and I'm trying to help them to get started in the right direction. Describing balls as "weak" or "strong" is only confusing to them.

I'm not disagreeing that there needs to be a better system or terminology. Unfortunately I haven't seen anything out here that solves the problem. Even if you use your terminolgy as early rolling or late rolling how do you determine that unless you are very familiar with the balls already? I figure your going to say Rg but that only counts the core and ignores surface and coverstock.

[RobLV1]

The only reason that I emphasize the rg so much, is that it is the only thing that is numerically determined. Theoretically, if you have two balls with the same cover material, the same surface, the same layout, but one has an rg of 2.56 and the other has an rg of 2.48, the ball with the 2.56 rg will go longer. Obviously, rg is not the only thing that counts, but it is a great starting place as it's the only thing that is actually numerically measureable. You have to start somewhere, and it might just as well be with the rg.

[Amyers]

The only reason that I emphasize the rg so much, is that it is the only thing that is numerically determined. Theoretically, if you have two balls with the same cover material, the same surface, the same layout, but one has an rg of 2.56 and the other has an rg of 2.48, the ball with the 2.56 rg will go longer. Obviously, rg is not the only thing that counts, but it is a great starting place as it's the only thing that is actually numerically measureable. You have to start somewhere, and it might just as well be with the rg.

I agree that Rg is the only measurable thing you are given. Unfortunately that is the problem with it also. The core of the bowling ball only reflects about 20 percent of a balls motion. Leaving the remaining 80 percent to be determined by coverstock, drilling and surface. Very rarley will you have the opportunity to purchase two balls with different cores and the same surface

Buying a strong or agressive ball because that is what you think you need without doing any research makes you a fool. Using Rg as a lone determination makes you misguided even when you do research you may still be very incorrect. It is much easier to correct a fool than redirect the misguided.

[RobLV1]

I agree that Rg is the only measurable thing you are given. Unfortunately that is the problem with it also. The core of the bowling ball only reflects about 20 percent of a balls motion. Leaving the remaining 80 percent to be determined by coverstock, drilling and surface. Very rarley will you have the opportunity to purchase two balls with different cores and the same surface

Buying a strong or agressive ball because that is what you think you need without doing any research makes you a fool. Using Rg as a lone determination makes you misguided even when you do research you may still be very incorrect. It is much easier to correct a fool than redirect the misguided.

Back in the days of plastic and then urethane balls, when the ball had only a pancake weightblock to compensate for the holes that were to be drilled, it was said that cover and surface accounted for about 80% of a ball's reaction. The cover and surface was all there was with the exception of static weights creating a very slight imbalance depending on how the ball was laid out. Now, some thirty to forty years later, when balls are made with dynamic cores the create massive weight imbalances within the ball, you are telling me that cover and surface account for about 80% of ball reaction. Think about what you are saying logically. Does this really make sense to you?

[Amyers]

Back in the days of plastic and then urethane balls, when the ball had only a pancake weightblock to compensate for the holes that were to be drilled, it was said that cover and surface accounted for about 80% of a ball's reaction. The cover and surface was all there was with the exception of static weights creating a very slight imbalance depending on how the ball was laid out. Now, some thirty to forty years later, when balls are made with dynamic cores the create massive weight imbalances within the ball, you are telling me that cover and surface account for about 80% of ball reaction. Think about what you are saying logically. Does this really make sense to you?

Does it make it better if it is 30% of reaction? It's still not going to remove the differences in surface and cover stock.

For example if you purchased a Storm Optimus from the Rg you would expect a very early ball. That one makes it quite far down the lane more skid flip. Storm high road solid very high Rg more of an early turn ball. I'm sure there are more examples. Aslan had one not too long ago with his bullet train much different reaction than he expected due to a much stronger coverstock.

I don't have the answer here and maybe if your going to blindly follow a formula Rg is better than "strong" "weak" but in my opinion neither will lead you down the correct path on a consistent basis.

If you really want to make informed choices find a quality pro shop, try to sell the balls thrown as much as possible, watch videos (allowing for lower speeds and rev rates), and be a student of the game

[fortheloveofbowling]

The way i look at core vs drilling vs surface is this:

On the lower end of the spectrum you can take a storm crux or whatever nuclear bowling ball and take it your pro shop operator and he can make it go as straight as a white dot with surface adjustment. But if you are looking to make a new age bowling ball reach the ultimate level of performance it is designed to accomplish drilling is the main factor. If you are looking for a specific reaction the core and the numbers before drilling is your first consideration and surface factors in as well. It is not like you are ONLY and maybe not at all going to tell your pro shop guy give me something shiny if you are looking for skid flip. At that point experienced players or players with the help of their pso can fine tune the reaction with surface or another drilling option a weight hole.

If possible and especially if you are building an arsenal you should factor in different surfaces along with cores and drillings so you don't have to srcew around with surface adjustments. To many people mess around with changing surfaces on their ball themselves without really knowing what they are doing. There is a reason why you see pba guys talking with ball reps and letting them give advice on surface and doing that for the player.

[larry mc]

I'm not referring to the actual characteristics of the LT 48, but to the terminology of "weak" vs. "strong" that is commonly used to describe bowling balls. Think about our modern society. Don't we revere things that are "strong" and show distain for things that are "weak"? This cultural mindset often carries over to new bowlers who automatically assume that a "strong" ball is better for them, when in fact, something that is less aggressive and goes longer would be a much better match for them. I was not challenging your statement, only the misleading terminology that you, like so many bowlers (even Randy Pedersen on the PBA telecasts) choose to use.

I get what u r saying , i didnt mean weak as a negative at all , maybe we do need new terminology , a "weak" ball can be ur best friend on the right conditions

[RobLV1]

Does it make it better if it is 30% of reaction? It's still not going to remove the differences in surface and cover stock.

For example if you purchased a Storm Optimus from the Rg you would expect a very early ball. That one makes it quite far down the lane more skid flip. Storm high road solid very high Rg more of an early turn ball. I'm sure there are more examples. Aslan had one not too long ago with his bullet train much different reaction than he expected due to a much stronger coverstock.

I don't have the answer here and maybe if your going to blindly follow a formula Rg is better than "strong" "weak" but in my opinion neither will lead you down the correct path on a consistent basis.

If you really want to make informed choices find a quality pro shop, try to sell the balls thrown as much as possible, watch videos (allowing for lower speeds and rev rates), and be a student of the game

No, it doesn't matter what percentage it is. The only thing that I'm saying is that it is a component that cannot be ignored (any more than cover material, surface or layout can be ignored). Friction is easy to understand. It has been with us in bowling since the inception of the game. Resistence, how hard the ball has to work to rev up, is a relatively new phenomenon with the introduction of modern dynamic cores. Resistence is much harder to understand, but just because it's harder to understand, doesn't mean that it can be ignored. I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that RG (resistence) is more important than friction. I'm just saying that ignoring it altogether because it is harder to understand is a huge detriment toward developing a true working understanding of modern bowling balls because, whether it contributes 20%, or 30%, or 40%, it does contribute something.

I am not blindly following any path, and the issue of "strong" vs. "weak" is purely a semantic one. I am simply trying to encourage bowlers to open their minds to the idea that bowling, and bowling balls, have changed dramatically over the past twenty years. Falling back on the comfort zone created by "surface is 70% of ball reaction" is no more than an excuse not to put in the effort and thought that is required in understanding modern equipment today.

[RobLV1]

I get what u r saying , i didnt mean weak as a negative at all , maybe we do need new terminology , a "weak" ball can be ur best friend on the right conditions

Thank you. Personally, I like "more aggressive" or "less aggressive," or "early rolling" vs. "long."

[RobLV1]

The way i look at core vs drilling vs surface is this:

On the lower end of the spectrum you can take a storm crux or whatever nuclear bowling ball and take it your pro shop operator and he can make it go as straight as a white dot with surface adjustment. But if you are looking to make a new age bowling ball reach the ultimate level of performance it is designed to accomplish drilling is the main factor. If you are looking for a specific reaction the core and the numbers before drilling is your first consideration and surface factors in as well. It is not like you are ONLY and maybe not at all going to tell your pro shop guy give me something shiny if you are looking for skid flip. At that point experienced players or players with the help of their pso can fine tune the reaction with surface or another drilling option a weight hole.

If possible and especially if you are building an arsenal you should factor in different surfaces along with cores and drillings so you don't have to srcew around with surface adjustments. To many people mess around with changing surfaces on their ball themselves without really knowing what they are doing. There is a reason why you see pba guys talking with ball reps and letting them give advice on surface and doing that for the player.

Good point. Personally, as I bowl league in three different bowling centers, I often change the surfaces on my equipment to match up to the specific characteristics of each center's oil pattern and surface.

[HeroesFall]

Hey gents, looks like I missed a fun discussion!

I do agree the terms weak / strong do hold a connotation to them. For me, understanding WHAT that means as opposed to the connotation is what's important. For my case, I would assume a weak ball would have a "weak" or small hook, and a strong ball a "strong" or big hook. Herein lies the issue. I throw a big hook, a curve actually. So in my mind, I want a ball that does what I do, hooks big. But this is actually counter-intuitive (at least from what I understand) and since I create a big curve with my style, I want a ball that is "weaker" or hooks less to compensate or bring balance. That's where I get / got in trouble.


Thought I'd provide an update. Bought the Hysteria, had it drilled in the same manner as my Disturbed - that is, to give the least amount of hook from the ball. The Hysteria has a much smoother hook. I do still have to loft it out on the lanes where I bowl league however. Where I bowl on Saturday's with my folks, its perfect - the Disturbed is still too much of a "heavy oil ball". I threw 8 games this past Saturday at my "fun lanes" and threw 11 in a row, which is huge to me. Sadly, it was split over 2 games, but I managed my first over 200 game (224). Was pretty proud and excited. Seems my limiting factor is follow-through. If I follow-through and hit my mark, I'll get strikes / 9's on my fun lanes.


The Hysteria unfortunately has its on and off nights at my "league" lanes. Best I've bowled there was a 155. Got so frustrated this past week, I threw my spare ball (basically rotating but a straight) to bring my third game up to a 185 because the first two games were terrible. My father has since been bowling these same lanes with me as we'd like to form a team next year. The lanes from his review are very heavy oil in a very short length, then dry as a bone. Which explains the hooking early and why everyone on league says there's "a lot of oil on the lanes." My father purchased a Urethane ball for the lanes thinking that would solve the issue (he also can throw a plastic and get good revs off of it). For me, I love the Roto Grip balls. I love the pin action, carry, and the way they hit the pins hard. I threw my father's Headhunter (an old urethane) this past weekend, got it in the pocket, but the kind of pin reaction just wasn't there, it didn't feel strong.

Was given a $100 gift certificate to our local pro shop from my folks for my recent birthday. I can score another ball at that price (without drilling). So I'm trying to figure out what to go with. I read the Wrecker and Uproar are for drier lanes, should I give those a look-see, or starting digging through urethane balls? For reference, my father just bought a Storm Pitch Black for the league lanes, wants me to try it out this weekend, but I just can't seem to get the same curve, or return on the ball, it just dies out on me, like it loses power (at least the old Headhunter does).


Thanks again for all the help. Bowling twice a week has been helping me improve as has having balls I am comfortable and confident with. Though the biggest part has been the bowler, not so much the balls - less the league lanes which I still need a solution to. Regards.

Edit: Appears there's also a Roto Grip Shout and Roto Grip Scream if I look for purely Dry Lanes. The Uproar and Wrecked are listed as Medium - Dry but all 4 balls have the "late roll" core. The former 2 are HP1's with the latter two, HP2's (which just mean newer versions, but I'm more focused on meeting my application.

[Mike White]

Perfect timing! Sean Rash just shot 300 on TV using the LT 48. It is obviously not a "weak" ball. I does get further down the lane, retaining energy to demolish the pins. If we could just get away from the "weak" or "strong" terminology and simply refer to early roll or late roll, I think that a whole lot of bowlers would actually end up with the right ball in their hands rather than the "strong" ball which is often the wrong ball.

Based on that criteria, since I shot 300 with the Polar Ice it's not a weak ball?

Ok a change in terminology... The Polar Ice, in definitely not an early roll, and for most people it's not a late roll, so I guess it would qualify as a never roll.

I guess it's a good thing I throw enough revs that ball speed, and surface motions match up enough to let the ball hook.

[Mike White]

No, it doesn't matter what percentage it is. The only thing that I'm saying is that it is a component that cannot be ignored (any more than cover material, surface or layout can be ignored). Friction is easy to understand. It has been with us in bowling since the inception of the game. Resistence, how hard the ball has to work to rev up, is a relatively new phenomenon with the introduction of modern dynamic cores. Resistence is much harder to understand, but just because it's harder to understand, doesn't mean that it can be ignored. I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that RG (resistence) is more important than friction. I'm just saying that ignoring it altogether because it is harder to understand is a huge detriment toward developing a true working understanding of modern bowling balls because, whether it contributes 20%, or 30%, or 40%, it does contribute something.

I am not blindly following any path, and the issue of "strong" vs. "weak" is purely a semantic one. I am simply trying to encourage bowlers to open their minds to the idea that bowling, and bowling balls, have changed dramatically over the past twenty years. Falling back on the comfort zone created by "surface is 70% of ball reaction" is no more than an excuse not to put in the effort and thought that is required in understanding modern equipment today.

Resistance is not a new phenomenon. Pancake weight blocks have always been in the 2.7 Low RG range.

What the new dynamic cores bring, is track flare.

Track flare is what makes static weights less important since what starts out as side weight doesn't stay side weight as the axis migrates across the ball.

Reactive resin covers were designed to skid more when there is oil between the ball and the lane, and hook more when there wasn't oil between the ball and the lane.

To achieve no oil between the ball and the lane after the oil pattern ends requires track flare, or the oil be transferred back off the ball to the lane (i.e. carry down).

[RobLV1]

Based on that criteria, since I shot 300 with the Polar Ice it's not a weak ball?

Ok a change in terminology... The Polar Ice, in definitely not an early roll, and for most people it's not a late roll, so I guess it would qualify as a never roll.

I guess it's a good thing I throw enough revs that ball speed, and surface motions match up enough to let the ball hook.

Your 300 game with a Polar Ice is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. If you threw 12 strikes in a row with it, it was not a weak ball or a strong ball; it was the right ball, not the wrong ball.

[Tony]

Hey gents, looks like I missed a fun discussion!

I do agree the terms weak / strong do hold a connotation to them. For me, understanding WHAT that means as opposed to the connotation is what's important. For my case, I would assume a weak ball would have a "weak" or small hook, and a strong ball a "strong" or big hook. Herein lies the issue. I throw a big hook, a curve actually. So in my mind, I want a ball that does what I do, hooks big. But this is actually counter-intuitive (at least from what I understand) and since I create a big curve with my style, I want a ball that is "weaker" or hooks less to compensate or bring balance. That's where I get / got in trouble.
[/I]

I think you're last thought here is right on target, a less aggressive / weaker ball is what you'll need. If I understand your style is thumb less with a lot or revolutions and hook. The type of ball you might want in the roto grip line according to the star search would be an outcry for heavy oil, and a shout for med oil. This is only a guide and you might want to look at the 3 balls in the hp2 line outcry, uproar, and wrecker and consult with your pro-shop and tell them how you're current ball is working. Sometimes the ball manufacturers guides for balls are misleading, the balls for heavy / med /dry lanes are relative to how you throw, also the more aggressive your delivery is requires a ball that's less aggressive to be able to control it on the lane. A good indication is the comment you made about having to loft the ball down the lane to keep it under control. When you have to do that you "have too much ball" would be the comment from the experienced bowlers around this area. I'm no expert but from what you've experienced the "weaker " balls might be the ticket for better scoring for you.