Relative "Strengths" of bowling balls

[Mike White]

Mike, I'm not talking about physics. I'm talking about the cultural bias towards the words "weak" and "strong" that are currently used by bowlers to describe the motions of different bowling balls. This has nothing to do with what I know about physics, or what you know about physics, it has everything to do with the way that bowlers think about bowling balls. That the words "weak" and "strong" are the current words that are generally used is a fact. That using these particular words has a detrimental effect on bowlers' ball choices is the very thing that this thread is all about.

The problem is you're ignoring the most significant element when it comes to "weak" or "strong".

That is the human element.

In my hands, a Storm Mix is strong, in your hands it's weak.

Likewise, a reactive resin ball in your hands may be strong, but in my hands would be weak because either it goes brooklyn, or I have to weaken my release to something like 30% of my ability which is a level that is hard to repeat.

Its like asking which size shoe is best. The answer is different based on the person's foot.

To know what the ball is best for an individual, you need to know how the individual can throw the ball comfortably, and what ball shape that produces with a specific ball.

From there you need to know how differences in the ball specs alter the resulting ball shape.

The key to understanding ball shape is understanding the interaction between the ball, the oil, and the lane.

The best way to understand, is via physics.

[Doghouse Reilly]

Mike, I'm not talking about physics. I'm talking about the cultural bias towards the words "weak" and "strong" that are currently used by bowlers to describe the motions of different bowling balls.

I see what your talking about Rob with how bowlers think when they hear the words strong and weak.

This stuff about physics and such seem to be more about 1VegasBowler posts were he's talking about energy retention which isn't what your talking about. It should be in a seperate thread about ball physics.

Coach T wrote a article on Tamer bowling that made a refference to what your talking about, how Strong, Medium, and Weak can be somewhat misleading. Because people think this means: Most Hook, Medium Hook, Least Hook when it doesn't neccessarily mean that because there's other variables involved in how a ball reacts.

Like a weak ball on the right condition can be really strong, so is the ball really "weak" or just the right ball for the condition and how you want to use it.

It's Like how when some bowlers see a ball described as high performance, medium performance, and entry level they think entry level means low performance or weak.

[RobLV1]

Who is Coach T? I'd like to read the article.

Rob Mautner

[got_a_300]

Rob here is a link to where you can read some stuff from coach T
http://www.tamerbowling.com

[1VegasBowler]

It's Like how when some bowlers see a ball described as high performance, medium performance, and entry level they think entry level means low performance or weak.

In this regard, I know a bowler that has to use entry level balls because of his high speed and high revs.

Cameron Hurtubise on the Lane Side Reviews videos has a ball speed of 18.6 with a rev rate of 570, and he can't use more than an entry level ball because the others are too much for him.

Entry level balls in the Brunswick line aren't bad at all. The Strike King (no loner made) was not only an entry level ball, but a pretty darn good one for any level. Same holds true for their Rhino line.

And even though the Vintage Danger Zone is only a step up from the Rhino, this is a sweet ball at any level as well.

[Amyers]

In this regard, I know a bowler that has to use entry level balls because of his high speed and high revs.

Cameron Hurtubise on the Lane Side Reviews videos has a ball speed of 18.6 with a rev rate of 570, and he can't use more than an entry level ball because the others are too much for him.

Entry level balls in the Brunswick line aren't bad at all. The Strike King (no loner made) was not only an entry level ball, but a pretty darn good one for any level. Same holds true for their Rhino line.

And even though the Vintage Danger Zone is only a step up from the Rhino, this is a sweet ball at any level as well.

The VDZ is no where near an entry level ball. The VDZ is rated as a 220 the Mastermind Einstein is rated at 230. The VDZ could easily be considered as benchmark but not anywhere near entry level. That's what balls like the Soul and Fanatic are for. The VDZ would be at least 2 steps above the Rhino if not three. I guess you could look at it as a step up in a three ball bag but it's a big step.

[1VegasBowler]

The VDZ is no where near an entry level ball. The VDZ is rated as a 220 the Mastermind Einstein is rated at 230. The VDZ could easily be considered as benchmark but not anywhere near entry level. That's what balls like the Soul and Fanatic are for. The VDZ would be at least 2 steps above the Rhino if not three. I guess you could look at it as a step up in a three ball bag but it's a big step.

Just my opinion here, but, I left the Soul out because I think it's not going to be too awful long before they put this one to rest (gut feeling). They are really pushing the Rhino line now. Heck, even my PSO only considers the VDZ as just a step up.

With the Fanatic, they put this one in the same classification as the BTU & Melee line (all purpose), and they certainly aren't getting rid of these anytime soon.

[Amyers]

Just my opinion here, but, I left the Soul out because I think it's not going to be too awful long before they put this one to rest (gut feeling). They are really pushing the Rhino line now. Heck, even my PSO only considers the VDZ as just a step up.

With the Fanatic, they put this one in the same classification as the BTU & Melee line (all purpose), and they certainly aren't getting rid of these anytime soon.

Brunswick currently has 18 balls in their lineup excluding plastic 11 of them have hook potentials less than VDZ so 61% of the line up has a lower hook potential.

Quantum Pearl
Fanatic BTU
Fanatic
MM Braniac
Brute Strength
Soul
Soul Mate
MM Scholar
Rhino Pro
Melee Jab
Lt-48

All of these have a much lower hook potential than the VDZ

Only 4 balls in the line have a significantly higher hook potential (+15 or more) 22% than the VDZ

The three Nirvana's and the MM Strategy. Depending on the arsenal you could call the VDZ a step up from the Rhino but that's only applicable in the three ball arsenal because the gap is huge. If I were playing strictly on THS even in a three ball arsenal I would have something between the VDZ and Rhino over something above the VDZ myself. In a four ball arsenal it's something above the VDZ and something below. In a five ball it's one above two between the rhino and VDZ. Just my opinion but I think it makes sense. People underestimate the VDZ because it was put out in the Vintage line and the previous balls in that line were much less than the VDZ. So it gets treated like it's the same as the LT-48 and it's not it's actually one of the stronger balls Brunswick produces. The cover on the new $179 quantum's is the same and the core numbers are close.

[1VegasBowler]

Brunswick currently has 18 balls in their lineup excluding plastic 11 of them have hook potentials less than VDZ so 61% of the line up has a lower hook potential.

Quantum Pearl
Fanatic BTU
Fanatic
MM Braniac
Brute Strength
Soul
Soul Mate
MM Scholar
Rhino Pro
Melee Jab
Lt-48

All of these have a much lower hook potential than the VDZ

Only 4 balls in the line have a significantly higher hook potential (+15 or more) 22% than the VDZ

The three Nirvana's and the MM Strategy. Depending on the arsenal you could call the VDZ a step up from the Rhino but that's only applicable in the three ball arsenal because the gap is huge. If I were playing strictly on THS even in a three ball arsenal I would have something between the VDZ and Rhino over something above the VDZ myself. In a four ball arsenal it's something above the VDZ and something below. In a five ball it's one above two between the rhino and VDZ. Just my opinion but I think it makes sense. People underestimate the VDZ because it was put out in the Vintage line and the previous balls in that line were much less than the VDZ. So it gets treated like it's the same as the LT-48 and it's not it's actually one of the stronger balls Brunswick produces. The cover on the new $179 quantum's is the same and the core numbers are close.

At least we're civil when we tend to disagree..lol

The VDZ & the Brainiac are pretty much on the same level, but I went with the VDZ because my PSO thought it would be better than the Braniac on shorter Sport oil patterns.

The Nirvanas are the typical medium/heavy oil balls. They have a lot of hook potential, with the Absolute having the biggest hook of all.

The BTU is certainly the slowest response hook of them all, but it was designed for that so that there was a better option from urethane.

I certainly don't doubt you about the hook potential for the VDZ, but I don't have that big hook with it due to the drilling I have. I also think that this is a ball that has a great price on it for a continuous ball.

I haven't seen much with the Quantum series yet, but from what I've seen, I think it's going to be sweet.

My 3 ball arsenal for a THS is the Ultimate, the Vandal and the BTU. Anything other than a THS, the length & volume of the pattern will determine where I go from there.

[Amyers]

At least we're civil when we tend to disagree..lol

The VDZ & the Brainiac are pretty much on the same level, but I went with the VDZ because my PSO thought it would be better than the Braniac on shorter Sport oil patterns.

The Nirvanas are the typical medium/heavy oil balls. They have a lot of hook potential, with the Absolute having the biggest hook of all.

The BTU is certainly the slowest response hook of them all, but it was designed for that so that there was a better option from urethane.

I certainly don't doubt you about the hook potential for the VDZ, but I don't have that big hook with it due to the drilling I have. I also think that this is a ball that has a great price on it for a continuous ball.

I haven't seen much with the Quantum series yet, but from what I've seen, I think it's going to be sweet.

My 3 ball arsenal for a THS is the Ultimate, the Vandal and the BTU. Anything other than a THS, the length & volume of the pattern will determine where I go from there.

Yes it is nice to be able to discuss stuff and disagree without people getting pissy.

I agree my wife has the Braniac and I have a strong length drilling on my VDZ and they are pretty similar. I think that a lot of PSO's really thought the ball to be similar to the LT-48 and put less aggressive drillings on the ball originally I had my MM Einstein at 4k and I've now got it at 500/3000 because the balls were to close together. I really like the looks of the Quantum's too especially the red one but I'm going to wait until the VDZ starts to die off some first. I have to say that ball is really holding up well it's been my first ball out of the bag for quite a while now and it doesn't seem to have lost much performance at all.