And this was my thought to go with that:
"There's a old book "Bowling: Knowledge is Key" by Fred Borden in it there's a part where he talks about "vertical placement" (Holding the ball higher or lower).
In it he talks about not holding it higher or lower to increase or decrease speed. But use it as a way of controlling arm swing timing to match the tempo of your feet movements. Raising the ball retards the arm swing in relation to the feet movement, lowering the ball advances the arm swing timing in relation to the feet movements
So Bowlers with a naturally fast tempo, hold the ball lower to match up with their footwork. Those with a slower tempo, hold the ball higher because it retards the swing.
Now if holding the ball higher retards the swing, that would mean it would be basically a longer, slower swing. And so the higher you hold it, the longer and slower the swing be.
Now if your trying to increase speed , using a longer and slower swing wouldn't help. You would wind up having to accelerate your arm through that longer, slower swing. Not only To make up for the speed you lost with the longer swing, but to get that extra speed you wanted in the first place. That would mean adding muscle to the swing, but muscling isn't something we want to do.
Now if you increase or decrease speed using foot work (as Bryan O'Keefe's article suggests). then using a lower ball height for faster and higher one for slower makes sense, because it's just matching up the swing timing with the foot work. Plus you can still have a free swing, with no muscles involved to increase the speed.
It just seemed to me that you could infer from Fred's idea above, that if you wanted to increase ball speed by faster footwork. You would have to hold the ball lower. And that is the basic idea put forth by Bryan O'Keefe's article. Increase ball speed by holding ball lower with faster footwork. Hold higher with slower footwork for slower ball speed. So to me it would seem to support Bryan's idea.
It's kind of a old idea, now new again. "
Bookmarks