The curse of Game 2!!

[RobLV1]

Okay, here's the link to the video: http://youtu.be/XItHVpq4d0A

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the reaction from the Fusion was actually stronger, based on the difference in layouts. Let me give you the scenario for the video: this was the sixth game of pot games with three bowlers on most pairs, moving one pair after each game, so the lanes had between 16 and 18 games on them. Please note that I was playing the same line with both balls, third arrow out no further than 12 board at the tracers. This was meant to be a demonstration that you don't have to be a high rev player, or use an overly-aggressive bowling ball to move left into the oil, as long as you move your breakpoint left as well. I do apologize for the quality of the video as it was shot on my cell phone as a last minute thing.

[Aslan]

Well…I don't get it.

Apparently the consensus opinion is that the core of a bowling ball simply makes no difference.

I find that odd….because nearly every ball has an RG of around 2.48 to 2.55….and a Differential of about .040 to .051…which is virtually nothing. So if RG and differential are insignificant…and the core is insignificant…then what? It's all release and a little bit of overstock? I mean, whats the point of all these specifications if they are meaningless?

An assymettric core should be more angular. A symmetric core should be less angular, smoother, more predictable. If that isn't happening…then ball specifications are no more meaningful than the scent.

[RobLV1]

On the contrary, the core of the bowling ball is very important, it's just important to different bowlers in different ways. The reason that I picked the Genius and the Fusion to compare is that they both have hybrid covers, and very similar low rg's: 2.488 for the Genius and 2.49 for the Fusion. For a lower rev player like me (and you for that matter), the low rg is a very important aspect to consider when purchasing a bowling ball. You also need to realize that the two different layouts that were used on these balls change the numbers that are associated with the core. The Fusion uses one of my standard layouts, while the Genius was drilled specifically to compliment my Mastermind which is drilled very similarly to the Fusion.

If you saw these two balls thrown side by side by a high rev player, and the layouts were the same, you would see a difference in ball reaction based not only on the symmetry of the cores, but also the differentials (0.052 for the Genius, and 0.029 for the Fusion).

I realize that you have a need to have some "rules" to make this modern complex game more controllable for you, but you need to realize that each of our individual games dictate what these rules are for each of us.

[Aslan]

but also the differentials (0.052 for the Genius, and 0.029 for the Fusion).

I found that very interesting about the Fusion. And further why its so confusing that the Fusion has an equal backend. With the core and that low of a differential…the numbers just don't match the performance.

I'm sure you're right that it varies for players. Just annoying that there is apparently no benchmark so long as people throw the ball slightly differently.

[RobLV1]

I think that it's more a matter of expectations than anything else. Many bolwers still want to believe that there is a magic ball out there that will magically transform them into great bowlers. That's just not the case. As I stated earlier, how the ball is drilled does nothing more than to change the numbers, both rg and differential. This is true for every ball, every time holes are drilled into them. Again, the Genius was drilled to go longer and be less angular than the Fusion simply because I wanted the Genius to compliment the Mastermind which, by the way, it does very well.

While a high rev player might very well take both the Genius and the Fusion to the same outing based on the differences in symmetry and differentials, I would not based on the similarities in cover materials and low rgs. As you hopefully saw in the video, there were differences between the balls for me, but the differences were slight. In the hands of a power player, I think that the differences would have been much more noticeable. I'll put another video on my bucket list, showing two bowlers, one low rev and one high rev, using the same two balls so that you can better see the differences.

Modern bowling balls are incredibly powerful machines, but they do not replace the need for developing a strong physical game.

[Aslan]

Modern bowling balls are incredibly powerful machines, but they do not replace the need for developing a strong physical game.

From what you're saying and the videos you did...I'd almost change that statement to be..."there really aren't much differences in bowling balls that you can't counter with release/drilling....so buy 3 different coverstocks and it really doesn't matter what the specs are."

And don't get me wrong...it's not just your opinion and videos that make me think that...bowlingball.com in one of their video episodes talked about the effect of cores and essentially said the same thing...cores don't really matter much. I've seen videos of ball manufacturers talking about different cores...but I've yet to see anyone show a difference. It would be interesting to see that USBC robot throw some symmetric and assymetric core balls to get a look at it in a very repeatable way...like they did to show surface differences. And bowlingball.com...siad the same thing in terms of coverstock/surface...that how you surface the ball has far more of an impact than cores/RG/Diff.

Just disappointing...because it really further adds evidence to the belief that you can buy whatever brand, whatever ball....and there's really no difference. Hammer, Brunswick, Columbia, Storm, RotoGrip...throw a dart at a dart board or just buy the one thats on sale...because they ALL hit "like a hammer"...whether they are "Hammer" or not.

[Mudpuppy]

In terms of a "magic" ball I think it is quite the opposite - I think it takes more work to figure out each new ball and drilling than it helps. Maybe once you do decode the ball's potential, etc. maybe there is a bit of magic - a small choir of angels might harmonize as you throw the 8th strike. But ultimately you can't take a great ball and bad form / technique and expect to go head to head with Aslan's favorite future hall of famer Belmo. Not happening. Just like trying to take someone (most people around here) and putting them into a F1 and expecting them to be competitive on the world stage - just not happening. That is the problem with this iSociety we live in - no one wants to work for anything. That is why social security is broke and welfare is booming. Bowling, like anything, takes hard work, time and patience to get good.

[RobLV1]

Aslan: This is exactly why I've long recommended sticking to two or three layouts for all of your bowling balls. If you have one ball with a low rg of 2.48, and another with a low rg of 2.56, you may not know the exact post-drilling numbers, but you will know that the difference between them will be the same as the ratio between 2.48 and 2.56. Take this information along with a working knowledge of how the layout angles affect the shape of the reaction, and the differences in the way that different cover materials from the same or different manufacturers, and you can begin to understand bowling balls. You seem to be looking for an overly simple answer, and there just isn't one, but that doesn't mean there isn't an answer, it just means you have to work at finding it.

[Aslan]

You seem to be looking for an overly simple answer

I'm just a very, very analytical thinker. So if I see a number or combination of numbers...I assume I can derive results using those numbers. Much of bowling is simply physics. If you understand every number in the equation...you should be able to get the answer. But if you rule out all other variables...and compare two numbers by themselves (like cores)...the assymetric core "should" in theory have a more angular motion.

Now, my secondary hypothesis is that by having different drilling layouts, you'd made the symmetric ball more assymetric and assymetric ball more symmetric. Also, as you mentioned...the angular motion may not be as noticeable for lower rev rates. It's just trying to wrap my head around why your video seems to defy physics.

I'm not looking for a "magic ball". I'm looking for the opposite...a way of predicting ball tendencies using the numbers given in their specifications....not to give me a ball that does "magic" but to give me a ball that does exactly what physics dictates.

Where are our bowling ball scientists!??? Ebonite?? RotoGrip? Track? Columbia? I know you got a nerdy guy with a pocket protector that can speak my language....I summon thee!!

[RobLV1]

My ball driller and coach who you met when you were in Vegas is also my golfing partner. He's says that I overthink everything, but I pale in comparison to you. This will really mess with your head: symmetrical balls are only symmetrical until they have holes drilled into them. Once the holes have been drilled, they are all asymmetrical. There is no ball that does exactly what physics dictates because there is alway the human factor involved: the physical game of the bowler. Learn the basics, and grow from there instead of tying to find the magic formula. It just doesn't exist, and I'm pretty sure that anyone from any of the ball companies will tell you the same thing. The closest that you can come are the Dual Angle System, and the Storm VLS System, and both of these deal with layouts and how the core is positioned within the ball.