Is it the BALL, or the SKILL of the Bowler

[Amyers]

Exactly. Rob was making the point that high level bowlers that believe in the arsenal concept should strike 9 out of 10 times when making a ball change on the shot just after making the change.

Still no reason why one could throw a strike 90% of the time after changing balls if you were only striking at 50 or 60% before. "Is it super ball comes to save the day" or something. I agree you should strike at a somewhat higher percentage than you do just taking the ball out of the bag on a practice shot because you have had some idea of the lane condition but you are still rolling the ball without actually seeing its reaction to those conditions. no reason in the world why your strike percentage would be higher.

[rv driver]

Exactly. Rob was making the point that high level bowlers that believe in the arsenal concept should strike 9 out of 10 times when making a ball change on the shot just after making the change.

In other words, and this is a Aslan bowling pet peeve, most bowlers with "arsenals" aren't good enough to justify having them...because many of them make changes for reasons they can't even put into words other than, "That ball isn't striking."

But I agree entirely with Rob on this. I think to truly take advantage of differences in balls, ball manufacturers, and even to a lesser extent ball/drilling specs...you have to have a very consistent game. I'm going to try and work with MWhite on a project where I have 2 balls drilled very differently to see if I can create 2 very different reactions using simply drilling/layout/surface changes. But both Mike and I agree that the biggest "challenge" is whether or not we can accurately see those changes given my below average bowling ability. Rob also made a video in another thread seeing the differences between assymetric and symmetric cores...and we had the discussion...is it that there is no real difference? Or is it that Rob's style/ability doesn't accurately depict the true difference?

I thought a lot about this after going to the coaching seminar last weekend. The instructor said they don't really recommend reactive resin balls or even HOOKING the balls for bowlers until they average about 150. 150!!

Do I agree with that? Well...I see the POINT of it...given the seminar was mainly about youth bowling. I think you want to develop their SKILLS before adding hooking and ball variations. But is that what I'd recommend to an adult?? Probably not. But it IS an illustration of this whole discussion...that ideally...IDEALLY...a person would become accurate and consistent enough with the straight ball...and good enough at shooting spares...THEN you add in hooking the ball...THEN when they get to a very high level you start having arsenals and all that kind of stuff.

I agree with the seminar. Even for adults. Here's why: one has to learn one's "style" and get comfortable with the basics of how and why the ball rolls down the lane, and with how to position and aim the shot. The variables of hooking only serve to obfuscate those basics. Once one has gotten comfortable with a straight shot (which requires discipline of motion and accuracy) one can more readily see how hooking will create a better shot. Then one can tweak the basics with a reactive ball. Further, if one is throwing plastic, one doesn't really need to worry about "oil patterns." One can simply concentrate on form, release, approach, etc. It seems like the reactive issues would work against learning the basics.

[bowl1820]

Still no reason why one could throw a strike 90% of the time after changing balls if you were only striking at 50 or 60% before.

You still don't understand, the 90% doesn't pertain to all the frames you bowl after you change balls.

It's just about the first frame you bowl after changing balls.


It's like someone saying "I have 90% strike percentage on frame 1" that means 9 out of 10 games they got a strike in the first frame of the game. The rest of the frames don't factor into it.

They could throw all gutter balls for frames 2-10 and it would still be a 90% strike percentage on frame 1.

"Is it super ball comes to save the day" or something. I agree you should strike at a somewhat higher percentage than you do just taking the ball out of the bag on a practice shot because you have had some idea of the lane condition but you are still rolling the ball without actually seeing its reaction to those conditions. no reason in the world why your strike percentage would be higher.

[Amyers]

You still don't understand, the 90% doesn't pertain to all the frames you bowl after you change balls.

It's just about the first frame you bowl with that different ball.


It's like someone saying "I have 90% strike percentage on frame 1" that means 9 out of 10 games they got a strike in the first frame of the game. The rest of the frames don't factor into it.

They could throw all gutter balls for frames 2-10 and it would still be a 90% strike percentage on frame 1.

I understand completely you are referring to the percentage of strikes that you throw on your first roll after changing balls. The point I am making is there is no practical reason why that strike percentage would exceed the percentage of strike you throw for the game on average over a period of time. Why would you throw 90% percent if you only throw 60%percent the rest of the time? You might do it for a while but eventually you are going to average back to your normal strike percentage. The only reason I can come up with is if you are paying additional attention to it or something it might raise that percentage but if it does you should start doing whatever it is all the time.

Over a short while I might average 60 percent strikes in the 4th frame but if I do its an anomaly not normal and if I throw enough 4th frames over time it is going to average out to the 40% percent that I normally throw. Again there is no reason why I would throw a higher percentage of strikes in the 4th frame, on a Tuesday, or on even calendar months. If there is an actual logical reason for you to throw a higher percentage of strikes on the first ball after a ball change let me know what it is .

[Aslan]

Further, if one is throwing plastic, one doesn't really need to worry about "oil patterns." One can simply concentrate on form, release, approach, etc. It seems like the reactive issues would work against learning the basics.

I agree. I just worry that if people are throwing plastic and struggling; we may lose them. Personally, I think we should change the oil patterns and pin weights to make the game harder...but I also recognize the downside to that belief.

If there is an actual logical reason for you to throw a higher percentage of strikes on the first ball after a ball change let me know what it is .

Rob's point is, for ADVANCED bowlers...they know their equipment so well...they can predict with a 90% accuracy what ball they could change to that would get them a strike. We're paying too much attentinon to the number (90%) and not enough to the "point".

The POINT is...concerning the original question...for most bowlers skill is 96% and the ball is 4%....because low level bowlers won't see a huge difference from one ball to another. HOWEVER...as bowlers become more advanced...a ball/change in layout/specs can have a bigger impact.

But like I said; it's a dumb arguement because skill SO far outweighs ball that we're arguing about whether a bucket of food coloring makes a river more blue or not. The discussion would make more sense if we split up "skill" into timing, release, stance, swing, slide, etc... and changed "ball" to surface, specs, drilling layout, manufacturer, smell, etc...

One thing I find interesting is;just as an example:
1) I heard one female USBC bowler talk about how the mental game is the most important...visualizing your shot, routine, etc...
2) I heard another female USBC bowler say the most important part of your approach is your starting stance.

For me, I don't think either of those are very important compared to other things (release, timing).

[bowl1820]

If there is an actual logical reason for you to throw a higher percentage of strikes on the first ball after a ball change let me know what it is .

The logical reason is because the ball you were using before wasn't striking enough. So you changed balls And if you knew how your different balls worked and you picked wisely your strike percentage went up.

You change balls To increase the number of strikes (your strike percentage) or at least maintain what you were doing, because you started seeing changes in the shot.

That's the whole point of changing balls in the first place! to increase your strikes.

So as a drill Rob said to look at the strike percentage you have on that first ball after a change. If you have a low percentage on that first ball (have to fish for several frames), then you might need to learn more about how your balls work.

So that you make wise ball changes and not waste frames which in turn will help raise the overall percentage of strikes.

[bowl1820]

Rob's point is, for ADVANCED bowlers....

It's not just for ADVANCED bowlers, knowing how you equipment works compared to each other.

Benefits all bowlers.

[Amyers]

The logical reason is because the ball you were using before either wasn't striking enough or you start seeing changes in the shot.

You changed balls To increase the number of strikes (your overall strike percentage) or at least maintain what you were doing. that's the whole point of changing balls in the first place!

So as a drill Rob said to look at the strike percentage you have on that first ball after a change. If you have a low percentage on that first ball (have to fish for several frames), then you might need to learn more about how your balls work.

So to make wise ball changes and not waste frames and raise that percentage, a bowler needs to know their equipment.

Now your statement I can agree with you should throw a higher percentage of strikes than what you would have if you continued to play that line that has transitioned away.

But that is not what Rob said I went back and reread the original post. His exact words were to track it and you should throw a strike 90% of the time on your first ball after a ball change. I want to meet the person who can do this! Over the long haul no one is going to strike 90% of the time on anything. You could put Belmo on THS and he is not going to strike 90% off the time on a consistent basis more less after a ball change.

As I said earlier the goal should be to reduce the drop off of strike percentage due to the ball change because it's going to be lower than your average overall. I would also say done perfectly (easier said than done) their shouldn't be a significant drop off in strike percentage before your change or your waiting too long to transition.

[bowl1820]

But that is not what Rob said I went back and reread the original post. His exact words were to track it and you should throw a strike 90% of the time on your first ball after a ball change.

Yes that is what Rob said no doubt

Keep track of the percentage of times that you strike on your first shot when you change bowling balls. You should be able to 90% of the time.

and you said

Rob this doesn't make sense. I think you are little high on your number. The pro's don't even strike 90% of the time on average using the same ball. Why would you be able to strike 90% picking one up cold? If you averaged striking 90% percent of the time you would be averaging over 11 strikes a game.

and all I said was that Rob was referring to just the first frame after the ball change not the whole game. Like you implied here in the underlined.

I want to meet the person who can do this! Over the long haul no one is going to strike 90% of the time on anything. You could put Belmo on THS and he is not going to strike 90% off the time on a consistent basis more less after a ball change.

Now as for the 90%
All I said was

"Now is 90% high for that? That I can't say."

Now I don't know if there is any statistical data on strike percentage in the first frame after a ball change. 90% might be too high.

As for Belmo I don't know what his percentage of strikes on the 1 frame after a ball change were talking about, if he can do it or not.

As I said earlier the goal should be to reduce the drop off of strike percentage due to the ball change because it's going to be lower than your average overall. I would also say done perfectly (easier said than done) their shouldn't be a significant drop off in strike percentage before your change or your waiting too long to transition.

And yes that's the goal from learning about your equipment, not to reduce your strike percentage do to a ball change.

and as a drill Rob suggested looking at that first ball strike percentage. if its a low percentage then learn more about your equipment to try and raise it.

And yes you shouldn't be waiting too long to make a change, that's a problem a lot of bowlers have. They notice something might be wrong, but wait too long to make a change either in line or equipment.

[Amyers]

Well I'm pretty sure we agree then Bowl1820 other than I believe I'm pretty sure that 90% on 1st balls after a ball change is unrealistic and I think you are waiting on evidence. Which I have no problem with. You and Rob probably know more about bowling than I ever will but I can't think of a better way to pass the day than having a good discussion about its aspects. Would be interesting to see what some peoples numbers actually ar.