Selecting a Ball to Suit New Lanes

[Amyers]

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

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

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

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

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

[fortheloveofbowling]

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

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

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

[larry mc]

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

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

[RobLV1]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[RobLV1]

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

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

[RobLV1]

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

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

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

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

[HeroesFall]

Hey gents, looks like I missed a fun discussion!

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


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


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

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


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

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

[Mike White]

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

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

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

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

[Mike White]

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

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

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

What the new dynamic cores bring, is track flare.

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

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

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

[RobLV1]

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

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

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

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