Aslan's Arsenal Progression Discussion Thread: (Part 1 of 6)

[Amyers]

Glad it helped Tony.

Timmy as you pointed out I'm much better with bowling balls than I am drag racing and I'm sure you are correct.

I'm not really a progression guy anymore either I buy my balls to play specific points on the lane not so much so that I can switch to that next. I can throw my fanatic for an entire set on synthetics if they are on the oily side but it's not always the best choice. I bowl on synthetics and wood both regularly. Here lately my best option is actually to start with my Rhino (least aggressive ball) and then ball up to the Danger Zone as I move in. Chasing the shot with the rhino just doesn't work for me. It all depends on what your throwing and where your throwing at. I bowl frequently at 4 different houses 2 wood 2 synthetic and one of them has the most inconsistent shot you ever seen (i'd do better job running down the lane with a bucket). It can be the Sahara desert or play like badger you never know from week to week so it requires me to be flexible. If you think your going to stand on 20 and throw at 10 in that house better expect to put up some 130's

[Aslan]

I agree with Amyers about the car analogy. But...any car enthusiast can tell you:

- What a car part does.
- How changing that one part will affect performance.

In other words, you can "isolate" a variable and tell people 'exactly' what it will do in terms of performance. A car is certainly a complex mix of varaibles...but each variable has a point...and it has a purpose...and it was always do what it is intended to do.

For example..let's say "turbo charger". A turbo charger (or incresed engine displacement in older cars) will ALWAYS increase horsepower. Now, sometimes a larger engine...will add weight, and negate the increases in horsepower...but if you take the same model of car and put a 405 in one and a 350 in the other...the 405 will ALWAYS have more horsepower.

With bowling...it's not that simple. The core is supposed to be the "engine" of the ball...yet we never are able to isolate the core...because every manufacturer is different and they wrap the cores in different covers.

The next topic was going to be "core symmetry". What is the difference between a symmetric core and an assymetric core? We know that a symmetric core tends to have a smoother arc to the pocket and an assymetric core has a more angular motion. It "seems" fairly simple, right? Yet...how many bowling balls have come out in the last 5-10 years that claim to be "angular" or "skid/flip"...yet they have symmetric cores? That doesn't make sense independent of other variables.

Like a car...if a bigger engine makes it go faster...why would you intentionally put a smaller engine in the car while trying to make it go faster? Car enthusiasts will point to many possible answers...like; nowadays cars are lighter...they may be turbo charged...current technology is more efficient, etc... But independent of other variables...the smaller engine won't make the car go faster. It's only when we start factoring in other variables...that it makes sense.

I'd like to see more testing data where these specs (bowling ball) are tested independently of each other. Take a Brunswick Rhino...keep everything the same...have the bowling robot throw the balls on a fresh condition...and change ONLY one thing at a time. For example, make three Rhinos...pearl, hybrid, solid...and surface them each to 2000 abralon. Now have the robot throw them...see what the difference is. If there is no difference...then pearl vs hybrid vs solid are meaningless specs and should be completely ignored.

Then...take two Rhinos...everything the exact same (surface, RG, differential, cover) and simply make one a symmetric core and one an assymetric core. See if there's a difference. If there is, then we know that core symmetry is a worthwhile variable. If there is no difference, then we know core symmetry is a useless variable and should be ignored. We'd do the same experiments for every variable (except surface, because that's already been done) while keeping all other variables completely the same...and we could actually find out if RG is meaningful...and if differential is meaningful. We could even evaluate things like manufacturer differences and drilling layout.

The KEY (and what has been missing in the testing to date)...is every SINGLE SPEC...except the one you're evaluating...MUST be kept identical. It's simple scientific method. Isolate one variable and compare. Until that kind of testing can be done...we have no idea if the specs actually mean anything. Car companies do this kind've testing all the time. They take identical models and simply swap out one variable and compare. With bowling balls it's a bit more complicated...because chemistry is involved...and once a ball is made...you can't just crack it open and swap out cores. You can't make a solid a pearl...it takes a whole new ball being made.

But, there's no point in Parts 4-6...because we can't seem to isolate just one spec. Thus, every answer becomes, "it sort of depends".

[RobLV1]

The thing that you have to keep in mind is that a great, great majority of bowlers don't understand the role of the core. They know that "75% of ball reaction is determined by the ball's surface," so they ignore the core. The manufacturers know this, so they focus a great deal of their marketing rhetoric on the cover/surface. When they talk about a ball having a skid/flip reaction, they are talking about the cover for the simple reason that cores are nothing more than three elements; symmetry, low RG, and Differential, and all of them can be manipulated by the layout that is chosen by the bowler or the PSO.

[Timmyb]

I am a fan of the RG number, simply because it gives me an idea when the ball will break. Keep in mind that is influenced by surface and layout. I tend to lean toward higher RG balls, 2.48 and up. Just my style.

[Tony]

I agree with Amyers about the car analogy. But...any car enthusiast can tell you:

- What a car part does.
- How changing that one part will affect performance.

In other words, you can "isolate" a variable and tell people 'exactly' what it will do in terms of performance. A car is certainly a complex mix of varaibles...but each variable has a point...and it has a purpose...and it was always do what it is intended to do.

For example..let's say "turbo charger". A turbo charger (or incresed engine displacement in older cars) will ALWAYS increase horsepower. Now, sometimes a larger engine...will add weight, and negate the increases in horsepower...but if you take the same model of car and put a 405 in one and a 350 in the other...the 405 will ALWAYS have more horsepower.

With bowling...it's not that simple. The core is supposed to be the "engine" of the ball...yet we never are able to isolate the core...because every manufacturer is different and they wrap the cores in different covers.

The next topic was going to be "core symmetry". What is the difference between a symmetric core and an assymetric core? We know that a symmetric core tends to have a smoother arc to the pocket and an assymetric core has a more angular motion. It "seems" fairly simple, right? Yet...how many bowling balls have come out in the last 5-10 years that claim to be "angular" or "skid/flip"...yet they have symmetric cores? That doesn't make sense independent of other variables.

Like a car...if a bigger engine makes it go faster...why would you intentionally put a smaller engine in the car while trying to make it go faster? Car enthusiasts will point to many possible answers...like; nowadays cars are lighter...they may be turbo charged...current technology is more efficient, etc... But independent of other variables...the smaller engine won't make the car go faster. It's only when we start factoring in other variables...that it makes sense.

I'd like to see more testing data where these specs (bowling ball) are tested independently of each other. Take a Brunswick Rhino...keep everything the same...have the bowling robot throw the balls on a fresh condition...and change ONLY one thing at a time. For example, make three Rhinos...pearl, hybrid, solid...and surface them each to 2000 abralon. Now have the robot throw them...see what the difference is. If there is no difference...then pearl vs hybrid vs solid are meaningless specs and should be completely ignored.

Then...take two Rhinos...everything the exact same (surface, RG, differential, cover) and simply make one a symmetric core and one an assymetric core. See if there's a difference. If there is, then we know that core symmetry is a worthwhile variable. If there is no difference, then we know core symmetry is a useless variable and should be ignored. We'd do the same experiments for every variable (except surface, because that's already been done) while keeping all other variables completely the same...and we could actually find out if RG is meaningful...and if differential is meaningful. We could even evaluate things like manufacturer differences and drilling layout.

The KEY (and what has been missing in the testing to date)...is every SINGLE SPEC...except the one you're evaluating...MUST be kept identical. It's simple scientific method. Isolate one variable and compare. Until that kind of testing can be done...we have no idea if the specs actually mean anything. Car companies do this kind've testing all the time. They take identical models and simply swap out one variable and compare. With bowling balls it's a bit more complicated...because chemistry is involved...and once a ball is made...you can't just crack it open and swap out cores. You can't make a solid a pearl...it takes a whole new ball being made.

But, there's no point in Parts 4-6...because we can't seem to isolate just one spec. Thus, every answer becomes, "it sort of depends".

Not to be too picky here...... "but saying a larger displacement engine will always have more horsepower" is absolutely not the case......the answer like in your bowling
example will be, it depends. In your example you can easily get more HP out of a 350 than a "405" (I'm not sure anyone has ever manufactured a 405 anyway but aside from that)
displacement does make a difference of course but it can also be misleading, changing the bore and stroke of the engine can keep the displacement constant and change other things, like all the new Subaru's that people are complaining have no torque anymore, the boxter engine was known for it's torque, the kept the displacement the same and increase bore and strike to get better fuel mileage, and increased HP, but in the process lost torque ......

[Timmyb]

Not to be too picky here...... "but saying a larger displacement engine will always have more horsepower" is absolutely not the case......the answer like in your bowling
example will be, it depends. In your example you can easily get more HP out of a 350 than a "405" (I'm not sure anyone has ever manufactured a 405 anyway but aside from that)
displacement does make a difference of course but it can also be misleading, changing the bore and stroke of the engine can keep the displacement constant and change other things, like all the new Subaru's that people are complaining have no torque anymore, the boxter engine was known for it's torque, the kept the displacement the same and increase bore and strike to get better fuel mileage, and increased HP, but in the process lost torque ......

Any car guy would know, it's not displacement that makes power, it's air flow. The swinging melee under the head gaskets just needs to support what's being thrown at it. It's everything above those said gaskets that makes the power. Super/turbochargers just multiply that. The 8-cylinder engine has a limit to what it can produce for power. Right now, on gas it's around 4000, alcohol 5000, and nitromethane 10,000+. Those are all standards based on the same CID (500 cubes).

However, more air to move makes more power. So the answer is, there's no replacement for displacement! No one runs around bragging about their blown small block......Now, back to talking about bowling!

[Aslan]

...and all of them can be manipulated by the layout that is chosen by the bowler or the PSO.

I agree with that. The cores are more complicated and you can slightly manipulate the ultimate reaction via drilling layout.

I'd argue the same is true for coverstocks...they can be greatly manipulated by surfacing.

[J Anderson]

Any car guy would know, it's not displacement that makes power, it's air flow. The swinging melee under the head gaskets just needs to support what's being thrown at it. It's everything above those said gaskets that makes the power. Super/turbochargers just multiply that. The 8-cylinder engine has a limit to what it can produce for power. Right now, on gas it's around 4000, alcohol 5000, and nitromethane 10,000+. Those are all standards based on the same CID (500 cubes).

However, more air to move makes more power. So the answer is, there's no replacement for displacement! No one runs around bragging about their blown small block......Now, back to talking about bowling!

I sort of like the car metaphor. When I used to regularly commute from Fairfield CT to jobs around Stamford CT I would often be stuck in rush hour traffic doing 25-35 mph on the Merrit Parkway. While most of the cars would be run of the mill Chevys, Fords, Toyotas, and Hondas, there would usually be an occasional Porche, Corvette, or Ferrari. Here were cars designed speeds well in excess of 100mph stuck going no faster than the rest of us. I think of these cars as the high-end, newest issue bowling balls that we're tempted to buy. Unless we have the physical game to match the ball and are bowling on lanes conditions that fit the characteristics of the ball, we will be like the guy stuck in traffic in his Ferrari.

[Tony]

Any car guy would know, it's not displacement that makes power, it's air flow. The swinging melee under the head gaskets just needs to support what's being thrown at it. It's everything above those said gaskets that makes the power. Super/turbochargers just multiply that. The 8-cylinder engine has a limit to what it can produce for power. Right now, on gas it's around 4000, alcohol 5000, and nitromethane 10,000+. Those are all standards based on the same CID (500 cubes).

However, more air to move makes more power. So the answer is, there's no replacement for displacement! No one runs around bragging about their blown small block......Now, back to talking about bowling!

Yes from the drag racers perspective a blown small block is nothing, when you view things from the classic car, muscle car, street cruiser perspective, people aren't concerned primarily about max power.
Much in the same way with bowling, some people are most interested in gaining maximum hook from a ball and throwing a high rev, high speed ball while others would rather throw a more moderate hook, rev, speed ball and in many cases will use different equipment thats more suitable for the way they are planning to play the game.

Neither outlook is necessarily right or wrong, it's our task to try and understand our own game and the attributes of the ball that give us the best chance for success in scoring on the lanes. Part of it is trying different layout's, surface's, combined with the given ball manufactured characteristics to see what exact mix gives us the best results.

[Amyers]

I agree with Amyers about the car analogy. But...any car enthusiast can tell you:

- What a car part does.
- How changing that one part will affect performance.

In other words, you can "isolate" a variable and tell people 'exactly' what it will do in terms of performance. A car is certainly a complex mix of varaibles...but each variable has a point...and it has a purpose...and it was always do what it is intended to do.

For example..let's say "turbo charger". A turbo charger (or incresed engine displacement in older cars) will ALWAYS increase horsepower. Now, sometimes a larger engine...will add weight, and negate the increases in horsepower...but if you take the same model of car and put a 405 in one and a 350 in the other...the 405 will ALWAYS have more horsepower.

Actually the car example still works I don't know enough about turbos to make a good argument but lets take a carburetor you switch out a single for set of 6 pack holly's and you may very well get a decline in horsepower if it'll even run if you don't upgrade the fuel pump probably something similar with turbos if you don't adjust the air/flow fuel mixture properly. Everything has a give and take. also even if you do increase the horsepower if you can't transfer it to the pavement it won't necessarily improve your times.

The next topic was going to be "core symmetry". What is the difference between a symmetric core and an assymetric core? We know that a symmetric core tends to have a smoother arc to the pocket and an assymetric core has a more angular motion. It "seems" fairly simple, right? Yet...how many bowling balls have come out in the last 5-10 years that claim to be "angular" or "skid/flip"...yet they have symmetric cores? That doesn't make sense independent of other variables.

We've disagreed about this for a while. First off all balls are asymmetric once drilled so we are merely discussing the potential of greater asymmetry being created from a ball that starts that way. I say potential because the actual amount of asymmetry is also determined by the drill angles and can be enhanced or lessened by the layout.

Also asymmetry is not required for either type of reaction and is more used on heavy oil balls than balls that are designed to flip. The greater the asymmetry plays a roll in how strongly the ball enters the hook phase. You can see why this is useful on heavy oil patterns and can be of use on skid flip balls also. Watch some videos on the Code Black and the Hy-road pearl same cover (supposedly anyway), same surface, and different cores Hy-road pearl symmetrical Code Black Asymmetrical. Both balls are flippy by nature you'll see the Code Black starts just slightly earlier (mostly due to the RG being lower but maybe somewhat due to the asymmetry) and moves harder off the spot than the Hy-road pearl does.

Like a car...if a bigger engine makes it go faster...why would you intentionally put a smaller engine in the car while trying to make it go faster? Car enthusiasts will point to many possible answers...like; nowadays cars are lighter...they may be turbo charged...current technology is more efficient, etc... But independent of other variables...the smaller engine won't make the car go faster. It's only when we start factoring in other variables...that it makes sense.

More isn't always better

I'd like to see more testing data where these specs (bowling ball) are tested independently of each other. Take a Brunswick Rhino...keep everything the same...have the bowling robot throw the balls on a fresh condition...and change ONLY one thing at a time. For example, make three Rhinos...pearl, hybrid, solid...and surface them each to 2000 abralon. Now have the robot throw them...see what the difference is. If there is no difference...then pearl vs hybrid vs solid are meaningless specs and should be completely ignored.

You'd also have to put the same drill, same lanes, the same shot down. All to prove something the manufactures wouldn't want to prove so it wouldn't ever happen. My feelings (and that is all that it is) is that the differences are so small to be undetectable by even the above average bowler

But, there's no point in Parts 4-6...because we can't seem to isolate just one spec. Thus, every answer becomes, "it sort of depends".

It only really becomes "it sort of depends" when you try to evaluate one spec across different balls. If you change the surface on a particular ball that ball will roll earlier. It becomes a problem when you try to say that all balls with surface roll early. All you can say is that a ball will roll earlier than it would have if it had less surface.