Making Effective Ball Change Adjustments (LINK)

[Aslan]

I see what you're saying swingset. Valid points as well.

One (short) story from my experience...in GOLF. I had SO many people try to help me fix my swing and my massive slice. SO many people. And one day I ran into a guy that hit the ball almost 90 degrees off the tee and sliced it into the center of the fairway. He "played" his slice. And I started doing that. Was it successful? Nope. But it was MORE successful than all the attempts I had made trying to fix it.

Now...later on...realizing my immense distance potential and realizing that THAT guy made that swing work because he had an incredible short game so he didn't need to get as close to the green as I do...I eventually stopped "playing my slice" and started to fix my swing...and when I did...nearly everyone tried straightening my left arm. And I just couldn't get it to work. One day...met a really good golfer...best guy on our outing. I asked him for some pointers and told him my struggles...and he just said, "if bending your arm feel natural....bend your arm. I bend my arm." Bamm...slowly I went from a 177 per 18 holes golfer to a 124 per 18 holes golfer. It wasn't ALL that comment...but it helped. And when you're playing a frustrating game like golf or bowling...when you're really playing against yourself more than anything...sometimes the difference from hating the sport and being miserable and loving the sport is simply just getting a "little" better at it.

I think everyone has made some good points though. I was taught by my family...that got me started. Coaching got me over the next hurdle. More coaching and input from other bowlers and internet stuff is helping me to the next level. Some of it I use...some of it I discard...some of it I mold into my game.

[Aslan]

Rob (or any certified coach out there)...quick question about coaching:

Would you ever advocate teaching a very new, or very young bowler a somewhat outdated/more traditional approach?

The reason I ask is, I've been trying to help my 10-year old daughter...but I just have been giving her the very low level basics...the throwing the ball "out" rather than just dropping it...or the "handshake with the ceiling" to get her to follow-through. The 4-step approach. I figure if she takes to bowling...obviously a real coach and her own equipment are the next step. But as Rob mentioned..I'm really just trying to get her to hit that 100 mark with basics.

However , after reading about the difference in the modern bowling technique...I'm wondering if maybe a traditional/transitional bowler like me shouldn't even do that kind of "teaching" because if she DOES take to bowling....it might be a detrimental start. But if the answer is "no...don't teach her that."; then is it even possible to teach advanced things like the modern approach/release to such a beginner level bowler?

[swingset]

Good points all.

swingset: To answer your question, the first coaches came from people who yearned to be teachers first, so they became students of the game. The approach that more advanced coaches take is illustrated by the differences in the USBC Coaching Levels. Level I and Bronze Level Coaches are taught to look at bowlers from the beginning of the approach forward to the foul line. This is how the basics are taught to beginning and intermediate bowlers. Silver and Gold Level Coaches are taught to evaluate more accomplished bowlers from the foul line backward. A good example that you mentioned is Leanne Hulsenberg. While her approach is unorthodox to watch, her position at the foul line is perfect. A high average bowler who suddenly decided to call himself a coach would try to change her. An educated coach wouldn't dream of it!

Rob Mautner

I absolutely get what you're saying, but I guess I disagree slightly in how coaches came to be. I think the first people to teach the game were in all likelihood products of the free market as much as emissaries of skill, tho both might have existed. I know coaches in not just this game but in disciplines like mine (I'm a coach of HS and Col. marksmanship and shooting sports) who arrive at it from being top level athletes first, and parlay that into staying in the game or keeping themselves employed while they compete. But, irregardless, I think my point was more to do with the skills they started teaching didn't arrive by tablet from the USBC Gods. They were honed and learned by trial and error, often without the benefit of someone else there to see what was going right or wrong. And, I contend that's been the case for 100 years of this game. It's how new skills make it into the coaches bag. Coaches help this game immensely, absolutely they do, but I think most every watershed in the game came from someone tossing tradition or bias out the window and chucking it contrary to conventional wisdom.

I know for my other hobby, that coaches often learn from other coaches (or from a long study and understanding of the game)...and their skill set as a coach can be limited by bias or tradition. I think this is especially dangerous to a coach with regards to form, it certainly was the issue I wrestled with the most predominantly before having some realizations about its importance. As you probably would agree, form is only a framework meant to enhance repeatability and remove the bowler's natural inclination to manipulate each shot. Without repeatability, less muscle memory and thus more conscious or unconscious input and finally - inconsistency. To that end, it's natural that bowling coaches have over the course of time come to place a great importance on finishing as a "metric" of seeing consistency...as Leanne's example suggests (although I don't see her finishing form as exemplary...her trailing foot is often up in the air, behind her, which acts as a counterbalance for the fact that her shoulders and head are far forward). But, that focus on one part of the delivery being crucial illustrates my wariness with some coaching.

I have not, obviously, been privy to the best and top level coaches in the world but I've done my share of reading and watching of those that post lessons or speak on the subject of form (to include you sir, whom I hold in very high regard). I see some similarities in all of them, some divergence, but I see a great deal of calories being burned to illustrate the methods that your form can be molded into that framework of "proper" movements.

I guess my split, philosophically, with the coaching I've seen and what I have learned from my own is that I think it has been too largely focused on molding the approach in order to finish correctly with a good release. Not that this isn't a noble and seemingly correct aim, but that physiologically, left to our own devices, many bowlers seem to be able to develop that repeatability even with what could best be described as outrageous gross muscle movements. I'm coming to believe as I get older, that repeatability is far less of a physical function as it is mental and discipline...and I think coaching has fallen for a false premise of teaching the fundamentals which (ideally for certain physiology or natural inclinations) harness that repeatability, but don't create it.

It's been a recent catharsis for me, and I'm not sure I'm fully right...but I'm now seeing consistency in terms of release not only being the superior attribute but shaping the approach in a backwards way. Meaning, that consistent releases dictate that the body come to the line the same way...teaching the body "backwards" by getting the ball to that release in the way that is natural to the bowler (often screwy looking) and most apt to produce that release again. It's why I believe extreme cuppers - with nearly ZERO backswing, muscling the ball and using mostly body momentum can still play this game to a high degree of accuracy. It's all in their release...and the approach is not setting the release up as much as the release forces the body to adhere to the design. A little physical in the body, a lot of physical in the hand, and mostly mental. They break every rule, but we've all seen guys who bowl this way and are lights out bowlers that drop it on the mark the same way every time.

I hope that makes sense, I'm not trying to be dismissive of coaching, believe me. Perhaps this revelation is something not new to you, or I'm talking out of my butt, or it's something you even teach...but it seems like something I don't see out there in the ether of skills and methods.

[Aslan]

I just wanna say I love swingset....because he is the only one besides Iceman that matches me in wordiness.

Ya know what annoys me....as I try so very, very, very hard to perfect my game and my approach and my release and my line to the target and my follow-through...and remembering at the end that goddam it I forgot to use my balance arm again!!?? Ya know what is MOST frustrating. Looking at the lane to my right...and seeing a short little fat guy with a bald head...do some weird arse release...where he almost falls over sideways...and the guy rolls a 249 and anchors his team while me and my struggling self...with above average balance...bowl a 143.

But...it's times like that where I tell myself...and I'm sure this was kinda the point that many of the "pro-coaching/technique" guys were eluding to...I tell myself that in time I'll be the better bowler because that guy and his flawed approach/timing/balance/release has probably maxed out his potential. The key...is being patient...and...it's not my strong point. I want to be as good as Wes Malott NOW...not "someday"!!

[RobLV1]

Wow! I'm speechless, and that doesn't happen very often.

[dnhoffman]

Wow! I'm speechless, and that doesn't happen very often.

Pray tell, what exactly, has you speechless?

[swingset]

Wow! I'm speechless, and that doesn't happen very often.

If I've gored a sacred cow, that's entirely fair but perhaps I'm not conveying my thoughts on the matter in the correct way. I'm not downplaying form as unimportant, not at all, only that once you've created enough mechanical know-how to 4 or 5-step and leverage the ball (however you intend to bowl, be it 2-handed, thumbless cupped, traditional stroker/tweener behind-the-ball, whatever) and practice that into some sort of aptitude for the game, I believe your release will sort of dictate backwards the finer mechanics of your approach and not the other way around....and that the more your release becomes refined, your body starts learning to adapt to this by setting itself up for what is a more natural release for your physiology (which is also going to dictate your bowling style to a degree). I think this explains the unconventional greats, frankly.

I have seen this with new bowlers coming to fingertip/hook bowling where, absent any real instruction, the release isn't being formed after the approach is "built" but rather the clumsiness and gross mistakes in the form tighten up and consistent approaches (even if they're fundamentally awkward) take shape as the release gets hammered out. And, when the release works first, the body follows faster than if the approach/form is good but they're not getting the release they want. I think the release is dictating to the body the intuitive movements to deliver the ball in a sense.

If bowlers do this instinctively, isn't there a lesson in it? And, like I said above I could be nuts but I recognized it in myself. The most profound leap forward in my game was developing a new, natural and stronger release without any thought or regard to my approach, and when I did that I found my approach had to change and my swing, and shoulders, and the whole shooting match. Without deciding or informing my body where I wanted it to be, my more natural (in to out) release was preventing me from defaulting back into the form I had been taught (think Earl Anthony...square to the pins...handshake....yada yaha). It was a lightning bolt move for me, it was an almost instant 20-30 pin average increase.

After that, I started paying attention to other bowlers and seeing if I recognized that in someone learning or re-learning the game. It's not evidence or a conclusion, as much as a theory.

[J Anderson]

If bowlers do this instinctively, isn't there a lesson in it? And, like I said above I could be nuts but I recognized it in myself. The most profound leap forward in my game was developing a new, natural and stronger release without any thought or regard to my approach, and when I did that I found my approach had to change and my swing, and shoulders, and the whole shooting match. Without deciding or informing my body where I wanted it to be, my more natural (in to out) release was preventing me from defaulting back into the form I had been taught (think Earl Anthony...square to the pins...handshake....yada yaha). It was a lightning bolt move for me, it was an almost instant 20-30 pin average increase.

I just read "The Inner game of Tennis" on the recommendation of Rob Mautner and "The Game Changer" by Mark Baker. Actually Rob had suggested the Inner Game of Golf. A lot of what you've said about your evolution as a bowler in this and previous posts I think agrees with the "Inner Game" philosophy.

Mark Baker's approach to the release seems to be the exact opposite of yours. He focuses on swing path and timing and lets the release take care of itself.

Your approach has worked well for you. Mark's approach has been very successful with his students. My conclusion is that coaching works best when both the coach and the student approach the game with an open mind.

[sprocket]

For every bowler that has worked on their release first and then successfully had the rest of their approach fine tune itself around it, there is another guy that tried to do the same thing and now, 15 yrs later, he still has a terrible, forced approach where he basically stops at the foul line, thus negating his entire approach, and then does just his release and only that. He might as well have just stood at the foul line and released the ball. Then he wonders why his wrist hurts, why he has to wear a tendinitis band, why he has no speed, why he is so rev dominant, why his ball hooks the second it hits the lane, and why he has never improved.

[RobLV1]

I think that the bottom line here is that no two athletes are alike, and this goes straight back to a coaches training in terms of learning to become a teacher of the game, rather than just a communicator of his/her own style. The most important thing is for a coach to approach the student in the way that will benefit the student the most. It has to do with learning styles, and the coaches knowledge that different learning styles even exist.

Everyone has an opinion in terms of what makes a coach successful, and most bowler's opinions are based on their own experiences that, in a great majority of cases, does not include any coaching training. If you have been "helped" by a high average bowler who gave you some adviced that proved to be successful for you, then you probably think that the whole certification thing is a bunch of nonsense because of your positive experience with a non-certified coach. If, however, you have had your own game put on never-never hold through bad advice from a good bowler, then you may agree that seeing a trained coach is valuable if you "want to be as good as Wes Malott NOW... not "someday"!!"

When I give you my opinion on the value of seeing a Certified Coach, it is not just based on my own personal experiences as a bowler, but also my own experiences as a coach who has actually experienced the Certification process. And, just so you know, this opinion of mine continues to exist despite the fact that the person who has help me the most with my own game is not only un-certified, he has also never coached before! It's all a matter of percentages: if you want the best chances for success with a particular coach, see someone who is USBC Certified.

Rob Mautner