16# vs 15#

[LOUVIT]

I was watching the team bowling on Sunday on TV and after someone left a solid 10 pin the announcer in the booth said that's why I stick with the 16#, some one with low revs and slow speed needs that extra pound to leave less corner pins. Is this true?

[foreverincamo]

If you throw it slower, the only way to produce more energy is add mass.

[foreverincamo]

I throw 16 pound equipment only. Moderate revs and rely on being accurate.

[DMS]

"If you throw it slower, the only way to produce more energy is add mass. "

That's true... However, energy increases by the square of the velocity, so if you can throw the 15# ball a couple MPH faster, then it'd yield more energy... considering the percentage changes in mass / velocity are near the same. For instance, if you normally throw 14 MPH with a 16# ball, but can throw a 15# ball at 16 MPH, then the latter will have more energy off the hand; you'd have a 14% increase in velocity with only a 6% reduction in mass.

Of course we all know... Much more to be gained by just throwing good shots! THAT'S the hard part. <g>

[RobLV1]

If you throw it slower, the only way to produce more energy is add mass.

Or, you could learn a modern release and get your added energy through added revs... just saying'!

[fokai73]

Bowler has 250 rpms at 13mph with a 15 lbs ball. Bowler increased ball weight to 16lbs. Rev rate drops to 200-220, speed drops to 11-12 mph..... this will trip the corners better?? Really?

Robs answer is better....

[NewToBowling]

Or, you could learn a modern release and get your added energy through added revs... just saying'!

Yes, just flip a switch and voila, new modern release. Might as well have them try 2 handed bowling.

Some people have probably been bowling for 20+ years. Hard to ask them to change their release after all those years. Let me guess, get a coach right :)

[Amyers]

Yes, just flip a switch and voila, new modern release. Might as well have them try 2 handed bowling.

Some people have probably been bowling for 20+ years. Hard to ask them to change their release after all those years. Let me guess, get a coach right :)

It would be as likely to be effective as adding weight to try and make the ball hit harder. If your speed challenged it's likely your release is weak also. Adding weight will most likely lead to even more reduced speed and rev rate more than making up anything is added by the additional mass

[NewToBowling]

It would be as likely to be effective as adding weight to try and make the ball hit harder. If your speed challenged it's likely your release is weak also. Adding weight will most likely lead to even more reduced speed and rev rate more than making up anything is added by the additional mass

Or just getting older. Let's teach these 65 year olds the new modern release.

[foreverincamo]

Or, you could learn a modern release and get your added energy through added revs... just saying'!

I'm too old to learn a new release. Thanks anyway

[SRB57]

I was off for 12 years and recently had both hips replaced and just turning 60 I switched to 15 lb equipment from 16. I think the 15lb stuff hits as hard as the 16lb stuff. I still can leave a solid 8 or 9 pin. In today's game it is finding the right angle to carry. When I left the game in 2002 I was averaging 215 and after coming back after the hip replacements I averaged 197 for the last half of the season which was ok as I was still getting my strength back. So I like the 15lb equipment. Steve

[RobLV1]

I'm too old to learn a new release. Thanks anyway

I just taught one of the super seniors on the PBA50 Tour how to use a modern release. He's resisted it for a long time. Finally, last month, he gave in. Now, he says that when he feels his wrist break he knows it's money. He's bowling better than he ever has. I hope I NEVER reach an age where I think I'm too old to learn anything!

[J Anderson]

I just taught one of the super seniors on the PBA50 Tour how to use a modern release. He's resisted it for a long time. Finally, last month, he gave in. Now, he says that when he feels his wrist break he knows it's money. He's bowling better than he ever has. I hope I NEVER reach an age where I think I'm too old to learn anything!

I once worked with a carpenter who was old at 33. I don't mean in the sense of having physical problems caused by over use or misuse of his body. He had absolutely no interest in learning anything more than he already knew about the trade.

On the other hand I've known 90 year old people who were still learning.

[MICHAEL]

I just taught one of the super seniors on the PBA50 Tour how to use a modern release. He's resisted it for a long time. Finally, last month, he gave in. Now, he says that when he feels his wrist break he knows it's money. He's bowling better than he ever has. I hope I NEVER reach an age where I think I'm too old to learn anything!

Super Senior,,, I guess so! Does it cause pain when he breaks it? I thought I was one tough Iron Worker,,, but teaching seniors to bowl by breaking their wrist?

Rob, I am glad I just had ONE lesion while bowing with you in Vegas! Would have been tough riding the bike back to Kansas City, with a broken wrist! When you say: "When he feels his wrist break, he knows it's money!" I bet,,, what does the ER charge there in Vegas! I love bowling bud, but breaking my wrist to bowl better is not going to happen.http://i744.photobucket.com/albums/xx88/mousesjc/Broken%20Wrist%202009/IMG_0021.jpg (http://media.photobucket.com/user/mousesjc/media/Broken%20Wrist%202009/IMG_0021.jpg.html)

[Tony]

My question on learning the modern release is concerning stress on the hand / wrist / elbow/ shoulder. I see the younger guys put a ton of revs on the ball, and even several of the guys doing that in their 30's are questioning how much longer they can keep it up without risking injury.
It makes sense that putting more revs on the ball will increase scoring, however the force to create the extra revs has to come from somewhere at some cost. The question is for older bowlers is it worth it, especially guys like me who have already had multiple surgeries on my arm.
At what point do you concede that throwing a ball with an easier release is the way to prolong your ability to continue to play the game.

[J Anderson]

My question on learning the modern release is concerning stress on the hand / wrist / elbow/ shoulder. I see the younger guys put a ton of revs on the ball, and even several of the guys doing that in their 30's are questioning how much longer they can keep it up without risking injury.
It makes sense that putting more revs on the ball will increase scoring, however the force to create the extra revs has to come from somewhere at some cost. The question is for older bowlers is it worth it, especially guys like me who have already had multiple surgeries on my arm.
At what point do you concede that throwing a ball with an easier release is the way to prolong your ability to continue to play the game.

The "modern" release is not the Mark Roth, 'rip the cover off the ball' release that almost every bowler tried to copy in the 80s and 90s. The modern release relies not on wrist strength, but wrist flexibility and good timing. If you wait till the top of the backswing, the weight of the ball will cup your wrist for you. If you try to help your swing to put more speed on the ball it becomes almost impossible to maintain a cupped position.

[Aslan]

Bowler has 250 rpms at 13mph with a 15 lbs ball. Bowler increased ball weight to 16lbs. Rev rate drops to 200-220, speed drops to 11-12 mph..... this will trip the corners better?? Really?

Robs answer is better....


It would be as likely to be effective as adding weight to try and make the ball hit harder. If your speed challenged it's likely your release is weak also. Adding weight will most likely lead to even more reduced speed and rev rate more than making up anything is added by the additional mass

I think 15lbs is the ideal "weight/speed/rpm" combination...at this point in time.

That "may" change...if bowling balls continue to get stronger and hook more....we may see bowlers start to move to heavier equipment to control their rpms....kinda like what we're seeing with urethane.

For Myself:

15#: Speed = 17.5 mph (at the pins), rev rate = 275rpms, tendency to leave more 8-pins and 8-10s.

16#: Speed = 15.5 mph (at the pins), rev rate = 240rpms, rarely leave an 8-pin or 8-10.

But...each person is going to be different. Foot speed and release both play into the equation despite the ball weight.

[LOUVIT]

I went from 16 to 15 and picked up zero speed. As far as modern release is the the thumb at like 1 o'clock or so? I used to use the handshake release 40 years ago, now I am trying to do the 1-2 o'clock release and my coach says I'm spinning the ball instead of rolling it...

[chip82901]

I threw 15# equipment for years, even a few 16# equipment here and there. When equipment started getting more and more aggressive, I actually dropped down to 14# to keep my ball speed higher. I've been stuck at 14# ever since and I wouldn't change a thing. Being a 2-hander, I've always had a decent rev rate (not crazy by any means, around 385-400). But, what I did notice, was that 14# gave me more pin action, something that is desperately needed in my home house with Twister pins. I didn't really notice too much in pin action in other houses either. If anything, it's gotten better. This game is getting more and more about angles with the equipment that is being produced. The more aggressive the equipment, it seems the more angle you need to create. I've notice that, even when I throw urethane, I have to have a large entry angle to kick the corners.

[fordman1]

The "modern" release is not the Mark Roth, 'rip the cover off the ball' release that almost every bowler tried to copy in the 80s and 90s. That is me only add the 70's also. I still use it but have lost some of my speed. Mostly due to being afraid of sticking and killing myself. Need fast feet to create ball speed. I can still rip the cover off just not with enough speed. I tried the new release but almost dropped the ball on my foot and gave up on it.
I don't have enough years left to relearn bowling now.
If you have to use 2 hands to get revs on the ball you better get to the gym and grab some weights.

[J Anderson]

The "modern" release is not the Mark Roth, 'rip the cover off the ball' release that almost every bowler tried to copy in the 80s and 90s. That is me only add the 70's also. I still use it but have lost some of my speed. Mostly due to being afraid of sticking and killing myself. Need fast feet to create ball speed. I can still rip the cover off just not with enough speed. I tried the new release but almost dropped the ball on my foot and gave up on it.
I don't have enough years left to relearn bowling now.
If you have to use 2 hands to get revs on the ball you better get to the gym and grab some weights.

The main advantage two hands is that the thumb never exits the ball too late, killing the revs.

[fordman1]

New rule two handers have to put their thumb in the ball. Matter of fact two hands two thumbs.....

[chip82901]

New rule two handers have to put their thumb in the ball. Matter of fact two hands two thumbs.....

You sure do talk a lot of smack about 2 handers...so...let me break it down for you:

1. There's no "integrity" lost in the game. The game is evolving, get used to it.
2. You complain about there being a higher rev rate blah blah. So, beat me with YOUR game.
3. Fast feet isn't exactly a good thing to have.
4. You tried something once and it didn't work right off the bat, so you gave up on it, instead of figuring out how to do it. Sounds like a personal problem.
5. I don't have to use 2-hands to get revs on the ball, I use 2-hands as I shattered my wrist at a very young age and have never been able to use 1 hand, and refuse to use a robo-wrist.

[bubba809]

This is about to get good. Can I "subscribe" to a thread?

[chip82901]

This is about to get good. Can I "subscribe" to a thread?

I agree, could get interesting, but, I will forever back my game

[hotdog`966]

!4# balls now

[Aslan]

It was interesting to hear Randy Pederson talk about switching back to 16lbs during his guest telecast at a recent PBA50 event.

The tide has definitely turned in favor of 15lbs...but it was interesting to hear Randy echo some of the things I noticed...i.e. too many flat 10s, flat 7s, stone 8s, and 8-10s.

[ALazySavage]

In regards to two handed bowling I don't believe there is an issue with it anymore. The one pure advantage was the ability to manipulate balance holes in the bowling ball and this has been taken care of. Once you removed this, what advantage does a two-handed bowler have that a one-handed bowler not have (theoretically)?

[J Anderson]

In regards to two handed bowling I don't believe there is an issue with it anymore. The one pure advantage was the ability to manipulate balance holes in the bowling ball and this has been taken care of. Once you removed this, what advantage does a two-handed bowler have that a one-handed bowler not have (theoretically)?

Thumb never gets stuck. Thumb never gets blisters.

[ALazySavage]

I agree those are advantages, but they are typically issues that are caused by an error in the one-handed bowler's physical game. The point I was poorly trying to explain was that there isn't a built in advantage that one bowler will have that the other cannot under any circumstance replicate due to the style (obviously rev rates will tend to be higher, no issues with the thumb clearing, etc. but these are not exclusive to a two-handed bowler - single handed can increase revs and have their thumb clear). The balance hole issue is the only one I could think of of that nature.

[Aslan]

In regards to two handed bowling I don't believe there is an issue with it anymore. The one pure advantage was the ability to manipulate balance holes in the bowling ball and this has been taken care of. Once you removed this, what advantage does a two-handed bowler have that a one-handed bowler not have (theoretically)?

Generally speaking, a one-handed bowler won't be able to generate the rpms UNLESS they take their thumb out of the ball. Having the thumb in the ball reduces the maximum revs you can acheive. Even thumbless/palm bowlers are at a disadvantage (compared to 2-handers) because it's very difficult to repeat those type of shots (no thumb in the ball, extremely high rpms).

The 2-handed advantage is it gives you greater control (using two hands versus one w/o thumb) but provides a tremendous increase in rpms, entry angle, and power over traditional one-handed releases.

It's not a new arguement, per se. When lane conditions started becoming more of a factor in the sport...there became somewhat lesser of an outcry over left-handed advantage. When the patterns weren't a big deal...and it was all about the skill of the bowler...and equipment was relatively equal...the left-handed advantage was minor. As those things changed over time...left-handers suddenly got more and more of an advantage....to the point that recently the USBC had to make some modifications to the USBC Open pattern to even the playing field. That may be something the USBC does in the future regarding 2-handers as well...perhaps putting a higher oil-volume at the 2-hander's breakpoint so their shot needs to be more precise and the conditions are less forgiving. How to do that while not also making the shot impossible for traditional bowlers...I don't know.

I DO think they (USBC) will eventually have to do something. More and more 2-handed bowlers are emerging at the youth and world level...and as they grow older and begin to be a greater part of the adult league scene...we're going to see a further exasperation of the problems the sport is already experiencing (too many honor scores, a multitude of 900 series, etc...) and we'll likely end up driving traditional bowlers out of the sport. If traditional bowlers have to bowl the best game of their lives to match the usual night of a 2-hander...there's just no point to it anymore.

[fordman1]

Dry up the lanes and you take away their advantage. Make accuracy more important.

[ALazySavage]

I understand the concept that typically a two handed release will produce more revs than a one handed release, but what I'm saying is that there isn't an unfair advantage created...there is nothing that a two-handed bowlers gets that a one-handed bowler doesn't have exposure to. Other than mechanics there is nothing stopping the one-handed bowler from getting those revs (see Robert Smith, he is rated at getting the highest rev rate...I know he is an exception, but in a sense so is the few 2 handed pros who have accuracy control like Belmonte). As with any style change there are trade-offs, this being very clear of power vs. accuracy.

I don't know how the USBC would address this situation especially now that the style is established, to remove it and declare it illegal is very dangerous. This is more of an evolution of the game and becomes a slippery slope if it is determined that it isn't legal.

[Brite1]

I understand the concept that typically a two handed release will produce more revs than a one handed release, but what I'm saying is that there isn't an unfair advantage created...there is nothing that a two-handed bowlers gets that a one-handed bowler doesn't have exposure to. Other than mechanics there is nothing stopping the one-handed bowler from getting those revs (see Robert Smith, he is rated at getting the highest rev rate...I know he is an exception, but in a sense so is the few 2 handed pros who have accuracy control like Belmonte). As with any style change there are trade-offs, this being very clear of power vs. accuracy.

I don't know how the USBC would address this situation especially now that the style is established, to remove it and declare it illegal is very dangerous. This is more of an evolution of the game and becomes a slippery slope if it is determined that it isn't legal.

Say it again for the people in the back lol

[Amyers]

I understand the concept that typically a two handed release will produce more revs than a one handed release, but what I'm saying is that there isn't an unfair advantage created...there is nothing that a two-handed bowlers gets that a one-handed bowler doesn't have exposure to. Other than mechanics there is nothing stopping the one-handed bowler from getting those revs (see Robert Smith, he is rated at getting the highest rev rate...I know he is an exception, but in a sense so is the few 2 handed pros who have accuracy control like Belmonte). As with any style change there are trade-offs, this being very clear of power vs. accuracy.

You are correct the difference is it will take a level of talent and years of practice for the one hander to be able to produce the same amount of revs that a two handed bowler does with little to no talent and 6 months or less of practice. In addition the modern game of THS bowling emphasizes power and rev rate not accuracy which creates the issue.




I don't know how the USBC would address this situation especially now that the style is established, to remove it and declare it illegal is very dangerous. This is more of an evolution of the game and becomes a slippery slope if it is determined that it isn't legal.

At this point you are correct the style should have been outlawed as soon as it developed even before Belmo started winning tournaments. At this point it would hurt the game to remove it and we will just have to live with it's effects.

[Aslan]

....I know he is an exception, but in a sense so is the few 2 handed pros who have accuracy control like Belmonte). As with any style change there are trade-offs, this being very clear of power vs. accuracy.
True. And I always, despite being a "2-handed bowling hater", point out that Belmonte is not the 3-time MVP...ONLY because of his 2-handed advantage. He's the 3-time MVP (or 3-time whatever he is) because he's able to be a 2-handed bowler with the incredible accuracy and consistency that very few 2-handed bowlers possess. I've seen a LOT of high rev (2-handed and 1-handed) bowlers that are absolutely MISERABLE spare shooters. That may win sidepots and brackets on league night...maybe even allow a bowler to have the high average in their league...but you have to have accuracy to make it at the next level...and Belmonte has tremendous combination of skills...and doesn't really get enough credit for that.


You are correct the difference is it will take a level of talent and years of practice for the one hander to be able to produce the same amount of revs that a two handed bowler does with little to no talent and 6 months or less of practice. In addition the modern game of THS bowling emphasizes power and rev rate not accuracy which creates the issue.
Say it again for the people in the back lol


At this point you are correct the style should have been outlawed as soon as it developed even before Belmo started winning tournaments. At this point it would hurt the game to remove it and we will just have to live with it's effects.
Agreed.

The unfortunate consequence of the USBC acting so, so slowly...about lots of things (technology, patterns, styles, etc...) is that you create a situation that becomes difficult to get rid of.

- If a center is allowed to have non-sanctioned leagues...then those leagues get popular and sanctioned league play declines...it's hard for the USBC to outlaw non-sanctioned leagues at sanctioned centers.
- If ball manufacturers are allowed to make stronger and stronger equipment...even in exceedence of USBC specs...it becomes very difficult to reign the technology in. Look at the Motiv case...even though Motiv clearly violated the specs...I'd say 30%-90% of bowlers thought the USBC was wrong to intervene.
- If centers area allowed to use any oil they choose...any pattern they choose...it's hard for the USBC to mandate a pattern and type of oil after the fact.
- And, if bowlers are allowed to bowl without putting their thumb in the ball...it's hard to have the USBC step in decades later and say, "Well...it wasn't a problem when it was 1-handed cranker/palm bowlers...but now it's a problem with 2-handers.
- When the USBC/PBA allowed the use of wrist devices...it's hard now to go back and say, "Umm...now you can't use them."

One can argue that each of those issues has contributed to the decline of bowling as a sport. Some can argue that those things have made the game more 'fun'. Do we want an activity/game that is fun for a broad segment of the population? OR...do we want a sport that is seriously considered as an Olympic 'sport'? It would be great if we could have BOTH...but I don't think we can. High scoring, powerful cores, easy patterns, 'hooking the entire lane', and bionic arms....in a non-sanctioned league that costs $7/night...thats FUN! Turn out the lights...put up the bumpers...grab a bucket of beers...FUN time! But thats NOT a 'sport'....thats a game/activity.

OR...do you mandate pancake cores in balls, outlaw wrist braces/supports, mandate USBC patterns, require that sanctioned centers sanction all their leagues, and outlaw any bowling form where the thumb isn't in the ball (and the use of 2 hands)?

Like everything in life...every action has both a positive and negative reaction. More fun and less 'sport'...means more casual bowlers...more birthday parties....more concession sales, etc... But...you lose serious bowlers...you lose interest in the 'sport'...you lose older, traditional bowlers...you lose your 'league' bowlers...and the USBC becomes further obselete. Should the USBC move towards more restrictions...you lose casual bowlers, you lose 2-handers, you lose those that use wrist devices, bowling ball manufacturers will fight the changes, etc... and you risk the further decline of the sport.

Ying and Yang

[Aslan]

Possible Solutions:
(because I like to offer some level of constructive commentary....not jsut "hating")

- Mandate USBC patterns
- Restrict "robo braces"...but not ALL braces. Perhaps wrist supports (like the Dick Weber Wristmaster Pro) with only a couple pieces of ridged plastic/metal.
- Lower the maximum differential from 0.060 to 0.053 on future new releases
- Mandate all leagues are sanctioned; but provide financial incentives to bowling centers...especially for youth leagues, senior leagues, and leagues designed to introduce new bowlers to the sport.

I agree with fordman...I think you can deal with 2-handed/thumbless bowling (as well as bowling ball technology) by simply mandating patterns that make those styles less advantageous...and that will accomplish the same result (fairness) without unnecessarily ticking off alot of the new interest in the sport/game.

[fordman1]

- Mandate all leagues are sanctioned; I bet you meant Cetrified.
How does the USBC get revenue then?

but provide financial incentives to bowling centers...especially for youth leagues, senior leagues, and leagues designed to introduce new bowlers to the sport.
Profit should be profit enough.

[Aslan]

- Mandate all leagues are sanctioned; I bet you meant Cetrified.
How does the USBC get revenue then?
Many centers offer some non-sanctioned leagues. These leagues are usually beginner/youth focused...many times can be leagues that have very short seasons...and in many cases don't necessarily follow USBC rules (such as no-tap leagues).

In some cases, these make sense. For example...handicap leagues...where some of the bowlers need to use a ramp...or very young leagues where the youth bowlers need to use bumpers. But, unfortunately, many centers have started to offer leagues that are "non-sanctioned" simply to make them shorter and cheaper. I bowled in one way, way, way back...and it was called "El Cheapo League". It cost $13/night...shorter season...and the only real difference between that league and sanctioned leagues...was it was cheaper and the bowlers didn't need their USBC membership/card.


Profit should be profit enough.
Well, from the center's perspective, non-sanctioned, no-tap, short season leagues can be very profitable. Many Bowlmor centers don't even bother sanctioning their lanes nor even having leagues...and the ones in certain high-end locations make a very nice profit.

And, the USBC has to be diplomatic in their approach. Drawing a hard line in the sand with the BPAA could lead to the BPAA simply agreeing to no longer certify. The USBC doesn't own their own their own centers (except for maybe the training center)...so that would end the USBC pretty darn quick. Just like ball manufacturers...the USBC taking too aggressive an approach could lead the ball manufacturers to just non-certify their equipment....meaning bowlers would quickly run out of sanctioned equipment to use in sanctioned leagues.

The 3 groups, and to a lesser extent the PBA, have to work together as much as possible...or the whole thing could collapse...and the USBC could be the main casualty.

[fordman1]

So real league bowling is doomed. It was fun while it lasted. Break out the bochie balls.