In League Play When Do You Change To Another Ball?

[Mike White]

This would be a rare topic where Rob and Mike seem to be in agreement....that the lane conditions nowadays and the advanced equipment has made the game very easy.

If they ask me that on Wednesdays...I'd agree with them. If they ask me most other days...I'd disagree with them.

I think the game hasn't gotten "easier", it's just been changed. Where I DO AGREE with them is that houses can now alter the scores at their facilities by changing the oil pattern...and without significant oversight at significant cost...I don't see a time when bowling will be a level playing field where you can honestly compare averages from house to house. Case in point...last season I was 173 at one house and 194 at the other. This season so far I'm 179 at one house and 207 at the other. It's almost like playing two different games.

Get rid of reactive reside balls, go back to about 8 ml of oil on the lane instead of 20+ml, and require the oil to be much flatter.

The urethane balls give you less friction, but the lower amount of oil gives you more friction.

What is different is the lower amount of oil doesn't give you a lot of help.

The lower friction balls require you to improve your release in a way that doesn't ruin your accuracy.

That would bring skill back to the sport.

Modern bowling is to the sport of bowling much like miniature golf is the the sport of golf.

Aslan, you score bettie when you can start the ball just outside the wall of oil, and when you tug the shot up into the oil, it keeps the ball on line.

Your mistakes to the right are the ones that get you in trouble.

When you started sanding the crap out of the ball, your scores went up because the extra friction make your ball roll.

[Amyers]

Is the game different yes is the game easy not really. Does it really matter if at the top levels the games are decided at 234-257 or 189-204? I will grant that at some houses the game has become a carry contest and the guy who lucks into tripping out a couple of pins is the winner which kind of stinks. Not all THS patterns play like this though. My biggest complaint is the power guys advantage has just gotten to the point of being crazy though. The world's not going backwards though so wishing that urethane balls and 8ml oil patters are coming back is a fools errand. I do wish the average player would learn that tougher conditions actually favor them over the super high average guys. I've found I'm much more competitive in a bowling world where the top is at 220-230 than where it is at 240-300.

Throwing super high scores is easier than it used to be 300 was something an above average player did a couple of times in there life if they were lucky now I'm not surprised when someone tells me they have 50. 800 was never even on most bowlers radar now most of the high end bowlers I know have a couple. These awards are like steroid homerun numbers in baseball but it doesn't mean the game is now easy.

[NewToBowling]

Get rid of reactive reside balls, go back to about 8 ml of oil on the lane instead of 20+ml, and require the oil to be much flatter.

The urethane balls give you less friction, but the lower amount of oil gives you more friction.

What is different is the lower amount of oil doesn't give you a lot of help.

The lower friction balls require you to improve your release in a way that doesn't ruin your accuracy.

That would bring skill back to the sport.

Modern bowling is to the sport of bowling much like miniature golf is the the sport of golf.

Aslan, you score bettie when you can start the ball just outside the wall of oil, and when you tug the shot up into the oil, it keeps the ball on line.

Your mistakes to the right are the ones that get you in trouble.

When you started sanding the crap out of the ball, your scores went up because the extra friction make your ball roll.

Yeah, but we wouldn't have the gutter to gutter hook action with the nice swirly multi colored balls

[RobLV1]

So, you should be throwing 900's all the time. Why don't I see you doing that. How many of the easy peasy 300's have you thrown? Don't have to be "Elite" to throw a 300 game.
If it really were as easy as just throwing out on the lane, we would all have 300's every night.

Don't know what kind of house shot you all have over there. But here, if you aren't on target, you aren't hitting the pocket.

Unfortunately, by the time the USBC gave up on monitoring lane conditions, my body was already on a downhill slide that will undoubtedly force me to quit bowling before too much longer. I can tell you that in the handicap "fun league" in which I bowl with my wife on Thursday nights, there were five 300 games bowled in the first four weeks, and only one of them was thrown by a serious bowler. Kudos to the proprietors in your area of Texas if they are putting out a real shot. In a great majority of bowling centers across the country, they're not.

[RobLV1]

So maybe that's a good idea for another article...but again, I don't see in a standard league...with leftys and rightys and women and low ball speeds and different styles exactly the information you could gather that will allow you to avoid preconceptions or predeterminations. Rob is an expert and he has very valid points about why preconceptions/predeterminations are not ideal...I just want to see how we can avoid those preconseptions/predeterminations with 2-7 shots. That's the challenge and I've heard very little in terms of how to gather data that will tell you somewhat definitively that can be used to put you on the RIGHT line and the RIGHT ball in your hands off 2-7 shots.

Like I said originally; Rob's article and theory behind it are strong...but it's primarily a criticism or conventional approaches without ever offering a real solution that can be done in the time pre-league that most of us encounter.

I think that your confusion is coming from what you are looking for during practice, and what you are not looking for. You are looking for a line, but you are not looking at ball reactions. During ten minutes of practice, at the rate of two shots per minute on two lanes, you get the opportunity of seeing the ball reactions of forty shots. If you know something about bowling balls, it's not too difficult to extrapolate what might work for you based on others rev rates and ball speeds. It is certainly more effective than starting with your most aggressive ball because that's what you always do, and standing on the big dot and hitting the second arrow because that's where you always play.

You seem to be looking for someone to give you a formula, and, frankly, there isn't one. You need to use your eyes to see the phases of ball reaction, and your brain to interpret what you see. That is the point of the Strategies article; nothing more, and nothing less.

[bobforsaken]

Regarding the original question.. I make a ball change if I'm on a great line and stringing strikes and I start creeping high in the pocket, or if during transition I start hitting weak. The result of this is usually when I start leaving corner pins if I'm seeing the ball well that night based on the path of the ball through the pocket. Otherwise, my only ball change is in the 3rd game if I move deeper and need to come flush quickly before I waste too many frames. If I move 3 and 2 ( for example) and start out coming in weak I may ball up rather than trying to fudge with my target line.



As for THS and its "ease". A lot depends on the house. Where I bowl they just got a new lane machine and are putting down a new white pattern. I bowled on the Sphinx one day and the fresh house shot the next. The only difference was with the count you get on a really bad shot. The precision needed to strike was pretty close. The big difference in scoring pace (For me at least) was a bad shot in on the House shot may be an 8 count... On the Sphinx it was a split or 5 count and a difficult spare.

[Tony]

Comparing modern bowling / old time bowling to miniature golf seems like a bit of a stretch, maybe compare modern golf to old time golf would be more accurate. What we have here is called advanced equipment and technology, it's different but I wouldn't say it's a joke.
If you want to go back in time send me a letter written by the light of your lantern and stop using the computer and electricity, it just makes stuff too easy.
Careful not to use that damn car, ride a horse or take the train instead

[Aslan]

Aslan, you score bettie when you can start the ball just outside the wall of oil, and when you tug the shot up into the oil, it keeps the ball on line.

Your mistakes to the right are the ones that get you in trouble.

When you started sanding the crap out of the ball, your scores went up because the extra friction make your ball roll.

That's one line of thinking. And it makes sense. Because I have a higher speed and less rpms, a solid cover is going to grab sooner and ultimately help me into the pocket.

The other line of thinking is that the solid cover and too much surface caused the balls to lose energy on the outside in the dry and caused them to hit weaker than they should.

Both valid lines of thinking and both would be validated by one pro or another. To me, that's the trickiest thing about modern bowling. Because we rely so much on the balls to do the work...we end up robbing Peter to pay Paul. If I throw a pearl ball up second arrow and it misses right of the headpin...logic would dictate a need for a stronger ball. But what does "stronger" mean? Does it mean a ball with the same cover and a more advanced core? Or does it mean a ball with a hybrid or solid cover? If you believe in the concept of a ball burning up and losing energy...it begs the question...why would anyone throw anything but Pearls? Everything else will lose energy sooner.

And this is a hard concept for you AND Rob (mentioned in the same sentence on purpose) because YOU have a tremendous rev rate and fair amount of speed. Not to mention...you throw the weakest equipment around. I think I saw you throw a Storm BYTE once...but you quickly abandoned it because it was hooking too much. So the idea of you throwing a solid cover ball is absurd. Rob on the other hand might advocate moving further inside...but Rob's speed is much lower than mine. His shots at my speed would be in the gutter. And his shots at his speed on my line...probably head to the left gutter. And that also explains why he advocates less surface and more of a breakpoint style...because if HE adds surface or throws solids...they probably pick up the roll too soon at that lower speed and by the time the ball hits the pin; it's dead.

I think that your confusion is coming from what you are looking for during practice, and what you are not looking for. You are looking for a line, but you are not looking at ball reactions.

I have 2-7 shots and 4-5 balls to try on two different lanes and am likely to muff at least 1-2 shots. The math is not in favor of doing what you're asking.

During ten minutes of practice, at the rate of two shots per minute on two lanes, you get the opportunity of seeing the ball reactions of forty shots. If you know something about bowling balls, it's not too difficult to extrapolate what might work for you based on others rev rates and ball speeds. It is certainly more effective than starting with your most aggressive ball because that's what you always do, and standing on the big dot and hitting the second arrow because that's where you always play.

While I agree with you that we need something better than just standing in the same spot and targeting the same spot just because that's what you're used to....I think you are a bit off on what can be learned from other bowlers during practice. I MAY BE WRONG....and I'd love to read an article on BTM about what to look for in practice from other bowlers...BUT....you have to understand that 96% of leagues are not scratch leagues with serious bowlers. For the vast majority of bowlers, you're asking them to watch bowlers that have no idea how to bowl...leftys, thumbless, 2-handed, back-up balls, etc...and make determinations based on what we see.

And maybe that's where I'M wrong. BTM is likely content for more serious bowlers...so maybe the article wasn't meant for the 96% of regular bowlers. And I know that's a difficulty writers have, same as folks who post on here. Sometimes content makes sense to a certain group and not another, so I get that.

[Amyers]

That's one line of thinking. And it makes sense. Because I have a higher speed and less rpms, a solid cover is going to grab sooner and ultimately help me into the pocket.

The other line of thinking is that the solid cover and too much surface caused the balls to lose energy on the outside in the dry and caused them to hit weaker than they should.

Both valid lines of thinking and both would be validated by one pro or another. To me, that's the trickiest thing about modern bowling. Because we rely so much on the balls to do the work...we end up robbing Peter to pay Paul. If I throw a pearl ball up second arrow and it misses right of the headpin...logic would dictate a need for a stronger ball. But what does "stronger" mean? Does it mean a ball with the same cover and a more advanced core? Or does it mean a ball with a hybrid or solid cover? If you believe in the concept of a ball burning up and losing energy...it begs the question...why would anyone throw anything but Pearls? Everything else will lose energy sooner.

And this is a hard concept for you AND Rob (mentioned in the same sentence on purpose) because YOU have a tremendous rev rate and fair amount of speed. Not to mention...you throw the weakest equipment around. I think I saw you throw a Storm BYTE once...but you quickly abandoned it because it was hooking too much. So the idea of you throwing a solid cover ball is absurd. Rob on the other hand might advocate moving further inside...but Rob's speed is much lower than mine. His shots at my speed would be in the gutter. And his shots at his speed on my line...probably head to the left gutter. And that also explains why he advocates less surface and more of a breakpoint style...because if HE adds surface or throws solids...they probably pick up the roll too soon at that lower speed and by the time the ball hits the pin; it's dead.


I have 2-7 shots and 4-5 balls to try on two different lanes and am likely to muff at least 1-2 shots. The math is not in favor of doing what you're asking.


While I agree with you that we need something better than just standing in the same spot and targeting the same spot just because that's what you're used to....I think you are a bit off on what can be learned from other bowlers during practice. I MAY BE WRONG....and I'd love to read an article on BTM about what to look for in practice from other bowlers...BUT....you have to understand that 96% of leagues are not scratch leagues with serious bowlers. For the vast majority of bowlers, you're asking them to watch bowlers that have no idea how to bowl...leftys, thumbless, 2-handed, back-up balls, etc...and make determinations based on what we see.

And maybe that's where I'M wrong. BTM is likely content for more serious bowlers...so maybe the article wasn't meant for the 96% of regular bowlers. And I know that's a difficulty writers have, same as folks who post on here. Sometimes content makes sense to a certain group and not another, so I get that.

As usual your making this more complicated than it really is. It's not about choosing between 4 balls each with three different lines for 12 possibilities. In general for league in a house I'm used to bowling in I'm choosing between 2 balls the others are there more for lane machine being broke (no oil, lots of oil) I'm going to start within 5 boards with my target (for me between the 2nd and 3rd arrow) and my feet in about a 10 board area unless I see my teammates balls performing wildly different than I expect. I can feel that area out pretty well with a couple of balls and make a decision. Really your 12 possible should be about three unless things are wonky. The other thing is if my ball doesn't react I'm not going to sit there and continue to throw the ball at the same spot expecting a different reaction I'm moving to where I need it even if it's not where I usually play.

The other thing I will mention at this point you should know enough bowlers to fill out a decent team of people that feel and think similar to you do about bowling. I struggled this fall with the closing of my center and people going multiple directs and I'm limited to availability with my wife only being able to bowl on Friday's so that makes it tougher for me for that night but if I had any night available. Which I do for my other leagues I could put three teams together pretty easily of top level and above average bowlers to bowl with. Not saying they would all put in the work you do, people like us are kind of rare but there are plenty of talented bowlers here in my little area can't believe it's that hard in an area like So. Cal.

[Aslan]

I'm beginning to think bowling is 45% lane conditions, 50% release, and 5% other.

We spend a LOT of time talking and researching and kicking ideas around....but at the end of the day the vast majority of us (and bowlers in general) just kinda grab a ball or two and go throw up the line they usually play. And if they aren't scoring well....maybe they switch balls. Maybe not.

Like, lets say I'm throwing the Le. Revolver...and I'm missing Brooklyn (AND making good shots). I can:
1) Move laterally to find more oil...play a little more inside.
2) Ball down to the D. Encounter.
3) Increase speed.
4) Decrease axis tilt.
5) Decrease axis rotation.
6) Loft the ball vertically out more on the lanes to delay the hook.

So that's SIX THINGS I can do based on missing Brooklyn. Only ONE of those options involves changing balls. So why even bother with arsenals? If you have 5 ways to change a ball's path...why choose "ball change"?

There are people that swear up and down that if you're missing it's because you have the wrong ball for the conditions. Yet last month I was wasting time at a bowling center while getting my car worked on and threw a 207 with a house ball. Could it be, that after all of this, the ball really doesn't matter?? #theballdoesntmatter (also see Aslan's previous thread entitled "Does the ball Really Matter?")