To expand on this further....because I've been thinking about it some more...
Let me preface this by saying, (because not everyone knows the past history)
1. I've gotten 1 on 1 instruction from Rob in the past.
2. I greatly respect his opinion on many bowling-related and non-bowling related matters.
3. I regularly use his advice and teachings in my current game.
4. I would say we certainly agree on more than we disagree.
However...concerning my quoted difference...it 'seems' to me...and I MAY BE WRONG...that Rob is trying to put all bowlers...or almost all bowlers...into a box that really should be reserved for older bowlers and bowlers that are speed-challenged. Let me explain...because thats not 'a shot'...far from it.
See, I met Rob before his more recent health failings. Gods be good, he recovered to the point that he can still bowl and at a relatively high level...although he would be the first to admit not at the level he could before his ailments. However, his ailments gave him a blessing in disguise (in my eyes)...a way to see bowling with a unique perspective and the opportunity to help other bowlers who face similar challenges. And there are MANY bowlers that are being afflicted with ailments or just old age...and are losing the speed they once had...and becoming "rev dominant'...not because they are developing a 425 RPM release....but because they can no longer throw 17-19mph.
This change in Rob's approach allowed him to look at his approach to the lanes differently and look at his arsenal differently. He MUST use higher RG equipment. He MUST utilize the oil and stay away from the dry. His adaptions have allowed him to regain a level of bowling that many bowlers lose forever when they suffer injuries (or even just get older)...and he's the perfect resource for those type of bowlers on how to adapt their game to restore their game to close to what it was before.
I wish every week that my teammate would seek out Rob and take Rob's advice. My teammate used to be a 200+ average bowler but suffered a hip injury and now he can't throw heavier equipment and can't hit the speeds he used to. He's always been a cranker style...but now he's down in the 10-12mph range. He usually spends the whole evening in misery as he goes from a strong ball that hooks too much to a plastic ball that hits the pocket and deflects. I've tried to help him understand the need for a higher RG and his only response was, "what is RG?" I've given him advice, I've given him Rob's advice via proxy...but he's that typical bowler that doesn't take advice. He's been bowling too long and too well to listen.
Like Mark Baker told me once. There's 3 types of bowlers and only one type is generally going to seek out coaching.
1. Those who are terrible bowlers, but too terrible to care.
2. Bowlers that are very good and therefore think they know too much to get anything out of coaching.
3. Those bowlers in that 160-180 range that are just good enough to want to get better but not so good that they are beyond listening. It's #3 that are generally the ones that seek out coaching.
So, back to my original premise/issue/question...all bowlers in a box.
See, speed dominant bowlers...are going to struggle if you try to move them inside. It's just a fact. It's pure physics. It can't be altered by opinion. 240 RPMs at 15.5-17.5 mph is not enough to make a ball turn when that ball spends the majority of the travel distance in the oil. There are little things you can do to help make that happen...lower RG equipment...sanded equipment, etc... But then what's the difference between higher RG/polished equipment in the dry versus sanded/lower RG equipment in the oil? It's the same physical dynamic at play...just in different ways. It's preference at that point.
So why would one "prefer" the track with polished equipment over dull equipment in the oil?
Well, 3 reasons. See, there is a method to my madness and none of these reasons are "to annoy Rob".
1. As Parker Bohn once told me, when I asked him what the biggest difference was between the national tour and PBA50 tour was...it's speed. The longer you can hang onto speed...the better. To give up speed...just for the sake of playing inside...is like hitting yourself in the knee with a hammer so you can play with knee problems when you previously didn't have knee problems. Never give up speed until God makes you.
2. Rob and I generally agree....generally...that you want to move left...not right. Well, the further right you START...the more options you have as the evening progresses. The further LEFT you start...the LESS options you have as the evening progresses. Ideally I'd love to start out on 10 and never move left of 11 and throw a 900 series. But, odds are I'm gonna have to move left as the night progresses...and some nights have moved as far left as 19. Last night I finished standing at 29-30 and throwing at 15-16 at the arrows. Not exactly me "playing the track"!
3. Most of the people around me, throwing 300-games...are throwing up the track. If Rob's theories were 100% bulletproof...nobody throwing right of 12 would ever accomplish such a feat. Their bowling balls wouldn't have the carry. So, there "must" be a way to retain energy in the dry.
The important things aren't what Rob and I differ on...but what we agree on. And the important thing for both Boatman and myself...is to try and figure out...how to fix the current dilemma we are facing. I don't think the solution is lowering our ball speed to 12mph, increasing our rev rate 100 rpms, moving inside center arrow, and throwing 2.56-2.58 RG equipment. But, I'll be brutally honest...I'm starting the year with a 37% strike rate...and I'd feel a LOT better about giving advice if that number was in the 43-50% range
I WILL say...if I can't figure things out and finally am forced to move inside and take Rob's advice...it will be more than just a move inside. It will be an adoption of the 2-handed style. If I can't bowl the way I was taught all my life and am forced to play some 'new game' of throwing a ball in a pool of oil to an 8-board breakpoint...then I might as well go all the way and abandon 'bowling' completely and take up whatever "2-handed bowling" is.
Bookmarks