Pin up, or down, does it really make a differance?

[channelsurfer]

And here are some guys on tour and their rev rates.....


Jason Belmonte 580

E.J. Tackett
514

A.J. Johnson
514

Tommy Jones
480

Chris Barnes
424

Steve Smith
424

Mike Fagan
424

Kyle King
424

Bill O'Neill
424

Sean Rash
424



You may possibly be 400 or so but NO where near 600.

[RobLV1]

Assuming the comments about temp and humidity come from the Ball Motion Study, on page 13.

The graph indicates side weight is a larger factor than temp, and humidity.

How does he get it, if he can't even read it?

Once again, Mike, you are tripping over the trees and not seeing the forest. For those readers who are trying to actually learn something here rather than simply watching you flex your muscles, here are the details from the USBC Ball Motion Study:

Overall, there are eighteen variables listed that affect ball motion. Six of these variables earned 300 or more weighted points based on P-Value. The more points, the more the variable affects increasing the performance of a bowling ball. The six highest weighted variables are: SR-Ra (840), On-Lane COF (580), SR-RS (515), Dry Lane COF (405), Oil Absorption (360), and RG (320). There are three variables rated between 200 and 300 weighted points: Total Differential (280), Spin Time (275), and Diameter (275). Finally, there are six factors that earned less than 200 weighted points: Side Weight (195), Int. Differential (160), Oil @ 32' (155) Room Humidity (125), Oil @ 8' (115), Top Weight (105), Room Temperature (100), Thumb Weight (90), and Lane Temperature (60).

So, yes, Mike Side Weight is more important than Room Humidity and Room Temperature, however Top Weight is less important than Room Humidity, and Thumb Weight is less important than everything except the actual temperature of the lane. If, however, you look at those top six variables based on weighted points, they account for over 60% of ball reaction. If you add in the next three variables, the total of the nine account for over 77% of ball reaction. If you take the total of the three static weights (Side Weight, Top Weight, and Thumb Weight), they account for less than 8% of ball reaction.

My point in all of this is to try to educate bowlers as to the non-importance of static weights in relation to the things that count, ie., the surface material and finish, and the core characteristics. Is it really worth it to you to muddy up the waters for all of those bowlers who want to learn, just to be right?

[Mike White]

And here are some guys on tour and their rev rates.....


Jason Belmonte 580

E.J. Tackett
514

A.J. Johnson
514

Tommy Jones
480

Chris Barnes
424

Steve Smith
424

Mike Fagan
424

Kyle King
424

Bill O'Neill
424

Sean Rash
424



You may possibly be 400 or so but NO where near 600.

This is what you call proof?

You think maybe the people listed have limited their rev rate to match the ball speed they can achieve to maximize the effectiveness of the equipment they use.

I learned to throw high revs before reactive resin, and since I didn't bowl between 1992 and 2012, I haven't adapted to the needs of a resin ball yet. Which is why I throw urethane.

[Mike White]

Since you used a Marvel S that is a symmetrical ball no you would not see a significant difference unless the placement of a balance hole created it........in a asymmetrical you would see a huge difference.

Just to warn you I am not afraid of your "mine field"...... not your normal poster here.

You stated earlier that the Dual Angle Sum would change the reaction, and now you say it won't, except for a select class of ball. (asymmetrical)

Thats valid,

I'm saying if you do away with static weight limits, static weights can have a significant effect on ball reaction on all classes of ball.

[Mike White]

Once again, Mike, you are tripping over the trees and not seeing the forest. For those readers who are trying to actually learn something here rather than simply watching you flex your muscles, here are the details from the USBC Ball Motion Study:

So, yes, Mike Side Weight is more important than Room Humidity and Room Temperature,

My point in all of this is to try to educate bowlers as to the non-importance of static weights in relation to the things that count, ie., the surface material and finish, and the core characteristics. Is it really worth it to you to muddy up the waters for all of those bowlers who want to learn, just to be right?

When you post invalid information, that is where the mud comes from.

Static weights don't "count" because they have limits on them.

Bowling balls now react so much more, because the USBC has abdicated it's role as protector of the sports integrity.

You want the USBC to remove static limits as well, but you've seen what can happen when those limits are removed.



Put that weight on the other side of the ball, and it's a hook monster even if Aslan throws it.

[channelsurfer]

LOL!!!! Your post get more ridiculous every time.....please keep going this is getting really good

I learned to "throw revs" as you would say way before resin also......I don't have to throw urethane today.....why is that?

Proof..... it's obvious that your rev rate is not even close to the bowlers on that list. NO POSSIBLE WAY you are even close to 500rpm's much less 600!! You may get that if you are measuring at the pins because even Walter Ray has that much rev rate at the pins. Please do a high quality video and post it to prove me wrong. You may fool the majority of people here but I know better. My rev rate is around 400 and you don't have as much rev rate as I do. They do vary speed and rev rate to match conditions (not equipment). Have you seen anyone with a 500+ rev rate in person like EJ or Robert Smith since you are in CA?

[channelsurfer]

And yes dual angle sums will even have an effect on syms. Changing drill angles will force you to either use balance holes or have the option to not use them so yes sums matter. VAL angle is the bigger factor with syms which will change the shape of the ball down lane (which in your example VAL angles were the same). The PSA is around the thumb on a sym unless you use a balance hole then it can be slightly manipulated.

[channelsurfer]

Here is one of those old videos......notice there was no change in ball motion from 2-1/8 positive side weight to 5/8 negative side weight.......because statics do not change ball reaction enough for you to see it or it to make any difference.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8vX_yoM0Q4

[bowl1820]

For those interested, the video of the ball fading to the right is from the USBC Static Weight study.
Which you can read here and make your own mind up about just what it says:

http://usbcongress.http.internapcdn....ightsStudy.pdf

[fortheloveofbowling]

Here is one of those old videos......notice there was no change in ball motion from 2-1/8 positive side weight to 5/8 negative side weight.......because statics do not change ball reaction enough for you to see it or it to make any difference.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8vX_yoM0Q4

What mike has been talking about is older pancake weight blocks. When the pin and cg were basically in the same spot. Back then and i'm sure mike remembers drilling balls with axis leverage layouts. We would shift the label over to your postive axis point and drill a big hole right through it to get it back to legal and that was a big help with those balls. Static weights on older balls with no weight block to speak of does matter. The usbc study on cg shift on symmetrical balls and the little difference it creates is not in dispute. The cg location as we know doesn't really matter on asymmetrical balls either, it is the mass bias that is the focal point on those balls in addition to the pin location on both types.