Breakpoint shapes

[RobLV1]

Benchmark has nothing to do with shape, other than most benchmark balls are fairly neutral in terms of shape. Benchmark balls are simply the balls that are in the middle of a bowlers arsenal, with different shapes and lengths above and below it. Most bowlers start with a benchmark ball and change balls from there depending on what they see on the lanes that particular day. The reason that the specifications of bowling balls are so "fuzzy" in terms of shape is that the majority of shape characteristics are a result of cover material about which no specifications are given. Coverstocks are measured in terms of coefficient of friction on dry, coefficient of friction in oil, oil absorption, and surface roughness. The only thing that we as consumers are told is the surface roughness. All we are left with is marketing lingo which is meant to sell, not inform. What the hell is "melty cheese?"

[boatman37]

In my previous bowling life I had a Brunswick Cobalt Rhino that had a smooth continuous hook. I had always thought it was just the way I bowl since I don't do any big wrist action, etc. My 2nd week in I used a fellow bowlers Storm Sync and was shocked to see the big sweeping backend. Never thought I would ever do that...lol. You have to keep in mind when I left bowling the internet was just starting to get popular so we didn't have Google or forums like this to learn from so I had assumed it was me and not the ball.

[J Anderson]

I understand ball motion, it's simply physics and geometry. Seeing hundreds of bowlers a week and paying attention you definitely can see the differences in the shape. Watching from behind the masking units by the pinsetters really gives you a different perspective as well. Being that close you can clearly see the transition a ball makes and it's amazing to watch.

My only point of the post besides just being obnoxious was simply to point out the stupid ways they describe the shape of the breakpoint. I think I've proven that it's not an actual specification as it's portrayed to be. It's just buzzy sounding words with little to no factual content unlike how Ron Hickland so elegantly describes. Therefore should be ignored when researching specifications for a ball. I still don't know what "benchmark" is supposed to mean for a breakpoint shape, that really gives me absolutely nothing to go on.

Usually bowlers refer to a benchmark ball. Since benchmark is defined as a standard to which other things are compared, your benchmark ball could be any one in your bag. In practice, most bowlers would call the ball that best matches the usual lane condition they bowl on their benchmark ball. It generally is also a bowlers favorite ball. I have never heard a bowler talk about a benchmark breakpoint shape, nor do I recall reading anything about a benchmark breakpoint shape. The shape of the path your ball takes to the pocket is going to be determined my your delivery, the characteristics of the ball you are using, lane topography, and oil pattern. The lane conditions, ( topography & pattern ), not only influence the shape, but dictate which shape is going to be the most effective for good pin carry.

[Phonetek]

So benchmark implies completely middle of the road, a zero + or -, the bar standard. So by them saying "benchmark" I could assume a ball like this would fall likely fall under "medium" for lane conditions and likely medium around 2.6" flare potential and about 2.6 RG, and .021 Diff, which I think would be approximate medium benchmark specifications?

All we are left with is marketing lingo which is meant to sell, not inform. What the hell is "melty cheese?"

LMAO, EXACTLY what I'm saying. It's pointless lingo to sell. So Breakpoint Shape is nothing more than Melty Cheese. It's NOT a specification because they could say banana which last I checked isn't a specification. Thanks, now I want nachos!

I have never heard a bowler talk about a benchmark breakpoint shape, nor do I recall reading anything about a benchmark breakpoint shape.

You never heard a bowler talk about it because they didn't want to look like a loony idiot. LMAO To see what I'm talking about J, just go to Bowlingball.com and click on just about any ball and you'll see it there. Here, after I clicked on the first ball this one says "Controllable" LOL Okie dokey. Who the hell would want one that was Uncontrollable? "Whoa! Look at my ball! IT'S OUTTA CONTROL, EVERYBODY RUN!" I wonder if Ferrari puts that in their list of "specs" for the next billion horsepower car? https://www.bowlingball.com/products...-new-item.html

[RobLV1]

So benchmark implies completely middle of the road, a zero + or -, the bar standard. So by them saying "benchmark" I could assume a ball like this would fall likely fall under "medium" for lane conditions and likely medium around 2.6" flare potential and about 2.6 RG, and .021 Diff, which I think would be approximate medium benchmark specifications?

A few years ago I wrote an article for BTM entitled "The Spaces Between." In the article, I suggested that each bowlers individual style should determine where his individual arsenal should fall in terms of the span of balls from the earliest rolling to the latest breaking. In my own case, when I was still able to use reactive resin balls, I decided to never purchase a ball with an RG below 2.50 for the simple reason that for me, as a rev dominant bowler without much ball speed, anything lower would just lose energy. My own range, therefore, consisted of balls with a low RG of 2.50 to one with an RG of 2.60 or higher. Because of that, my benchmark ball tended to be in the RG range of 2.54-2.55.

A speed dominant bowler might determine a range of 2.47 - 2.55 with a benchmark ball in the 2.50 - 2.52 range.

With your obvious interest in the sport, you might want to consider a subscription to Bowling This Month... there's a wealth of information there, and while there is a minimal subscription cost (about $40 per year I think), you get access not only to current articles, but to archived items as well.

[Phonetek]

A few years ago I wrote an article for BTM entitled "The Spaces Between." In the article, I suggested that each bowlers individual style should determine where his individual arsenal should fall in terms of the span of balls from the earliest rolling to the latest breaking. In my own case, when I was still able to use reactive resin balls, I decided to never purchase a ball with an RG below 2.50 for the simple reason that for me, as a rev dominant bowler without much ball speed, anything lower would just lose energy. My own range, therefore, consisted of balls with a low RG of 2.50 to one with an RG of 2.60 or higher. Because of that, my benchmark ball tended to be in the RG range of 2.54-2.55.

A speed dominant bowler might determine a range of 2.47 - 2.55 with a benchmark ball in the 2.50 - 2.52 range.

With your obvious interest in the sport, you might want to consider a subscription to Bowling This Month... there's a wealth of information there, and while there is a minimal subscription cost (about $40 per year I think), you get access not only to current articles, but to archived items as well.

Yes getting the subscription is on my to-do list definitely. I'd love to read some of your articles Rob. I think I read a post a while back that said you no longer write for them? I do read the ones they email to me. We also get a lot of literature at work. There is also a local publication we get that we have on a rack anyone can grab free. I'm not really up to date with what the pro's are up to and such. I do like to do my research on things hence why I joined here to begin with. I thought I knew a ton about bowling until I joined and found out how untrue that was. I think I've learned more here than I ever did from my instructor.

It's kinda cool working at a bowling center too. I learn a lot from people watching, talking to veteran bowlers and of course learning the workings behind the scenes. I've learned more in the past 5 months about bowling that I would have in a lifetime had I not got the job and joined this forum. I'm grateful for the likes of you Rob, the other members and of course Bowl1820 who tolerates me putting up ridiculous posts like this original topic. Between me getting my job and wifey working we are finally getting our heads above water. For the first time we are just recently getting those little niceties that would couldn't afford to get before. BTM subscription will be one of them. Before it was just about food, shelter and keeping the lights on which at times we unfortunately lacked some or all of those. Thanks again Rob

[boatman37]

So a little off topic but not really...lol. I notice a few guys in our league (noticed 2 that are both 220+ average bowlers) in practice on their first ball they just roll it down the lane. No real effort put into it, not really any hook, anything. Why would that be?

[bowl1820]

So a little off topic but not really...lol. I notice a few guys in our league (noticed 2 that are both 220+ average bowlers) in practice on their first ball they just roll it down the lane. No real effort put into it, not really any hook, anything. Why would that be?

Without a bit more info, just one shot their first it could be anything. From maybe seeing how long the oil is or just checking their slide, they might just be stiff it could be anything

[J Anderson]

So a little off topic but not really...lol. I notice a few guys in our league (noticed 2 that are both 220+ average bowlers) in practice on their first ball they just roll it down the lane. No real effort put into it, not really any hook, anything. Why would that be?

We often tell the youth bowlers to make their first few warm-up throws at half speed. I think most of them pay no attention, or if they do the speed drops from 17 or 18 mph to 16.5 mph.

My first two warm up throws are almost always at the 10 pin or the 7, depending on which hand I’m using. I’ve noticed this season that it takes about four throws to get up to speed.

[RobLV1]

So a little off topic but not really...lol. I notice a few guys in our league (noticed 2 that are both 220+ average bowlers) in practice on their first ball they just roll it down the lane. No real effort put into it, not really any hook, anything. Why would that be?

I'd guess that they are just trying to warm up a little without getting any false preconceptions based on their ball reactions.