Bowling Chat elitist forum

[NewToBowling]

This thread will probably get locked but those boys over there seem to be a cult. A few of the people here tried to have an open discussion over there and immediately got shot down. It's an "if you're not with us you're against us" cult attitude.

Their basic response to one of the threads was to question why they post on BC if they didn't conform to the user base thinking and their wiki.

Makes Aslan almost tolerable :)

Sorry to rant...

[Amyers]

I've spent some time on bowling chat if you want some seriously high end info as long as it conforms to their ideals it's a great place. Again within their preset ideals you can't find that level of info and math to back it up anywhere else but the downside is large as if it's outside of their preset ideas they are not just going to cut you off or try to explain why your wrong they are going to run you down in the process. for lower to lower mid level bowlers I really don't think its a good place to hang around for the upper mid level bowler to high end bowler you can get some good info there as long as your willing to wear a bridle and not speak your mind about anything that doesn't agree with them. Personally some of their topics I find over detailed and more on the equipment side than the physical side but I will say Jim Merill offers online analysis that's free hard to beat and without the condemnation that you might feel in the general forums on the site.

[Mike White]

I've spent some time on bowling chat if you want some seriously high end info as long as it conforms to their ideals it's a great place. Again within their preset ideals you can't find that level of info and math to back it up anywhere else but the downside is large as if it's outside of their preset ideas they are not just going to cut you off or try to explain why your wrong they are going to run you down in the process. for lower to lower mid level bowlers I really don't think its a good place to hang around for the upper mid level bowler to high end bowler you can get some good info there as long as your willing to wear a bridle and not speak your mind about anything that doesn't agree with them. Personally some of their topics I find over detailed and more on the equipment side than the physical side but I will say Jim Merill offers online analysis that's free hard to beat and without the condemnation that you might feel in the general forums on the site.

What kind of "math to back it up" do you get there, you can't get elsewhere?

[bowl1820]

Bowlingchat is a highly technical forum (frankly it's not for beginners, you can go wrong easily there) and they have their own philosophy which they are trying to promote. (Mainly BC was started by users that left BBE.com, when Mo Pinel was banned/left from there.)

That philosophy for the most part is that if your not using the scientific methods & information provided to them by certain sources and/or that have been developed on the forum, then your using and promoting unscientific, outdated methods & information.

The thing is they are assuming the majority of the bowling companies and their representatives and the players are not using their methods so are using unscientific, outdated methods & information. (which I disagree with)

So thus don't understand proper ball motion and the ways to obtain it by using what they regard as the scientifically proven proper layouts methods and equipment choices.

A lot of the proof offered for this contention is just based on after the fact observation of players that have lost in competition which can be highly speculative and from those that don't have first hand experience with what was happening at the time. (Monday morning quarterbacking)

Just because a player loses or their ball doesn't have the motion you think it should have or they don't play the lane where you think they should. Doesn't automatically mean the player or the Rep. or company advising them was using outdated methods & information & equipment or they didn't understand proper ball motion.

Just as winning doesn't mean they must have known all the up to date information.

Also some of these assumptions are based on technical information that comes from mainly one company. While this doesn't necessarily mean the information is wrong, you have to look at that information more closely. (Especially if that information makes that companies product look superior to other companies products.)

All forums might want to have truly open discussions, But in reality navigating the currents of discussion can be hard.

[Amyers]

Bowlingchat is a highly technical forum (frankly it's not for beginners, you can go wrong easily there) and they have their own philosophy which they are trying to promote. (Mainly BC was started by users that left BBE.com, when Mo Pinel was banned/left from there.)

That philosophy for the most part is that if your not using the scientific methods & information provided to them by certain sources and/or that have been developed on the forum, then your using and promoting unscientific, outdated methods & information.

The thing is they are assuming the majority of the bowling companies and their representatives and the players are not using their methods so are using unscientific, outdated methods & information. (which I disagree with)

So thus don't understand proper ball motion and the ways to obtain it by using what they regard as the scientifically proven proper layouts methods and equipment choices.

A lot of the proof offered for this contention is just based on after the fact observation of players that have lost in competition which can be highly speculative and from those that don't have first hand experience with what was happening at the time. (Monday morning quarterbacking)

Just because a player loses or their ball doesn't have the motion you think it should have or they don't play the lane where you think they should. Doesn't automatically mean the player or the Rep. or company advising them was using outdated methods & information & equipment or they didn't understand proper ball motion.

Just as winning doesn't mean they must have known all the up to date information.

Also some of these assumptions are based on technical information that comes from mainly one company. While this doesn't necessarily mean the information is wrong, you have to look at that information more closely. (Especially if that information makes that companies product look superior to other companies products.)

All forums might want to have truly open discussions, But in reality navigating the currents of discussion can be hard.

Thank you for saying that even better than I did Bowl

[Amyers]

What kind of "math to back it up" do you get there, you can't get elsewhere?

Mike you know as well as I do other than the occasional fight between you and Rob we don't get into math portion of bowling on this site anywhere in the same reality as they do on bowling chat and generally I think you could easily say that the conversations between here, ballreviews, and bowling chat tend to be along the lines of beginner to moderate=BB, moderate to advanced=BR, and advanced to overly complicated=BC. Not saying necessarily either site has better bowlers, just the level of the conversation. I am also not stating that some of our members aren't capable of those conversations we just tend not to have them.

I actually prefer the conversation here and we are way more accepting of newbies and at least listing to different ideas than the other above mentioned sites.

[bowl1820]

I've spent some time on bowling chat if you want some seriously high end info as long as it conforms to their ideals it's a great place. Again within their preset ideals you can't find that level of info and math to back it up anywhere else but the downside is large as if it's outside of their preset ideas they are not just going to cut you off or try to explain why your wrong they are going to run you down in the process. for lower to lower mid level bowlers I really don't think its a good place to hang around for the upper mid level bowler to high end bowler you can get some good info there as long as your willing to wear a bridle and not speak your mind about anything that doesn't agree with them.

You pretty much got how it works there. Don't say anything bad about a certain ball company either.


Personally some of their topics I find over detailed and more on the equipment side than the physical side
Yeah someone can ask a simple question, that one sentence could answer. But the answer you get will be way detailed and most likely over the head of the person who asked.

A lot of the time though if you ask a question, you get a short answer "Go read the wiki". They are trying to do the "teach a man to fish so he can eat tomorrow" thing, the trouble is you might starve before you have a chance to learn.


but I will say Jim Merrill offers online analysis that's free hard to beat and without the condemnation that you might feel in the general forums on the site.

Jim does a good job offering bowling advice and there are couple of other guys too that don't show up too often anymore. Like ballspinner from innovative, great for info on spinners. You don't see Slowinski on there anymore though.

[RobLV1]

As one who has reached the elite status of receiving several warnings from their moderators and, most recently, a final warning, I can honestly say that there is some great information on that site, but it is treated as a religion rather than as a bowling philosophy. It just so happens that I was talking with a friend of mine who is a moderately successful senior tour bowler and told him about the site and their views. He brought up an interesting point: as far as either of us can remember, no National PBA Title has ever been won using the equipment that they tout as being the best out there.

[Doghouse Reilly]

as far as either of us can remember, no National PBA Title has ever been won using the equipment that they tout as being the best out there.

That's why every other ball company needs to make sure their equipment is in spec. or else the USBC will get another box of balls with a note that says spin these.

[Mike White]

Mike you know as well as I do other than the occasional fight between you and Rob we don't get into math portion of bowling on this site anywhere in the same reality as they do on bowling chat and generally I think you could easily say that the conversations between here, ballreviews, and bowling chat tend to be along the lines of beginner to moderate=BB, moderate to advanced=BR, and advanced to overly complicated=BC. Not saying necessarily either site has better bowlers, just the level of the conversation. I am also not stating that some of our members aren't capable of those conversations we just tend not to have them.

I actually prefer the conversation here and we are way more accepting of newbies and at least listing to different ideas than the other above mentioned sites.

The point I was trying to make, if you actually examine the situation at BC in regards to the question I asked you'll find over at BC, they don't actually back up what they claim with math, or at least not correct math.

They try to claim their correctness by means of precedence (it has been said), and educational titles.

When they are wrong, and someone tries to correct them, they use all of the tactics available to them to protect precedence.

[NewToBowling]

Yeah I am not a user there just an observer. They certainly are not newbie friendly. If I had found their site before BB I would probably be golfing now :)

[Mike White]

As one who has reached the elite status of receiving several warnings from their moderators and, most recently, a final warning, I can honestly say that there is some great information on that site, but it is treated as a religion rather than as a bowling philosophy. It just so happens that I was talking with a friend of mine who is a moderately successful senior tour bowler and told him about the site and their views. He brought up an interesting point: as far as either of us can remember, no National PBA Title has ever been won using the equipment that they tout as being the best out there.

Can't speak for any other tournament, but in June 2010 Bowling This Month, Mo claimed his PBA plastic ball layout lead to the title for Brian Zeisig in the 2009-2010 Mark Roth Plastic ball tourney, which I believe would qualify as a National PBA Title.

[bowl1820]

Can't speak for any other tournament, but in June 2010 Bowling This Month, Mo claimed his PBA plastic ball layout lead to the title for Brian Zeisig in the 2009-2010 Mark Roth Plastic ball tourney, which I believe would qualify as a National PBA Title.

That would be a layout, Rob said equipment. Most likely meaning a Radical ball which is the brand BC promotes over all others.

[Mike White]

That would be a layout, Rob said equipment. Most likely meaning a Radical ball which is the brand BC promotes over all others.

Well it's kind of hard for their brand to win when they aren't paying anyone to use them on the tour.

[Amyers]

The point I was trying to make, if you actually examine the situation at BC in regards to the question I asked you'll find over at BC, they don't actually back up what they claim with math, or at least not correct math.

They try to claim their correctness by means of precedence (it has been said), and educational titles.

When they are wrong, and someone tries to correct them, they use all of the tactics available to them to protect precedence.

I would agree. There are some guys there that are knowledgeable but you have to be willing to swallow the whole thing hook line and sinker to fit in

[billf]

Well it's kind of hard for their brand to win when they aren't paying anyone to use them on the tour.

That was what was suppose to be so great about Radical being a Brunswick company along with DV8. All those staffers and not a one has chose to use a Radical ball. Enough to at leat cause curiosity.