Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: The Equipment Specifications Committee has ruled to suspend the three-unit rule.

  1. #1
    Super Moderator
    bowl1820's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Central, Florida
    Posts
    6,440
    Blog Entries
    12
    Chats: 554

    Default The Equipment Specifications Committee has ruled to suspend the three-unit rule.

    Short version is the USBC finally listened to everyone, studies the situation etc. and figured out the current lane dressing rules no longer work with todays ball technology. So they are suspending the 3 unit minimum rule and sitting back and watch what happens, then figure out what to do from there.


    Excerpt:
    SUMMARY
    The research has shown the current lane dressing rules by USBC no longer are applicable because of advancements in technology.

    The research and testing by the Equipment Specifications and Certifications team is an ongoing commitment to its educational effort and dedication to the idea that USBC needs to continually explore all facets in bowling while thinking about the future of the sport and the integrity of the competitions conducted in the sport.

    In addition to the research and data gathered,USBC believes the engagement of all stakeholders in these topics is extremely important to build a brighter future for the sport and a better USBC of which everyone can be proud.

    I like this part here, It basically states what most of us already knew
    The modern bowling balls drastically alter any oil pattern applied to a lane surface,to the extent that by the end of a league session the pattern is totally different than the starting pattern. Most patterns likely do not comply with the current three-unit rule,required at the time oil is applied, by the end of a league session.The existing enforcement policy of one inspection per year does little to ensure continuous compliance.

    The ability to govern and uphold policies, the very reason for USBC’s existence, must be for meaningful cause with the ability for its governing body to enforce. The three-unit rule in the current environment no longer makes sense,and therefore,suspension or elimination of the rule is required


    You can read the report here:
    http://usbcongress.http.internapcdn....ternReport.pdf
    Last edited by bowl1820; 06-23-2019 at 04:43 PM.

    Right handed Stroker, high track ,about 13 degree axis tilt. PAP is located 5 9/16” over 1 3/4” up.Speed ave. about 14 mph at the pins. Medium rev’s.High Game 300, High series 798

    "Adjust too soon and maybe ruin one frame, adjust too late and ruin a game."

  2. #2

    Default

    Free for all!!!

  3. #3

    Default

    Rob, Maybe i'm wrong here but given the pace of ball tech since this rule was implemented back in the early 90s, hasn't this rule been pretty much obsolete for a long time? Do you think there will actually be a noticeable change in how houses oil?
    Last edited by mc_runner; 06-24-2019 at 01:04 PM.

  4. #4
    Bowler taxexpert2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Cleveland Ohio East Area
    Posts
    127
    Chats: 0

    Default

    I would think if they could get away with it there might be some houses that choose to do away with the oil altogether. That would be an interesting scenario.

  5. #5
    Super Moderator
    bowl1820's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Central, Florida
    Posts
    6,440
    Blog Entries
    12
    Chats: 554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taxexpert2 View Post
    I would think if they could get away with it there might be some houses that choose to do away with the oil altogether. That would be an interesting scenario.
    I doubt that would happen or else we would have seen it happen before now. Houses weren't required to oil the lanes in the first place, just that if they did oil they had to have a minimum of 3 units.

    Lanes are a capital investment for the house and oiling them protects that investment. The house would be shooting themselves in the foot by not oil at all.

    IMO the suspension of the 3 unit rule will change pretty much little to nothing.

    Rob has said many times that modern balls don't react to less than I think it was 6-7 units of oil. Given if that is accurate and some place on the lane only had 3 units (or a little more) of oil to begin with, the balls never reacted to it in the first place. So if a house drops it 0 units in those areas it won't make any difference.

    If the balls did react to 3 units in any way, going to 0 units would just be minuscule change in their reaction.

    As for oil on the rest of the lane, the houses aren't going to jump up and say "Yeah we can reduce how much oil we are putting out now." in those areas because if they wanted to do that, they could have already did it.

    The 3 unit rule was just a minimum they had to put out if they used oil in the first place. So they could have dropped the oil down to the minimum long before now.

    The main thing this rule change will do is give everybody something else to blame for them bowling bad or the other player bowling good. Even if it had absolutely nothing to do with it.

    Right handed Stroker, high track ,about 13 degree axis tilt. PAP is located 5 9/16” over 1 3/4” up.Speed ave. about 14 mph at the pins. Medium rev’s.High Game 300, High series 798

    "Adjust too soon and maybe ruin one frame, adjust too late and ruin a game."

  6. #6

    Default

    No, I don't think that we will see any significant change in how bowling centers oil. I do, however, think that the USBC's admission that 3 units of oil is of no consequence to modern reactive resin balls should put an end to the on-going discussions about carry-down still being a factor in bowling. I have had tapes taken past the pattern on a THS, and there were no "streaks" of carrydown that were over 2 units of oil. If reactive balls don't "see" three units of oil, they will certainly not react to two units of carrydown. Like I said, "It should put an end to the discussion." Unfortunately, I can almost hear it already, "Oh, no, I've always believed in carrydown, it can't be, it can't be..."

  7. #7
    Super Moderator
    bowl1820's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Central, Florida
    Posts
    6,440
    Blog Entries
    12
    Chats: 554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RobLV1 View Post
    I do, however, think that the USBC's admission that 3 units of oil is of no consequence to modern reactive resin balls
    The Usbc report didn't say 3 units of oil was of no consequence to modern reactive balls or that it was.

    The report just said that with todays modern lane equipment technology the 3 unit rule was no longer relevent and that modern balls drastically change the conditions.

    As for the debate about carrydown, Yes until there is reliable definitive testing of how modern balls react to varying amounts of oil, how much transfer of oil (carrydown) happens during different bowling situation and equipment and oils used the debate will go on.
    Last edited by bowl1820; 06-26-2019 at 11:18 AM.

    Right handed Stroker, high track ,about 13 degree axis tilt. PAP is located 5 9/16” over 1 3/4” up.Speed ave. about 14 mph at the pins. Medium rev’s.High Game 300, High series 798

    "Adjust too soon and maybe ruin one frame, adjust too late and ruin a game."

  8. #8
    Bowling God Aslan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    6,336
    Chats: 204

    Default

    Meanwhile...I think the most important part of that statement is the acknowledgement that inspecting a center once a year is pointless.

    And honestly...what happens if the USBC inspects a facility and they violate a rule? Massive penalties and decertification!!?? Yeah right...more like, "okay, let's go test a second lane...and if that doesn't pass...have them re-oil a lane until we get a passing reading."

    If bowling is going to really be taken seriously, there has to be some standardization of USBC certified patterns. As I've griped about recently in my scoring post...it's just pathetic that in Fall league I average 178 at one center...then I average 201 at another center...then I average 135 on a challenge pattern.

    We've tried to coax kids into bowling with changing to a 2-handed style...we've tried to keep bowlers bowling by giving them balls that hook on their own...we've catered patterns to increase scoring...then these bowlers and kids go to a tournament on a sport pattern and they all pretty much swear off ever bowling on a non-THS pattern ever again because its so emabarrassing. We all know guys that are 200+ bowlers in league that go to the USBC Open and average 147 and swear off ever bowling outside their league again.

    No other sport can influence the results the way bowling can. Basketball can't have some games with lowered rims. Football stadiums can't have shorter fields. Hockey can't make bigger nets. Baseball is able to "sort of" change their stadiums to be more pitcher friendly or hitter friendly...but nearly the way a bowling center can boost averages with oil patterns.

    And, while some used to argue...and some (like Iceman) think I'm full of it...pointing out that I haven't managed to throw multiple 800s yet...so bowling can't be THAT easy...but every single other metric (than my game) OVERWHELMINGLY points to the problem. 3x-10x the perfect games...far more 900 series in recent decades. A 175 average used to qualify you for the PBA...now I've seen bowlers after 1-3 years bowling average over 175.

    What can the USBC do?? I don't know. Every answer I have is almost impossible for the USBC to implement. It's just gone too far downhill at this point.
    In Bag: (: .) Brunswick Aura Mystic; (: .) DV8 Grudge Hybrid; (: .) Brunswick Fortera Exile; (: .) Brunswick Vintage Gold Rhino Pro; (: .) Ebonite Maxim
    USBC#: 8259-59071; USBC Sanctioned Average = 176; Lifetime Average = 169;
    Ball Speed: 15.7mph; Rev. Rate: 240rpm || High Game (sanc.) = 300 (268); High Series (sanc.) = 725 (689); Clean Games: 143

    Smokey this is not 'Nam', this is bowling. There are rules. Proud two-time winner of a bowlingboards.com weekly ball give-away!

  9. #9

    Default

    Golf is the sport that you can compare to bowling in regards to influencing the scoring pace. In many ways bowling and golf can be compared.

  10. #10
    Bowling God Aslan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    6,336
    Chats: 204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fortheloveofbowling View Post
    Golf is the sport that you can compare to bowling in regards to influencing the scoring pace. In many ways bowling and golf can be compared.
    So...a standard house would be a municipal golf course...an easier house would be a 3-par golf course...and a sport pattern would be a TPC golf course??
    In Bag: (: .) Brunswick Aura Mystic; (: .) DV8 Grudge Hybrid; (: .) Brunswick Fortera Exile; (: .) Brunswick Vintage Gold Rhino Pro; (: .) Ebonite Maxim
    USBC#: 8259-59071; USBC Sanctioned Average = 176; Lifetime Average = 169;
    Ball Speed: 15.7mph; Rev. Rate: 240rpm || High Game (sanc.) = 300 (268); High Series (sanc.) = 725 (689); Clean Games: 143

    Smokey this is not 'Nam', this is bowling. There are rules. Proud two-time winner of a bowlingboards.com weekly ball give-away!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •