Bowling Ball Progression Issues

[Aslan]

Thought I'd nerd it up a bit because I'm having a bit of an issue with my arsenal prgression and then I read Rob's article from April 2015 on BTM and I thought I'd throw this out there:

Right now I have:
Brunswick Lethal Revolver, solid, symmetric, RG = 2.547. 0.054 diff.
Columbia300 Dark Encounter, solid, asymmetric, RG = 2.50, 0.052 diff.
RotoGrip Asylum; symmetric, hybrid, RG = 2.50, 0.043 diff.

Now, there is also a high RG Pearl but it's still at the pro shop so I left it out of the comparison.

Now, when I put this together....I thought the Dark Encounter would be the strongest ball. It has a solid cover, a powerful core, a low RG of 2.50, and using PerfectScale as a reference, has the highest rating at 209.9.

I had the Lethal Revolver as #2 as it also had a solid cover, but was a symmetric core, and a much higher RG...and for reference...it was slightly lower on the PerfectScale at 209.5.

That left the Asylum at #3 with a hybrid cover, and much lower PerfectScale rating...a much lower Diff. as well and a symmetric core. The PROBLEM is...it has a more advanced cover (it's much newer technology) and a low RG of 2.50.

So...if we believe that the cover is the #1 factor...and we also believe that lower RG hooks sooner....then Columbia DE is #1 and Le. Revolver #2, and despite the RG....the coverstock wins and the Asylum is #3.

If we believe you set up the arsenal based on RG and core strength....then it's Columbia DE, Asylum, and the high RG Le. Revolver as #3.

The coach set my progression as Le. Revolver, D. Encounter, and Asylum. The reasoning was simply that Brunswicks hook way more than Columbia. I thought that was rather alarming...because thats not a specification I can measure or quantify. But, if you look at the PerfectScale comparison....it somewhat explains why the weaker core and higher RG Le. Revolver is practically the same PerfectScale value as the D. Encounter.

Thats the technical specifics/background. How are they behaving on the lanes???

The Lethal Revolver is clearly #1 in terms of strength. It has a very angular backend, which I've had to get used to. I don't know if it hooks sooner or later than the other 2 balls....but I know it hooks more sharply and aggressively and covers more boards.

I've been balling down to the Dark Encounter...but have found that it gives me very little angle...I often have to at LEAST move right 2 boards with my feet and target...sometimes as much as 3 boards with my eyes and 4 with my feet just because otherwise the cover simply cannot grab the lane. Since I can't swing it out very far...it becomes a ball to just play the oil line and hope for carry....which it is NOT good with. Lots of pocket hits that don't strike.

Then we get to the Asylum. I can't just ball down to the Asylum and maybe move 1:1 right. If I try to play the same line as the D. Encounter...I end up missing left as the Asylum bites more at the end of the pattern...or I end up hitting light as the Asylum skids through the oil line looking for friction and hooks too late.

In order to optimize the Asylum, I actually have to move my target out to the right (1.5 boards) while bringing my feet left (3.5 boards). I actually need to change the angle to account not only for the lane breakdown, but also for the fact/hypothesis that the Asylum pound for pound is probably stronger than the D. Encounter. And thats AFTER the Asylum had a small balance hole drilled in it to weaken it a bit AND after taking a 1500 pad to the Dark Encounter to try and give it some more bite.

But, as I mentioned in my scores thread...the good news is I'm starting to break out of defined, specific systems for movement and starting to actually read the pattern.

[RobLV1]

Once you learn that there is more to ball selection than just how much they hook, the easier it will be to understand. Often times, the most aggressive ball on a given lane condition is the one that stores the most energy for the backend. I'm impressed that you are factoring in the age of the ball and the technology issue. I would really like to see you get away from the whole weak ball, strong ball thing, and just look at them as being different; reading different parts of the lane. I would also like to see you get away from the idea that putting more surface on the ball gives it more bite. It's true in the oil, but that same surface will make the ball die in the friction, making it seem "weaker." Finally, the Perfect Scale is a crutch for those bowlers who are afraid to learn about the components of bowling balls: core, layout, cover material and surface. You are already past that. Use your eyes, and, oh no, I'm going to say it again, STOP OVER-THINKING EVERYTHING! We'll talk Friday.

[bobforsaken]

A couple of thoughts to spitball out there.
1) RG and Differential are for Undrilled. Layout can change those numbers. Believe your own eyes over the numbers.
2) You mentioned the Dark Encounter has very little angle. I also noticed it is an Asymmetric ball. I don' t know if this is the case for all Asymmetric or can change with layout but I find that my Asymmetric is very sensitive to Axis of Rotation. If I increase my AOR with My Thug Unruly I can hook the lane.. if I stay behind it it hooks less than my tropical breeze. If you are a low axis of Rotation bowler that may be why you are seeing it "hooking less" than your symmetric balls that the numbers would indicate hook less. I've also noticed that if I get it out to the dry to early it will just die. I need to give it oil for it to live to its potential..
3) Its harder to see, but try to not watch the balls as much as they migrate right to left, but rather where they start to change their motion front to back. IE.. Does your Revolver seem more angular simply because it hooks later than your Dark Encounter. My guess is that it hooks Later than the Dark Encounter but Earlier than the Asylum which is why you have to find more friction with the asylum by throwing it to the dry in order to get the Asylum into a roll. When playing the same line as the Revolver it probably has too much oil for the speed/rev rate you are imparting to it and is hitting in the hook phase. Based on your descriptions I'd guess that when playing the same line as the Lethal Revolver your Dark Encounter is Rolling out and your Asylum is never getting into a roll because its skidding too far.

We are different bowlers so listen to your coach.. but for Me I would start with the Asylum as far right as I can (probably right of second arrow for a target) and play it as long as I can.. When it starts skidding past the break point as I migrate in, I would go to the Lethal Revolver. My Dark Encounter would be used when I need to move the breakpoint closer to the headpin (move my target left but feet the same) because the outsides are toasted and give it the oil it needs. Since the breakpoint is closer to the head pin I won't need the large hook to hit pocket, I just want to make sure it gets in to a roll but not too soon.

[billf]

I've recently changed my progression but have been using the same philosophy. Numbers and science are great starting points but we are missing parts of the equation, such as lane surface, oil brand, brand and maintenance of the lane oiler, etc..

I start with my earliest reading ball. This is my new Cyclone drilled RICO. When I get too far left to carry the ten (laydown at 30, 18 at arrows seems to be the limit) then I go to my pin down Shock.
If we are on a lane where more back end is needed I go Panic (pin above and centered on the fingers), Octane (pin through ring) then Covert Revolt (75 x 4 x 30)
All these balls have OOB surface. Wood lanes. Kegel Prodigy conditioner with a Kegel Kustodian oiler. The first 4 lanes of 12 are 40 years older. Those along with lane 8 tend to have more back end.

[Aslan]

2) You mentioned the Dark Encounter has very little angle. I also noticed it is an Asymmetric ball. I don' t know if this is the case for all Asymmetric or can change with layout but I find that my Asymmetric is very sensitive to Axis of Rotation.

That may be the case. I'm starting to get much better axis tilt than I used to but still don't have a 90 degree release with lots of axis rotation. If it's too sensitive to axis rotation, that might be the issue. Because I've noticed the same thing that even out on the dry it just doesn't seem to have any angle...just a lame banana shape curve.

[Amyers]

Rob will probably be able to tell you after he watches you bowl my guestimate is the Dark Encounter is consistently burning up due to lower rev rate and where you like to play on the lanes. I really thought the Asylum would be a hit for you. The one problem I had with that ball is it doesn't carry well once I move inside and start throwing it right to left shouldn't be an issue for you. I would try starting with the asylum use it until you need to move in a little then switch to the lethal revolver.

Part of the problem with asymmetrical balls is that how they perform is very dependent on the pin to pap measurement. It could be with the changes to your game you pap has changed quite a bit and the ball drilling is no longer working for you. I figure a lot of it has to do with throwing aggressive cover ball with lower grit surface 2k down dry lane boards with low revs= ball death

[Aslan]

Yeah. I don't know about starting with the Asylum out in the dry up and in. My concern is that I'm essentially down to 2 balls that work (Le. Revolver and Asylum) and I know that sometime before the 4th game, I am going to eventually not be able to use the more aggressive Le. Revolver...so I need another option at that point or on shorter patterns or drier conditions. If I start with the Asylum and the lanes transition too much...especially until I get the 4th ball from the pro shop...I'm not going to have a ball to ball down to.

The other issue is carry. I can maximize the angle with the Asylum and get it to work well at getting to the pocket...BUT...it won't carry as well as the Le. Revolver does.

The real question I'm facing is whether or not I just switch the Asylum and D. Encounter since there really is just so little movement with the D. Encounter. And I brought the surface to 1500...but it was just by hand to scuff it up a little...and it was acting the same with the OOB finish so it wasn't like I ruined it or anything.

I think your Asylum and mine might be drilled much differently. The reason I say that is, I too had higher hopes for the Asylum and have been disappointed with it's performance...BUT...when I got that ball it had 3" pin and the ball driller was instructed by the coach to add a small/deep balance hole because I "can't control that pin length". I don't know what that means...but it leads me to think they intentionally "dumbed down" the Asylum to get it to better fit in that #3 slot and try to give me a little difference ball to ball.

I'll try to remember to ask Rob about the balls when I see him Friday morning. I read his article on RGs and I know it's a controversial topic (even on BTM), but I don't understand how a ball with a solid cover and a 2.50 RG doesn't "move" much. It probably is less aggressive than my old Slingshot. It'll move earlier, for sure, but the same or less total board coverage. And it's hard to have this kind of discussion because there are SO many variables affecting the answer.

For example;
Ball with low RG and solid cover SHOULD react aggressively...but they can also die out/burn out early and APPEAR to act non-aggressively.

And then there's drilling. Minor factor? Maybe. But when we're talking detailed specs...an asymmetric core...more revs...maybe drilling can lead the ball to appear dead when it fact it is fine and just needs to be thrown differently or drilled differently. As Bill said, it may be that I need more axis rotation to utilize the core.

[Aslan]

I'm impressed that you are factoring in the age of the ball and the technology issue.


Finally, the Perfect Scale is a crutch for those bowlers who are afraid to learn about the components of bowling balls: core, layout, cover material and surface. You are already past that.

Just to provide an alternate opinion on this (PerfectScale)...I totally agree with you that people are better off learning more about specs and not using a generic scale...but I think you're looking past the value of it in terms of the first quote.

There is no specific measurement available to most bowlers that can compare technology to technology. And if we assume that all solid covers are the same...all hybrid covers are the same....and all pearl covers are the same...and we discount technological advances year to year...I think we could make big mistakes in arsenal construction.

And thats why I use PerfectScale as a sixth performance measure (1 of 6)...because it will remind me that despite my 2015 ball being a hybrid and my 2011 ball being a solid....they are much closer in performance than their covers would indicate...because the newer cover is stronger than a hybrid cover from 2011.

It's also probably not as important to you...but thats because you're unique (compared to most bowlers) in two MAJOR ways that will skew your research:

1) You tend to bowl with only one brand (Brunswick).
2) You tend to use only new releases (or newer releases).

I know you also test other manufacturer's balls and stuff...but I'm saying in GENERAL...you don't have to worry as much about variance from company to company or from years past until now.

[Amyers]

Yeah. I don't know about starting with the Asylum out in the dry up and in. My concern is that I'm essentially down to 2 balls that work (Le. Revolver and Asylum) and I know that sometime before the 4th game, I am going to eventually not be able to use the more aggressive Le. Revolver...so I need another option at that point or on shorter patterns or drier conditions. If I start with the Asylum and the lanes transition too much...especially until I get the 4th ball from the pro shop...I'm not going to have a ball to ball down to.

The other issue is carry. I can maximize the angle with the Asylum and get it to work well at getting to the pocket...BUT...it won't carry as well as the Le. Revolver does.

The real question I'm facing is whether or not I just switch the Asylum and D. Encounter since there really is just so little movement with the D. Encounter. And I brought the surface to 1500...but it was just by hand to scuff it up a little...and it was acting the same with the OOB finish so it wasn't like I ruined it or anything.

I think your Asylum and mine might be drilled much differently. The reason I say that is, I too had higher hopes for the Asylum and have been disappointed with it's performance...BUT...when I got that ball it had 3" pin and the ball driller was instructed by the coach to add a small/deep balance hole because I "can't control that pin length". I don't know what that means...but it leads me to think they intentionally "dumbed down" the Asylum to get it to better fit in that #3 slot and try to give me a little difference ball to ball.

I'll try to remember to ask Rob about the balls when I see him Friday morning. I read his article on RGs and I know it's a controversial topic (even on BTM), but I don't understand how a ball with a solid cover and a 2.50 RG doesn't "move" much. It probably is less aggressive than my old Slingshot. It'll move earlier, for sure, but the same or less total board coverage. And it's hard to have this kind of discussion because there are SO many variables affecting the answer.

For example;
Ball with low RG and solid cover SHOULD react aggressively...but they can also die out/burn out early and APPEAR to act non-aggressively.

And then there's drilling. Minor factor? Maybe. But when we're talking detailed specs...an asymmetric core...more revs...maybe drilling can lead the ball to appear dead when it fact it is fine and just needs to be thrown differently or drilled differently. As Bill said, it may be that I need more axis rotation to utilize the core.

I know you've added surface to the encounter have you tried it at a higher grit? Try hitting to with 4k and see if that make any difference if it doesn't trash the thing and move on.

[bobforsaken]

I second the suggestion to try the Encounter with a higher grit to see if its better. I doubt it will hook more for you but it may carry better.

One thing that probably doesn't need to be said, but I'll say it just in case. In terms of "bowling ball progression", can I assume that you are thinking strictly in terms of how balls relate to each other and not necessarily which ball you always use first.. which one is always second.. etc? In other words, the Lethal Revolver may be the first ball out of your bag to get a read on the lane.. you may start with the Asylum and then go back to the revolver one week.. The next you may start with the Revolver and go to the Asylum. The reason I ask is I used to think that the lanes are always drying up so I'm always playing where I was as being drier than when I started. The truth is many times the line I'm playing requires me to ball up and then ball back down as Oil gets pushed into my line and then starts to dissipate again. I would get killed during transition because I was afraid to go more aggressive or move right because "It can't possibly be more oil there now.. it has to be drying out.. if I ball up I'll go through the nose"

[RobLV1]

"It's also probably not as important to you...but thats because you're unique (compared to most bowlers) in two MAJOR ways that will skew your research:

1) You tend to bowl with only one brand (Brunswick).
2) You tend to use only new releases (or newer releases).

I know you also test other manufacturer's balls and stuff...but I'm saying in GENERAL...you don't have to worry as much about variance from company to company or from years past until now."

While I do use Brunswick balls exclusively right now, I do observe the ball reactions of other bowlers using both newer and older equipment. The main things with the age of any balls are the changes in technology that have occurred since the balls introduction (known) and the number of games bowled on the ball in the past in relation to how well the ball has been maintained (not known).

By the way, you have just made a very valid point as to why it is in most bowler's best interests to use one, or at the most two brands exclusively. It makes it much easier to learn the differences between the balls in your arsenal without relying on a system that does not take into account the unknowns and try to assign a value based only on the knowns (Perfect Scale).

[Aslan]

By the way, you have just made a very valid point as to why it is in most bowler's best interests to use one, or at the most two brands exclusively. It makes it much easier to learn the differences between the balls in your arsenal without relying on a system that does not take into account the unknowns and try to assign a value based only on the knowns (Perfect Scale).
The problem with that is...which brand?

Had I started out with Columbia and just went 100% Columbia...I think I'd be struggling to average 170. Had I done what most everyone else does and just throw Storm...maybe I'd be averaging in the 180s a year or so ago. There are some people that still exclusively throw Ebonite and Track...why?? You've found a company that you like in Brunswick...I also think right now Brunswick is probably the best out there...but others claim Motiv...or Storm...or RotoGrip...and make valid arguments.

I probably won't switch to JUST ONE brand anytime soon. But my next 15lb arsenal is already put together and the 4 strike balls are Brunswick, 900Global, Brunswick, and Brunswick. So, hopefully that will help. I think after I retire this arsenal...my brief love affair with Columbia is dare I say at an end. Two different high performance balls and both hit weaker than a Brunswick Slingshot. That's not good.

[Amyers]

The problem with that is...which brand?

Had I started out with Columbia and just went 100% Columbia...I think I'd be struggling to average 170. Had I done what most everyone else does and just throw Storm...maybe I'd be averaging in the 180s a year or so ago. There are some people that still exclusively throw Ebonite and Track...why?? You've found a company that you like in Brunswick...I also think right now Brunswick is probably the best out there...but others claim Motiv...or Storm...or RotoGrip...and make valid arguments.

I probably won't switch to JUST ONE brand anytime soon. But my next 15lb arsenal is already put together and the 4 strike balls are Brunswick, 900Global, Brunswick, and Brunswick. So, hopefully that will help. I think after I retire this arsenal...my brief love affair with Columbia is dare I say at an end. Two different high performance balls and both hit weaker than a Brunswick Slingshot. That's not good.

I have never been a Colombia fan. I have had some teammates throw the Antics line and the Eruption line and they are ok but was never anything that made me turn my head to look at going down the lane or when they hit the pins. Of all the brands out there Colombia has always been my least favorite.

I don't know about the whole buy the one company thing unless they are handing out staffer positions then great but the line ups among a lot of the brands at times stink at some point. I'm a big storm/roto fan but I don't think I could build a lineup out of them right now that fit me great. I guess you could from Hammer since they keep 50 balls in their lineup. Brunswick actually looks pretty good at the moment as far as my game goes and they finally seem to have their act together on the bigger hooking stuff with the Mastermind series but I wasn't a fan of their high end stuff before that.

I felt like all the new storm/roto stuff has been for the power player set which is great but it leaves guys like me out. I hate to say it but if I was building today it would be Hammer or Brunswick with an outside shot to Motiv. I've seen some of the upper end 900 global stuff look really good but I can't find anyone who throws the midline lower line stuff to see it in action.

[Aslan]

Brunswick actually looks pretty good at the moment as far as my game goes and they finally seem to have their act together on the bigger hooking stuff with the Mastermind series but I wasn't a fan of their high end stuff before that.

I agree. Of tournament and competitive players, I'm seeing balls like the Guru series, Mastermind series, and Hyper Cell series. I have liked Brunswick since the Aura series...and I think the Mastermind series is about as good top to bottom as anything out there. Motiv has interesting balls but I just don't understand their specs and how all their balls fit together. And Rotogrip is great at the top...but even the pros throwing Storm/Rotogrip tend to go from the Hyper Cells to the IQ series because RotoGrip's mid-range stuff seems questionable. And I think a LOT of that is just too many ball releases. They went from releasing the Wrecker (which most people found disappointing) and suddenly there was the Outcry...then the Menace...then the Haywire....and it's just confusing as to where the hell all these balls are supposed to fit in a progression since they all seem to be so similar.

My only knock on Brunswick is the decision to make the balls in Mexico. I think that hurt them with the blue collar crowd especially...but even me, I almost would rather buy from Storm or Motiv where I know it's supporting American workers. And the other "knock" is like Rotogrip...too many ball releases. The Mastermind and Genius were very, very popular and very good performance...then they feel the need to release the Intellect and the Einstein and it just isn't clear how they all fit together. It used to be that a company would release a low level reactive ball...usually a pearl. Then they'd have a midrange, best out there right now is probably the IQ series from Storm...which is probably more in between mid and high performance. And the midrange would have a pearl, a hybrid, and a solid. Then there'd be the high performance/pro performance line...the Hyper Cells and Masterminds of the world...again...a pearl, a hybrid, and a solid....all the same cores.

But recently, it seems like the companies are just trying to release ANYTHING at 3-4 times during the year...thinking that if it's NEW...people will think it's better and they MUST have it. And the strategy tends to work. But it calls into question how much technology is actually advancing release to release. I had this debate with Rob before about "new technology"....I'll buy advancement in technology year to year or even every 6 months sometimes...but if Rotogrip releases a ball in September and then another in January...there's very little chance that in that 4 months...Rotogrip made a huge leap forwards in technology. Of matter of fact...if you did a study and could get the ball companies to release the information....you'd likely find that some of the releases are almost identical to previous releases. 900Global got that reputation when they started using old cores in new releases.

I actually had to laugh because I was bowling against a pro shop operator and he saw my Asylum and said, "wow...busting out the old Asylum huh?" And I'm thinking:

1) It's hardly "old". They were throwing it on the tour last season.
2) It's far and away Newer than anything else I've thrown since my Frantic that I used back in 2013.

[RobLV1]

There are two issues that you are not considering: the overall design concept of the brand, and what brands are made by the same manufacturers.

The cover material is the one factor in ball reaction that we have to go totally on what the manufacturer tells us, and what we see when others use the equipment. The biggest difference that can be easily seen is between Storm balls and Brunswick balls. Storm balls have long be known for their skid/snap reactions. Brunswick has long been known for their "rolley" qualities. These qualities are determined more by the cover materials being utilized than anything else. When Storm produces a ball that is supposed to be aggressive and early-rolling, it usually isn't around for long. When Brunswick makes an attempt to introduce a skid/snappy ball, it is usually quickly forgotten. In terms of these qualities, you need to choose a brand based on your own bowling style both physically and how you play the lanes. I can only talk about styles with which I am familiar: my own which is dominated by the fact that I am really trying to get better at playing more inside lines, and Brunswick is very good at reading the oil, and Aslan who is very speed-dominant, so Brunswick is also good choce for him.

The other factor to consider is what company makes which brands: Storm makes Storm and Roto Grip, and is now involved with Global. Brunswick makes Brunswick and DV8, as well as Radical. Ebonite makes Ebonite, Columbia, Hammer, and Track. Motiv makes only Motiv. If you are going to use multiple brands of equipment, you are probably better off choosing balls made by one manufacturer, as you will see more similarities in the the cover materials than if you cross over between manufacturers.

[Ptnomore]

My last Brunswick ball was the Wicked Siege. I LOVED that ball. Then it died. Or so we thought. I wanted to try Motiv so I picked up a Cruel Intent since it's numbers were very similar to the Wicked Siege, and I had it match drilled to the WS. It worked beautifully...until this season. New lane surface (synthetic from wood), new lane conditioner, having trouble finding a ball surface that works consistently.

In an effort to "try something" and not wanting to ruin the Cruel Intent, I pulled the Wicked back off the rack, and refinished it again using what I've learned over the last few years of finishing my own equipment. It's back from the dead. It's been a GREAT ball for me for the last couple of weeks, averaging 220 with it (198 league average). And I use a Hammer Nail Smoke and Fire for Game 3. Between The Brunswick and the Motive, I was trying Hammer stuff. Hammer worked well last year, but this year, the Taboo Jet Black and Arson Hybrid are having trouble finding spots in the line up.

It's odd that the old Wicked came back, and I do get LOTS of smart *** comments about the old purple ball on the High dollar mens league I'm in. But those comments die off as I start stringing the strikes together with it. It hits SO damn hard, just like I remember it used to.

The numbers matter. But it's not quite rocket science as I see it, to find that match up that works. Rocket science to me would indicate that there is a formula out there somewhere. But there seems to be just so much more that affects the ball reaction that can't be quantified like humidity, air temp, lane conditioner, lane machine maintenance, the types of balls the other bowlers are throwing, your skid on the approach (more or less sticky than a week ago, a day ago, an hour ago), pin setter maintenance (more and more at our house we're noticing pins out of place), etc.

[RobLV1]

In an effort to "try something" and not wanting to ruin the Cruel Intent,...

I once did a study of the ball reviews in BTM, and matematically calculated that over 60% of bowlers have to change the surface of a ball to get the best reaction for themselves! By changing the surface, you are not "ruining the ball," you are just changing the surface which, if you are smart, you will do before you ever throw it, as the OOB finish can NEVER be duplicated. Overthinking again? ...

[scottymoney]

As strictly a Motiv user I have pieced together an arsenal that I know the differences and can make good ball changes when I need to. What people miss most about comparing balls is the cover material differences (which do very by brand) but the one number all balls can be compared by is the RG numbers.

Also being a strictly Motiv guy, I have noticed the difference in oil absorption. Not sure how Motiv does it but the balls do not absorb oil like the Storm/Roto and Brunswick balls. As I have done oil extraction from all these brands, I have noticed I rarely get much out of the Motiv balls but the other brands I have to bake for at least an hour or 2. Although it has nothing to do with progression I find it interesting and see it as an advantage that the balls I use do not pick up and absorb the oil like the other brands.

[Tony]

My last Brunswick ball was the Wicked Siege. I LOVED that ball. Then it died. Or so we thought. I wanted to try Motiv so I picked up a Cruel Intent since it's numbers were very similar to the Wicked Siege, and I had it match drilled to the WS. It worked beautifully...until this season. New lane surface (synthetic from wood), new lane conditioner, having trouble finding a ball surface that works consistently.


It's odd that the old Wicked came back, and I do get LOTS of smart *** comments about the old purple ball on the High dollar mens league I'm in. But those comments die off as I start stringing the strikes together with it. It hits SO damn hard, just like I remember it used to.



Played against a guy last week throwing an Brunswick old purple ball, not sure if it was the same ball but he had a 700 !

[Ptnomore]

Played against a guy last week throwing an Brunswick old purple ball, not sure if it was the same ball but he had a 700 !

706 with a 247 and 248 games 2 and 3 for me last week.

[Ptnomore]

Overthinking again? ...
I didn't mean to suggest anyone is over thinking anything. I put it out there to spur some more dialog. Re-surfacing a new ball is something that has been suggested numerous times, but something I can't get myself to do even if I did think about it, particularly if it works works well OOB. It definitely makes sense. But every ball that I have purchased, I researched, poured over the numbers, etc. to fill a particular need. So my natural instinct is to try it OOB for that purpose. I haven't had one yet that disappointed me out of the box. In comparison, I know I haven't tried or purchased nearly enough bowling balls to argue against your suggestion. Again, I agree that it makes sense to do, and something I'll have to keep in mind on the next purchase...which won't be anytime soon, if I can help it. Wife said 9 balls in 3 years is enough, at least until the kids start graduating from college and not entering college. 2 in, 2 more to go. Hopefully, she won't find my stash of flyrods. :)

[Ptnomore]

Also, RobLV1, Thought you'd like to know, that because of a few things I've read today, written by you, I've signed up for a BTM subscription. Thanks!!

[RobLV1]

Also, RobLV1, Thought you'd like to know, that because of a few things I've read today, written by you, I've signed up for a BTM subscription. Thanks!!

You're welcome. I'm sure that you'll find BTM to be a very valuable resource.

[Amyers]

I didn't mean to suggest anyone is over thinking anything. I put it out there to spur some more dialog. Re-surfacing a new ball is something that has been suggested numerous times, but something I can't get myself to do even if I did think about it, particularly if it works works well OOB. It definitely makes sense. But every ball that I have purchased, I researched, poured over the numbers, etc. to fill a particular need. So my natural instinct is to try it OOB for that purpose. I haven't had one yet that disappointed me out of the box. In comparison, I know I haven't tried or purchased nearly enough bowling balls to argue against your suggestion. Again, I agree that it makes sense to do, and something I'll have to keep in mind on the next purchase...which won't be anytime soon, if I can help it. Wife said 9 balls in 3 years is enough, at least until the kids start graduating from college and not entering college. 2 in, 2 more to go. Hopefully, she won't find my stash of flyrods. :)

Here is the real point to what Rob said. If you have the ball you poured over the numbers on for weeks and really love and go bowl 10-20 games with it do you still have that same reaction? The answer is no it has changed because ball surface changes after as little as 3 games! it just happens gradually so we tend not to notice until it gets really bad. That's the reason why it is important to have a finish that you can easily supplicate again because if you want to keep that motion your going to have to accept the fact that your going to need to resurface that ball every 10-20 games max.

[Aslan]

New Question:

Since I've hit 200+ games on the arsenal, I've at least started to give some thought to arsenal #3 and to clear out some of my collection...I may go back to 16lbs...if for no other reason than to go through some of the last of my collection that is at that weight. So, in other words, I'm trying to not have to buy a 16lb ball to fit in a progression spot. If I DID....I'd probably get something like a Brunswick Soul Mate and use it as the #3 option...but lets just use the below scenario for right now.

You have 4 balls....one is a 2.57 RG pearl, low diff. Essentially this is just a long, straight ball...probably similar to what I was used to with the Slingshot in Arsenal #1.

So here's the dilemma....and I figured RobM might chime in because his arsenal article in BTM was very RG focused...the other 3 balls ALL have identical RGs of 2.49.

So, if I have 3 balls...and ALL have RGs of 2.49....what are some strategies to maximize the differences between them so that they do actually compliment one another? Or is RG so, so important....that there's really no point to having 2-3 balls with the same RGs +/- .02 much less identical?

I was thinking one of the balls had a higher differential...and even though it's a pearl...it's probably the stronger choice. Then what to do with balls #2 or #3? Both the same company...the same RGs...the same 0.041 diff. The only real difference is one is a hybrid and one is a pearl....I guess that could provide 'some' separation.

And yes, yes, yes....I know RobM will have a disclaimer that there is no possible way to put a reasonable arsenal together without massive amounts of data and video footage and blueprints and humidity measurements and a drone that circles the various centers to take topography measurements and I'm sure it all ties into some type of farmer's almanac....but lets just say for the sake of argument...an EMP goes off and all that is reduced to uselessness...and we can't visually watch everyone else because it's a league for blind players....with no friends to ask for advice.

There....I tried to keep the conversation on 3 balls with a 2.49 RG....although I have a sneaking suspicion I left some side door open....something that's gonna revert the discussion back to what the ball thrown by the 96 average female bowler does at 20, 40, and 60 feet downlane and whether or not the lanes face due South or are more of an East/West facing lane(s).

[RobLV1]

The reason that my arsenal article in BTM was very RG focused was simply because that is the one element that most bowlers have the most difficulty understanding, so it is often ignored. As to how important it is, the article explained that the lower a bowlers rev rate is, the more important the RG is. Simply put, the faster the ball is spinning, the more friction becomes the main element in ball reaction. In your case, your rev rate is not that high, so RG is pretty important for you despite your higher ball speed. If you forget about differential (you don't put that much turn on the ball), and stop this obsession with cover materials, what's left is SURFACE. You can take your three 2.49 balls and put a lot of surface on one, a medium surface on another, and polish the third, however they WILL NOT show you the same separation that three balls with a range of RG's will. So, simply put, no, there's really not much point in having three balls that are that close in terms of RG and trying to make them different.

With that being said, please excuse me, I have to go polish my drone! LOL

[Amyers]

1. First off what are the balls we are talking about?
2. The difference between two balls with the same RG and Diff one being a pearl and the other a hybrid is probably less than your deviation from shot to shot but you could maybe separate these some by drilling/surface adjustment
3. With your ball speed/speed dominate style low differential balls probably aren't your friend.

[JJKinGA]

Aslan,
I have an arsenal of four balls. Similar to what you report - one has a high RG and the other three are all at 2.52. All have similar shape on the lanes. But there is a difference that makes having them useful. They all read the lanes at a different length. This is due to the coverstock and surface preparation. If I was planning I would have changed the drilling layout to further accentuate the difference. what I have now is two with P3 balance holes and two without. All have the same basic drilling. I have one that is dull (2000) and reads very early. One that is dull (4000 with a light hand sanding of 800 every once in a while) and reads moderately far downlane. One that is polished and reads moderately far downlane. And one that is polished and goes far down lane (the high RG ball). The two that are the same length are where I find I have to decide if I need a smoother reaction from the dull ball or the more aggressive reaction from the polished ball (but the difference is very slight - I think the lane surface is why I like one at some centers and the other at different centers).

So, how do I make sense of this? How would I create an arsenal? I find that the BTM ball reviews (or BJI) have a length rating that is most useful. The total hook rating does help some. Usually it is boards different in strength, but that is totally overwhelmed by the lanes friction so one lane may have 2 boards difference and a different lane (oil/surface/etc) might make that 5 boards difference. The drilling layout can enhance the difference just a little. If I was optimizing the four I have, I would have the mid-length dull ball redrilled to read a bit earlier - more of a pin under, control drilling. If I was starting from scratch I would cluster my options by length rating into early, medium and late. Then further exaggerate by Rg and drilling layout. I am sure it can get more complicated, and if I was more precise with my release I might want to have more than just four lengths. But for me at 175-180 average and bowling just a few tournaments a year plus league in one house I feel I have enough range to never be frustrated. And I can bring the whole set plus a spare ball to a tournament quite easily.

[Aslan]

With that being said, please excuse me, I have to go polish my drone! LOL

Ha. "Polish his drone"...indeed.

Okay. Dang. Had I read that article BEFORE I purchased 3 16lb balls with identical RGs....might have been useful. Craples.