Benchmark ball? Then what?

[Amyers]

That certainly muddy's the waters a bit. So now, the numbers mean less than the manufactures statement of each ball motion (smooth, angular) and oil typ (Heavy, Medium or dry). And I was trying to get away from that, since each individual bowlers talent and style affects what the ball motion is, and what oil volume is perceived.

I feel like I'm back in Calculus 3 for the 2nd time, again. I guess that would make it a 3rd time.

Their are no numbers for cover stock. I didn't mean to try and dissuade you from looking at core numbers on the balls. I've seen a few different breakdowns but in general understand 2 things. Cover stock is about 70% of a balls reaction the remaining 30% are surface, core, and drilling. Also keep in mind on the front part of the lane what happens is 80% directed by the cover on the back part of the lane it's about 80% directed by the core. It can make you feel like it's calculus and there is no guarantee's on how you are going to match up with a ball. The best you can do is research look at those core numbers, watch video's, look at how the ball is placed in the manufactures lineup, talk with a qualified PSO about how that ball should match your game, and don't be afraid to adjust the cover. You do that you will find the ball is what you want most of the time and you will make better decisions than probably 80-90% of the people who buy bowling balls.

[RobLV1]

Their are no numbers for cover stock. I didn't mean to try and dissuade you from looking at core numbers on the balls. I've seen a few different breakdowns but in general understand 2 things. Cover stock is about 70% of a balls reaction the remaining 30% are surface, core, and drilling. Also keep in mind on the front part of the lane what happens is 80% directed by the cover on the back part of the lane it's about 80% directed by the core. It can make you feel like it's calculus and there is no guarantee's on how you are going to match up with a ball. The best you can do is research look at those core numbers, watch video's, look at how the ball is placed in the manufactures lineup, talk with a qualified PSO about how that ball should match your game, and don't be afraid to adjust the cover. You do that you will find the ball is what you want most of the time and you will make better decisions than probably 80-90% of the people who buy bowling balls.

I hate to disagree (not really!), but the 70% number that you quote is a carryover from the pre-modern era. 70% may be accurate in some cases, but it's a combination of cover material and surface, not just cover material. In terms of the importance of the core, it varies greatly, based on bowler's styles. There are only two factors involved in ball reaction: friction and resistence. Friction comes from the cover, and resistence is a result of the low RG. Bowlers with high ball speeds and rev rates rely primarily on friction. In their case, cover is probably closer to 90% than 70%. Bowlers with lower ball speeds and rev rates, however, need to be aware of the core resistence if they want to get a ball that will be effective for them. Resistence is closer to 40%-50% for them.

If you happened to see the US Open on TV a couple of weeks ago, notice that most of the bowlers on the show were using very aggressive bowling balls with low RG's. The one exception was Pete Weber who was throwing a Storm Rocket (much higher RG) for the simple reason that his lower ball speed made it a better choice for him. Often companies have come out with low RG balls with polished surfaces and promoted them as "going long." The one thing that these balls have in common is that they tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared.

[Amyers]

I hate to disagree (not really!), but the 70% number that you quote is a carryover from the pre-modern era. 70% may be accurate in some cases, but it's a combination of cover material and surface, not just cover material. In terms of the importance of the core, it varies greatly, based on bowler's styles. There are only two factors involved in ball reaction: friction and resistence. Friction comes from the cover, and resistence is a result of the low RG. Bowlers with high ball speeds and rev rates rely primarily on friction. In their case, cover is probably closer to 90% than 70%. Bowlers with lower ball speeds and rev rates, however, need to be aware of the core resistence if they want to get a ball that will be effective for them. Resistence is closer to 40%-50% for them.

If you happened to see the US Open on TV a couple of weeks ago, notice that most of the bowlers on the show were using very aggressive bowling balls with low RG's. The one exception was Pete Weber who was throwing a Storm Rocket (much higher RG) for the simple reason that his lower ball speed made it a better choice for him. Often companies have come out with low RG balls with polished surfaces and promoted them as "going long." The one thing that these balls have in common is that they tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared.

You are probably correct with lower speed bowlers being more effected by core numbers than higher speed bowlers. My 70% number was just for approximate sake. I have to disagree with you about the Low Rg polished balls "disappearing quickly" though. Look at the Mastermind line (I admit they raised the rg in some of the newer ones but I still consider 2.50 pretty low) a low rg core quite a few of which have been polished that have been very popular another good instance is the Storm Optimus. Seems like to me the ball manufactures are working some magic with low rg balls that can get down the lane. In the past you are correct those balls didn't work well but in the newer stuff somethings different. If you haven't seen it yet check out the Melee Hook another ball with a low rg (and some surface amazingly enough) that gets down the lane.

[RobLV1]

You are probably correct with lower speed bowlers being more effected by core numbers than higher speed bowlers. My 70% number was just for approximate sake. I have to disagree with you about the Low Rg polished balls "disappearing quickly" though. Look at the Mastermind line (I admit they raised the rg in some of the newer ones but I still consider 2.50 pretty low) a low rg core quite a few of which have been polished that have been very popular another good instance is the Storm Optimus. Seems like to me the ball manufactures are working some magic with low rg balls that can get down the lane. In the past you are correct those balls didn't work well but in the newer stuff somethings different. If you haven't seen it yet check out the Melee Hook another ball with a low rg (and some surface amazingly enough) that gets down the lane.

The only balls in the Mastermind series that were polished were the pearls and hybrid. While a few lower rev players have had some success with the Genius, it was only those with sufficient ball speed. Mostly they are used by the higher rev guys in their unique rendition of "balling down." The main ball to which I was referring was the Hammer First Blood which I saw purchased by several lower speed senior bowlers, only to be put away once they watched their averages nosedive. Those with higher ball speeds could use them. The same is seemingly happening with the Special Opps.

[Amyers]

The only balls in the Mastermind series that were polished were the pearls and hybrid. While a few lower rev players have had some success with the Genius, it was only those with sufficient ball speed. Mostly they are used by the higher rev guys in their unique rendition of "balling down." The main ball to which I was referring was the Hammer First Blood which I saw purchased by several lower speed senior bowlers, only to be put away once they watched their averages nosedive. Those with higher ball speeds could use them. The same is seemingly happening with the Special Opps.

The Genius, Scholar, and Intellect were all polished to some extent which is 3 out of 5 of the line and my Einstein (supposedly 3k) sure does look like it's been hit with some rubbing compound or something it's glossier OOB than any other 3k ball I ever owned. The Genius was ok, the Intellect was too much for most but the speed dominate, the Scholar is probably one of the most highly used balls in my area seems like everyone has one. I agree with the you on the First Blood and the Special Ops too much ball for those who lack ball speed but we can easily find instances of bowlers buying too strong of balls regardless of Rg it just makes it more obvious. What I was getting at is the proliferation of sub 2.5 rg balls that can get down the lane that I don't think existed even a couple of years ago.

[Ptnomore]

So, Rob, I've gotten into the articles that you asked me to read. TONS of info there that's going to take me awhile to get through, and digest.

But, in the "misses" article... alot of "Huh!'s" and "Hmmm's coming from me reading that one. Definitely making me think and giving me a few "ah-HAH!" moments.

Assuming the lanes I bowl at stick with the existing light to medium volume and long (for a THS) pattern, and knowing that the only thing I have that works well is the Columbia 300 Freeze, and to a lesser extent (much less miss room) the Arson Hybrid, am I on the right track looking at the Forza Redline and LT-48 to compliment the Freeze, or would I be better served picking up both Forza's (Forza and Forza Redline) with same core and slightly different coverstocks?

or should I be able to do something with my Brunswick Wicked Siege or Motiv Cruel Intent that would better compliment the Freeze without me having to buy more equipment? A few weeks ago, I rolled a 700 with the Wicked Siege, but I haven't been able to get it to work since then. I found out that the house changed the viscosity of the conditioner that they were using then. I haven't played with the surface yet to see if I can get it in there again. I've played with the surface on the Cruel Intent, and I'm not getting anywhere on this pattern with that ball. With the Wicked, I can get it to the pocket, but I have no room for error with it. The Cruel hits like Nerf ball.

I really like the look of that LT-48, now that I understand what it could do for me, and at least the possible versatility of that ball.

[Aslan]

Here's what I don't understand.

If you take out the variables, and just focus on cover. Same surface and RG in this example...

Most bowlers would want it to go long. So a solid wouldn't interest them...unless they have no revs or a super high speed...or are playing in very heavy, non-THS conditions.

Yet the other thing 95% of bowlers ask for is "snap". Right?

PSO: "What kinda ball are ya lookin for?"
95%: "I want it to go long and snap into the pocket."

Well...again...why would you want a solid...it's not designed to "snap". I guess you could polish the daylights out of it....but why bother with that when there's a pearl version with the same core?

And what are the big problems in todays game (from a technology point of view)? Balls that don't retain enough energy to carry corner pins. At the highest level, that's the difference between winning and losing....most miss room and carrying corner pins. They aren't thinking (like I am), "hopefully I can find the pocket today." Not even Tom Daugherty!! <-- that was mean.

So if the IDEAL BALL goes long (high RG, shiny cover) and SNAPS (axis tilt, axis rotation, powerful core, skid/flip ball)...why buy a solid or a ball with a low RG? Won't likely be dead before it ever hits the pocket (unless you're throwing it 21-23mph)??

I dunno. Still trying to process all this. We need Chris Barnes to come in and post his thoughts...cuz I'm sure he has nothing better to do around holiday time with the WSOB coming up...

[RobLV1]

Aslan: Once again, you have this thing about cover material that is clouding your thinking. Personally, I have tried several balls to fill the "go long and snap" hole in my arsenal: Soul Mate (pearl), LT 48 (solid), Gold Rhino Pro (pearl), Platinum Ringer (pearl), and Meanstreak Brawler (hybrid). Of these five balls, the two that "snap" the hardest are the LT 48 (solid), and the Meanstreak Brawler (hybrid). While the Soul Mate (pearl) goes the longest, the cover material is less reactive, so it doesn't give me as much backend (which is a good think on fried lanes sometimes). The other two pearls, the Rhino Pro and the Platinum Ringer I find to be a little "squirty," so they remain on my shelf while the other three often accompany me to the lanes.

Ignoring your reference to a low RG solid, let me say that various conditions allow me to use low RG balls in various circumstances: Mastermind Intellect, Mastermind Einstein, Mastermind Scholar, and Nirvana, despite the fact that I have neither high rev rate, nor high ball speed. So when do I use them? The answer is simple: I use them when they work, and I use either mid-range or long, snappy balls when they don't.

My recommendation for you: pick one ball each for the two houses where you bowl and, without cheaping out and trying to do it yourself, try different surfaces until you find one that works for you. Once you find that, leave it alone, and start on a second ball for each house. As we've discussed on severeal occasions, your over-thinking is your worst enemy. Try using your eyes instead of your brain to find the balls that work for you.

[RobLV1]

Ptnomore: Looking at the specs on all the balls that you've mentioned, I really think that the LT-48 is your best bet. While you did not specify which Freeze you are using, my own experience with them shows a much less reactive cover than you'll find on the LT. Before you purchase, you might try putting a heavy polish on the Cruel Intent, but I don't think it will give you as much reactivity as the LT.

[Ptnomore]

Ptnomore: Looking at the specs on all the balls that you've mentioned, I really think that the LT-48 is your best bet. While you did not specify which Freeze you are using, my own experience with them shows a much less reactive cover than you'll find on the LT. Before you purchase, you might try putting a heavy polish on the Cruel Intent, but I don't think it will give you as much reactivity as the LT.

My Freeze is the original. Blue/Green 4000 grit with polish. I REALLY appreciate the time and info that you and Amyers have provided in this thread. I'm sure you've answered many of the questions over and over. I'll be spending a lot of time with those articles on the link that you provided.

Thanks to both of you!

I hear what Aslan is saying. I used to be one of those, when I first got back into this sport a few years ago. I wanted that ball to do what every one else's was doing, without knowing how to do it. Even info in this thread gave me more info on that subject that I didn't have before.

But now,I know I (personally) don't need a ball that goes long and snap. I have one. And it doesn't work. The pattern is already long, so a ball that is designed to go long is not going to have enough room at the end to "snap". Plus, I'm finding by my own experience and watching others, that on this pattern, the skid/flip motion is far less controllable and forgiving.

For various reasons, I'm not nearly good enough to hit the same board over and over. I'm very lucky if I can hit within +/-2 boards of my target at the arrows time and time again. Over a complete game, that target is a blur about 10 boards wide with my misses. I fight the simplest of errors in concentration.

Rob, we talked about surface changing the OOB surface before bowling with it. i've never done that before, and I understand completely the benefits of it. So for my first one, For the LT-48, where do I start? Take it down and bring it back up to the OOB condition (500, compound, polish)? or since I'll be using it on what I think is medium volume long pattern, add some surface to it, say 4000 or leave it at compound?