PAP Identification Method (& Terminology)

[Mike White]

You've never said what those flaws are.

Thats right, I haven't gotten there yet.

You yourself said you haven't layouted out a ball in 20 years. So your knowledge is 20 years behind the times.

Knowledge of the effect one layout vs another is what I lack.
Knowledge of work my way around the surface of a sphere I don't lack.
I just didn't know the current tools provided angles.
I know the quarter scale only provided a distance measure which when used properly can be converted to angles.

You should learn about how thing are done now and why they are done that way. Before you go trying to change it.

Yeah, it took all of 2 minutes to see how it is done, and notice a flaw in it.

Do we agree on the following statements?
Each bowler (worth making a layout for) has a PAP.
At the point of release the ball with rotate around the PAP.
(technically it's the line from the PAP to NAP)
For a ball to rotate around PAP some torque has to be applied to it.
That torque is applied at the finger holes.

Now lets look at the major problem.
At the point of release, what is the position of the core in relation to where the force is applied.

It makes a big difference if the PIN is facing down, or up at that moment.
But that question can't be accurately answered if you use the current PAP identification method.

BTW the method I showed as an alternative (what I used years ago) has the same potential flaw since it uses the grip center as a reference point. The difference is back then the goal wasn't to position an exotic core. It was to position for static weights.

So I have another PAP identification method that eliminates the flaw. I referred to its main feature in the first message of this thread, so it's not something I just made up on the spot.

[bowl1820]

Okay Mike if you think there's something wrong with the system fine, I'm not going to say your wrong.

Determine what the problems are, Come up with a solution, get some opinions from some experts in the industry (I already suggested one) ,test out your solution, get someone at a pro shop to try it out (or do it in your own pro shop). Then If your solution works out, spread the word.

[Mike White]

If the picture doesn't show up, it's from message #30

I would like to use this dual angle layout in comparing two different people, but I can't see the distance from Pin to PAP.
Can you tell me what it is?


Nevermind I found it was the same as the flat diagram..

45 x 3" x 30.

I'm working on that now, to show the flaws.

[kidlost2000]

Now lets look at the major problem.
At the point of release, what is the position of the core in relation to where the force is applied.

It makes a big difference if the PIN is facing down, or up at that moment.
But that question can't be accurately answered if you use the current PAP identification method.

BTW the method I showed as an alternative (what I used years ago) has the same potential flaw since it uses the grip center as a reference point. The difference is back then the goal wasn't to position an exotic core. It was to position for static weights.

So I have another PAP identification method that eliminates the flaw. I referred to its main feature in the first message of this thread, so it's not something I just made up on the spot.

What do you mean by pin facing down or up at release?
What do you mean by the current pap identification method? No matter how you identify someones pap it will still be there no matter what or how you call it.

I'm guessing your trying to say that where the force is applied to the top of the core/pin is a more relative marker then going off the center grip line? So the pin to center of fingers above the bridge is the factor that isn't equal based off the dual layout method?

[Dogtown]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line. You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release. My question is why does that matter? You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

[billf]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line. You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release. My question is why does that matter? You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

Well that's a hell of a first post! Welcome to the forum! I look forward to reading more clear, concise, no beating around the bush posts from you.

[Mike White]

This is a sample ball using the 45 x 3 x 30 dual angle Over and Up method.
I created that as a reference.


This is how I would Identify the exact same ball using the "Prime" method.

The ROG is the point between the two spans, on the grip center line. It's the same point the USBC uses in determining the location of the grip center.
Since I made up this system, I get to pick the name of the new point of interest. BTW, extra credit for anyone who can figure out what ROG stands for.
This ball had the Pin 30 degrees below the fingers when viewed at the point of release, thumb up, fingers at 3 o'clock when viewed like the face of a clock with the PAP in the center of the face.

The specs for this bowler are 5 11/16 lat, and 91 degrees to the grip center line.

I would refer to this as 45 x 3 x -30, so for this bowler, the conversion factor from the Over and Up to the Prime would be -60 degrees.




This shows the steps of drilling a blank ball using the the specs:
5 11/16 lat, 91 degrees, and a layout of 45 x 3 x -30.

If someone can give me a concrete example of their spans, and PAP using the Over and Up method, I'll show why the Over and Up method is inconsistent from bowler to bowler, while the Prime method produces the same results bowler to bowler.

[Mike White]

Mr. White,

If I understand everything I've read so far, it sounds like you disagree with locating the PAP in relationship to the center grip line.

I wouldn't say it's the center grip line that is the problem, it's more the Over and Up method which is based on the grip center (not the same as center grip line).

Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in a slightly different location based on the difference in the spans.
My system ignores the span because when the torque is applied to the ball, the thumb is already out.

You have proposed in your original post to use a "Prime Meridian" line drawn from the center of the fingers to the PAP.

In your last post, you mention looking at where the force is applied in relationship to the position of the core at release.
My question is why does that matter?

The starting position of the core makes a difference in how it rolls. Do you remember the "old" days where you had finger weight or thumb weight.
That is the analogy the last factor in a dual angle layout. Think of it as Dynamic thumb/finger weight.

You assume the force is applied at the fingers but this is where I see a flaw. There is no accurate way to determine this. While there is force applied by the fingers, it is not equal in both fingers. If someone throws the ball with a Sarge Easter grip (Google that if you don't know) that really changes where the forces are applied. Where does Jason Belmonte (or any other two-handed bowler) apply force to the ball? The fingers and somewhere else with the left hand.

Well I've yet to see the force applied to the ball at the elbow. I agree the point I selected is not perfect in the extreme cases such as a Sarge Easter, and I considered using the longest span as the reference point, but that could be wrong for other extreme reasons. So yes, we won't know exactly the balance between the forces, but isn't it better to make a good estimate for 99% of the people than just ignoring the concept.

I have drilled bowling balls for over 15 years. The fact is that dual angle method does a great job at matching a desired ball reaction to a bowler’s style. Does it account for everything? No. That is where the experience of the proshops come in. You have to understand the dynamics of the balls, the style of the bower and then use a drill pattern that compliments both to get the desired reaction.

To sum it up, it IS a proven method that has been widely accepted in our industry.

There is a lot of crap that has been widely accepted in the bowling industry.
The ABC and BPAA had a pissing match over lane conditions. Clearly the BPAA won and turned the game into somewhat of a joke.

Why do bowlers commonly expect to use 2 or 3 balls each night as the conditions change? Who benefits from that situation?
Someone has to manufacture all those extra balls, and pro shops needs to sell them, and drill them.

It was common for me to use the same ball not only all night, but all season. And score quite well with it.

15 years sounds like a long time, but trust me, it's just a blink.
Much like Stock Brokers in the 80's-90's, almost every recommendation they made to clients turned out to be a winner.
What they didn't notice was just how hard it was to actually pick a loser. They were living during the biggest stock market boom.
When it turned south, they had no experience dealing with that.

So 15 years of making bowlers scores go up doesn't mean much when EVERYONE's scores are going up.
If the USBC ever gets it's head out of it's *** and requires all sanctioned leagues to oil like sport leagues, the boom will become a bust.
That's when pro shop operators will have to earn their money.

"I was shredding the rack last season, now I'm leaving the bucket on pocket hits."

[bowl1820]

Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in a slightly different location based on the difference in the spans.

Okay just to be sure this is the flaw your talking about.
Here's two bowlers, same layout, same pap location, only the spans are different.


Why shouldn't we look at this way:
Take two bowlers who are identical in every way except in spans. The Over and Up method puts the Pin in the same location regardless of the difference in the spans.

Why does the pap have to be directly across from the fingers?

[Dogtown]

Okay. Now, I think I understand you a little better.

Let's take your example of two bowlers with the same PAP, ball speed & Rev rate BUT the spans are different. One guy has a 3.5" span, the other has 5" span. We drill the same ball for both bowlers using the dual angle method (pick whatever angles and pin distance you want). The end results: The balls WILL roll virtually identical. Why? Because the balls are laid out identical in relationship to the PAP. The pin distance tells you how the core is positioned at release. The fact that the pin maybe further away from the fingers of the shorter span and closer to the fingers of the longer span is irreverent. (Yes the static weights could vary slightly between the two, especially if the core of the ball is close to any of the holes) The ball DOES NOT care where the force is applied. Think of this. USBC and Brunswick both have a million dollar machines they can emulate ANY style of ANY bowler, yet it has no fingers to put in the holes and uses two robotic hands). So I could throw one of my balls, and one of these robots could emulate me and throw my same ball. If you watched a video of the ball just after release, you couldn't tell where the force is being applied. If you assumed it was at my finger holes, you would be wrong for the robot. But the reactions would be identical. Where the force comes from doesn't matter. After the point of release all the laws of physics are identical.

Pin location and the bowlers PAP tell you everything you need to know. AMF used to have a video of one of their balls that showed a transparent view of the ball to see how the core worked. If the pin was placed on the bowlers PAP, the core was basically in a balanced position at release. The ball had virtually no flare and hooked very evenly. If the pin was place 3 3/8" from the PAP, the core was at its most unbalanced position. The results; the ball had maximum flare, maximum revs in the midlane and hook.

Your idea of where force is applied in relationship to the core or pin location serves no point. Dual Angle Method wins!!

ROG = Radius of Gyration???