Importance of Surface

[RobLV1]

Most bowlers believe that surface accounts for 75% of ball reaction. I'm one of very few who don't. I would like to ask that each of you set aside everything that you have had drummed into your heads for many years, and just think about one thing logically. Back in the eighties when then only elements in a bowling ball were the surface and the static weights, we were told that surface accounted for 75% of ball reaction. Now, despite the addition of dynamically weighted cores that create huge imbalances within the ball, we are told that surface accounts for 75% of ball reaction. To me, this makes no sense, and, as Judge Judy often says, if it doesn't make sense, it's not true. Thoughts?

[fokai73]

I thought back in the day it was stated 90/10. Then over the years it changed as weight blocks got teched out to the current 75/25 as you stated.

I think it was Revolution I or Revolutions II - Chip Zielke that I read it was 90/10...

Anyway, surface is a major factor in ball reactions first then the core.

[Amyers]

I seen something from Mo Pinel not too long ago. "Surface controls the reaction on the front 80% of the lane. Core controls the reaction on the back 20% of the lane." Surface is very important but I know which portion of the lanes the pins are on too.

[bowl1820]

Most all the information shown about ball motion has shown that surface roughness and coverstock properties, are the major factors in ball motion with ball dynamics affecting ball motion to a lesser degree.

Now whether or not 75 percent is the exact percentage, I don't think it exactly matters. It's just saying that surface is playing more of a roll in ball motion than other factors.

And while dynamic cores etc. may play more of a part in ball motion today than they use too, that does really lessen the degree the surface plays in ball motion today.

[bowl1820]

I thought back in the day it was stated 90/10. Then over the years it changed as weight blocks got teched out to the current 75/25 as you stated.

I think it was Revolution I or Revolutions II - Chip Zielke that I read it was 90/10...

Anyway, surface is a major factor in ball reactions first then the core.

In Revolutions II (from 1998) - Chip Zielke listed it as follows:

1. Coverstock/Surface Preparation 65-70% (Chip said this was the industry consensus at the time)

2. Weight Block/Core Design 15-20%
3. Dynamic Balance (layout) 10-15%
4. Balance Holes 0-5%
5. Mass Bias 0-5%
6. Static Weights 0-5%

[djp1080]

Yesterday I found the lanes not surfaced for our senior league. Brought a Storm IQ Tour Nano, Reign On and Optimus. Started with the Nano for about a game and a half. I was further left than I ever recall being. The ball could have been rolling out, but a couple shots looked almost like the ball was coming back at me that it crossed the lane that hard. I switched to the Optimus and finished out with it. It was making hard moves at the breakpoint, but it made it further down the lane which made it a bit better than the Nano. Looking at the specs it looks as though the RG of both balls are on the low end and differentials are higher on the Optimus than the Nano. In this case the Nano's surface was dominant getting into a roll. Wish I had either a Lights Out or Tropical Breeze with me as a back up rather than the Reign On. I'll have one of those with me next time just in case...

[foreverincamo]

I've seen enough videos where someone takes their ball and videos it as they go thru surface changes . Starting around 500 grit, and work their way up to 4000 grit. The higher the grit, the father down the lane the ball went before turning into the pocket.

[RobLV1]

Looking at the responses so far, I feel that I have to clarify. I've never said that surface isn't the most important factor in ball reaction. It is. One of the main reasons that it is is because, once the ball is drilled, it's the only aspect of the ball that can be readily changed. I get that. My problem with the whole "surface is 75% of ball reaction" thing is that many bowlers use it as an excuse for not learning about the core numbers. Whether it's because they can't learn about them, or THINK that they can't learn about them, they use the memorized 75% phrase to rationalize the fact that they don't understand cores.

[Amyers]

Looking at the responses so far, I feel that I have to clarify. I've never said that surface isn't the most important factor in ball reaction. It is. One of the main reasons that it is is because, once the ball is drilled, it's the only aspect of the ball that can be readily changed. I get that. My problem with the whole "surface is 75% of ball reaction" thing is that many bowlers use it as an excuse for not learning about the core numbers. Whether it's because they can't learn about them, or THINK that they can't learn about them, they use the memorized 75% phrase to rationalize the fact that they don't understand cores.

I think most serious bowlers who care know the basics higher Rg farther down the lane later roll. low Rg hooks sooner earlier roll. Differential lower numbers flare less (which you've marginalized for average bowlers in the past). The crowd that buys a ball because it's the pretty one or because of the name you're not going to change them.

Now if you want to get into the hard core of drilled differentials and the more esoteric aspects of ball drilling I will admit I get a little glassy eyed myself. Not sure if I'll ever be advanced enough for that stuff to matter or if it really does make much difference.

I see just as many bowler pick the wrong ball by looking at the core numbers without understanding the differences in coverstock and surface make to it then I do bowlers picking the ball by cover surface and ending up with something different than expected. Now if you really want to find what I think is crazy check out the bowlers who believe there's much difference between a pearl and a polished solid.

[RobLV1]

Part of the challenge of posting questions/responses on a forum like this is the wide range of experiences that are brought here by the posters.

I think most serious bowlers who care know the basics higher Rg farther down the lane later roll. low Rg hooks sooner earlier roll. Differential lower numbers flare less (which you've marginalized for average bowlers in the past I continue to believe this and I have proved it with my own bowling - as my rev rate has increased, so has the impact of the differential on the flare that I can expect). The crowd that buys a ball because it's the pretty one or because of the name you're not going to change them. New to bowling players have enough to worry about without adding core and/or surface to their confusion.

Now if you want to get into the hard core of drilled differentials and the more esoteric aspects of ball drilling I will admit I get a little glassy eyed myself. Not sure if I'll ever be advanced enough for that stuff to matter or if it really does make much difference. The main thing to remember about drillings is that they change the core numbers, and the shape of the reaction. As long as you pick two or three drillings that work for you, you really don't have to worry about them.

I see just as many bowler pick the wrong ball by looking at the core numbers without understanding the differences in coverstock and surface make to it then I do bowlers picking the ball by cover surface and ending up with something different than expected. Now if you really want to find what I think is crazy check out the bowlers who believe there's much difference between a pearl and a polished solid. This is an example in the other direction. More knowledgeable bowers who play on different parts of the lane know that there is quite a difference between a pearl and a polished solid. While they often have comparable lengths, the way they react to oil and friction is completely different.