USBC modifies rule on bowling ball gripping holes

[Mike White]

There is a big problem with this rule.

Lets assume two bowlers, one uses his thumb, the other bowls thumbless.

Each have an identical ball drilled identically. One having a thumb hole, the other having a balance hole.

For the one who uses his thumb, his ball measures out at 7/8 ounce thumb weight relative to the grip center (between the bridge and the thumb hole).

For the thumbless bowler, his ball exceeds 1 ounce thumb weight because his ball is measured relative to the bridge.

Both balls would have the exact same properties, but would be illegal for the thumbless bowler.

Using the same criteria, a thumbless bowler is allowed more finger weight than the thumb bowler.

Symmetrical balls drilled without a thumb hole, tend to have no, or a very weak preferred spin axis.

[bowl1820]

There is a big problem with this rule.

Lets assume two bowlers, one uses his thumb, the other bowls thumbless.

Each have an identical ball drilled identically. One having a thumb hole, the other having a balance hole.

For the one who uses his thumb, his ball measures out at 7/8 ounce thumb weight relative to the grip center (between the bridge and the thumb hole).

For the thumbless bowler, his ball exceeds 1 ounce thumb weight because his ball is measured relative to the bridge.

Both balls would have the exact same properties, but would be illegal for the thumbless bowler.

Using the same criteria, a thumbless bowler is allowed more finger weight than the thumb bowler.

Your example here doesn't really prove anything, other than that both balls are just are not drilled properly to meet the static weight and hole requirements for a thumbless bowler or a ball without a thumb hole.

Symmetrical balls drilled without a thumb hole, tend to have no, or a very weak preferred spin axis.

So what?

The thumbless bowler would just have to have a decent sized weight hole drilled, which in turn would act as the PSA.

This new rule is just trying to placate the majority of bowlers who use their thumb. Who complain about the perceived advantage two handed/thumbless bowler's have over them now and are afraid they are going to be placing the unused thumb hole in exotic locations to manipulate the ball dynamics in ways they can't and gain even more advantage.

[Mike White]

Your example here doesn't really prove anything, other than that both balls are just are not drilled properly to meet the static weight and hole requirements for a thumbless bowler or a ball without a thumb hole.



So what?

The thumbless bowler would just have to have a decent sized weight hole drilled, which in turn would act as the PSA.

This new rule is just trying to placate the majority of bowlers who use their thumb. Who complain about the perceived advantage two handed/thumbless bowler's have over them now and are afraid they are going to be placing the unused thumb hole in exotic locations to manipulate the ball dynamics in ways they can't and gain even more advantage.

I'm sorry you can't see the problem.

By changing the rule of calling the unused thumb hole, a balance hole, it is changing the reference point used for measuring imbalances.

I've drilled a number of balls for thumbless bowlers, and each time I have included a properly fitted thumb hole so the ball can be thrown straight at spares.

The person running the scale at tournaments wouldn't know if the hole is for gripping, or for balance.

If the ball passes, someone would have to monitor the bowler to be sure they are releasing the ball using the same criteria as was used during the weighing process.

Simply requiring the bowler to demonstrate the hole could be used for gripping eliminates the "exotic" locations.

Rules aren't supposed to placate the masses based on perceived advantages. They should stick to realities.

Any advantage no thumb bowlers have comes the larger timing window to achieve high revs, not from the dynamics of the ball.

A bowler using his thumb, with good timing, can achieve similar rev rate.

The more speed you want to put on the ball, the better the timing would have to be.

[bowl1820]

I'm sorry you can't see the problem.

By changing the rule of calling the unused thumb hole, a balance hole, it is changing the reference point used for measuring imbalances.

I understand that very well, this new rule means if your going to bowl thumbless. That the balls with thumb holes will have to be plugged and if needed be redrilled to meet the static weight requirements.

I've drilled a number of balls for thumbless bowlers, and each time I have included a properly fitted thumb hole so the ball can be thrown straight at spares.

Well you won't be doing that anymore, they'll have to get a dedicated spare if they want to use their thumb for spares.

The person running the scale at tournaments wouldn't know if the hole is for gripping, or for balance.

If the ball passes, someone would have to monitor the bowler to be sure they are releasing the ball using the same criteria as was used during the weighing process.

Now your talking about enforcing the rule, which is problem. That will be up to the officals to figure out how to monitor and enforce it.

Simply requiring the bowler to demonstrate the hole could be used for gripping eliminates the "exotic" locations.

That was brought in another forum and was pointed out it doesnt really work. Because there are places where you can put a hole and still grip it, but you couldn't really bowl with it.

Rules aren't supposed to placate the masses based on perceived advantages. They should stick to realities.

Any advantage no thumb bowlers have comes the larger timing window to achieve high revs, not from the dynamics of the ball.

A bowler using his thumb, with good timing, can achieve similar rev rate.

The more speed you want to put on the ball, the better the timing would have to be.

I agree with this!

[austin]

Someone mentioned Belmo earlier, with regards to this bloke, from what I have seen all his balls are drilled basically label anyway with no extra hole, so wont change the way he bowls.

[dnhoffman]

I think it's a good change that addresses what was an unfair advantage at the professional level

[Mike White]

Now your talking about enforcing the rule, which is problem. That will be up to the officals to figure out how to monitor and enforce it.

Since the rule effects league bowling as well, enforcement is going to be spotty, and probably used more as a tactic.

There was one person in my friday league who I noticed throwing thumbless last night.
I commented to him about the pending rule, and he showed me his ball.

I didn't have the opportunity to weight the ball, but based on the location of his CG mark (about an 2 inches inch to the right, and a little up from his thumb hole) and no balance hole, he has probably been using an illegally weighted ball (under current rules) the whole season.
The new rule will only make it worse.

There is no real enforcement of ball rules unless it is taken to a tournament.

Even when you shoot an honor score, all they ask is does the ball have a serial #, not what that serial # is.

[TCJ]

Honestly, I think a lot of bowlers probably use illegally weighted balls, but it's nearly impossible to spot. On the flip side, people automatically want to look at the equipment of a two-hander because his style stands out. They are under suspicion immediately.

What I see this rule doing is making the pro shops more money, placating the masses who think (erroneously) that two-handers have such an unfair advantage (if it were so true, why don't they do it?), driving some bowlers away (me included), and ultimately not changing competition that much. In my league (25 teams last year) there were four people who have been known to bowl two-handed: me (bowling left that year, so no two-handed), one person who tried it for awhile and gave up because he wasn't doing well, and two others who chose not to bowl that way aside from perhaps a ball here and there on shots that didn't matter. Why such a focus on such a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of bowlers? Personally, I think a lot of the old school bowlers just automatically view us as cheaters and want to get rid of us or limit how we can bowl.

[vdubtx]

Honestly, I think a lot of bowlers probably use illegally weighted balls, but it's nearly impossible to spot.

Won't be able to use an illegally weighted ball at Usbc open as they check all balls when checking in for Team event. It is responsibility of pro shops to be sure balls are legally set up. My thinking is it would be a code of ethics for pro shop operators to be sure no balls leave their shop that are not legal.

[TCJ]

Won't be able to use an illegally weighted ball at Usbc open as they check all balls when checking in for Team event. It is responsibility of pro shops to be sure balls are legally set up. My thinking is it would be a code of ethics for pro shop operators to be sure no balls leave their shop that are not legal.

I'm referring to leagues. Many, many bowlers don't bother with the USBC Open.