Next Arsenal Dilemmas: Part III

[Aslan]

Aslan:

I think that the actual differences between solids, pearls, and hybrids are greatly over-stated. Have you ever taken a solid and a pearl version of the same cover material with the same core and put the same surface on them. I have.

Yes. I actually saw that analysis you did. Thats kind've what gave me the idea to maybe ignore the cover material. I still would prefer a solid-hybrid-pearl line-up...but it's not a "necessity" after seeing your and I think one other conversation I had on the coverstock material.

Second issue: When a ball has a 2000 surface on it and is used over a period of however many games, it does not develop more surface (going down to 1000 as you suggest), it loses surface going up to 2500, 3000, 4000, etc...

I was going to diversify my answer to state that while surface can get deteriorated...this equipment (bowling equipment) can also pick up oil and/or absorb oil. So a ball can get slightly more beat up and lose 15 in abralon over 2 games (hypothetical numbers)...but the picking up of "lane shine" could add 20 + another 40 on soaked in oil (3000-15+20+40 = 3050). As you stated, the abralon number tends to go up.

Third issue: It seems that you are viewing your arsenal as a static thing that remains unchanged until you totally replace it. A arsenal should be fluid and may change from week to week, depending on the center where you are bowling, the time of day that you are bowling, and even the weather outside.

Well, I see your point, but you have a bit of a more unique situation than most bowlers. You;
- bowl at 3-7 centers.
- have bowling balls all over the place drilled and ready to go either from ball testing gigs or other reasons.

So, I agree...the more balls you have, the more likely you'll be to match up a ball to a speed/pattern/center/season. But given a person (hypothetical)...that bowls 1 speed, on one pattern, at 1-2 centers...1 season (winter-spring)...1 league...thats 1 x 1 x 1.5 x 3 (seasons) = 4.5 Compare that to a hypothetical person in your situation which has 2 speeds, 3 patterns, 3 centers, full year; (2 x 3 x 3 x 4 = 72). Or even additive it's 6.5 versus 12. So how many balls should a bowler closer to 6.5 have versus closer to 12? We field the "How many balls should I bring with me to league night" question quite often. Very few people suggested the bowler have a minimum of 13 drilled balls.

[Amyers]

Uh oh. Mommy and Daddy are fighting again!!



Your method was sorta like my previous method. Just try to go "solid-hybrid-pearl" or most surface to less surface. And the sound reasoning behind that is that it's largely agreed upon that the "most" impact on a ball's path is surface/cover.

i tend to think in terms of surface, Rg, degree of asymmetry, differential, and manufactures intent for the ball when slotting balls. If I have a personal experience with seeing the balls that plays a role too. If you start with 4 balls with basically the same Rg +- a few points your going to end up with an Arsenal mostly based on surface.

The problem with this method in my opinion is it's very true if everything else is constant. But everything else isn't constant. I would characterize it with this analogy:

It's very easy to test tires and determine relatively easily...which tire grabs more and which tire skids more. It's a simple test and is very, very accurate. But....how much a car skids....is the result of a multitude of factors including speed, and power, and transmission, and technology, and the weight of the vehicle, the surface the tire is on, etc...

And thats when I started giving PerfectScale and Rob's RG-focused arsenal selection method a look. Like Rob talks about, the RG is like the "engine"...the core is like the "engine" of the ball. Surface is still most relevant...as anyone who has ever lost control of a muscle car could tell you....but one the ball is transitioning from skid to hook...something has to push it in that physical direction....and just as important...something has to try and extend that hooking motion to delay the roll phase. I'm not explaining it well...you can look at Rob's article on ModernBowling (I think) for his explanation on RG use in arsenal selection.

As we've argued about before, the one weak point of using surface as the primary selection tool....is that while the coverstock remains a constant chemistry during usage; the surface changes are constantly happening and create more rapid changes to the ball movement than anything else. How long a person can throw a 2000 surface ball before the surface goes to 1000...???? You'll read all kinds of numbers. Some pro level bowlers will claim it's 5 games...5 weeks...5 rounds....and then others will claim it's 500 games, 5 years, 5 seasons. But from a pure physics standpoint, it is a physical certainty that said object will be constantly going from a state of order to disorder and everything from temperature to humidity to oxygen content to the force the ball must absorb each time it is thrown....all affect the surface...constantly.

We've discussed surface before it actually is something you can control. If you don't keep up with the surfaces on your ball you eventually end up with an Arsenal at 4500-5000 surface. I think this effects Pearl balls slower but when they lose their teeth they actually die more.

Looking at it in 3 parts:

First Ball:
I could agree on the Ruckus. I can't see the Ruckus being of much use in my current house at my current speed. But I think it could be a strong enough ball to start out with on wider or longer patterns. I'd just have to make sure when I get it drilled that the ball driller knows I want to use it for that purpose (i.e. Asylum issue). I don't agree on the other 2 (per se). Maybe the Bullet Train because the cover is so strong...but I would see the Bullet Train as more of a fresh pattern ball that won't react too early. And the Warning Sign...other than the low RG, it doesn't have the numbers at all to be a #1 ball...if anything it's a weak #2 ball.

My decision: I'm going to choose the Reaxx Pearl as my #1 ball. I think it's strong enough to overpower the Pearl cover...yet the Pearl cover at the OOB polish level will keep it from reacting too soon. The Ruckus was my 2nd choice, but I think I'll save that for the next arsenal.

As I mentioned my first ball is not the first ball out of my bag and may not even get used much I actually chose the Reax as one of the two benchmark balls if your thinking as first ball out of the bag this isn't a bad choice of your pearls this is easiest the earliest rolling most controllable

Second Ball:
The Ruckus...given it's cover and RG...I could see it as a 2nd ball...1st ball on my house shot (which is a bit narrower). But the Reaxx Pearl...the only thing that would tell one that it's anything other than a #1 ball...is that it's a Pearl.

Decision:
I wanted to use the Defiant Edge if possible. And I think #2 is the best place to put it. I actually don't like many of these balls as a #2 ball...none of them really fit well there. But I think the Defiant Edge has a low enough RG to balance out the Pearl cover and is strong enough overall to make a good move downlane.

If you think this is your second strongest ball your probably wrong this ball will offer more backend and probably cover more boards than anything else you've got. I do think this is a good choice if your wanting something to step down too and move farther left with

Third Ball:
As attached as I was to the idea of using the Track300A as the #3 ball....practice, drier lanes...Game #2 or #3 of a series...despite the weakness of the 300A...I thought it would be a good ball down option most nights. And the Exile, while I disagree a bit, is a skid/flip ball and if I was going to use it...I'd actually put it at #4 and use it the way I did the Melee Jab.

Decision:
I decided to go a little outside the box with #3. The Ebonite Innovate. Everything about this ball screams #3 ball with the exception of the RG. But I'll talk more about RG below.

I really can't say why you would put this ball here. It's a relatively agressive ball somewhat less agressive than the other two but not enough to be a light oil piece and it's going to be a ball that honestly you would move right with instead of left which is a bad idea in my book

Thats definitely a risk. While I'm not 'that' concerned about it...but it's fair to say overall reviews have been lacking.

Perhaps.

Before I start, 2 things;
1) This is the 3rd or 4th possible combination I've come up with...and I have at least 120 more games on my current arsenal...so this CAN change.
2) I've spent enough time with my 2 coaches, that at LEAST out of courtesy....I will get their input as well...so if this is a truly BAD idea...it'll get relatively vetoed.

But, I think this proposed next arsenal will also be a good test of cover stocks and RG. All three balls will be pearls and will have almost identical low RGs. If there is going to be a fair amount of separation....I have to rely on:

1) The manufacturer difference to come into play. Radical to Roto Grip to Ebonite should go from hooking soonest to hooking latest.

That is a crazy notion bowling balls start hooking by the surface, and Rg not who makes them
2) The differential to be a greater influence than on the actual RG value. ).054, 0.052, then 0.041.

Another truly bad idea Rg value is way more important than differential especially among less talented bowlers. I see no detectable difference between .054 and .052 and very little difference between the others and .041
3) Set up with PerfectScale in mind. 224.8, 216.47, 189.9.

Perfect scale is a joke

4) Symmetry doesn't matter. All 3 are assymetrical cores.
wow just wow

By keeping symmetry, coverstock, and RG constant...and surface relatively constant....I can better compare manufacturers, differential, and PerfectScale.

You are not comparing manufactures. Or keeping coverstock or symmetry constant here each of these balls have different amounts of asymmetry so it's not "constant" they don't have the same cover so that's not constant

The risk is that all 3 with the same RG and surface and cover stock and symmetry will perform nearly identical. I'll pay to drill 3 balls...then have to either buy a couple or drill a couple other ones shortly after realizing my experiment was a failure.

Your still thinking of balls as strong vs weak instead of balls to fit situations you are likely to face and using weird unknowable criteria (ball manufacturer as a sign of how soon the ball rolls). Thinking things are constant that aren't is dangerous you think because each of these balls are asymmetrical that's constant but each of these balls have different degrees of asymmetry the surfaces on each of these balls will be different not a constant.

I actually like the Reax as your first ball out of your bag. It's the most benchmark of the bunch. The defiant edge is a good #2 as long as you accept the fact it's going to be longer and most likely force you left from the Reax regardless of what the perfect scale says. The biggest problem here is you've got nothing for heavier flatter patterns here throwing a pearl on those conditions is not optimum and you don't really have a light oil ball in the mix.

Retread what I posted about how I put my Arsenal together it's not about what order I take the balls out of the bag but the ability to have the right ball in the right situation. It's about the amount of oil and the shot shape that I'm looking for not surface or strength.

[bowl1820]

Mo Pinel has said the Rg of the PAP (which is what matters) can be well approximated for most bowlers by LowRg + 0.7*differential. That requires some simple math, but then you have one number to worry about in the comparisons.

Here's the other part that goes with that.

MO's Suggestions for using the undrilled ball #s to help anticipate ball reaction. (remember these are just estimates)

1) Take the min. RG # and add 70% of the total diff to it. That will give you the approximate RG of the PAP for about 80% of the layouts.

(Note: If you want to estimate the RG of the PAP closer, try M4R10's RG of the PAP estimator it factors in the layout used. Just input layout and the mfg. Low RG/Total Diff./Int. Diff. specs)

It's a excel spreadsheet, You can get it here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~litefroze...10 PAPs_RG.zip

2) Divide the int. diff. of the undrilled ball by the total diff. of the undrilled ball. That will give you the diff. ratio. That tells you the potential of the ball to respond to friction.

Diff. ratios:
>.45 is strong reaction
.25 to .45 is medium reaction
<.25 is smooth reaction

[Aslan]

i tend to think in terms of surface, Rg, degree of asymmetry, differential, and manufactures intent for the ball when slotting balls. If I have a personal experience with seeing the balls that plays a role too. If you start with 4 balls with basically the same Rg +- a few points your going to end up with an Arsenal mostly based on surface.

Well, in this case the RG, cover checmisty, and surface will be kept relatively constant. So, by your theory, all three of these balls will react identically. And thats possible. Thats why it's a theory and you test it.

We've discussed surface before it actually is something you can control. If you don't keep up with the surfaces on your ball you eventually end up with an Arsenal at 4500-5000 surface. I think this effects Pearl balls slower but when they lose their teeth they actually die more.

True, but as we've argued about before...how successful surface changes are depend on two rather important questions.
1) How long does a X Abralon surface last? How does the surface change each time the ball is thrown?
2) How effective are hand applied surface changes?

If surface changes are your strategy, you need to know roughly how the use of the ball changes the surface. If you know that a 3000 Abralon ends up being a 3130 Abralon after 1 series...then you can make adjustments to surface accordingly. And, just as important, you have to be able to change surface by hand. If not, you need a personal ball spinner. Most inexpensive models are poor quality. The more professional units are very costly. And paying a pro shop $25 per ball every 3 games...thats essentially $75-$100 per week of surfacing cost. For a pro that gets this service for free by their rep out in the truck...not a big deal. For the 99.4% of the rest of the bowlers...it's an absurd expense.

That is a crazy notion bowling balls start hooking by the surface, and Rg not who makes them

I don't understand this comment. You seem to be saying RG is irrelevant and manufacturer differences are myths. I can tell you that PBA professionals...more than 1...have stated there is a BIG difference between one company and another. Radical is believed to hook the soonest...followed by Brunswick. Ebonite/Track/Columbia tend to hook the latest. The rest of the brands fit in between.

Another truly bad idea Rg value is way more important than differential especially among less talented bowlers. I see no detectable difference between .054 and .052 and very little difference between the others and .041

Are you sure? How did Motiv cheat? Answer = Differential. Why would a company choose differential as the way to cheat if differential didn't really matter much?

Perfect scale is a joke

Poor PerfectScale...nobody likes it. : ( The bottom line is you need a quantitative way to compare balls from numerous manufacturers. There is no method that is currently available that is more likely to be worth a darn. It's not "Perfect"...but nobody else has a better system...so until they do, we have PerfectScale.

Not to mention, I've seen a decent correlation between PerfectScale and overall ball reaction. Lets look at an example:
Arsenal #1.
When I put Arsenal #1 together, a couple years back, I thought the progression would be:

Hammer Rhythm, 900Global Bullet Train, Columbia300 Encounter, Brunswick Slingshot. That is putting together an arsenal based on cover material. Solid, Hybrid, Pearl, Pearl. But when I went to put this together, the ball driller that was going to drill the Bullet Train said the Bullet Train cover (S79) would be too strong to be used as a ball down option and he would suggest the Bullet Train be the 1st ball in the progression for medium-heavy oil.

So the new progression was Bullet Train, Rhythm, Encounter, Slingshot.

Had I used RG, the progression would have been Rhythm (2.50), Encounter (2.51), Bullet Train (2.55), Slingshot (2.586).
Had I used manufacturer strength, it would have been Slingshot, Bullet Train, Rhythm, Encounter.
Had I used PerfectScale, it would have been Bullet Train (222.8), Rhythm (211), Encounter (203.8), Slingshot (157.6). <----Ding Ding Ding!!

In other words, PerfectScale predicted the exact arsenal and progression that the ball driller eventually suggested. Why? How? Luck? Randomness?

It's actually quite simple. PerfectScale takes into account all of the above specs, data, and how balls behave when tested...to give a number that has a lot of information that goes into it's make-up. I'm not trying to convince anyone to use PerfectScale. I promise, I get no royalties...I don't work for bowlingball.com...if I did, Bowl1820 would probably resign and we'd lose about 1/3 of our community. But so far...I have seen no actual data nor testing that shows PerfectScale to be any less reliable a system for arsenal and progression development...than any other spec. The great thing about the arsenal and progression tool I'm working on is it takes into account ALL of these items. PerfectScale is just 1 of 7 variables. Currently all values are weighted equally...but that would probably change once I get the testing complete.

4) Symmetry doesn't matter. All 3 are assymetrical cores.
wow just wow

I meant by having all the cores assymetrical, that variable is held constant. I didn't mean symmetry didn't mean anything.

You are not comparing manufactures. Or keeping coverstock or symmetry constant here each of these balls have different amounts of asymmetry so it's not "constant" they don't have the same cover so that's not constant

Again...not saying you can ever isolate just one variable...when comparing balls from numerous time periods and manufacturers. But you also will have a difficult time trying to understand the effects of specs on a progression or arsenal...if you have a large number of variables. Every time you reach a conclusion...someone can just point to one of the many variables and say your conclusion is wrong.

The trick is, with 7 variables...potentially 8 or more...to truly isolate a variable...would require a much larger pool of equipment to test. I am interested...but not that interested...nor that wealthy. But if a manufacturer wants to furnish me the equipment, I'd gladly accept the challenge.

Thinking things are constant that aren't is dangerous you think because each of these balls are asymmetrical that's constant but each of these balls have different degrees of asymmetry the surfaces on each of these balls will be different not a constant.

Like I argue with Rob. At the end of the day you need a system you can use to build an arsenal and are likely going to be building an arsenal of a lot of different manufacturers. That means you need a way to slot balls in your arsenal. Of course there are nearly 10 variables to consider...and thats the trick. Which of these variables MEAN something? Which of them MATTER? If they all matter, then we'll never have a true system to create an arsenal. Just might as well buy 3 random balls and use constant surfacing to try an manipulate ball movement.

[JaxBowlingGuy]

If surface changes are your strategy, you need to know roughly how the use of the ball changes the surface. If you know that a 3000 Abralon ends up being a 3130 Abralon after 1 series...then you can make adjustments to surface accordingly. And, just as important, you have to be able to change surface by hand. If not, you need a personal ball spinner. Most inexpensive models are poor quality. The more professional units are very costly. And paying a pro shop $25 per ball every 3 games...thats essentially $75-$100 per week of surfacing cost. For a pro that gets this service for free by their rep out in the truck...not a big deal. For the 99.4% of the rest of the bowlers...it's an absurd expense.
.

If you are playing $25 for a surface change, you need to find a new pro shop lol local shops are $3-5 for sanding, polishing, or cleaning. Now a complete resurface is around $25 but that's not needed to simply adjust surface.

[RobLV1]

If you are playing $25 for a surface change, you need to find a new pro shop lol local shops are $3-5 for sanding, polishing, or cleaning. Now a complete resurface is around $25 but that's not needed to simply adjust surface.

Second that! Average cost for simple sanding, polishing, or cleaning is $5 at most any proshop I've ever used.

[Aslan]

Second that! Average cost for simple sanding, polishing, or cleaning is $5 at most any proshop I've ever used.

If you are playing $25 for a surface change, you need to find a new pro shop lol local shops are $3-5 for sanding, polishing, or cleaning. Now a complete resurface is around $25 but that's not needed to simply adjust surface.

I've seen prices range from $3 to $25.

Usually $3 is just a ball cleaning (which you should already do regularly) and then polishing.

Some places will do $5 for cleaning and then either a polish or sanding with an abralon pad. Other places charge $10-$15 for cleaning, sanding, and polishing.

Some places will recommend de-oiling and then a full re-surface which can run $25-$50.

The point is, it's an expense. And while surfacing by hand periodically to tweak a reaction for sweeps or a tournament pattern is certainly a vital option...spending $15 a week to have a pro shop do it...or $25...or $9....or $75....is a significant expense over the course of a season. Not to mention, with that extensive amount of surfacing, I would be concerned that the ball would soon become illegal as it would no longer have a circumference of at least 26.7". Most people don't care...but the circumference and diameter specifications of bowling ball are very small ranges. 26.7 to 27.002 inches (circumference). 8.5 to 8.595 inches (diameter) Sand a ball every week...I gotta think you'd wear off 0.3 inches quickly.

[billf]

Sand a ball every week...I gotta think you'd wear off 0.3 inches quickly.

No. Go grab a 5/16 wrench. This is just under .3". Sanding only goes down to ten thousandths of an inch not tenths of even hundredths.

[bowl1820]

I've seen prices range from $3 to $25.
Not to mention, with that extensive amount of surfacing, I would be concerned that the ball would soon become illegal as it would no longer have a circumference of at least 26.7". Most people don't care...but the circumference and diameter specifications of bowling ball are very small ranges. 26.7 to 27.002 inches (circumference). 8.5 to 8.595 inches (diameter) Sand a ball every week...I gotta think you'd wear off 0.3 inches quickly.

The specifications for diameter (circumference) and roundness are manufacturing specifications only, they are not for the end user or the drilled ball. For a long time there was a size and roundness requirement on the drilled bowling balls at tournaments, but those specifications have since been removed.

Regardless it would take a long time to take that much off a ball using normal surfacing methods.

[billf]

I wouldn't make this joke if I didn't think Aslan could take it so.....


Anybody else wonder how long it takes him to decide what to eat? Pick out clothes to wear each day? You sir, give this much more thought than even the top 1%. That's not necessarily a bad thing but you can out think yourself, out think a particular ball and even out think a bad ball reaction so beware.