PAP Identification Method (& Terminology)

[Mike White]

How long ago did this method of identifying a bowlers pap location get started, and is there time to change the method?

The method of over X and up Y the way it's implemented to me is like sticking with the english method when clearly the metric system is better.

The X and Y values simply don't translate into anything useful other than identifying a location.

In my opinion the PAP location should be the equivalent to the North Pole, and the line from the PAP to the center of the fingers (not including the thumb) should be the equivalent to the Prime Meridian.

Measure from the PAP to the center of the fingers gives you a longitude, latitude value, longitude being 0 degrees.

The equator is always 6.75" from the PAP or North Pole.

Positioning the PSA, and PIN make sense when referenced to the Prime Meridian.

When you release the ball, is the PIN ahead of your fingers, or behind? The longitude coordinate of the PIN would answer that question. It's similar to "Does the ball have finger or thumb weight?" in the "old" days.

As an example, if your fingers are 3.5" latitude, and you have 40 degrees of axis rotation, your fingers are almost directly behind the ball at release. Off by just 6 2/3 degrees.

[bowl1820]

Update: The links to mikes images appear to no longer work. So some images are missing.



How long ago did this method of identifying a bowlers pap location get started, and is there time to change the method?
When did they start using it? Probably a little while after they discovered that they needed to know where the PAP was.
Is there time to change? Nope that ship sailed already.


The method of over X and up Y the way it's implemented to me is like sticking with the english method when clearly the metric system is better.

The X and Y values simply don't translate into anything useful other than identifying a location.
That is all that's needed, it locates the PAP.


In my opinion the PAP location should be the equivalent to the North Pole, and the line from the PAP to the center of the fingers (not including the thumb) should be the equivalent to the Prime Meridian.

Measure from the PAP to the center of the fingers gives you a longitude, latitude value, longitude being 0 degrees.

The equator is always 6.75" from the PAP or North Pole.

Positioning the PSA, and PIN make sense when referenced to the Prime Meridian.

When you release the ball, is the PSA ahead of your fingers, or behind? The longitude coordinate of the PSA would answer that question. It's similar to "Does the ball have finger or thumb weight?" in the "old" days.

As an example, if your fingers are 3.5" latitude, and you have 40 degrees of axis rotation, your fingers are almost directly behind the ball at release. Off by just 6 2/3 degrees.

This is just a confusing mess.

But if you want a real good opinion go over to the forum on http://www.bowlingchat.net/ and post your idea there.
Mo Pinel one of the top ball and drilling experts is on there all the time. Get his opinion on your idea.

[billf]

Not that we are trying to send people away but Mo will know better than the rest of us if it's feasible and have no issues explaining why if it's not.
Who knows, maybe Mike is onto the next new thing in drilling.

[bowl1820]

Measure from the PAP to the center of the fingers gives you a longitude, latitude value, longitude being 0 degrees.
Also-
What is the center of the fingers?
Your still going to need to use over X and up Y coordinates to locate the pap.
What about when you project back from the pap to your grip center line to layout the finger and thumb holes?
Where ever the "center" of the fingers is, it will then will require more measurements to locate the finger holes than is needed now.

[Mike White]

I am in the process of brushing up on my Linear Algebra to identify locations on a sphere after being turned on the X, Y, and Z axis.

Just to be sure my assumptions are correct. Is distance from the PIN to the PSA is always 6 3/4" ?

[bowl1820]

I am in the process of brushing up on my Linear Algebra to identify locations on a sphere after being turned on the X, Y, and Z axis.

Just to be sure my assumptions are correct. Is distance from the PIN to the PSA is always 6 3/4" ?

Yes 6 3/4", 1/4 of the balls circumference.

If you have a ball with a unmarked MB you draw a line from the pin through the CG, then measure from the pin 6 3/4" and mark that spot on the line, thats the mass bias (PSA)

A little extra info for you.
The neutral position is (4 1/8" from the x,y,and z axis)

This is using a Determinator.
Measuring the X, Y, and Z Axes of a Bowling Ball.
1. Place the ball on the deTerminator with the pin aligned with the eyehole of the support arm.
2. Turn the deTerminator on and trace the ball path through the eyehole. The ball will eventually spin about a fixed axis (this axis runs through the bowling ball – from the surface, the ball will spin about a point) – this is known as the Preferred Spin Axis or PSA. This PSA represents the Y or High RG Axis of the bowling ball. Mark the spot through the eye hole (dot) and the top of the arm, creating a small circle about the PSA.
3. Using the pro-sect, draw a line from the PSA towards and through the manufacturer pin of the bowling ball. Mark the point 6 3⁄4” from the PSA along the line – this will represent your X axis.
4. Now draw a Perpendicular Line from the X axis toward the ‘equator’ of the ball. Mark a spot 6 3⁄4” down the line from the X axis - this will give you the Z or intermediate RG axis.
5. To ensure the accuracy of this location, take your pro-sect and measure perpendicular from the X axis to Y axis line toward the Z axis. This line should directly intersect where your Z axis is marked and be 6 3⁄4” in length. If they do intersect and your line is 6 3⁄4”, you have correctly found all three axes. If not, be sure to check that your lines are 6 3⁄4” long (this is 1⁄4 of a bowling ball’s circumference) and perpendicularly intersect at the axis locations.

http://www.bowl.com/uploadedFiles/Equipment_Specs/Information/ballMotionAnalysis.pdf

[Mike White]

Can you clarify what you mean by neutral position?

[bowl1820]

Can you clarify what you mean by neutral position?

The Neutral Position is the point that is equidistant from all three major axes.

It has to do with the determinator and measuring the spin time of a ball.

spin time is a real world measurement of the complex relationship between RG, Diff, Int Diff, Diff Ratio. It quantifies the strength of the PSA, which affects the quickness of the reaction to friction on the lanes.

The Neutral Position

Here's a little mathematical proof for you.

The image below shows us a triangle drawn on a sphere:
Image
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/RechtwKugeldreieck.svg/500px-RechtwKugeldreieck.svg.png
The law of sines states (as found on wikipedia):

Sin a / Sin α = Sin b / Sin β = Sin c / Sin γ

Where γ is the angle created at vertex C, and a, b, c are the angles created by the arcs, relative to the center of the circle. Since the arc c = 6.75", we know the angle at the center of the circle is 90°.

If α = β = 45° we can find γ, using the second spherical law of cosines (also found wikipedia).

Cos γ = - Cos α * Cos β + Sin α * Sin β * Cos c
Cos γ = - Cos 45° * Cos 45° + Sin 45° * Sin 45° * Cos 90°
Cos γ = - Cos 45° * Cos 45° (since Cos 90° = 0)
Cos γ = -0.5
∴ γ = ArcCos (-0.5) = 120° [ArcCos is the Inverse Cos operation]

Using the law of sine (see above), we can find solve for a, as follows:

Sin a = Sin c * Sin α / Sin γ

Since c = 90°, Sin c = 1, so this formula becomes:

Sin a = Sin α / Sin γ
Sin a = Sin 45° / Sin 120°
a = ArcSin (Sin 45° / Sin 120°) [ArcSin is the Inverse Sin operation]
∴ a ≈ 55° (54.7356° to 4 decimal places)

All that's left is to find the length of the arc a, we first convert a to radians, a

a = a * ╥ / 180 = (55 * ╥ / 180)

Then we multiply a by the radius of the ball to get the arc length, which is 13.5 /╥

∴ a = (55 * ╥ / 180) * (13.5 / ╥) = 4.125"

If you use the EXACT angle for a, it comes out to 4.105", which for our purposes, is the same is 4.125", since the difference is a little over 1/64".

[billf]

^^^now that makes more sense to me

[Mike White]

The Neutral Position is the point that is equidistant from all three major axes.

That was all the info I needed. I wasn't sure if neutral meant something about the balance (static or dynamic)

Finding the distance along the sphere from an axis to the neutral position can be done with some simple algebra, and just a hint of trigonometry.

Imagine our sphere has a radius of 1. (it makes the math much easier and we'll scale it back up at the end).

The coordinates for the three main locations in your picture could be:

A (1,0,0)
B (0,1,0)
C (0,0,1)

Three points make a plane, and those 3 points make an equilateral triangle on that plane. To find the center of that triangle we average the coordinates. Lets call that point D.
D = (A + B + C) / 3 = (1/3, 1/3, 1/3)

The important thing we get from that is the x, y, and z coordinates of point D all have the same value.

D however is not on the surface of the sphere. We would need to project a line from the center of the sphere thru point D and find where it touches on the sphere. Lets call that point N. N = (Nx, Ny, Nz)

We do know that the distance from the center to N is 1 since we selected a radius of 1. Using the distance formula:

sqrt(Nx^2+Ny^2+Nz^2) = 1

square both sides

Nx^2 + Ny^2 + Nz^2 = 1

Remember that Nx = Ny, and Ny = Nz

Nx^2 + Nx^2 + Nx^2 = 1

3(Nx^2) = 1

Nx^2 = 1/3

Nx = sqrt(1/3)
Ny = sqrt(1/3)
Nz = sqrt(1/3)

The formula to convert from spherical coordinates to (x, y, z) type coordinates is.

X = cos(theta)*sin(phi)
Y = sin(theta)*sin(phi)
Z = cos(phi)

Where theta is similar to a longitude angle, and phi is similar to a latitude angle, except phi = 0 at the north pole and 90 degrees at the equator.

since Nz = sort(1/3) = cos(phi) we need to know what angle phi would give us a value sqrt(1/3) from the cosine function. 54.736 degrees gives that value.

Now we scale up to the bowling ball size with a simple proportion problem.

54.736 / 90 = v / 6.75

v = 4.105

[bowl1820]

And after all is said and done.

Your still going to need to use over X and up or down Y coordinates to locate the pap.

[Mike White]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the down and over method is like fingers on a chalk board for me.

Imagine simple graph paper with vertical lines, and instead of horizontal lines they were diagonal.

To me, down and over has diagonal lines.

[billf]

That is all well and good but is it truly any more accurate or better than the current methods? Maybe trying it will be the only real way to tell.

[Mike White]

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/BowlingTest.png

This is an image of the odd grid structure that down and over uses.

In this example the PAP is 4 3/4" down and 1" over.

[bowl1820]

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/BowlingTest.png

This is an image of the odd grid structure that down and over uses.

In this example the PAP is 4 3/4" down and 1" over.

What's odd about it? It's locating the PAP in relation to the grip in the simplest way.
The A highlighted line would be the current way of locating the PAP 4 3/4" Across and 1" UP measured from the grip center.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/BowlingTest_cr.jpg

Now you talked about measuring the pap from the center of the fingers, The B&C lines in this image can't be used because they are not perpendicular to the center line of the grip.

Example:
If line A is 4 3/4" long, then line C is going to be shorter in that picture.

[billf]

Mike, at the beginning of this thread you said we should use the metric system due to being more accurate. Yes, the metric system is slightly more precise albeit using a grease pencil to mark the layout offsets any gains. However, I still don't see where you have incorporated the metric system anywhere in your calculations. Using "advanced" mathematical equations doesn't make it metric.

[bowl1820]

Mike, at the beginning of this thread you said we should use the metric system due to being more accurate. Yes, the metric system is slightly more precise albeit using a grease pencil to mark the layout offsets any gains. However, I still don't see where you have incorporated the metric system anywhere in your calculations. Using "advanced" mathematical equations doesn't make it metric.

Actually he didn't say use the metric system for the measurements.

The method of over X and up Y the way it's implemented to me is like sticking with the English method when clearly the metric system is better
He was just making a comparison, like why use the old way when there's a better one.

[billf]

I guess it's true; the memory is the first to go

[Mike White]

The useful difference isn't in identifying the PAP relative to the center of the grip.

The different way of identifying the PAP is a break even deal.

It's after that step that it become more useful.

Here is the grid I would use to Identify an unknown PAP.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/MyGrid.png

You draw the line directly from the grip center thru the PAP down to the equator.

Measure from the grip center to the PAP, Measure from the bottom right corner to the intersection with the vertical line thru the PAP.

The PAP is identified by 4 3/4 down and 1 over using the down and over system.

In my system it's 4 13/16 latitude and 5 11/16 longitude. Instead of the equator being 0 degrees, the north pole is 0 degrees.

So far both systems have done the same thing with the same amount of effort, and results. Much like measuring in English vs Metric.

Next I'll take a drilled dual angle layout convert the numbers into my system.

P.S. does anyone know what the criteria is for uploading graphic files. The picture of my shoes worked fine, but I couldn't upload the Ball images I made so I had to link to them. When I tried to upload, it showed a red exclamation to the right of the file info.

[Mike White]

What's odd about it? It's locating the PAP in relation to the grip in the simplest way.
The A highlighted line would be the current way of locating the PAP 4 3/4" Across and 1" UP measured from the grip center.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/BowlingTest_cr.jpg

Now you talked about measuring the pap from the center of the fingers, The B&C lines in this image can't be used because they are not perpendicular to the center line of the grip.

Example:
If line A is 4 3/4" long, then line C is going to be shorter in that picture.

1820 you're jumping ahead, so far my two pictures are just a representation of how the down and over is used to identify the location of the PAP, and my grid to do the same task.

Later on I'll move the origin of the graph to the PAP and things will be clearer (I hope).

Step by step.

[bowl1820]

P.S. does anyone know what the criteria is for uploading graphic files. The picture of my shoes worked fine, but I couldn't upload the Ball images I made so I had to link to them. When I tried to upload, it showed a red exclamation to the right of the file info.

To post a inline picture Click on "go Advance" look at the formatting icons click on the one that looks like a tree in box (next to the film strip looking one.) thats the "insert image" a dialog will open click on "from URL", paste the link to your picture in the box, unclick the retrieve box.then click ok. this will insert the link in the post.

or type this code manually in.
your link here

[Mike White]

To post a inline picture Click on "go Advance" look at the formatting icons click on the one that looks like a tree in box (next to the film strip looking one.) thats the "insert image" a dialog will open click on "from URL", paste the link to your picture in the box, unclick the retrieve box.then click ok. this will insert the link in the post.

or type this code manually in.
your link here

Thank You

[bowl1820]

The useful difference isn't in identifying the PAP relative to the center of the grip.

Locating the pap relative to the grip center is useful in that you need it to locate the holes to drill them.


The different way of identifying the PAP is a break even deal.

It's after that step that it become more useful.


Here is the grid I would use to Identify an unknown PAP.
You mean to get the pap location measurements from a drilled ball where the PAP has been located.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/MyGrid.png


You draw the line directly from the grip center thru the PAP down to the equator.
Okay simple enough, Thats the red line going from the grip center to the pap right?


Measure from the grip center to the PAP, Measure from the bottom left corner to the intersection with the vertical line thru the PAP. The bottom left corner of what? where the two yellow lines meet on the lower left?

The problem here will be projecting the measurement back on a undrilled ball to locate the grip in relation to the pap.



The PAP is identified by 4 3/4 down and 1 over using the down and over system.


In my system it's 4 13/16 latitude and 1 1/16 longitude. Instead of the equator being 0 degrees, the north pole is 0 degrees.


So far both systems have done the same thing with the same amount of effort, and results. Much like measuring in English vs Metric.


Next I'll take a drilled dual angle layout convert the numbers into my system.
That will be a feat, because you've changed the way the VAL is oriented (the red line running from left to right, is no longer perpendicular to the midline) which would change how the dual angle system works . Also I have a feeling driller will have to go back to using a ball compass to swing arcs around the ball.

As a point of reference here's the current way of locating the pap and some of the terms for the different lines.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/BowlingTest_1.jpg

[bowl1820]

Just so I'm clear, this is what you mean. On how to locate the pap.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/ly01_cr.jpg

If so, then instead of using just 2 measurements, you are now using three measurements 6 3/4" , 4 3/4" and 1".

It would be simpler to just use a angle and a distance, once you had the centerline and midline. Like say 5 degrees by 4 3/4". and forget the 6 3/4"

[Mike White]

I can't agree with your description of "my way" because when you flatten it into a plane there are distortions you aren't considering. and you've mislabeled the length from the mid grip, to the pap.
You're using the down and over coordinates. Just a minor difference.

Actually when it comes to working backwards from the pap to the grip, the 6 3/4 is the last thing you want to forget.

I'll work up an example of projecting back from the pap to the grip center on an undrilled ball.

Go back and check the message you quoted before I submitted an edited version. It's only a minor change.

[bowl1820]

I can't agree with your description of "my way" because when you flatten it into a plane there are distortions you aren't considering. and you've mislabeled the length from the mid grip, to the pap.
Okay it should have said 4 13/16 latitude?? what kind of measurement is this? if it's not inches what is it?


You're using the down and over coordinates. Just a minor difference.

Actually when it comes to working backwards from the pap to the grip, the 6 3/4 is the last thing you want to forget.

I'll work up an example of projecting back from the pap to the grip center on an undrilled ball.

Go back and check the message you quoted before I submitted an edited version. It's only a minor change.


Before making a example of how to project it back, make a clear example of how you want to locate the pap in the first place.
Okay I'll use the grid you made, Since my pic distorted it.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/MyGrid01.jpg

You said.


You draw the line directly from the grip center thru the PAP down to the equator.
That would be Line "A" (The Yellow highlighted line)


Measure from the grip center to the PAP,
Okay on line "A" you measure 4 3/4" (4 13/16 latitude??) from the grip center to the pap.

Before

Measure from the bottom left corner to the intersection with the vertical line thru the PAP.
and Now

Measure from the bottom right corner to the intersection with the vertical line thru the PAP.
Okay you changed this part.
Mark the corner your talking about.

Before

In my system it's 4 13/16 latitude and 1 1/16 longitude. Instead of the equator being 0 degrees, the north pole is 0 degrees.
and Now

In my system it's 4 13/16 latitude and 5 11/16 longitude. Instead of the equator being 0 degrees, the north pole is 0 degrees.
Okay you changed this part I see also.

--------
Here make it easy
Use your picture like this
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/MyGrid.png
and draw the two line you mean on it.
The "Measure from the grip center to the PAP"
and the
"Measure from the bottom right corner to the intersection with the vertical line thru the PAP"
lines

[bowl1820]

I'm posting this as a reference, this would be how you layout a ball.
With a Dual Angle layout and the standard PAP measurement system
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/layoutexample_cr.jpg

Layout" 45 X 3" X 30
1-Draw a reference line from Pin to Mass Bias

2-Draw a line at a 45 degree angle to the reference line from the Pin.

3-Now on that line measure 3" from the pin and mark that spot, that's the PAP

4-Next draw a line a 30 degree angle to the Pin to PAP line, this is the VAL. (Vertical Axis Line)

Now we are going to project back from the PAP to the center of the grip
5- From the PAP measure down 1" on the Vertical Axis Line (VAL).

6- Draw a perpendicular line from that point (That's the called the Midline, it's A line that's 90 deg. to the VAL)

7- Now measure over 4 3/4" from the VAL and make a mark. That's where the center line of your grip is.


Now you only had to draw four lines to layout the ball all the way over to the grip center.
(Using only a Pro-sect and a yellow pencil.)

Now your new system would have to simplify that.

[Mike White]

It's five lines if you include the Grip Line which you have to draw.

[Mike White]

When I was laying out balls for myself 20 plus years ago I only had access to a quarter scale. All of the measurements were in inches, no angles. Give me a chance to upgrade my method to use the tools currently available.

[bowl1820]

When I was laying out balls for myself 20 plus years ago I only had access to a quarter scale. All of the measurements were in inches, no angles. Give me a chance to upgrade my method to use the tools currently available.

Yes it's five lines counting the grip center line.

A Pro-Sect is a quarter scale. no need to upgrade.
http://www.bowlingindex.com/store/graphics/00000001/ps-tproscale.jpg

and here's a pic of the ball with the layout on it.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/100_0852a.jpg

[Mike White]

Upgrade in the sense. since the ability to measure angles directly now exists, I will make more use of that feature.

[bowl1820]

Upgrade in the sense. since the ability to measure angles directly now exists, I will make more use of that feature.

While I don't have a 20 year old quarter scale. I believe they could do angles back then. Not that they, used it. They didn't have the "Dual angle Method" back then, that's new.

I would suggest finding out how ball's are layed out now and the methods used, Before trying to rewrite the system.

Here's some starting places links
Dual Angle Layout Technique (Most have been going to this method)
http://www.morichbowling.com/Education/DualAngleSeminar/DualAngleSeminar.htm

Motion Enhancement Guide (Pro Sect User Guide)
http://www.turbogrips.com/downloads/ProSectUserGuide.pdf

A Storm method Lightning Strike PSA Layout Guide
http://www.stormbowling.com/drill-specs/PSA_Lightning_Stikes.pdf

[Mike White]

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/FindPAP1.png

The yellow line is a reference line.
The red line is to be measured in inches.
The blue line is to be measured in degrees.

To identify a PAP you have a distance and angle.
Distance is from Grip Center to PAP
Angle is from PAP to Grip Line.

While we are at this point another piece of information would be handy to know.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/FindPAP2.png

This is the angle between what you call the VAL and the line from the PAP to the Grip Center.
It's not needed to identify the PAP, but it will be useful to know.
Lets call that the Grip to VAL angle for now.

On this ball the Grip Center to PAP is 4 11/16 inches.
The PAP to Grip Line is 75 degrees.
And note that the Grip to VAL angle is 95 degrees (for future use)

[Mike White]

While I don't have a 20 year old quarter scale. I believe they could do angles back then. Not that they, used it. They didn't have the "Dual angle Method" back then, that's new.

I would suggest finding out how ball's are layed out now and the methods used, Before trying to rewrite the system.

Here's some starting places links
Dual Angle Layout Technique (Most have been going to this method)
http://www.morichbowling.com/Education/DualAngleSeminar/DualAngleSeminar.htm

Motion Enhancement Guide (Pro Sect User Guide)
http://www.turbogrips.com/downloads/ProSectUserGuide.pdf

A Storm method Lightning Strike PSA Layout Guide
http://www.stormbowling.com/drill-specs/PSA_Lightning_Stikes.pdf

You could do angles, but you had to convert angles to inches and measure the right area. There wasn't an angle scale on the tool.

I understand how layouts are implemented, that didn't take long. It took about 2 minutes to figure out what the 3 values in a dual angle layout controlled.
That is different than knowing how the 3 values affect the ball while it's on the lane. Actual bowling will teach me that. So far I'm waiting on my replacement shoes.

[bowl1820]

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/FindPAP1.png

The yellow line is a reference line.
The red line is to be measured in inches.
The blue line is to be measured in degrees.

To identify a PAP you have a distance and angle.
Distance is from Grip Center to PAP
Angle is from PAP to Grip Line.

Okay you've located the PAP in relation to the grip center. Is this "The PAP to Grip Line is 75 degrees" angle?.


While we are at this point another piece of information would be handy to know.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/FindPAP2.png

This is the angle between what you call the VAL and the line from the PAP to the Grip Center.
It's not needed to identify the PAP, but it will be useful to know.
Lets call that the Grip to VAL angle for now.
And is this second blue angle line the "Grip to VAL angle is 95 degrees"?



On this ball the Grip Center to PAP is 4 11/16 inches.
The PAP to Grip Line is 75 degrees.
And note that the Grip to VAL angle is 95 degrees (for future use)

[bowl1820]

Okay assuming the PAP location using the standard method is
4 3/4" over and 1" up

when compared to your method (using 75 X 4 11/16 " X 95) it does seem to locate the same points.

When projecting back from the pap to the center of the grip. I just tried it on a ball.

But it offers no advantage over the standard method.

But it has complicated the process more.

You now need 3 measurements 1 distance and 2 angles and Those two angles will be different for everyone.

Also about the second angle (the 95) to get that angle off a already drilled balled. you would still need to find the vertical axis line (the 4 3/4" meas. on the midline) to have a line to measure that angle from.

And if you have to do that, you could have just used the standard method and been done with it.

Using the standard method you only need 2 measurements and those two angles using the current method are always the same for everyone (90 degrees)

Now this is just looking at it from the stand point of using it with the dual angle layout method.

There maybe other problems with it also, when used with the other layout methods that can be used. I don't know off hand.

[bowl1820]

It would be nice if some of you lurkers would offer a second opinion here. We could use another pair of eyes.

[J Anderson]

It would be nice if some of you lurkers would offer a second opinion here. We could use another pair of eyes.

If I really understood how balls are laid out I would. As it is, I'm happy if the ball fits my hand well. That reminds me I need to get Tim or Chris to change the ring finger grip on my Hyroad.

[Mike White]

Okay assuming the PAP location using the standard method is
4 3/4" over and 1" up

when compared to your method (using 75 X 4 11/16 " X 95) it does seem to locate the same points.

When projecting back from the pap to the center of the grip. I just tried it on a ball.

But it offers no advantage over the standard method.

But it has complicated the process more.

You now need 3 measurements 1 distance and 2 angles and Those two angles will be different for everyone.

Also about the second angle (the 95) to get that angle off a already drilled balled. you would still need to find the vertical axis line (the 4 3/4" meas. on the midline) to have a line to measure that angle from.

And if you have to do that, you could have just used the standard method and been done with it.

Using the standard method you only need 2 measurements and those two angles using the current method are always the same for everyone (90 degrees)

Now this is just looking at it from the stand point of using it with the dual angle layout method.

There maybe other problems with it also, when used with the other layout methods that can be used. I don't know off hand.

Why is it every time I pause, you assume I'm done and thats all there it to it. We're still making the cake, you need to wait on the frosting.

About the vertical axis line, one end of that line is 4 3/4" down for some people, but the other end of that line is 6 3/4" from the grip center on a line that goes thru the fingers. And thats the same dimensions for everyone.

BTW how do you find the Vertical axis line for someone with X down and 0 over?

I don't need three measurements to find the PAP. only 2. 1 distance, and one angle. The other angle measurement is useful later.

To me each time you have a choice between two apparently equal options you should select the option that provides the most useful information.

Again wait until the cake is done cooking before you decide if it tastes bad.

[bowl1820]

Okay I'll start from scratch:
First here's how you measure the location of a bowler's PAP on the ball they are using.
This is where you get the PAP measurements from in the first place.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/loc_pap_cr.jpg

First you find the PAP on the ball and put a mark there.
(I'm not going into how you find the PAP, you can see it here http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index.php?title=Measure_Bowlers_Positive_Axis_Poin t)

next you draw a center line on the grip.

next find the middle of the grip.

next draw a line that's perpendicular to the center line from the middle of the grip mark, this is called the Midline (also known as the Horizontal Axis Line "HAL").

Next draw a line from where you marked the PAP on the ball that is perpendicular to the Midline. This line is called the Vertical Axis Line "VAL".
(A person's PAP is always on the Vertical Axis Line )

Now we measure

On the Midline measure from the Middle of the grip to where the "VAL" touches the Midline. In the Example above that is 4 3/4" this is the Horizontal measurement.

Next measure up from the Midline to the PAP mark on the "VAL". In the Example above that is 1" this is the Vertical measurement.

You've now have the PAP coordinates which are 4 3/4" across 1" up.

[billf]

I gave up because I got bored. Feels as if this thread is taking just as long as the measuring process being proposed. I'm waiting to see what the advantage is suppose to actually be. So far it seems as though the ball was turned sideways and using more math to reinvent the wheel. No matter how many times you add 2 to a prime number, it's still a prime number. Whether inches or degrees are used, it's still linear math on a sphere.

If I had to wait this long on all my food, I would be THIN as I wouldn't bother to eat.

[bowl1820]

Why is it every time I pause, you assume I'm done and thats all there it to it. We're still making the cake, you need to wait on the frosting.

I'm sorry I'm making you mad by commenting on your posts.


About the vertical axis line, one end of that line is 4 3/4" down for some people, but the other end of that line is 6 3/4" from the grip center on a line that goes thru the fingers. And thats the same dimensions for everyone.
This make no sense




BTW how do you find the Vertical axis line for someone with X down and 0 over?
See post above

Also it's not "X down and 0 over" it would be "X over and O up or down(depending if the PAP is above or below the Midline)
The balls holes would be oriented like in the post above when getting the measurements off the ball.


I don't need three measurements to find the PAP. only 2. 1 distance, and one angle. The other angle measurement is useful later.
Yes you located the PAP with 1 distance, and one angle, But if you don't know what that 2nd angle is before you try to layout a ball. You won't be able to project the line from the PAP at the correct angle to locate the grip center.

So you would have to measure that 2nd angle also, when you do the other measurements. And to do that you would need to have the Vertical Axis Line. And if you have that you don't need your angle measurements in the first place. just use the regular measurements and save having ti do more steps.


To me each time you have a choice between two apparently equal options you should select the option that provides the most useful information.

Your method doesn't tell you anything the other method doesn't. What about the current why of doing it , does it not tell you?


Again wait until the cake is done cooking before you decide if it tastes bad.

The cake has failed to rise yet.

[GeorgiaStroker]

I'm glad all you Left brain types are there for us right minded people. We can take you a ball and say make it do this and you can. lol That frees us up to enjoy 70's sitcoms and beer.

[Mike White]

Let me rephrase the question...

If the PAP happens to be exactly on the midline, how do you determine the VAL?

[billf]

The same way you would if it was up or down from the midlane. The VAL still goes through the PAP at an angle determined by what ball reaction is desired.

[billf]

VAL angle is the angle through the PAP in correlation to the pin. So a 20 degree VAL doesn't care if the PAP is above or below the midline, nor would a 70 degree VAL angle.

[bowl1820]

Let me rephrase the question...

If the PAP happens to be exactly on the midline, how do you determine the VAL?

You still draw a line perpendicular from the point on the midline.

The vertical measurement is just zero example 4 3/4" across 0 up

[bowl1820]

The VAL is a line perpendicular to the midline that passes through the PAP.


VAL angle is the angle through the PAP in correlation to the pin. So a 20 degree VAL doesn't care if the PAP is above or below the midline, nor would a 70 degree VAL angle.
just to be clear:
The angle billf is talking about here is used later when doing the layout. And is not part of getting the PAP location measurements off a ball.

[billf]

The VAL is taken at the PAP in degrees from the pin to PAP line. It's not until after these measurements are completed do you measure back from the PAP to get the midline. The pin to PAP distance chosen (depending on reaction desired) would affect the relative position of the pin to the grips using the same PAP.

[bowl1820]

The VAL is taken at the PAP in degrees from the pin to PAP line. It's not until after these measurements are completed do you measure back from the PAP to get the midline. The pin to PAP distance chosen (depending on reaction desired) would affect the relative position of the pin to the grips using the same PAP.

Yes Billf your talking about how you put a layout on a ball. The Angle to VAL part of the Dual Angle Layout.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/layoutexample_cr.jpg
What we are talking about is measuring where the PAP is in the first place on a ball all ready drilled.
The Vertical Axis Line is always at a 90 degree angle to the Midline.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/loc_pap_cr.jpg

[J Anderson]

No matter how many times you add 2 to a prime number, it's still a prime number.

Huh? Seven is a prime number. If I add two to seven I get nine, not a prime number.

[ursus]

Huh? Seven is a prime number. If I add two to seven I get nine, not a prime number.

I had saw that earlier but didn't want to get drug into this conversation

[bowl1820]

No matter how many times you add 2 to a prime number, it's still a prime number.

If you add a prime number that is odd to the only even prime number (2), you will have an odd number. This odd number might be prime or might be composite

2 + 3 = 5 which is a prime number
2 + 7 = 9 which is a composite number
2 + 23 = 25 which is a composite number
2 + 41 = 43 which is a prime number

[Mike White]

Let's give billf the benefit of the doubt and assume he meant something like..

Bob is 7 foot tall, even if you put Bob on 2 foot stilts, Bob is still 7 foot tall.

Bob + Stilts however is 9 foot tall.

Where Bob is the "prime number"

[billf]

No don't give me the benefit of the doubt. my head was just stuck in my own body cavity.

[billf]

What we are talking about is measuring where the PAP is in the first place on a ball all ready drilled.
The Vertical Axis Line is always at a 90 degree angle to the Midline]
I'm missing something Bowl. If the ball is already drilled and you know the PAP, what's the question? If PAP is unknown then there are easier methods to find it (tape, armadillo) then all the math being thrown about.

[bowl1820]

I'm missing something Bowl. If the ball is already drilled and you know the PAP, what's the question?
You might kn ow where the PAP is, but if you don't know measurements, you have to measure it. I was telling how to do it.


If PAP is unknown then there are easier methods to find it (tape, armadillo) then all the math being thrown about.
(tape, armadillo) show you where the pap is, but you still have to get the measurements

The PAP measurements are like directions to another city. You might know generally where the city is, but with out directions you can't drive there.
Tape or armadillo just show you where the city (PAP) is, but not the directions on how to get there (exactly where it's located in relation to the grip on the ball).



Positive axis point(PAP)
Fig. 1 - Positive and Negative sides of the ball
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/images/6/66/Positve_vs_Negative.png
Fig. 2 - Positive Axis Point (PAP) for a right hander
http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/images/8/8f/Positive_Axis_Point_%28PAP%29.png
A bowler's Positive Axis Point (PAP) is a point on the surface of the ball that is the positive end point of the bowlers initial axis of rotation.

Fig. 1 shows the Center of Grip, Grip Centerline and Grip Mid line, as well as the Positive and Negative sides of the ball, for a right hander. Left handers would be a mirror image of the one seen in Fig. 1.

The PAP is usually expressed as a pair of numbers, showing the PAP's offset from the Center of Grip, e.g. 4.5" over, 1.25" up, or 4 1/2" x 1 1/4" up, as seen in Fig. 2. The first number represents the horizontal offset along the Grip Midline, while the second number represents the vertical offset along the Vertical Axis Line (VAL). So, using 4 1/2" x 1 1/4" up, we know that this bowler's PAP is located 4 1/2" along the Grip Mid line and 1 1/4" up the VAL.

The PAP is instrumental in laying out a bowling, as it serves as the point of origin for the layout.

There's no math to this , just taking measurements.
and you need those measurements to put the grip back on a new ball.

Go here this shows how to find the PAP and measure it. They have videos

http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index.php?title=Measure_Bowlers_Positive_Axis_Poin t

They show three ways Pro sect, Armadillo and spinner ways of finding the pap.
All three ways the last thing on the instructions are:
7. Calculate the horizontal PAP distance by measuring the distance between the center of grip and marked PAP on the midline.
8. Calculate the vertical PAP distance by measuring the distance between the horizontal PAP measurement on the midline and the marked PAP.

And those two measurements are what this shows.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/loc_pap_cr.jpg

[Mike White]

There's no math to this , just taking measurements.
and you need those measurements to put the grip back on a new ball.

I disagree with this because of a minor flaw.

Yes you need measurements, but NO they do not have to be THOSE measurements.


My attempt is to show the process step by step and point out where the "over and up" method has some flaws in it.
It seems some people here don't have the patience for my style so I'll lay out the plan so you will know if/when I have achieved my goals.
It takes a while to produce the graphics because I can't draw for squat, and I'm learning how to work with the software in use.

My plan:

1) Show my opinion of the current method so we have a basis of agreement.
the current method (http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/BowlingTest.png)
This picture is why I called it down, and over. From a different perspective it would be over and up.

2) Show an alternative method to achieve the same results.
alternate (http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/MyGrid.png)

3) Show the flaws in the current method.
A dual angle layout doesn't produce the same dynamic parameters for each bowler.
Graphic(s) pending

4) Develop a system that does produce the same dynamic parameters for each bowler.
To do so I will modify the approach in step 2 since it achieves better results.
Graphic(s) pending

5) Finding as close as possible a translation factor from the dual angle method to my proposed method.
Graphic(s) pending.

[billf]

Mike, I don't mean to be so impatient. I understand the trouble with drawing and graphics. I also don't mean to come across as a wise guy either. I believe I understand (fundamentally anyway) what you are attempting but as yet don't see it being able to work. With the variable associated with each individual bowler I don't see a fathomable way to obtain a system to create the same dynamics for each bowler.

Maybe I was taking some of this topic for granted. I know how to locate PAP and how to get the measurements. I also know those measurements are needed to place it correctly on an undrilled ball. The question was how to find the VAL if PAP is on the midline. My answer stays the same; the same way as if it was above or below the midline. If PAP is on the midline then it's even easier as one less measurement is needed.

[bowl1820]

I disagree with this because of a minor flaw.

Yes you need measurements, but NO they do not have to be THOSE measurements.



My attempt is to show the process step by step and point out where the "over and up" method has some flaws in it. You've never said what those flaws are.


It seems some people here don't have the patience for my style so I'll lay out the plan so you will know if/when I have achieved my goals.
It takes a while to produce the graphics because I can't draw for squat, and I'm learning how to work with the software in use.

You say I don't patience, If I didn't have patience I would have quit this thread a long time ago. You yourself said you haven't layouted out a ball in 20 years. So your knowledge is 20 years behind the times.

You should learn about how thing are done now and why they are done that way. Before you go trying to change it.


My plan:

1) Show my opinion of the current method so we have a basis of agreement.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/BowlingTest.png"]the current method
This picture is why I called it down, and over. From a different perspective it would be over and up.

Here is how the picture should be oriented and the lines I highlighted and labeled are where it's measured.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/BowlingTest_1.jpg



2) Show an alternative method to achieve the same results.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/MyGrid.png
Okay you'll have to show how it works


3) Show the flaws in the current method.
A dual angle layout doesn't produce the same dynamic parameters for each bowler.
Graphic(s) pending

And just what do you base that statement (in bold) on?

Like I said before go over to the bowlingchat and ask Mo Pinel and make that statement, he developed the Dual Angle System and if the current way of measuring the pap was wrong he would know. http://www.bowlingchat.net/



4) Develop a system that does produce the same dynamic parameters for each bowler.
To do so I will modify the approach in step 2 since it achieves better results.
Graphic(s) pending

5) Finding as close as possible a translation factor from the dual angle method to my proposed method.
Graphic(s) pending.

[Mike White]

You've never said what those flaws are.
Thats right, I haven't gotten there yet.



You yourself said you haven't layouted out a ball in 20 years. So your knowledge is 20 years behind the times.

Knowledge of the effect one layout vs another is what I lack.
Knowledge of work my way around the surface of a sphere I don't lack.
I just didn't know the current tools provided angles.
I know the quarter scale only provided a distance measure which when used properly can be converted to angles.


You should learn about how thing are done now and why they are done that way. Before you go trying to change it.

Yeah, it took all of 2 minutes to see how it is done, and notice a flaw in it.

Do we agree on the following statements?
Each bowler (worth making a layout for) has a PAP.
At the point of release the ball with rotate around the PAP.
(technically it's the line from the PAP to NAP)
For a ball to rotate around PAP some torque has to be applied to it.
That torque is applied at the finger holes.

Now lets look at the major problem.
At the point of release, what is the position of the core in relation to where the force is applied.

It makes a big difference if the PIN is facing down, or up at that moment.
But that question can't be accurately answered if you use the current PAP identification method.

BTW the method I showed as an alternative (what I used years ago) has the same potential flaw since it uses the grip center as a reference point. The difference is back then the goal wasn't to position an exotic core. It was to position for static weights.

So I have another PAP identification method that eliminates the flaw. I referred to its main feature in the first message of this thread, so it's not something I just made up on the spot.

[bowl1820]

Okay Mike if you think there's something wrong with the system fine, I'm not going to say your wrong.

Determine what the problems are, Come up with a solution, get some opinions from some experts in the industry (I already suggested one) ,test out your solution, get someone at a pro shop to try it out (or do it in your own pro shop). Then If your solution works out, spread the word.

[Mike White]

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/100_0852a.jpg
If the picture doesn't show up, it's from message #30

I would like to use this dual angle layout in comparing two different people, but I can't see the distance from Pin to PAP.
Can you tell me what it is?


Nevermind I found it was the same as the flat diagram..

45 x 3" x 30.

I'm working on that now, to show the flaws.

[kidlost2000]

Now lets look at the major problem.
At the point of release, what is the position of the core in relation to where the force is applied.

It makes a big difference if the PIN is facing down, or up at that moment.
But that question can't be accurately answered if you use the current PAP identification method.

BTW the method I showed as an alternative (what I used years ago) has the same potential flaw since it uses the grip center as a reference point. The difference is back then the goal wasn't to position an exotic core. It was to position for static weights.

So I have another PAP identification method that eliminates the flaw. I referred to its main feature in the first message of this thread, so it's not something I just made up on the spot.

What do you mean by pin facing down or up at release?
What do you mean by the current pap identification method? No matter how you identify someones pap it will still be there no matter what or how you call it.

I'm guessing your trying to say that where the force is applied to the top of the core/pin is a more relative marker then going off the center grip line? So the pin to center of fingers above the bridge is the factor that isn't equal based off the dual layout method?

[Dogtown]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line. You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release. My question is why does that matter? You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

[billf]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line. You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release. My question is why does that matter? You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

Well that's a hell of a first post! Welcome to the forum! I look forward to reading more clear, concise, no beating around the bush posts from you.

[Mike White]

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/SampleBall1.png

This is a sample ball using the 45 x 3 x 30 dual angle Over and Up method.
I created that as a reference.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/PAP_ID_1.png
This is how I would Identify the exact same ball using the "Prime" method.

The ROG is the point between the two spans, on the grip center line. It's the same point the USBC uses in determining the location of the grip center.
Since I made up this system, I get to pick the name of the new point of interest. BTW, extra credit for anyone who can figure out what ROG stands for.
This ball had the Pin 30 degrees below the fingers when viewed at the point of release, thumb up, fingers at 3 o'clock when viewed like the face of a clock with the PAP in the center of the face.

The specs for this bowler are 5 11/16 lat, and 91 degrees to the grip center line.

I would refer to this as 45 x 3 x -30, so for this bowler, the conversion factor from the Over and Up to the Prime would be -60 degrees.


http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/BlankDrill.png

This shows the steps of drilling a blank ball using the the specs:
5 11/16 lat, 91 degrees, and a layout of 45 x 3 x -30.

If someone can give me a concrete example of their spans, and PAP using the Over and Up method, I'll show why the Over and Up method is inconsistent from bowler to bowler, while the Prime method produces the same results bowler to bowler.

[Mike White]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line.

I wouldn't say it's the center grip line that is the problem, it's more the Over and Up method which is based on the grip center (not the same as center grip line).

Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in a slightly different location based on the difference in the spans.
My system ignores the span because when the torque is applied to the ball, the thumb is already out.



You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release.
My question is why does that matter?

The starting position of the core makes a difference in how it rolls. Do you remember the "old" days where you had finger weight or thumb weight.
That is the analogy the last factor in a dual angle layout. Think of it as Dynamic thumb/finger weight.


You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

Well I've yet to see the force applied to the ball at the elbow. I agree the point I selected is not perfect in the extreme cases such as a Sarge Easter, and I considered using the longest span as the reference point, but that could be wrong for other extreme reasons. So yes, we won't know exactly the balance between the forces, but isn't it better to make a good estimate for 99% of the people than just ignoring the concept.


I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

There is a lot of crap that has been widely accepted in the bowling industry.
The ABC and BPAA had a pissing match over lane conditions. Clearly the BPAA won and turned the game into somewhat of a joke.

Why do bowlers commonly expect to use 2 or 3 balls each night as the conditions change? Who benefits from that situation?
Someone has to manufacture all those extra balls, and pro shops needs to sell them, and drill them.

It was common for me to use the same ball not only all night, but all season. And score quite well with it.

15 years sounds like a long time, but trust me, it's just a blink.
Much like Stock Brokers in the 80's-90's, almost every recommendation they made to clients turned out to be a winner.
What they didn't notice was just how hard it was to actually pick a loser. They were living during the biggest stock market boom.
When it turned south, they had no experience dealing with that.

So 15 years of making bowlers scores go up doesn't mean much when EVERYONE's scores are going up.
If the USBC ever gets it's head out of it's *** and requires all sanctioned leagues to oil like sport leagues, the boom will become a bust.
That's when pro shop operators will have to earn their money.

"I was shredding the rack last season, now I'm leaving the bucket on pocket hits."

[bowl1820]

Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in a slightly different location based on the difference in the spans.


Okay just to be sure this is the flaw your talking about.
Here's two bowlers, same layout, same pap location, only the spans are different.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/flaw_01_cr.jpg

Why shouldn't we look at this way:
Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in the same location regardless of the difference in the spans.

Why does the pap have to be directly across from the fingers?

[Dogtown]

Okay. Now, I think I understand you a little better.

Let's take your example of two bowlers with the same PAP, ball speed & Rev rate BUT the spans are different. One guy has a 3.5" span, the other has 5" span. We drill the same ball for both bowlers using the dual angle method (pick whatever angles and pin distance you want). The end results: The balls WILL roll virtually identical. Why? Because the balls are laid out identical in relationship to the PAP. The pin distance tells you how the core is positioned at release. The fact that the pin maybe further away from the fingers of the shorter span and closer to the fingers of the longer span is irreverent. (Yes the static weights could vary slightly between the two, especially if the core of the ball is close to any of the holes) The ball DOES NOT care where the force is applied. Think of this. USBC and Brunswick both have a million dollar machines they can emulate ANY style of ANY bowler, yet it has no fingers to put in the holes and uses two robotic hands). So I could throw one of my balls, and one of these robots could emulate me and throw my same ball. If you watched a video of the ball just after release, you couldn't tell where the force is being applied. If you assumed it was at my finger holes, you would be wrong for the robot. But the reactions would be identical. Where the force comes from doesn't matter. After the point of release all the laws of physics are identical.

Pin location and the bowlers PAP tell you everything you need to know. AMF used to have a video of one of their balls that showed a transparent view of the ball to see how the core worked. If the pin was placed on the bowlers PAP, the core was basically in a balanced position at release. The ball had virtually no flare and hooked very evenly. If the pin was place 3 3/8" from the PAP, the core was at its most unbalanced position. The results; the ball had maximum flare, maximum revs in the midlane and hook.

Your idea of where force is applied in relationship to the core or pin location serves no point. Dual Angle Method wins!!

ROG = Radius of Gyration???

[kidlost2000]

I wouldn't say it's the center grip line that is the problem, it's more the Over and Up method which is based on the grip center (not the same as center grip line).

Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in a slightly different location based on the difference in the spans.
My system ignores the span because when the torque is applied to the ball, the thumb is already out.




I understand what your saying now because of the above statement. (i think) Yes a difference in spans will have an effect on the ball, but not exactly for why you mentioned. No ball will ever be 100% exact for two different bowlers with different spans or different other factors.(save for last)

Lets see if we can agree on a few things

1. The dual angle method uses the bowlers PAP which is measured from the center of the span to layout the ball.

2. By laying the ball out on this method for any bowler or any span or style it puts the pin and mb/psa in the exact same distance and degree from each bowlers PAP.

That we can agree on, where you see fault is after drawing the center grip line, the span will be based off the center of the bowlers span which can be 3" or 5" and there for the relation of the pin to fingers is different for each bowler? Correct?

In the pic below we have the ball laid out with a 3" span and a 5" span. I used paint to touch up the finger lines and where the mb/psa is to help see better.

548
http://www.bowlingboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=548&d=1342110943

That is true the pin to fingers for each is different, but this irrelevant because even though the spans are different the pin and mb at release will be at the exact same position for each bowler based on their actual PAP. That is the key factor. So even with a 6" span, at release on the DA method the pin and mb will be in the exact same relation as the 3" 4" 5" ect span and give the bowlers the same layout in every way. The difference in reaction from bowler to bowler will be based on the bowlers style, not the ball, Example you can layout a ball on the exact DA method for Walter Ray and Sean Rash but there obviously going to have different reactions even with the same ball, but they will have the same pin and psa to PAP distance and degree at releases onto the lane.

It may not change your mind or way of thinking but you may come up with something else or modify yours to better work.

Now (the save for later part) what you can't factor in as the other concern is the dynamics that change the ball when you add holes. This is where your somewhat right. using the 3" span and 5" span when your start drilling those finger holes typically what happens is the balls low rg axis/pin shifts away from holes while the bowling balls high rg axis/ mb/psa generally shifts towards holes. When this happens you can use a determinator to spin the ball and find its new high rg axis and then draw a line 6 3/4" back through the cg to find its new low rg axis. Depending on the size of the finger holes, depth, if a weight hole is added and where will all have effects on the end result of the dynamics of the ball. I would say at that point even if all holes where drilled the same size for two different spans on the above pictured ball, the effect it has on the core will be slightly different and the end location of the high and low rg axis will not be the same even though the starting points for each span where. That being said, the effects are very small and not enough to be a determining difference if laying out and drilling a ball identical for different spans.

[Mike White]

Okay. Now, I think I understand you a little better.

Let's take your example of two bowlers with the same PAP, ball speed & Rev rate BUT the spans are different. One guy has a 3.5" span, the other has 5" span. We drill the same ball for both bowlers using the dual angle method (pick whatever angles and pin distance you want). The end results: The balls WILL roll virtually identical. Why? Because the balls are laid out identical in relationship to the PAP. The pin distance tells you how the core is positioned at release. The fact that the pin maybe further away from the fingers of the shorter span and closer to the fingers of the longer span is irreverent. (Yes the static weights could vary slightly between the two, especially if the core of the ball is close to any of the holes) The ball DOES NOT care where the force is applied. Think of this. USBC and Brunswick both have a million dollar machines they can emulate ANY style of ANY bowler, yet it has no fingers to put in the holes and uses two robotic hands). So I could throw one of my balls, and one of these robots could emulate me and throw my same ball. If you watched a video of the ball just after release, you couldn't tell where the force is being applied. If you assumed it was at my finger holes, you would be wrong for the robot. But the reactions would be identical. Where the force comes from doesn't matter. After the point of release all the laws of physics are identical.

Pin location and the bowlers PAP tell you everything you need to know. AMF used to have a video of one of their balls that showed a transparent view of the ball to see how the core worked. If the pin was placed on the bowlers PAP, the core was basically in a balanced position at release. The ball had virtually no flare and hooked very evenly. If the pin was place 3 3/8" from the PAP, the core was at its most unbalanced position. The results; the ball had maximum flare, maximum revs in the midlane and hook.

Your idea of where force is applied in relationship to the core or pin location serves no point. Dual Angle Method wins!!

ROG = Radius of Gyration???

This is so bad I don't know where to begin pointing out the mistakes.

Lets start with the robot.

Back when scores started to climb ABC (at the time) defended itself by saying that even it's robot hadn't shot 300.

Ya think maybe the robot wasn't as good as implied.

About the gripping method of the robot vs the human. I'll bet if you talked to the people who designed the robot, the core position (in terms of rotation around the axis) was an issue, but they couldn't find an acceptable solution.

If the position of the core, in terms rotation around the axis, at the point of release, doesn't matter, then what is the point of the 30, in a 40 x 3 x 30 layout?

The Pin to PAP distance only tells you 1/3 of what you need to know.

15 years? How much of that was napping?

[Mike White]

Okay just to be sure this is the flaw your talking about.
Here's two bowlers, same layout, same pap location, only the spans are different.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w89/aloarjr810/misc%20files/flaw_01_cr.jpg

Why shouldn't we look at this way:
Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in the same location regardless of the difference in the spans.

Why does the pap have to be directly across from the fingers?

Your picture is taking bad, and compounding it with worse.

Part of the problem is visualizing the ball surface projected onto a flat surface.

A 90 degree angle on the ball isn't a 90 degree angle on the flat surface.

Example. Assume all angles are 90 degrees and each line is 6 3/4 inch long.



A......D
|.......|
|.......|
|.......|
B-----C

A, B, C, and D represent 4 different points on a flat surface.

On a sphere, points A, and D would be the same point.
To draw that on a flat surface, the angles to use would be 60 degrees.

....A
.../.\
../...\
B-----C

[Dogtown]

This will be my last post on this subject.

If you took a picture right at the point of release of a person with a 3.5" span and a 5" span (from my last example; same PAP, style, etc..), the core would be in the exact same position for both bowlers (assuming the balls were transparent for everyone to see). We know this because the pin to PAP are the same. The pin location tells you exactly where and how the core is positioned. How do we know this? Because the pin is what is holding the core in place.

The video I referred to earlier was actually from Ebonite. They sent out a video when they released their Matrix Trimax. I have tried to find this on the internet because it very clearly illustrates what I'm trying to describe to everyone reading.

Mr. White, I think you have a great understanding of math as it relates to bowling. In fact I learned something from one of your post that I had always just taken for granted. But, I think if you spend some more time on the subject, you may come to realize that the dual angle method works and works pretty well. I will say this one last time. Where torque is applied on the ball is irrelevant. Your method WILL need to account for the Sarge Easter grip, two handerd bowlers, bowlers who cuff the ball, bowlers who use 3 fingers, 4 fingers or No fingers. They make up more than the 1% you are assuming. The dual angle method does this.

Good luck!

[Dogtown]

Good job KidLost2000!! Now, I'm done.

[kidlost2000]

What DT mentioned is what others are trying to say as well. On the dual angle method even if you have 5 different bowlers, styles, and spans when the ball is released by each they will have have the same pin and mb to pap relationship. So that 45 x 3 x 30 layout will be identical at release for each bowler. The torque may be applied in a different location on the ball from one person to the next, but the core will be in the exact same position for every bowler when it the torque is applied.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-EHBg3-wn4&feature=fvwrel

Shows different style bowlers and there releases with their PAP marked. By using there PAP in the DA method for any bowler with the same layout based off their PAP the pin and MB will be in the exact same location no matter how the force is applied. That is irrelevant once the ball touches the lane. The torque may be applied in a different location on the ball from one person to the next, but the core will be in the exact same position for every bowler when it the torque is applied.

[bowl1820]

As I said earlier Mike, if you think there's something wrong with the system fine, I'm not going to say your wrong.

In fact since you worked it out and you won a ball here, when you take it to the pro shop to get it drilled. Have the driller use your system to lay it out and drill it.

Might take a look at at Ebonite's Blueprint software, you can input in your layout and try it out in computer sim.
They have a demo version.
http://www.blueprintbowling.com/

CAD-Powered Virtual Bowling Ball Drilling
Drilled Bowling Ball With Ball Track

Blueprint lets you try different drill patterns on your computer without ever putting a physical hole into the bowling ball. This allows you to experiment with different core orientations, balance holes, and gripping hole depths in order to achieve the desired as-drilled mass properties and on-lane ball track flare.

Additional highlights from the virtual ball drilling process include:

Calculation of the ball's as-drilled mass properties, including RGs, overall differential, intermediate differential (mass bias), static weights, and principal (minimum, maximum, and intermediate) RG axis position relative to the positive axis point (PAP).
Interactive 3D display of the drilled and undrilled bowling ball, with coverstock transparency for easier visualization of how the core is affected by the drilling; rotate, zoom, and pan the model to better see areas of interest.
As-Drilled RG Axes With RG Contour Plot
Optional overlay of the ball's as-drilled principal mass moment of inertia (RG) axes and the bowler's PAP...see how the RG axes move when the ball is drilled and how they are oriented relative to the PAP.
Optional overlay of an RG contour plot on the ball's surface...a Blueprint-exclusive feature that lets you better position the core relative to the PAP for optimal on-lane track flare.

[Mike White]

This is an overlay for two balls drilled for someone with 5" span and another with 3.5" span.
Blue dots represent the thumb hole location for each ball.
Red dots, the center of the finger holes.
Cyan dots, the center of the grip
Yellow dots, PAP
Orange dots, Pin
White dots, PSA

These are overlays keeping both the PAP, and the center of the grip aligned.

No surprise that the Pin and PSA match, however this isn't how the ball is thrown

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay1.png

This is the same layouts, just rotated to place the fingers at 3 o'clock relative to the PAP. This represents the release point.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay2.png

As you see, with the only difference being span, the Pin, and therefore the core in located differently.

[kidlost2000]

I see one ball with the same layout, and one with what would be two different layouts. By shifting the pin you shift the core. When the two bowlers throw the first ball pictured the pin/top of the core will be at the same point of release for each bowler. When the ball is spinning around the pap off the hand the pin and mb will be in the same place for both bowlers. (3", 4" 5" ect span) When you understand that the rest will follow. By shifting the pin going off the second pic at release both balls while axis on the pap and will have the pin/top of the core, in different positions because they are not the same with your method.

Watch where the pin is on many of these vids in relation to the pap off the hand. No matter how long or short the span, the pin/top of the core, for both would be in the same location revolving around the pap off the hand. Even though it isn't the same distance from the fingers from one bowler to the next it doesn't matter because it revolves around the same axis from the same starting point for the bowlers style and span. The vid of different bowlers and layouts but clearly show where the pin is in reference to the pap onto the lane. Even with different spans the pin will always be in the same relation because of the bowlers pap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOINRpWGrlw

[billf]

Hmmm. My doubles partner and I share equipment. We have identical spans and ball speed. We have different size thumbs but use the interchangeables. Same ball, same speed, same lane, obviously same layout, yet my higher rev rate and axis rotation nets me more of an angular, back end reaction.
The purpose of the choice of layout is to manipulate the stability of the core to produce the desired ball reaction for that particular bowler's style. Research has shown that Pin to PAP of 45 degrees (3 3/8") is the most unstable so it produces the maximum flare, maximum rev potential and maximun hook potential. I'm sure that would mean way too much ball dynamics for the majority of bowlers. Keep working it Mike but I'm fairly certain you will come to the same conclusion that the companies that have spent millions doing the research have..dual angle is the best available right now.

[Mike White]

This example only has a difference in the up number by an amount of 1/4".
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay3.png

Here the two balls are aligned to the point of release. Just 1/4" difference in the Up number and the Pin is clearly moved.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay4.png

This example only has a change in the Over value, again 1/4". In this case the finger holes are still fairly aligned compared to the PAP, and the Pin hasn't moved much so I didn't rotate it to release position.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay5.png

[Mike White]

I see one ball with the same layout, and one with what would be two different layouts. By shifting the pin you shift the core. When the two bowlers throw the first ball pictured the pin/top of the core will be at the same point of release for each bowler. When the ball is spinning around the pap off the hand the pin and mb will be in the same place for both bowlers. (3", 4" 5" ect span) When you understand that the rest will follow. By shifting the pin going off the second pic at release both balls while axis on the pap and will have the pin/top of the core, in different positions because they are not the same with your method.

Watch where the pin is on many of these vids in relation to the pap off the hand. No matter how long or short the span, the pin/top of the core, for both would be in the same location revolving around the pap off the hand. Even though it isn't the same distance from the fingers from one bowler to the next it doesn't matter because it revolves around the same axis from the same starting point for the bowlers style and span. The vid of different bowlers and layouts but clearly show where the pin is in reference to the pap onto the lane. Even with different spans the pin will always be in the same relation because of the bowlers pap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOINRpWGrlw

Those are the exact same layouts. Both balls were (after drilling) rotated along their axis to position the finger holes horizontal to the PAP.

[Mike White]

Ok one more time, I don't have a problem with the Dual Angle Layout. I have a problem with locating the PAP with the Over and Up method. My system would still use the Dual Angle, it would just use a more consistent method of locating the PAP. The Dual Angle is just a coordinate system for positioning the core. 3 values for 3 dimensions. The weak link is in the 3rd parameter. It is being referenced to the VAL, which in turn is referenced to the Grip Center via the Over and Up.

[bowl1820]

I agree that in this pic those are the same layouts. And all you did was rotate the ball on the axis(pap) and line up the finger holes.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay2.png

But whats that prove? one is just turned father along in its rotation.

The core is still at the same angle to the axis (PAP).

[billf]

The very first step in the dual angle layout is where your issue is? The first step is choosing the Pin to PAP distance but you're saying ANY of the current methods of obtaining PAP are inconsistent?

[billf]

Or is it that the industry is using the mid point of the span rather than the mid point of the finger holes as a reference point?

[Mike White]

I agree that in this pic those are the same layouts. And all you did was rotate the ball on the axis(pap) and line up the finger holes.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay2.png

But whats that prove? one is just turned father along in its rotation.

The core is still at the same angle to the axis (PAP).

Here is a comparison between the same bowler and balls with different layouts.
One is 45 x 3 x 30, and the other is 45 x 3 x 40.

Based on your theory that "just being turned farther along in it's rotation" isn't significant you logically think the 3rd value of the Dual Angle layout is insignificant.

http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay6.png

[Mike White]

The very first step in the dual angle layout is where your issue is? The first step is choosing the Pin to PAP distance but you're saying ANY of the current methods of obtaining PAP are inconsistent?

The weakness with the Dual Angle Method is it's reliance on the VAL. Obtaining the VAL is where the defect is. It's directly related to the Over and Up process.

[bowl1820]

Here is a comparison between the same bowler and balls with different layouts.
One is 45 x 3 x 30, and the other is 45 x 3 x 40.http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay6.png
I asked the question:
But whats that prove?

Showing the the same bowler with 2 different layouts doesn't answer that or anything.



Based on your theory that "just being turned farther along in it's rotation" isn't significant you logically think the 3rd value of the Dual Angle layout is insignificant.
you say I must logically think the 3rd value of the Dual Angle layout is insignificant. I think All the values are important!

What I'm saying is just because you turn the ball on the axis a little bit it didn't change anything, The pin to pap distance is still the same, It didn't change the the angle of the core to the axis.

[billf]

The weakness with the Dual Angle Method is it's reliance on the VAL. Obtaining the VAL is where the defect is. It's directly related to the Over and Up process.

It's directly related to the PAP, not the process. No matter what process is used to determine the PAP it still is one of two absolute axis on a ball. Now when some configure it they say "good enough" and that is the only inconsistency with it. I have mine figure to within .002". When the ball is first released and that marker dot does not move that is the PAP irrelevant to what process what used to obtain it.

[kidlost2000]

Ok one more time, I don't have a problem with the Dual Angle Layout. I have a problem with locating the PAP with the Over and Up method. My system would still use the Dual Angle, it would just use a more consistent method of locating the PAP. The Dual Angle is just a coordinate system for positioning the core. 3 values for 3 dimensions. The weak link is in the 3rd parameter. It is being referenced to the VAL, which in turn is referenced to the Grip Center via the Over and Up.


It is over, over and up or over and down depending on where you PAP is actually located. Mine is 5.5" straight across, my brothers is 5.75" over and .25" up, another friends is 5" over and .5" down.

The VAL line runs parallel to your center grip line so how is that the weak link? Your method still runs off the center grip line. Then somehow locates the PAP and does something from there. Most people still don't understand what your trying to say and have to keep guessing to get very little in an explanation in return.

First your saying it is about having the pin in reference to the fingers be the same for different spans because that is where torque is applied, then you say yours uses the same info as the dual angle but doesn't use the over up systems which still doesn't really add up. If you use my pap of 5.5" straight across and 5 different spans you still have the identical layout for each bowler based off their PAP not where there finger holes are located.

How about when you get time you make a vid that shows what your trying to type. Maybe thats the problem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtEfzOzcbiE

[Mike White]

I asked the question:
But whats that prove?

Showing the the same bowler with 2 different layouts doesn't answer that or anything.



you say I must logically think the 3rd value of the Dual Angle layout is insignificant. I think All the values are important!

What I'm saying is just because you turn the ball on the axis a little bit it didn't change anything, The pin to pap distance is still the same, It didn't change the the angle of the core to the axis.

Ok how about if I make this clear.

The only different between a 45 x 3 x 30 layout, and a 45 x 3 x 40 layout is one is just turned further along it's axis.

[kidlost2000]

"Ok how about if I make this clear.

The only different between a 45 x 3 x 30 layout, and a 45 x 3 x 40 layout is one is just turned further along it's axis."

And your point? Changing the span ever so slightly slowly rotates the core and its starting position of instability at release. 45 x 3 x 41, 45 x 3 x 43, 45 x 3 x 45 is slightly rotating the placement of the pin and mb to the bowlers PAP which is where the ball will be at release. All three are different by slight degrees and the further you keep going the more noticeable the difference in reaction.

[MICHAEL]

Mike,,, just a thought!! LET IT GO!!! As long as your sure about your ideas,,,, then be happy,,, life is short, and in the grand scheme of things, 99.3 percent of all United States citizens, (that bowl),,, we just don't care! The last time I have seen so many mathematical formulas, and symbols, was when when I was abducted and laying on my back in a observation medical room, on board a UFO!! Believe me Mike, They have nothing OUT there on you and your geometry!!
I noticed while being probed, with various instruments, a black board with alien mathematical equations!
Much more simple then yours, and easier to understand! They were on a power system that uses Ding-Dongs to power a large metropolitan city!! In the design of the things,,,, why not put your genius to work on something that will help humanity! Sure this is a Bowling Site, but enough!! We all agree with you Mike! Take ten deep breaths, and get some sleep….. Your absolutely probably correct!!
Do you feel better now!!! LOL…… Mike,, I think I am very impressed with your Theory, or hypothesis what ever the case may be,,,,most of us on this site, are clueless to the formulas involved in the drilling of a ball! It was fun looking at all the math for a while, but just like my experience on the UFO, it gets painful after a period of time! Please Stop!! Not to change the subject, but what did you think of that All-Star-Game!! Lol… (J)

[bowl1820]

"Ok how about if I make this clear.

The only different between a 45 x 3 x 30 layout, and a 45 x 3 x 40 layout is one is just turned further along it's axis."
That is not the same thing!!
In your picture you rotated the whole ball (Layout and fingers) around the axis till the finger holes lined up.

In the layout change picture (45 x 3 x 30 layout to a 45 x 3 x 40) . You left fingers in the same place and just moved the pin and PSA. you changed the angles that's what moved the Pin and PSA around the axis and That's is not the same thing.

[Mike White]

That is not the same thing!!
In your picture you rotated the whole ball (Layout and fingers) around the axis till the finger holes lined up.

In the layout change picture (45 x 3 x 30 layout to a 45 x 3 x 40) . You left fingers in the same place and just moved the pin and PSA. you changed the angles that's what moved the Pin and PSA around the axis and That's is not the same thing.

What I was showing you is what changes the different layout makes.

Moving the PAP from one point to the other is doing what you said didn't matter. Because it's just further along in it's rotation.

Logically if "further along in it's rotation" doesn't matter, then the 3rd parameter wouldn't matter.

[bowl1820]

What I was showing you is what changes the different layout makes.

Moving the PAP from one point to the other is doing what you said didn't matter. Because it's just further along in it's rotation.

Logically if "further along in it's rotation" doesn't matter, then the 3rd parameter wouldn't matter.

You just refuse to see it, your comparing apples to oranges and saying they are the same thing. When clearly it is not!

in the 2nd pic. When you changed the 30 degree's to 40 degree's, that moved the pin closer to the fingers and the PSA (MB) farther from the thumb.

In other words you changed the angle of the Reference line to the center line of the grip.

In the first picture all you did was rotate the ball on the axis the pap marks. And that doesn't move the pin closer to the fingers and the PSA (MB) farther from the thumb or change the angle of the Reference line to the center line of the grip.

First pic.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay2.png

Second pic.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay6.png

[The Kid]

I wanted to give a couple of thoughts on ball motion and layouts to deal with the issue of the VAL angle. This will be long, math-y, and hopefully helpful.

As far as how the dynamics of the core affect bowling ball motion, there are three major components:

1) Differential Ratio (Intermediate Differential/Total Differential)
2) Total Differential
3) RG of the PAP



(1) The Differential Ratio has a direct effect on the SHAPE of the shot. Technically, we would say that it affects the hook-zone or the distance between the first and second transitions (skid-to-hook and hook-to-roll). Not-so-technically, what this means is that is makes the hook smooth (banana shaped) or sharp (hockey stick shaped). The lower the diff. ratio, the smoother the hook (on symmetrical balls, the undrilled diff. ratio is 0, which is why they tend to be very smooth). The higher the diff. ratio, the sharper the hook (as on many high-end bowling balls).

(2) The Total Differential affects the total amount of potential track flare a ball has. The larger the total diff., the more flare is possible. More flare, for those who don't know, means that the ball rolls over fresh coverstock on each rotation, which makes the ball hook more. (Low flare has the ball roll over the same track over and over, so oil is already on the ball). This is kind of like tread on a tire. If the tread can't shed water while driving on a slippery road, the car will hydroplane (if it can, it won't). For the ball, if the ball doesn't flare much, it will continue to skid (if it can, it will hook).

(3) Radius of Gyration (RG) is just a measure of how easy it is to rotate something. The lower the RG, the easier it is to rotate the object around that axis. This is why it is easier to rotate a pole through its ends (Low RG Axis!) than spin it like a helicopter blade (High RG Axis!). On a bowling ball, the only axis you will rotate the ball on is the PAP, so that is the only RG that matters.

-----

There are also TWO components of the Dual Angle Method which affect ball motion:

1) The Drilling Angle (the angle from the Pin-to-PSA line to the Pin-to-PAP line)
2) The Pin-to-PAP distance

(1) The Drilling Angle technically affects the length of the first transition (skid-to-hook). The lowest drilling angle (10 degrees) causes the ball to start hooking the earliest. The highest drilling angle (90 degrees) causes the ball to delay, starting it's hook later.

(2) The Pin-to-PAP distance largely affect the amount of potential flare, much like the Total Differential. On symmetrical balls (balls with intermediate differentials less than .007"), the lowest flaring pin-to-PAP distances are less than 2 1/2" and more than 4 1/2". The highest flaring pin-to-PAP distances are 3-4", with 3 3/8" flaring the most. For asymmetrical balls (intermediate diff. greater than .007"), this is [B]different. The lowest flaring positions are less than 2 1/2" and more than 5 1/2". Between these two (from 2 1/2" up to 5 1/2"), the flare continues to increase in most cases. That means the highest flaring position isn't 3 3/8", but more like 5".

-----

Finally, the VAL Angle. The VAL Angle is the third component of the Dual Angle Method (Drilling Angle x Pin-to-PAP distance x VAL Angle). This angle simply rotates the pin-to-PSA line around the PAP like a pivot. The effect, however, isn't in its relationship to the VAL, but in the way it changes the dynamics of the core (specifically, the Diff. Ratio and Total Diff.). Follow me here:



Smaller VAL angles (no less than 20 degrees) cause the Pin to be higher and the MB/PSA to be closer to the gripping holes. So, the Low RG value is not raised much, but the High RG value is. So, our Diff. Ratio and Total Diff. both increase- i.e., we get a sharper, stronger hook. Larger VAL angles (no more than 70 degrees) cause the Pin to belower and the MB/PSA to be further from the gripping holes. So, the Low RG value is raised some, but the High RG value is not. So, we get a lower Diff. Ratio and lower Total Diff- i.e., a smoother and weaker hook.

-----

[B]SO, IN CONCLUSION:

The VAL Angle matters a whole lot. But really, it is not a clear-cut "objective" component like the Drilling Angle and Pin-to-PAP Distance. Spans, holes sizes, and hole pitches will play a part in "how" and "how much" the VAL Angle changes the Diff. Ratio and Total Diff. Therefore, it's really not worth trying to make it slightly more accurate.

As Mo Pinel might say: "We're not trying to get this thing into orbit!"

[Mike White]

So you're saying "Yes it's crap, but it doesn't stink that bad". ???


P.S. I'm reading the message closely to gather as many nuggets as possible. Thanks for all the info.

[Mike White]

The VAL line runs parallel to your center grip line so how is that the weak link?



The VAL line and the center grip line crosses, so how it that parallel?

[bowl1820]

AH, the parallel postulate of Euclid and non-Euclidean geometry now clash.

For those that don't know:
the parallel postulate of Euclid: Two lines are parallel if they are both perpendicular to a third line.

[Mike White]

You just refuse to see it, your comparing apples to oranges and saying they are the same thing. When clearly it is not!

in the 2nd pic. When you changed the 30 degree's to 40 degree's, that moved the pin closer to the fingers and the PSA (MB) farther from the thumb.

In other words you changed the angle of the Reference line to the center line of the grip.

In the first picture all you did was rotate the ball on the axis the pap marks. And that doesn't move the pin closer to the fingers and the PSA (MB) farther from the thumb or change the angle of the Reference line to the center line of the grip.

First pic.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay2.png

Second pic.
http://mikew1961.linkpc.net/images/overlay6.png

The first pic represents two different people who are using the same layout. After the layout is applied using the Over and Up method, the ball in centered on the PAP, then the fingers are rotated to 3 o'clock representing the point of release.

At said point of release, the PIN is located differently for each bowler, even though they used the same layout values.

The second picture represents one bowler having two different layouts. Since the PAP and fingers are already aligned I didn't feel the need to center the ball on the PAP, and rotate the fingers to 3 o'clock. What I was showing was that the difference in two layouts for one bowler is similar to the difference of one layout for two bowlers.

If the one bowler gets a different shape roll from two different layouts, then those two bowlers will get different shape rolls using the same layout.

I thought the whole idea was each layout had a unique shape roll, independent of the Span, Over, and Up values of the bowler.

[Mike White]

AH, the parallel postulate of Euclid and non-Euclidean geometry now clash.

For those that don't know:
the parallel postulate of Euclid: Two lines are parallel if they are both perpendicular to a third line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_(geometry)

"On the spherical plane there is no such thing as a parallel line."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_geometry

"Spherical geometry obeys two of Euclid's postulates: the second postulate ("to produce [extend] a finite straight line continuously in a straight line") and the fourth postulate ("that all right angles are equal to one another"). However, it violates the other three: contrary to the first postulate, there is not a unique shortest route between any two points (antipodal points such as the north and south poles on a spherical globe are counterexamples); contrary to the third postulate, a sphere does not contain circles of arbitrarily great radius; and contrary to the fifth (parallel) postulate, there is no point through which a line can be drawn that never intersects a given line.[5]"

[bowl1820]

The first pic represents two different people who are using the same layout. After the layout is applied using the Over and Up method, the ball in centered on the PAP, then the fingers are rotated to 3 o'clock representing the point of release.
I agree that's what did in the first picture.


At said point of release, the PIN is located differently for each bowler, even though they used the same layout values.

Yes, the pin visually appears in a different place as doe's the MB in the first pic. But the thing is the angle of the core to the Axis(PAP) hasn't changed and the location of the MB hasn't changed.The pin didn't get closer to the fingers, the MB didn't get farther from the thumb. That's not going to mean the ball's will react different.

In the pic. where you changed the angle used in the layout. While the angle of the core to the pin hasn't changed, you moved the pin closer the fingers (approx. a 1/2") and the MB farther away from the thumb (approx. 1"). using your own line drawn from the pap to the fingers, the pin has got closer to it. Now that will change how it reacts.

[bowl1820]

As for this thread it's going to go nowhere, it's not going to change how companies, pro shops on they measure paps or layout balls.

So the whole point is moot.

[kidlost2000]

In the end you have come up with your own method for laying out bowling balls that will be different and have different reactions from person to person.

As mentioned elsewhere by an individual who put it best

"After reviewing the referenced thread, I have a fundamental observation, and then a question or two.

It seems to me that Mr. White is basing his opinion on his findings that the length of a bowlers span changes the relation of the pap to the drilling holes, and thusly, must change the dual angle drilling effect for each individual span length.

To me, it appears that Mr. White must think that the pap location is dependent on the span length, but in actuality, span length and pap location are NOT related this way.

Pap location is predicated off each individuals grip center location, such that the pap in relation to the drilled holes is irrelevant in each case.

What builds the balls reaction is the pin location and mass bias location in relation to the individuals pap and track area. Span length plays absolutely no part in the equation, and is therefore irrelevant. This fact makes the difference in the relation between the pap and the drilled hole locations irrelevant as well.

The pap coordinates are important, and will be concrete in their nature, just as the track area. The drilled holes are ambiguous to the location of the pap and track area, and will differ from bowler to bowler, and thusly cannot be considered a constant on which you could base a drilling system that would give accurate results from bowler to bowler.

My question is: Am I correct in my observation of Mr. Whites premise, or am I missing the entire point of it?"

This is some of what others are trying to explain in reference to span, pin/core placement, and the bowlers pap.

[MICHAEL]

in the end you have come up with your own method for laying out bowling balls that will be different and have different reactions from person to person.

As mentioned elsewhere by an individual who put it best

"after reviewing the referenced thread, i have a fundamental observation, and then a question or two.

It seems to me that mr. White is basing his opinion on his findings that the length of a bowlers span changes the relation of the pap to the drilling holes, and thusly, must change the dual angle drilling effect for each individual span length.

To me, it appears that mr. White must think that the pap location is dependent on the span length, but in actuality, span length and pap location are not related this way.

Pap location is predicated off each individuals grip center location, such that the pap in relation to the drilled holes is irrelevant in each case.

What builds the balls reaction is the pin location and mass bias location in relation to the individuals pap and track area. Span length plays absolutely no part in the equation, and is therefore irrelevant. This fact makes the difference in the relation between the pap and the drilled hole locations irrelevant as well.

The pap coordinates are important, and will be concrete in their nature, just as the track area. The drilled holes are ambiguous to the location of the pap and track area, and will differ from bowler to bowler, and thusly cannot be considered a constant on which you could base a drilling system that would give accurate results from bowler to bowler.

My question is: Am i correct in my observation of mr. Whites premise, or am i missing the entire point of it?"

this is some of what others are trying to explain in reference to span, pin/core placement, and the bowlers pap.

the end !!! Lol WE hope,,, I can't help but go back and keep reading the posts EVEN,,,,, I was NOT a Math Major in College!! PLEASE STOP!! I am addicted to PAP, and it might as well be GREEK!!! Please in the name of humanity STOP! I need to get on with my life, and with this discussion of PAP,,,, HOW CAN I?????

[billf]

Michael, calm down. Understanding ball reaction and how drilling affects that reaction will only enhance your bowling. Knowledge is power, as you know my friend, so suck it up and learn some more ;)

[martin]

i still don't know any crap about my PAP.. lol..

[bowl1820]

Well I'm going to follow Mo Pinel example and lock this thread


Mo Pinel: As is my prerogative, I am locking this thread, as continuing this discussion is pointless.

you can read MO's and others thoughts on this Here:
http://forum.bowlingchat.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6245