bowling-forum.net
The bowlers choice for bowling chat.

Main
Date: 14 May 2005 08:43:33
From: Jimmy DeGazz
Subject: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
I just got this from Rot Grip. Thought I'd pass it along
May 13, 2005
ROTO GRIP SPEAKS OUT ABOUT THE USBC PROPOSED CHANGES
by Roger Noordhoek
Due to the large amount of comments and questions from consumers, and pro
shop operators, we decided it was necessary to speak out about the USBC
proposed changes. I spoke with Hank Boomershine, President, last night
before he left for Storm/Roto Grip Fair in Japan. Here are his thought and
concerns on the proposed changes:

First of all the proposed changes seem to be a thumb in the dyke of inflated
averages and Honor scores. The manufacturers and bowlers should not be
punished or prejudiced against by the USBC. We have been abiding by the
rules and developing equipment based on the specifications given. We have
already been subject to recent rule changes in the past year and we have
abided by all of them. We feel that the new proposed changes have pushed
past the line of fairness to both the bowlers and the manufacturers. We have
polled several of our staff members and Star Pro Shops across the country to
see how they feel. We are still getting feedback everyday, and we have
decided to post some feedback based on their responses as well as our
feelings on the matter. Let me say that no matter what is decided by the
USBC we will abide by the rules.

1. Elimination of Weight Holes: Eliminating weight holes and the use of
bowling balls with weight holes will cost the consumers thousands of
dollars. It may cost a large percentage of our current league bowlers
because the cost of replacing the equipment they have with weight holes may
be too big of a burden to bear. As a manufacturer we do not want to gain
sales of equipment because of a rule change. We would rather see them buy
the equipment based on performance, and to replace them as needed.

Weight holes can be used to adjust the ball's performance after it has been
drilled. These changes although minor are very valuable to the player and
with the elimination of these weight holes, you take the adjustment out of
play. It would be like eliminating the use of lead tape to the back of a
golf club or the newly designed drivers with the adjustable weights on the
back of the head by the USGA. These weight holes help to level the playing
field for some players of a lesser ability. They don't make a great player
even better, but they help a player of less ability to compete with some of
these players. Much the same as the adjustable golf clubs used on the market
today. So the elimination of weight holes will not help to better the sport,
but only drive the player's with less ability away.

2. CG With-in 1 Inch of the Center of Grip Once again this rule seems to
handicap the players who can adjust the distance of the CG away from the
center of grip to enhance ball reaction. It also handcuffs the pro shops
options to drill the ball. We as manufacturers try to keep pin distances
from the CG within a certain range. This will force us to manufacture balls
with greater variance. This will require a complete change in research and
development of our products and also in the manufacturing. It in turn will
force the pro shop and also the distributor to carry a wider variety of pin
distances and top weight. This may carry too large a burden of cost on both
parties; therefore, forcing some out of business because of the large amount
of capitol required to inventory that much product and not be certain of the
sale and the ability to use a ball with a certain pin distance and adjust it
with the movement of the CG and the placement of a weight hole.

3. The Placement of the USBC Logo on every ball To place the USBC logo on
every ball would cost the manufacturers a large amount of money and time. It
would require an extra step in the engraving process of the ball and
therefore slowing down the production of the bowling ball and increasing the
cost of labor which in turn would increase the price of the ball to the
consumer. This seems to be another rule that will hurt the consumer/player
which in turn may cause him to quit the sport.

All in all these rule changes if in fact they do go into effect will only
cost the USBC more loss of membership of an already declining organization.

Hank Boomershine
President
Roto Grip, Inc.






 
Date: 12 Jun 2005 13:47:33
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
>>Will you see the end to several people in your center
>>being able to score a 300 now and again?

>yes. the number would be reduced dramaticlly in the wally world houses

Without a doubt the number of 300s and 800s would drop significantly as

would average. Take away the free hold left and free hook right and
guys
that have lots of revs and speed but limited accuracy will no longer be

able to find the pocket. The guys with revs, speed and accuracy will
still
kick butt of course.

I'd think that if we bowled league on a reasonably tough, but "fair"
condition
we'd return to 279 being a big game and folks would actually stop to
watch
when someone had the front 9 or 10. I would also like to see 200 be
considered
very good and anything approaching 220 as huge.

> how long will it take for ball technology to catch up with such a condition?

Technology probably cannot catch up to a flat crown type of condition.
That's
why we want it - because it makes the bowler, not the ball, or the lane
surface and
conditioner the most important factor. Remember, balls can be regulated
more easily than what your laneman does each week. Just like in golf.
Clubs
and balls are regulated but a greenskeeper can make a course play much
harder or easier depending on how they cut the grass and place the
pins.

>> Was the condtion really that much tougher in whatever time period you are
>> longing for?

>yes and no. the legal condition was much much tougher than todays legal
>condition

This depends on who you ask. Kinda of like we all used to walk uphill
to school
in both directions, the past is a bit hazy to most people. Scoring was
lower, but
technology has come a long way.

The only data points I have that I trust on this are from some nice old
guys that
I bowled with in Utah. These dudes were champs in the 1960s and would
tell
me that while scoring was lower, the lanes back then could be made to
play
very nicely overall. They used to have notebooks for all the local
centers describing
exactly how to play each lane in the local centers. e.g. where the
track was for
each lane. Walking in with one ball and knowing where to throw it
probably had
some advantages in terms of consistency :)

>BUT most house "bent" the rules to various degrees to get higher scoring.

Integrity is an issue for sports and always will be. Some sports do a
better
job at this than others. I'd say bowling does a poor job overall and
it's sad
(cheating on the condition, sandbagging, improper ball weights or
surface
prep, etc).

>todays conditions as easy as they are, do present a completely different set
>of complications that we need to learn how to handle in order to get the
>maximum result. In some technicalogical sens. todays conditions are tougher.

There is nothing technically harder about today's conditions. It is
true, however,
that a condition which leads to a carry fest requires a different set
of
skills than what it would take to score well on a more difficult
condition. I fall
into that "problem" area as I don't have enough speed or revs to really
take
advantage of the easier patterns. I'll shoot 220-230 all night long,
but I won't
get the goofy carry that a higher rev + speed player will. That's life
and I can
make spares most of the time so it works out.

>>Or has the bowler become better?

>I think the "true" better bowlers today because of the need for technical
>knowledge as well as physical is

I think there are probably a larger number of better bowlers today and
the top
players are likely more fit as well. But I would think that the
Weber's, Anthony's
Holman's and Roth's of our history would do just fine with today's
equipment
because they knew how to bowl. Kind of like WRW Jr. and Norm Duke are
there
year in and year out winning tournaments while guys that can do one
thing
well have their moments but lack consistency.

Mark



 
Date: 21 May 2005 08:36:52
From: C D
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
I dont disagree, but just to play devil's advocate, the nationals shot
is one few are exposed to more than once a year (yes there are some,
but they are few in comparison to the entire nationals field) Expose
them to the nationals shot every week, the frequency of 300 games will
increase some as the bowlers adjust, readjust and re-readjust. Like any
other sport/activity the more you do it, the better you will get.

CD

Jeff Rife wrote:
> twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> > The days when a 300 wouldn't happen in a whole season are gone. No
amount
> > of lane conditioner or any special patterns are likely to change
that.
>
> Tell that to the people who are bowling in the ABC tournament.
>
> We are 13 weeks into a 20 week tournament where there are 13,222
5-man
> teams. If each person on each team bowls all events (which is almost
> always true), they bowl 9 games during the tournament. That's a
total of
> 594,990 games. Since we are 65% of the way through, about 386,743
games
> would have been bowled by now.
>
> There have only been *seven* 300 games so far. That's one every
55,249
> games bowled.
>
> With 35-week leagues, a league would have to have over 500 members to
> end up with *one* 300 game at that pace. So, a sufficiently hard
pattern
> would easily cause no 300 games to be rolled in a league in a season,
and it
> would be likely that there would be none in the entire *house*, even
with 5
> leagues per week, each with 100 bowlers.
>
> Note, too, that it wouldn't be a mistake to assume that the 66,110
people
> that bowl in the ABC tournament probably are better than the
"average"
> bowler in the 1-2 million sanctioned bowlers. So, it's even more
likely
> that an "average" house won't see any 300 games in a year with a
tough
> pattern.
>
> --
> Jeff Rife


  
Date: 21 May 2005 12:37:34
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
C D (texshark300@yahoo.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> Expose
> them to the nationals shot every week, the frequency of 300 games will
> increase some as the bowlers adjust, readjust and re-readjust. Like any
> other sport/activity the more you do it, the better you will get.

This is true, but I don't think anybody here would have a problem with that.
If you can shoot 300 on a shot like that, you're a damn good bowler (or else
completely lucky :), even with today's high tech balls.

--
Jeff Rife


 
Date: 16 May 2005 07:00:53
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
>There is nothing a ball manufacturer can do to a bowling ball that
will
>make up for inaccurate shots on a flat or sport condition.

Aki demonstrates teh truth of this statement every at the ABCs.

Aki D - You are confusing Tony with Robert. Same surname, different
side of the planet.

Cheers mate,

Mark



  
Date: 16 May 2005 20:11:06
From: HarleyVA@nospam.net
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On 16 May 2005 07:00:53 -0700, "Mark" <twobowlers@aol.com > graced this
newsgroup with:

>>There is nothing a ball manufacturer can do to a bowling ball that
>will
>>make up for inaccurate shots on a flat or sport condition.
>
>Aki demonstrates teh truth of this statement every at the ABCs.
>
>Aki D - You are confusing Tony with Robert. Same surname, different
>side of the planet.
>
>Cheers mate,
>
>Mark

*sigh*...I'm a perfect example of an excellent, godlike pro bowler
becoming soft to a house shot. Mark is right that the Nationals shot
isn't hard. What it *does* do is force one to be more accurate. I
bowl in a condition that allows just about every bowler 5-10 boards
room and still hit the pocket. There just isn't enough time to adjust
to a decent, fair shot. It's not my fault that there isn't a good,
challenging shot within reasonable driving distance yet I'm penalized
for that every year (well fortunately not this year).

Personally, I'd *love* to have the Nationals condition to be the house
condition. However, I fear there would be a mass exodus of "house
pros" leaving leagues because the house suddenly "sucks".

-aki




   
Date: 16 May 2005 19:10:02
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
HarleyVA@nospam.net wrote:

> Personally, I'd *love* to have the Nationals condition to be the house
> condition. However, I fear there would be a mass exodus of "house
> pros" leaving leagues because the house suddenly "sucks".

This is it exactly. It isn't the integrity of the ABC/USBC - the integrity
of the house owners - the integrity of the equipment manufacturers etc. It
is the integrity of the bowlers that causes the problem.

Therefore, the USBC isn't left with many options to propose rule changes.
They have a little control over the equipment. They have lost control of
the pattern because of the bowlers.

The house owners need to make money or there won't be any place to bowl.
The equipment manufacturers need to make money or there won't be equipment
to use. The USBC needs members paying dues or there won't be a USBC. It is
the consumer that controls all of this because it is the consumer that has
the dollars all the others need to stay in business.

Convince your fellow bowler that the shot is the problem and the rest will
fall into place.




 
Date: 16 May 2005 06:54:28
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
>Last comment. Your note about a 159 avg straight ball bowler rolling a
300.
>Just like the rest of your garbage I doubt that's true.

FWIW, while rare, this stuff happens and it's entertaining. About 6-7
years ago we watched a 150 ave guy throw a 300 game totally by
accident. For San Diego folks this was at Surf Bowl and happened just
before the then popular unlimited scratch doubles league floored.

The guy had about 6 "decent" shots and carried three brooklyns to get
the front nine. In the tenth frame he touched the pocket on the first
ball and the pins swished down. He barely was able to throw the second
shot, missed the pocket entirely and carried the 1-2-4 falling forward.
On the final shot, on his third attempt to actually throw the ball (he
was a bit nervous by then and I thought we might have had a heart
attack in the making...) he went light brooklyn and again carried a
swisher. So this fellow, a very nice guy, gets a 300 ring. Deserved?
Probably not by collective ASB standards, but I like to think it was
special for him and what the heck, no skin off my nose. He knows he's
not a top player and was thrilled to have what is likely a once in a
lifetime event happen.

Before jumping on TwoBirds for "garbage" be aware that if you spend
enough time in bowling centers you do see this sort of thing happen. As
for statistics, I've no idea if these events are more or less common
than in the good old days but I enjoyed Jeff's analysis of ABCs. I
would add that while tough compared to league, the ABCs shot is not
*that* difficult. It would be great to see the ABC types of patterns
become standard league patterns but I think I'm hoping ofr too much.

Mark



  
Date: 12 Jun 2005 20:18:21
From: bowldoug
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
you know Mark, what I think makes The Nationals shot so tough for so many of
us is theat we use overpowerful equipment. stuf that is over under reactive
to minor varietions of delivery. Tamer sruff keeps us in play much better
and if we have some decent consistency......

no if we can just use our heads and make our spares the scores would be much
higher than they are :-)

I have found the last few years the shot not that difficult. no OB, some
tug,etc, it was just that for a variety of reason (excuses) I wasn't goos
enough to take advantage of what I bowled on.

--
Douglas Moye
Director Greater Detroit Bowling Association
member of consitution and by-laws committee,
and hearings and rerating committee
secretary Drakeshire Merchant Men,
developing fossil\general pest
"Mark" <twobowlers@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1116251668.535278.34130@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >Last comment. Your note about a 159 avg straight ball bowler rolling a
> 300.
> >Just like the rest of your garbage I doubt that's true.
>
> FWIW, while rare, this stuff happens and it's entertaining. About 6-7
> years ago we watched a 150 ave guy throw a 300 game totally by
> accident. For San Diego folks this was at Surf Bowl and happened just
> before the then popular unlimited scratch doubles league floored.
>
> The guy had about 6 "decent" shots and carried three brooklyns to get
> the front nine. In the tenth frame he touched the pocket on the first
> ball and the pins swished down. He barely was able to throw the second
> shot, missed the pocket entirely and carried the 1-2-4 falling forward.
> On the final shot, on his third attempt to actually throw the ball (he
> was a bit nervous by then and I thought we might have had a heart
> attack in the making...) he went light brooklyn and again carried a
> swisher. So this fellow, a very nice guy, gets a 300 ring. Deserved?
> Probably not by collective ASB standards, but I like to think it was
> special for him and what the heck, no skin off my nose. He knows he's
> not a top player and was thrilled to have what is likely a once in a
> lifetime event happen.
>
> Before jumping on TwoBirds for "garbage" be aware that if you spend
> enough time in bowling centers you do see this sort of thing happen. As
> for statistics, I've no idea if these events are more or less common
> than in the good old days but I enjoyed Jeff's analysis of ABCs. I
> would add that while tough compared to league, the ABCs shot is not
> *that* difficult. It would be great to see the ABC types of patterns
> become standard league patterns but I think I'm hoping ofr too much.
>
> Mark
>
>




  
Date: 17 May 2005 01:42:10
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
As Mark has said, Nationals is "playable"... from anywhere on the lanes
actually... but for the average house shot bowler it is impossible!
Compared to a flat shot, or reverse block, it is easy... but you won't
see those conditions in your local center either. The next Nationals is
in Corpus Christi, TX. If you want to understand where we are coming
from, bowl it once... it is an eye opener!

Mark wrote:

>>Last comment. Your note about a 159 avg straight ball bowler rolling a
>>
>>
>300.
>
>
>>Just like the rest of your garbage I doubt that's true.
>>
>>
>
>FWIW, while rare, this stuff happens and it's entertaining. About 6-7
>years ago we watched a 150 ave guy throw a 300 game totally by
>accident. For San Diego folks this was at Surf Bowl and happened just
>before the then popular unlimited scratch doubles league floored.
>
>The guy had about 6 "decent" shots and carried three brooklyns to get
>the front nine. In the tenth frame he touched the pocket on the first
>ball and the pins swished down. He barely was able to throw the second
>shot, missed the pocket entirely and carried the 1-2-4 falling forward.
>On the final shot, on his third attempt to actually throw the ball (he
>was a bit nervous by then and I thought we might have had a heart
>attack in the making...) he went light brooklyn and again carried a
>swisher. So this fellow, a very nice guy, gets a 300 ring. Deserved?
>Probably not by collective ASB standards, but I like to think it was
>special for him and what the heck, no skin off my nose. He knows he's
>not a top player and was thrilled to have what is likely a once in a
>lifetime event happen.
>
>Before jumping on TwoBirds for "garbage" be aware that if you spend
>enough time in bowling centers you do see this sort of thing happen. As
>for statistics, I've no idea if these events are more or less common
>than in the good old days but I enjoyed Jeff's analysis of ABCs. I
>would add that while tough compared to league, the ABCs shot is not
>*that* difficult. It would be great to see the ABC types of patterns
>become standard league patterns but I think I'm hoping ofr too much.
>
>Mark
>
>
>


 
Date: 14 May 2005 22:00:38
From: PromptJock
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
> Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
> bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
> have ONLY one 300 to show for it.

Jeez....I've only been "in the game" (in a serious way) 5 years and I'd
like to make those claims! ; >



  
Date: 15 May 2005 06:24:42
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
You should work on that, Ken. A guy that bowled on my team last year...
his first year ever... averaged 192 this year.

PromptJock wrote:

>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>
>>
>
>Jeez....I've only been "in the game" (in a serious way) 5 years and I'd
>like to make those claims! ;>
>
>
>


   
Date: 15 May 2005 10:03:01
From: Jamie
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
well speaking for my own personal experience at the house I bowl at up until
this year we we're told by almost all bowlers that bowled in other houses
that we had the touhest shot. When I avg'd 153 last year I went to State and
bowled a 499, 498, and a 515. until then I had only had 1 maybe 2 500's. I
also went to a couple other tournaments and shot a 780 in a no tap winning
my division by over 200 pins.

In contrast this year our house had 25 300's and one guy bowled 4 300's. I
avg'd 176 at the end of the year and shot 2 600's, one game of 268 and when
I went to state I was looking forward to doing really good because I was
still under the impression that our house had a tough shot as Im not as
familiar as some of you are about easy patterns hard patterns and what not.
so we go to state and I was lucky if i bowled my current avg and barely
bowled my 153 avg. Then we went to a moose nationals tournament and I shot
in the team event a 615, and singles and double a 590, 480 (bad knee was
effecting my last series, *always have an excuse*).

I guess the bottom line is I now realize our house went to a wall shot, the
big series are shot by guys that throw left to right and have revs out the
yingyang, they hit the dry and snap back. I had some lucky nights where
things fell into place but over all I never really had a "good game" just
some good luck. Heck My 268 was a string of strikes and at least half were
brooklyn.

As a competitive person I would much rather have my 150 avg and know that I
earned it than have a 176 like I do now and know that anywhere I go its
going to be alot harder to find the right line where last year I had to find
the line every week twice a week. and very rarely were you able to stand in
the same spot twice.

Just my .02 I thought I would throw in there.

Jamie
"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:KWBhe.629$h86.486@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> You should work on that, Ken. A guy that bowled on my team last year...
> his first year ever... averaged 192 this year.
>
> PromptJock wrote:
>
>>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>>
>>
>>Jeez....I've only been "in the game" (in a serious way) 5 years and I'd
>>like to make those claims! ;>
>>
>>




 
Date: 15 May 2005 00:27:23
From: JohnO
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
>. These weight holes help to level the playing field for some players of a
>lesser ability. They don't make a great player even better, but they help a
>player of less ability to compete with some of these players.

We already have handicap for that, the sport doesn't need mechanical
handicap, too. IMHO.

John O




 
Date: 14 May 2005 14:19:36
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Hank has pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. I'd like to
simplify what he has said.

1) Eliminating balance holes and requiring the CG to be within 1" of the
center of grip will mean that those who can rip the cover off the ball
will still enjoy 5+ boards of area on your typical "wally world" shot
"and" have very little problem driving the pins out, where as your low
to medium rev bowler will have almost the same amount of area but won't
be able to drive shit unless there are clean backends. As Hank has said,
balance holes and CG placement only serves to even the playing field
between those that can rev the ball and those that can't... It does
nothing to increase required accuracy, which is why this sport is no
longer a sport.

2) The above rule change as well as the required USBC logo rule change
will required the manufactures to reconfigure, at some cost to them, and
bowlers to replace their equipment at significant cost to them. For many
of the higher average bowlers that buy new equipment on nearly a yearly
bases this won't be much of a big deal, but for the lower average or
"recreational" bowlers that might buy "a" new ball every 5-10 years, or
more... the very bowlers that have no real chance of seeing a USBC award
of any sort... there will be no "real" reason for them to bowl in a
sanctioned league. I sincerely believe that if your recreational bowler
is required to buy new equipment due to a rule change that they will
either quit league bowling all together or join unsanctioned leagues.

If the USBC is sincere about wanting to legitimize the sport again then
they need to forget about the bowling balls and change the rules for
lane conditioning. The "only" bowlers that will be effected by requiring
a sport or flat oil condition are the bowler with inflated averages due
to the "wally world" conditions that plague nearly every bowling alley
in the country. The recreational "straight ball" bowler won't even know
the difference, and the truly skilled bowler will still be able to score
well, albeit at a slightly lower average. Rewarding accuracy will
separate the truly skilled bowler from "wannabes" and return credibility
to the sport. Once again, you will be able to watch the pros on TV, or
even in your local house, and watch with amazement instead of saying to
yourself, "Shit... I can do that!". 300's, 800's, and 900's "should" be
a big deal. They "should" be so rare that only the top .01% ever achieve
them... and a 900? Only one person, in my opinion, has earned a 900...
and he is the only one without a ring! Don't get me wrong... the guys
that rolled 900s are "very" talented bowlers... but Glenn Allison did it
with a Yellow Dot when lanes were conditioned by hand and a "premium"
ball was was a Urethane. You want to fix things, USC? Give Glenn his
damned ring already! He fucking earned it!!! And it better be a special
one at that!

Jimmy DeGazz wrote:

> I just got this from Rot Grip. Thought I'd pass it along
>May 13, 2005
>ROTO GRIP SPEAKS OUT ABOUT THE USBC PROPOSED CHANGES
>by Roger Noordhoek
>Due to the large amount of comments and questions from consumers, and pro
>shop operators, we decided it was necessary to speak out about the USBC
>proposed changes. I spoke with Hank Boomershine, President, last night
>before he left for Storm/Roto Grip Fair in Japan. Here are his thought and
>concerns on the proposed changes:
>
>First of all the proposed changes seem to be a thumb in the dyke of inflated
>averages and Honor scores. The manufacturers and bowlers should not be
>punished or prejudiced against by the USBC. We have been abiding by the
>rules and developing equipment based on the specifications given. We have
>already been subject to recent rule changes in the past year and we have
>abided by all of them. We feel that the new proposed changes have pushed
>past the line of fairness to both the bowlers and the manufacturers. We have
>polled several of our staff members and Star Pro Shops across the country to
>see how they feel. We are still getting feedback everyday, and we have
>decided to post some feedback based on their responses as well as our
>feelings on the matter. Let me say that no matter what is decided by the
>USBC we will abide by the rules.
>
>1. Elimination of Weight Holes: Eliminating weight holes and the use of
>bowling balls with weight holes will cost the consumers thousands of
>dollars. It may cost a large percentage of our current league bowlers
>because the cost of replacing the equipment they have with weight holes may
>be too big of a burden to bear. As a manufacturer we do not want to gain
>sales of equipment because of a rule change. We would rather see them buy
>the equipment based on performance, and to replace them as needed.
>
>Weight holes can be used to adjust the ball's performance after it has been
>drilled. These changes although minor are very valuable to the player and
>with the elimination of these weight holes, you take the adjustment out of
>play. It would be like eliminating the use of lead tape to the back of a
>golf club or the newly designed drivers with the adjustable weights on the
>back of the head by the USGA. These weight holes help to level the playing
>field for some players of a lesser ability. They don't make a great player
>even better, but they help a player of less ability to compete with some of
>these players. Much the same as the adjustable golf clubs used on the market
>today. So the elimination of weight holes will not help to better the sport,
>but only drive the player's with less ability away.
>
>2. CG With-in 1 Inch of the Center of Grip Once again this rule seems to
>handicap the players who can adjust the distance of the CG away from the
>center of grip to enhance ball reaction. It also handcuffs the pro shops
>options to drill the ball. We as manufacturers try to keep pin distances
>from the CG within a certain range. This will force us to manufacture balls
>with greater variance. This will require a complete change in research and
>development of our products and also in the manufacturing. It in turn will
>force the pro shop and also the distributor to carry a wider variety of pin
>distances and top weight. This may carry too large a burden of cost on both
>parties; therefore, forcing some out of business because of the large amount
>of capitol required to inventory that much product and not be certain of the
>sale and the ability to use a ball with a certain pin distance and adjust it
>with the movement of the CG and the placement of a weight hole.
>
>3. The Placement of the USBC Logo on every ball To place the USBC logo on
>every ball would cost the manufacturers a large amount of money and time. It
>would require an extra step in the engraving process of the ball and
>therefore slowing down the production of the bowling ball and increasing the
>cost of labor which in turn would increase the price of the ball to the
>consumer. This seems to be another rule that will hurt the consumer/player
>which in turn may cause him to quit the sport.
>
>All in all these rule changes if in fact they do go into effect will only
>cost the USBC more loss of membership of an already declining organization.
>
>Hank Boomershine
>President
>Roto Grip, Inc.
>
>
>
>


  
Date: 21 May 2005 17:14:47
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
> You are correct.

I know. But I appreciate your affirmation.

Neat bit of history about Salvino - thanks for that. I always find
these stories entertaining and he is one of my favorite characters due
to his laboratory coat expliots in the CSI ads.


Regarding ways to visually mark one's PAP, PromptJ suggests:

>In this way, a MINIMAL amount of cover material is removed,
>thus it won't affect the ball's mass, balance, etc.

We're talking about a shallow hole filled with a contrasting color to
provide a visual reference mark. This won't do squat to upset any
relevant static or dynamic parameter you could specify. Let it be a
given that anyone with enough knowledge to actually take the effort to
find and then want to mark thier PAP as a visual aid will also know
enough not to bore a hole through the core in order to do so.

But feel free to knock yourself out enumerating the different ways one
could place a legal mark on a bowling ball, there might be some really
entertaining solutions to this non-problem.

To put this in perspective, I've been bowling about 33 years and have
seen exactly one guy who bothered to do so.

YMMV

Mark



  
Date: 21 May 2005 16:35:46
From: PromptJock
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
> You can't have tape (or anything else) on the ball surface during
> sanctioned play which is why you can't mark the PAP with tape during
> league. You can, however, drill a hole on the PAP and then plug that
> hole with a contrasting color.

IMHO, it would be easier to have your Pro Shoperator ENGRAVE the mark
(i.e. a "target" or large "X"), fill the "trench" with a highly
contrasting paint color (via paint stick), then permanently "fix" the
color. In this way, a MINIMAL amount of cover material is removed,
thus it won't affect the ball's mass, balance, etc.



  
Date: 18 May 2005 14:25:42
From: Mark
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
You can't have tape (or anything else) on the ball surface during
sanctioned play which is why you can't mark the PAP with tape during
league. You can, however, drill a hole on the PAP and then plug that
hole with a contrasting color.

Mark



   
Date: 18 May 2005 21:03:47
From: Phil Paskos
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Mark;
You are correct. But you can practice with it that way. The first bowler I
ever heard of that did this was PBA Star Carmen Salvino. The PBA put miill
holes to check the surface hardness of the ball to the surface just under
the skin.Carmen asked if they cared where they put the mill hole, they said
anywhere was OK. So Carmen put it on his PAP and filled it with paint. Just
a bit of history.

Phil P
"Mark" <twobowlers@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1116451542.308010.174340@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> You can't have tape (or anything else) on the ball surface during
> sanctioned play which is why you can't mark the PAP with tape during
> league. You can, however, drill a hole on the PAP and then plug that
> hole with a contrasting color.
>
> Mark
>




  
Date: 14 May 2005 12:47:51
From: HarleyVA@nospam.net
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Sat, 14 May 2005 14:19:36 GMT, Tony R Smith
<tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > graced this newsgroup with:

>Hank has pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one. I'd like to
>simplify what he has said.
>

<snip good stuff >

I think the USBC is attacking the lesser of two evils.

For them, to become more strict on the ball manufacturers doesn't hurt
the sport nearly as much as becoming more strict on the *houses*.

1. What purpose will pro shops have if drilling a ball becomes so
simplistic that it's cheaper to just have it punched out at your local
sports/athletic/K-Mart store? Many pro shops thrive on selling high
end bowling equipment and repeat customers based on their skill
at exotic drilling.

2. Why even *buy* high end equipment after the rule change? The
unique weight blocks that each ball manufacturer has that's their
trademark will be a thing of the past. Many of the smaller ball
manufacturers will simply go out of business. With all the research
and marketing they already have to endure, their profit margins are
already thin. Remember when the three biggest ball manufacturers
were AMF, Brunswick and Ebonite? Now there's literally dozens of
manufactuers (although some of them are partners with the larger
companies). That gives the consumer more choices and keeps
prices competitive. That may become a thing of the past as the
larger companies will be the only ones that can endure the high
cost of retooling their plants.

3. Since the focus seems to be on the *ball*, the houses will just
make their shots easier and easier. It'll be the only way they can
stay in business thus destroying the REST of the credibity the USBC
is trying so hard to retain.


The *only* way the sport will gain any credibility is make a strict
oil pattern the national standard. No more easy shots, no more
walled shots just bring in revenue. They need to balance both
the ball specifications as well as the lane conditions. If you
address only one, the other will merely adjust to keep the customers
coming in.

Go to a heavier pin. Oil the lanes gutter to gutter and rescue us
from a sport that's becoming more and more recreational than a real
challenge.

Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
have ONLY one 300 to show for it.

-aki



   
Date: 15 May 2005 06:40:27
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes


HarleyVA@nospam.net wrote:

><sniped good info>
>
>The *only* way the sport will gain any credibility is make a strict
>oil pattern the national standard. No more easy shots, no more
>walled shots just bring in revenue.
>
We are in complete agreement here.

>They need to balance both
>the ball specifications as well as the lane conditions. If you
>address only one, the other will merely adjust to keep the customers
>coming in.
>
>
There is nothing a ball manufacturer can do to a bowling ball that will
make up for inaccurate shots on a flat or sport condition. Nationals has
been proving this over the past three years since they started the new
oiling program. I have never seen sandpaper balls the likes of those I
saw being thrown at Nationals this year, many by our fellow TI
members... did it help? Not that I saw. I probably did as well as any in
our group (in team event anyway) pointing my Fear Factor off the corner
at the pocket... Mark loved it! ;-)

I don't care what kind of super wammodyne ball and drilling you have...
If the shot is flat, people will struggle big time!

>
>
>-aki
>
>
>


    
Date: 15 May 2005 15:42:05
From: HarleyVA@nospam.net
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Sun, 15 May 2005 06:40:27 GMT, Tony R Smith
<tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > graced this newsgroup with:

>
>
>HarleyVA@nospam.net wrote:
>
>><sniped good info>
>>
>>The *only* way the sport will gain any credibility is make a strict
>>oil pattern the national standard. No more easy shots, no more
>>walled shots just bring in revenue.
>>
>We are in complete agreement here.
>
>>They need to balance both
>>the ball specifications as well as the lane conditions. If you
>>address only one, the other will merely adjust to keep the customers
>>coming in.
>>
>>
>There is nothing a ball manufacturer can do to a bowling ball that will
>make up for inaccurate shots on a flat or sport condition. Nationals has
>been proving this over the past three years since they started the new
>oiling program. I have never seen sandpaper balls the likes of those I
>saw being thrown at Nationals this year, many by our fellow TI
>members... did it help? Not that I saw. I probably did as well as any in
>our group (in team event anyway) pointing my Fear Factor off the corner
>at the pocket... Mark loved it! ;-)
>
>I don't care what kind of super wammodyne ball and drilling you have...
>If the shot is flat, people will struggle big time!
>


..well, it'll definately make the nationals a LOT more interesting in
the coming years. You (and the rest of the GDF) paid up for Corpus
Christi?


     
Date: 16 May 2005 04:38:58
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
I ain't no GDF, Aki... I am from San Diego, remember? Yes, I paid at the
tournament. See ya there this year? ;-)

HarleyVA@nospam.net wrote:

>On Sun, 15 May 2005 06:40:27 GMT, Tony R Smith
><tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com> graced this newsgroup with:
>
>
>
>>HarleyVA@nospam.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>><sniped good info>
>>>
>>>The *only* way the sport will gain any credibility is make a strict
>>>oil pattern the national standard. No more easy shots, no more
>>>walled shots just bring in revenue.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>We are in complete agreement here.
>>
>>
>>
>>>They need to balance both
>>>the ball specifications as well as the lane conditions. If you
>>>address only one, the other will merely adjust to keep the customers
>>>coming in.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>There is nothing a ball manufacturer can do to a bowling ball that will
>>make up for inaccurate shots on a flat or sport condition. Nationals has
>>been proving this over the past three years since they started the new
>>oiling program. I have never seen sandpaper balls the likes of those I
>>saw being thrown at Nationals this year, many by our fellow TI
>>members... did it help? Not that I saw. I probably did as well as any in
>>our group (in team event anyway) pointing my Fear Factor off the corner
>>at the pocket... Mark loved it! ;-)
>>
>>I don't care what kind of super wammodyne ball and drilling you have...
>>If the shot is flat, people will struggle big time!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>..well, it'll definately make the nationals a LOT more interesting in
>the coming years. You (and the rest of the GDF) paid up for Corpus
>Christi?
>
>


      
Date: 16 May 2005 23:06:45
From: Lisa
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
"Tony R Smith" wrote:
>I ain't no GDF, Aki... I am from San Diego, remember? >Yes, I paid at the
>tournament. See ya there this year? ;-)

What are TI's dates for Corpus Christi?




       
Date: 17 May 2005 03:55:52
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
It should be March 19th and 20th, but don't quote me on that. Mark?

Lisa wrote:

>"Tony R Smith" wrote:
>
>
>>I ain't no GDF, Aki... I am from San Diego, remember? >Yes, I paid at the
>>tournament. See ya there this year? ;-)
>>
>>
>
>What are TI's dates for Corpus Christi?
>
>
>
>


      
Date: 16 May 2005 20:06:13
From: HarleyVA@nospam.net
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Mon, 16 May 2005 04:38:58 GMT, Tony R Smith
<tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > graced this newsgroup with:

>I ain't no GDF, Aki... I am from San Diego, remember? Yes, I paid at the
>tournament. See ya there this year? ;-)
>


oh for gawds sake. Now my mind is going along with my overly abundant
pools of testosterone. *sigh*..




   
Date: 14 May 2005 12:00:45
From: Al Whiteman
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
<snip >

>
> Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
> bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
> have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>
> -aki
>

What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch because
they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey" but haven't shot
800.
That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport




    
Date: 14 May 2005 18:45:28
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Al Whiteman wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>> bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>> have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>
>> -aki
>>
>
> What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch
> because they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey"
> but haven't shot 800.
> That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport

Seems like it would be worse if they were bragging on thier 800s, eh? Seems
odd that you would think that the fact that they are "bitching" about not
having an 800 yet emphasiases the destruction.... Seems to me that the
youngsters you mention still have something to strive for and therefore will
keep bowling. That would logically highlight the fact that the sport has a
future in those youngsters.




     
Date: 15 May 2005 06:22:29
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop operator
and PBA member (not sure if he still has his card). Al is old enough to
remember when there hadn't been a 800 shot "ever" at Nationals, when you
get a "gold" ring for a 300 game as well as money from local businesses,
800's were very, very, very rare, and "no" sanctioned 900's had been
recorded! Al carried a 200 average back when that meant something. There
is nothing to strive for when strikes are literally given to you. If
there is no need to be accurate, there is no challenge... If there is no
challenge, there is no sport... period!

twobirds wrote:

>Al Whiteman wrote:
>
>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>>
>>>-aki
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch
>>because they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey"
>>but haven't shot 800.
>>That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport
>>
>>
>
>Seems like it would be worse if they were bragging on thier 800s, eh? Seems
>odd that you would think that the fact that they are "bitching" about not
>having an 800 yet emphasiases the destruction.... Seems to me that the
>youngsters you mention still have something to strive for and therefore will
>keep bowling. That would logically highlight the fact that the sport has a
>future in those youngsters.
>
>
>
>


      
Date: 20 May 2005 22:18:49
From: Michael W. Lee
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Agreed!!!

"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:FUBhe.628$h86.556@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop operator
> and PBA member (not sure if he still has his card). Al is old enough to
> remember when there hadn't been a 800 shot "ever" at Nationals, when you
> get a "gold" ring for a 300 game as well as money from local businesses,
> 800's were very, very, very rare, and "no" sanctioned 900's had been
> recorded! Al carried a 200 average back when that meant something. There
> is nothing to strive for when strikes are literally given to you. If there
> is no need to be accurate, there is no challenge... If there is no
> challenge, there is no sport... period!
>
> twobirds wrote:
>
>>Al Whiteman wrote:
>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>>>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>>>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>>>
>>>>-aki
>>>>
>>>>
>>>What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch
>>>because they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey"
>>>but haven't shot 800.
>>>That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport
>>>
>>
>>Seems like it would be worse if they were bragging on thier 800s, eh?
>>Seems
>>odd that you would think that the fact that they are "bitching" about not
>>having an 800 yet emphasiases the destruction.... Seems to me that the
>>youngsters you mention still have something to strive for and therefore
>>will
>>keep bowling. That would logically highlight the fact that the sport has
>>a
>>future in those youngsters.
>>
>>
>>







      
Date: 15 May 2005 18:29:45
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Tony R Smith wrote:
> Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop
> operator
>
And this answers my question how?

Al said that teenagers who have a three hundred but don't have an eight
hundred epitomize the problem with the game and illuminate the fact the
games future is in jeopardy (or something very close to that). My question
is : Wouldn't it be more evident if those teenagers had a bucket full of
800s and nothing to bitch about? Wouldn't that mean it really has become
too easy to remain a viable and marketable product to people of that age
group?

So, shove the all due respect stuff and spare me the list of supposed
accolades and fond memories one such as he must have./.. and either forgive
me for challenging the great al whiteman a month ago to the ends of
answering the question or kill filter me.

Wether the game is too easy is subjective. Some guys play in houses with
easier shots than others... Some guys have more time and desire to practice
or travel to other centers and learn more about bowling... etc etc etc yadda
yadda yadda (a million variables) Furthermore, teenagers these days don't
view things the way al did or you did or I did. They have a lot more
pressure to perform than we did (unless you happen to come from a Texas
football family) and in all likelihood, those same kids would still find a
way to get their 300 if you put them in a time machine and dumped them in
1972 or 1966 or whenever. Those same kids who want to perform better and
obtain honor scores would have the same pressure to do so and the same
desire to do so on lane conditions identicle to any that have ever been.




       
Date: 16 May 2005 20:39:21
From: HarleyVA@nospam.net
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Sun, 15 May 2005 18:29:45 -0600, "twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com >
graced this newsgroup with:

> They have a lot more
>pressure to perform than we did (unless you happen to come from a Texas
>football family) and in all likelihood, those same kids would still find a
>way to get their 300 if you put them in a time machine and dumped them in
>1972 or 1966 or whenever. Those same kids who want to perform better and
>obtain honor scores would have the same pressure to do so and the same
>desire to do so on lane conditions identicle to any that have ever been.
>

I disagree that they have a lot more pressure to perform. They've
grown up in a era that *expects* to win *all the time*. If someone
does something wrong, *it's someone elses fault*.

Our daughters high school *doesn't even have tryouts" for track.
They've decided that anyone should be able to participate. They don't
want to leave anyone out just because they can't run.

That isn't competition, that's group participation.

In 1966, there were three times as many bowlers as we have today. And
I can assure you that they bowled more often and more seriously than
most kids in bowling do today. Hell, there were even "bowling camps*.

There are some very talented youth bowlers today, but by no means,
IMHO, can you randomly pick a group of them and expect them to be
better than kids in the 60's or 70's however, I wouldn't be surprised
if the reverse were true.

-aki




       
Date: 15 May 2005 20:54:30
From: Darby
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Tony was polite, you weren't. Your opinion will be given more credence if
you express it in a civilized manner. You are new here and choose to attack
two highly respected posters, not the best way to gain respect for yourself.
You may have some good ideas, but if you wish to have us to listen you need
to post like you are worth our time to read. Do you want to make loud noises
or do you want to discuss something?
Dar

"twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com > wrote
> Tony R Smith wrote:
>> Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop
>> operator
>>
> And this answers my question how?
>
> Al said that teenagers who have a three hundred but don't have an eight
> hundred epitomize the problem with the game and illuminate the fact the
> games future is in jeopardy (or something very close to that). My
> question
> is : Wouldn't it be more evident if those teenagers had a bucket full of
> 800s and nothing to bitch about? Wouldn't that mean it really has become
> too easy to remain a viable and marketable product to people of that age
> group?
>
> So, shove the all due respect stuff and spare me the list of supposed
> accolades and fond memories one such as he must have./.. and either
> forgive
> me for challenging the great al whiteman a month ago to the ends of
> answering the question or kill filter me.
>
> Wether the game is too easy is subjective. Some guys play in houses with
> easier shots than others... Some guys have more time and desire to
> practice
> or travel to other centers and learn more about bowling... etc etc etc
> yadda
> yadda yadda (a million variables) Furthermore, teenagers these days don't
> view things the way al did or you did or I did. They have a lot more
> pressure to perform than we did (unless you happen to come from a Texas
> football family) and in all likelihood, those same kids would still find a
> way to get their 300 if you put them in a time machine and dumped them in
> 1972 or 1966 or whenever. Those same kids who want to perform better and
> obtain honor scores would have the same pressure to do so and the same
> desire to do so on lane conditions identicle to any that have ever been.
>
>




        
Date: 15 May 2005 21:49:57
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Darby wrote:
> Tony was polite, you weren't.

That is certainly subjective as written word is always interpreted
differently by any reader versus another. This is usenet. Get over it or
use your killfilter. I think that point was well made.

>Your opinion will be given more
> credence if you express it in a civilized manner.

Lending credence to opinion has nothing to do with my manner nor my words.
Again, you chose to interpret something in a way it wasn't written. That is
a fact of life on usenet and anywhere where wrtitten word is the core.

>You are new here
> and choose to attack two highly respected posters, not the best way
> to gain respect for yourself.

I've attacked no one. I enjoyed some small debate with al last month but it
quickly degenerated because he couldn't stand someone he thinks is younger
than him disagreeing. No big deal.


>You may have some good ideas, but if
> you wish to have us to listen you need to post like you are worth our
> time to read. Do you want to make loud noises or do you want to
> discuss something?

I think you should re-read the thread. It is obvious I asked a question and
stated my beleif of a logical pattern. If you want to discuss a personality
you've stereotyped by reading and misinterpreting written word, then I can
suggest other groups where such would be on topic.

Again, this is usenet. You are using a news reader. If you don't like what
I said, use your killfilter and be done with it. If you want me to change
my writing style or choose other words, you'll have to present that argument
to me somewhere where it is on topic.





         
Date: 15 May 2005 23:41:31
From: Al Whiteman
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes

"twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com > wrote in message
news:QeKdnT-EtsSMhRXfRVn-tw@bresnan.com...
> Darby wrote:
>> Tony was polite, you weren't.
>
>
<snip >

>>You are new here
>> and choose to attack two highly respected posters, not the best way
>> to gain respect for yourself.
>
> I've attacked no one. I enjoyed some small debate with al last month but
> it
> quickly degenerated because he couldn't stand someone he thinks is younger
> than him disagreeing. No big deal.
>
>

<snip >

No, Al cannot stand someone that goes off and turns a debate into a personal
attack because it is reciprocal and not my cup of tea.
I also have no respect for liars, and if one goes back 4 or 5 months, or
however long you have been trying to contribute to this forum, one will find
numerous incidents of "forgetting the story".




          
Date: 16 May 2005 02:51:42
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Al Whiteman wrote:
> "twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com> wrote in message

>
> No, Al cannot stand someone that goes off and turns a debate into a
> personal attack

Who said what to whom first, Al? Still there on google groups, there pally.
Who was it that got bent out of shape and for what reason? Who made
disparaging comments and invited a little flame? Oh. That would be you.

Now. Enough is enough. Let's either kiss and make up, or at least let it
drop for the benefit of the rest of the readers. Same goes for your
supporter, Darby. I've had enough of this conversation and I made a bit of
an apology at the end of it a month ago. Get over it or killfilter me. I
don't care which.




       
Date: 15 May 2005 20:40:06
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> Tony R Smith wrote:
> > Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop
> > operator
> >
> And this answers my question how?
>=20
> Al said that teenagers who have a three hundred but don't have an eight
> hundred epitomize the problem with the game and illuminate the fact the
> games future is in jeopardy (or something very close to that).

I believe Al was complaining about the whining like they were *entilted* to
an 800 after 2-3 years of bowling, especially because they already had a
couple of 300s.

As another person who has been bowling for 30+ years, I also feel that 300
and 800 scores should be a real event, not just another "ho-hum" sort of
thing.

In the two houses I bowl in, there were a total of two 800 series this year=
,
and about fifteen 300 games. That's a little high, but it's still nothing
compared to some of the houses with really easy shots. Up the road an hour=
,
there's one that's pretty much good for 20-30 pins on your average, and any
real 200 bowler will get a 300 every season there...they have at least one
per week across all the leagues (in a less than 40 lane house).

--=20
Jeff Rife


        
Date: 15 May 2005 22:05:30
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Jeff Rife wrote:
> twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>> Tony R Smith wrote:
>
> I believe Al was complaining about the whining like they were
> *entilted* to an 800 after 2-3 years of bowling, especially because
> they already had a couple of 300s.

That I can see. Still, a 300 would be nothing to sneeze at (even on a wall)
from a 15 year old.

>
> As another person who has been bowling for 30+ years, I also feel
> that 300 and 800 scores should be a real event, not just another
> "ho-hum" sort of thing.

I understand this perfectly as well. I live in a city whose high series
record of an 843 has stood for a decade now. There are a handful of guys
who put up at least a couple of 300s every season, but they've never come
close to that 843. - Personally, I think that a sanctioned 800 would mean
a lot more to me than a 300. A 300 can happen for just about anyone with
any skill if it is "their night". An 800 is another story entirely. That
means that the bowler was able to be consistantly good through the whole
series. That means they were accurate and made the right adjustments... a
300 doesn't necesarily mean that.

>
> In the two houses I bowl in, there were a total of two 800 series
> this year, and about fifteen 300 games. That's a little high, but
> it's still nothing compared to some of the houses with really easy
> shots. Up the road an hour, there's one that's pretty much good for
> 20-30 pins on your average, and any real 200 bowler will get a 300
> every season there...they have at least one per week across all the
> leagues (in a less than 40 lane house).

That does seem a lot. And it lends itself to another point I made in the
thread. How easy or hard the sport has become is subjective. I would lend
my positive opinion towards some standardization of oil patterns. At the
very least, there should be four or five patterns and a set amount of
conditioner. The only problem I forsee is the differences in climate across
the country and around the world. Lighter oil wont stay in dry air like it
will in humidity... etc. I would imagine that the ABC studied that at some
point, though. I would have to guesse that they already have such data and
could consider some solutions.




         
Date: 16 May 2005 04:34:16
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
This is where you are dead wrong. It used to be that you might see a 300
game rolled in an entire county once every 5-10 years! Not by age
group... I am talking one, uno, ein, PERIOD! 300 Games are a dime a
dozen these days. You probably aren't old enough to remember when an
entire house would quit bowling and gather around a set of lanes if a
guy had the front nine and was stepping up for the 10th frame. My first
15 years of bowling I never saw a 300 bowled. 6 years ago on a scratch
league I bowled on in Bremerton, WA, for the first time ever (it's in
the ABC record books) three people bowled perfect games on the same
game, and the year prior on my Monday night scratch league a righty and
a lefty tied when they threw 300's at each other! It's fucking out of
control!

twobirds wrote:

>Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>
>>twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>>
>>
>>>Tony R Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>I believe Al was complaining about the whining like they were
>>*entilted* to an 800 after 2-3 years of bowling, especially because
>>they already had a couple of 300s.
>>
>>
>
>That I can see. Still, a 300 would be nothing to sneeze at (even on a wall)
>from a 15 year old.
>
>
>
>>As another person who has been bowling for 30+ years, I also feel
>>that 300 and 800 scores should be a real event, not just another
>>"ho-hum" sort of thing.
>>
>>
>
>I understand this perfectly as well. I live in a city whose high series
>record of an 843 has stood for a decade now. There are a handful of guys
>who put up at least a couple of 300s every season, but they've never come
>close to that 843. - Personally, I think that a sanctioned 800 would mean
>a lot more to me than a 300. A 300 can happen for just about anyone with
>any skill if it is "their night". An 800 is another story entirely. That
>means that the bowler was able to be consistantly good through the whole
>series. That means they were accurate and made the right adjustments... a
>300 doesn't necesarily mean that.
>
>
>
>>In the two houses I bowl in, there were a total of two 800 series
>>this year, and about fifteen 300 games. That's a little high, but
>>it's still nothing compared to some of the houses with really easy
>>shots. Up the road an hour, there's one that's pretty much good for
>>20-30 pins on your average, and any real 200 bowler will get a 300
>>every season there...they have at least one per week across all the
>>leagues (in a less than 40 lane house).
>>
>>
>
>That does seem a lot. And it lends itself to another point I made in the
>thread. How easy or hard the sport has become is subjective. I would lend
>my positive opinion towards some standardization of oil patterns. At the
>very least, there should be four or five patterns and a set amount of
>conditioner. The only problem I forsee is the differences in climate across
>the country and around the world. Lighter oil wont stay in dry air like it
>will in humidity... etc. I would imagine that the ABC studied that at some
>point, though. I would have to guesse that they already have such data and
>could consider some solutions.
>
>
>
>


          
Date: 16 May 2005 17:56:00
From: JimD
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Tony, I'm far from being a prude, but knowing
there are a few women and kids who do read
ASB. Could/would you tone back on the
language a bit. I would appreciate it and I'm
sure others would to. Thank you!

Jim
Enjoy! Friendship is the best part of bowling.
"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:cpVhe.18512$ya2.3923@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> This is where you are dead wrong. It used to be that you might see a 300
> game rolled in an entire county once every 5-10 years! Not by age
> group... I am talking one, uno, ein, PERIOD! 300 Games are a dime a
> dozen these days. You probably aren't old enough to remember when an
> entire house would quit bowling and gather around a set of lanes if a
> guy had the front nine and was stepping up for the 10th frame. My first
> 15 years of bowling I never saw a 300 bowled. 6 years ago on a scratch
> league I bowled on in Bremerton, WA, for the first time ever (it's in
> the ABC record books) three people bowled perfect games on the same
> game, and the year prior on my Monday night scratch league a righty and
> a lefty tied when they threw 300's at each other! It's fucking out of
> control!
>
> twobirds wrote:
>
> >Jeff Rife wrote:
> >
> >
> >>twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Tony R Smith wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I believe Al was complaining about the whining like they were
> >>*entilted* to an 800 after 2-3 years of bowling, especially because
> >>they already had a couple of 300s.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >That I can see. Still, a 300 would be nothing to sneeze at (even on a
wall)
> >from a 15 year old.
> >
> >
> >
> >>As another person who has been bowling for 30+ years, I also feel
> >>that 300 and 800 scores should be a real event, not just another
> >>"ho-hum" sort of thing.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I understand this perfectly as well. I live in a city whose high series
> >record of an 843 has stood for a decade now. There are a handful of guys
> >who put up at least a couple of 300s every season, but they've never come
> >close to that 843. - Personally, I think that a sanctioned 800 would
mean
> >a lot more to me than a 300. A 300 can happen for just about anyone with
> >any skill if it is "their night". An 800 is another story entirely.
That
> >means that the bowler was able to be consistantly good through the whole
> >series. That means they were accurate and made the right adjustments...
a
> >300 doesn't necesarily mean that.
> >
> >
> >
> >>In the two houses I bowl in, there were a total of two 800 series
> >>this year, and about fifteen 300 games. That's a little high, but
> >>it's still nothing compared to some of the houses with really easy
> >>shots. Up the road an hour, there's one that's pretty much good for
> >>20-30 pins on your average, and any real 200 bowler will get a 300
> >>every season there...they have at least one per week across all the
> >>leagues (in a less than 40 lane house).
> >>
> >>
> >
> >That does seem a lot. And it lends itself to another point I made in the
> >thread. How easy or hard the sport has become is subjective. I would
lend
> >my positive opinion towards some standardization of oil patterns. At the
> >very least, there should be four or five patterns and a set amount of
> >conditioner. The only problem I forsee is the differences in climate
across
> >the country and around the world. Lighter oil wont stay in dry air like
it
> >will in humidity... etc. I would imagine that the ABC studied that at
some
> >point, though. I would have to guesse that they already have such data
and
> >could consider some solutions.
> >
> >
> >
> >




           
Date: 17 May 2005 01:34:07
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
You bet.

JimD wrote:

>Tony, I'm far from being a prude, but knowing
>there are a few women and kids who do read
>ASB. Could/would you tone back on the
>language a bit. I would appreciate it and I'm
>sure others would to. Thank you!
>
>Jim
>Enjoy! Friendship is the best part of bowling.
>"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:cpVhe.18512$ya2.3923@tornado.socal.rr.com...
>
>
>>This is where you are dead wrong. It used to be that you might see a 300
>>game rolled in an entire county once every 5-10 years! Not by age
>>group... I am talking one, uno, ein, PERIOD! 300 Games are a dime a
>>dozen these days. You probably aren't old enough to remember when an
>>entire house would quit bowling and gather around a set of lanes if a
>>guy had the front nine and was stepping up for the 10th frame. My first
>>15 years of bowling I never saw a 300 bowled. 6 years ago on a scratch
>>league I bowled on in Bremerton, WA, for the first time ever (it's in
>>the ABC record books) three people bowled perfect games on the same
>>game, and the year prior on my Monday night scratch league a righty and
>>a lefty tied when they threw 300's at each other! It's fucking out of
>>control!
>>
>>twobirds wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Jeff Rife wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Tony R Smith wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I believe Al was complaining about the whining like they were
>>>>*entilted* to an 800 after 2-3 years of bowling, especially because
>>>>they already had a couple of 300s.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That I can see. Still, a 300 would be nothing to sneeze at (even on a
>>>
>>>
>wall)
>
>
>>>from a 15 year old.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>As another person who has been bowling for 30+ years, I also feel
>>>>that 300 and 800 scores should be a real event, not just another
>>>>"ho-hum" sort of thing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I understand this perfectly as well. I live in a city whose high series
>>>record of an 843 has stood for a decade now. There are a handful of guys
>>>who put up at least a couple of 300s every season, but they've never come
>>>close to that 843. - Personally, I think that a sanctioned 800 would
>>>
>>>
>mean
>
>
>>>a lot more to me than a 300. A 300 can happen for just about anyone with
>>>any skill if it is "their night". An 800 is another story entirely.
>>>
>>>
>That
>
>
>>>means that the bowler was able to be consistantly good through the whole
>>>series. That means they were accurate and made the right adjustments...
>>>
>>>
>a
>
>
>>>300 doesn't necesarily mean that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>In the two houses I bowl in, there were a total of two 800 series
>>>>this year, and about fifteen 300 games. That's a little high, but
>>>>it's still nothing compared to some of the houses with really easy
>>>>shots. Up the road an hour, there's one that's pretty much good for
>>>>20-30 pins on your average, and any real 200 bowler will get a 300
>>>>every season there...they have at least one per week across all the
>>>>leagues (in a less than 40 lane house).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That does seem a lot. And it lends itself to another point I made in the
>>>thread. How easy or hard the sport has become is subjective. I would
>>>
>>>
>lend
>
>
>>>my positive opinion towards some standardization of oil patterns. At the
>>>very least, there should be four or five patterns and a set amount of
>>>conditioner. The only problem I forsee is the differences in climate
>>>
>>>
>across
>
>
>>>the country and around the world. Lighter oil wont stay in dry air like
>>>
>>>
>it
>
>
>>>will in humidity... etc. I would imagine that the ABC studied that at
>>>
>>>
>some
>
>
>>>point, though. I would have to guesse that they already have such data
>>>
>>>
>and
>
>
>>>could consider some solutions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>


          
Date: 15 May 2005 23:32:27
From: Al Whiteman
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Thanks for the kind words Tony.
Yes, I am such a dinosaur I am almost an oil puddle. LOL But, I do remember
when we got our names in the ABC annual magazine if we averaged 200, and it
was only half a dozen pages. This was when there were 7 million ABC members.
Just recently concluded running our City Championship. High Scratch series
bowled in the event was 847. There were 2 other 800's shot. IIRC there were
also 5-300's, 2-299's, 1-298, 4 each 11-in -a- row. One young man of 23
years old shot 815 one day and 814 the next; nothing fancy, just throws real
hard, with ball speed near 20 mph down the left edge. I think he has a dozen
300 games. A real nice young man that has taken advantage of an
exceptionally easy, but legal, lane condition and bowling ball. Would
probably average 180 on a sport condition today, but he loves the sport and
would work to improve if "we" (USBC) would take a position on lane
conditions.
40 years ago it was difficult to shoot 300's. We remember when every
bowling alley in town had cash prizes of $300 to $3000 for perfect games.
Some centers even had new cars and speedboats as bonuses. In our
association, there was one 300 about every 3 years. Anyone here remember
(Doug Moye will) when ABC offered an award for the highest game in an
association when no honor score was shot? No one had a cash prize for 800
posted, because no-one ever shot one. A team mate of mine , Bill Lally,
shot the first 800, (803) in the state of Oregon in 1967. ABC gave a money
clip for 800's then. Had a nice little folding knife blade.
You can go to our website, www.pbabowling.com click on who's hot and see the
800 and 300's shot the month of April. I might add that April has been a low
scoring month. And we only have 6800 members.



"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:cpVhe.18512$ya2.3923@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> This is where you are dead wrong. It used to be that you might see a 300
> game rolled in an entire county once every 5-10 years! Not by age group...
> I am talking one, uno, ein, PERIOD! 300 Games are a dime a dozen these
> days. You probably aren't old enough to remember when an entire house
> would quit bowling and gather around a set of lanes if a guy had the front
> nine and was stepping up for the 10th frame. My first 15 years of bowling
> I never saw a 300 bowled. 6 years ago on a scratch league I bowled on in
> Bremerton, WA, for the first time ever (it's in the ABC record books)
> three people bowled perfect games on the same game, and the year prior on
> my Monday night scratch league a righty and a lefty tied when they threw
> 300's at each other! It's fucking out of control!
>




          
Date: 15 May 2005 23:32:57
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes

"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:cpVhe.18512$ya2.3923@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> This is where you are dead wrong. It used to be that you might see a 300
> game rolled in an entire county once every 5-10 years! Not by age
> group... I am talking one, uno, ein, PERIOD! 300 Games are a dime a
> dozen these days. You probably aren't old enough to remember when an
> entire house would quit bowling and gather around a set of lanes if a
> guy had the front nine and was stepping up for the 10th frame. My first
> 15 years of bowling I never saw a 300 bowled. 6 years ago on a scratch
> league I bowled on in Bremerton, WA, for the first time ever (it's in
> the ABC record books) three people bowled perfect games on the same
> game, and the year prior on my Monday night scratch league a righty and
> a lefty tied when they threw 300's at each other! It's fucking out of
> control!

It could certainly be that you are entirely correct. - The game has
changed beyond the wall, though. My reading tells me that there was a time
when there was no lane conditioner. It also indicates conditioner has
changed from petroleum base to the mineral oil used today. Balls are
drastically different now than they were in even recent times. Synthetic
lanes are different... You don't hear of anyone keeping a notebook on lane
topography these days, either.

The days when a 300 wouldn't happen in a whole season are gone. No amount
of lane conditioner or any special patterns are likely to change that. That
is largely due to two changes: Technique and Ball Technology. From the 60s
into the early 80s, about one in a hundred bowlers who owned their own gear
used a fingertip grip (statistic taken from several books written by current
and ex-professional bowlers... where they get that number, I don't know, but
it sounds about right). When the associations were at their peek, most
members didn't take advantage of what we now call revs. Today, more people
hook. Just judging by the leagues I participate in, it might be pretty
close to 35 or 40% who are utilizing drillings that enhance revs.

The other number (those utilizing other ball technology) is much greater.
Even those not utilizing drillings are certainly utilizing core technology
that causes some force to change during the balls travel, and all
manufacturers make claims about their cores being able to cause more energy
to disperse on impact.

Plastic and Urethane balls with no weight blocks are becoming a rarity among
bowlers. The urethane ball of the 1970s is almost completely a thing of the
past. The late 60s and early 70s ... well, was the shot so much harder
then? Or was the bowler less advantaged with equipment technology and more
likely not to be using a technique we now know is more likely to score?
Some of both, maybe? - If you gave Norm Duke the same experience and
equipment he has today and put him in that imaginary time machine I
mentioned earlier in the thread... and sent him back to maybe 1975. How do
you suppose he would do?

I'd like to see a tougher shot. I fully agree with the rest of the herd on
that point. But, what I have to wonder about is if that is completely the
answer. As I wonder, I end up with a hat full of questions. If you get
your "honest shot" that you desire, will you actually see scores drop
drastically for more than a couple of years or so? Will you see the end to
several people in your center being able to score a 300 now and again? How
long will it take for ball technology to catch up with such a condition?
Was the condtion really that much tougher in whatever time period you are
longing for? Or has the bowler become better? Or is the bowlers equipment
just so superior to that which was available during that time period that
there is a "no contest" situation?





           
Date: 12 Jun 2005 20:10:49
From: bowldoug
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes


--
Douglas Moye
Director Greater Detroit Bowling Association
member of consitution and by-laws committee,
and hearings and rerating committee
secretary Drakeshire Merchant Men,
developing fossil\general pest
"twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com > wrote in message
news:3eidncnQOJXZrRXfRVn-3g@bresnan.com...
>

>
> I'd like to see a tougher shot. I fully agree with the rest of the herd
on
> that point. But, what I have to wonder about is if that is completely the
> answer. As I wonder, I end up with a hat full of questions. If you get
> your "honest shot" that you desire, will you actually see scores drop
> drastically for more than a couple of years or so?

I think they would still be considerably lower, but they would also start an
upward climb again but not anywhere near the point they are at now

Will you see the end to
> several people in your center being able to score a 300 now and again?


yes. the number would be reduced dramaticlly in the wally world houses


> long will it take for ball technology to catch up with such a condition?
> Was the condtion really that much tougher in whatever time period you are
> longing for?

yes and no. the legal condition was much much tougher than todays legal
condition BUT most house "bended" the rules to many various degrees to get
higher scoring.

todays conditions as easy as they are, do present a completely different set
of complications that we need to learn how to handle in order to get the
maximum result. In some technicalogical sens. todays conditions are tougher.


<Or has the bowler become better? <

I think the "true" better bowlers today because of the need for technical
knowledge as well as physical is better

Or is the bowlers equipment
> just so superior to that which was available during that time period that
> there is a "no contest" situation?


well, it is definitely a no contest situation BUT if we were to use todays
stuff on yesteryears conditions they would blowup in our faces because of
the difference in conditioners and quantity of application. todays quantity
amkes the old stuff useless and yesteryears quantity makes todays equipment
tougher to use.
whet is considered as desert today was a flodd back then
>
>
>




           
Date: 16 May 2005 03:09:54
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> The days when a 300 wouldn't happen in a whole season are gone. No amount
> of lane conditioner or any special patterns are likely to change that.

Tell that to the people who are bowling in the ABC tournament.

We are 13 weeks into a 20 week tournament where there are 13,222 5-man
teams. If each person on each team bowls all events (which is almost
always true), they bowl 9 games during the tournament. That's a total of
594,990 games. Since we are 65% of the way through, about 386,743 games
would have been bowled by now.

There have only been *seven* 300 games so far. That's one every 55,249
games bowled.

With 35-week leagues, a league would have to have over 500 members to
end up with *one* 300 game at that pace. So, a sufficiently hard pattern
would easily cause no 300 games to be rolled in a league in a season, and it
would be likely that there would be none in the entire *house*, even with 5
leagues per week, each with 100 bowlers.

Note, too, that it wouldn't be a mistake to assume that the 66,110 people
that bowl in the ABC tournament probably are better than the "average"
bowler in the 1-2 million sanctioned bowlers. So, it's even more likely
that an "average" house won't see any 300 games in a year with a tough
pattern.

--
Jeff Rife


            
Date: 16 May 2005 02:47:02
From: twobirds
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Jeff Rife wrote:
> twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>> The days when a 300 wouldn't happen in a whole season are gone. No
>> amount of lane conditioner or any special patterns are likely to
>> change that.
>
> Tell that to the people who are bowling in the ABC tournament.
>
> We are 13 weeks into a 20 week tournament where there are 13,222 5-man
> teams. If each person on each team bowls all events (which is almost
> always true), they bowl 9 games during the tournament. That's a
> total of 594,990 games. Since we are 65% of the way through, about
> 386,743 games would have been bowled by now.
>
> There have only been *seven* 300 games so far. That's one every
> 55,249 games bowled.
>
> With 35-week leagues, a league would have to have over 500 members to
> end up with *one* 300 game at that pace. So, a sufficiently hard
> pattern would easily cause no 300 games to be rolled in a league in a
> season, and it would be likely that there would be none in the entire
> *house*, even with 5 leagues per week, each with 100 bowlers.
>
> Note, too, that it wouldn't be a mistake to assume that the 66,110
> people that bowl in the ABC tournament probably are better than the
> "average" bowler in the 1-2 million sanctioned bowlers. So, it's
> even more likely that an "average" house won't see any 300 games in a
> year with a tough pattern.

I'm not going to snip here... and a short (for me) reply:

You said 7 300s so far with the astranomical number of games. Those who
threw those seven... What can be gathered for information about them? Have
they had 300s before? Was this the first for any of them? Or were those
their 5th or 10th 300 game? The games themselves... Are we talking about
every pin in the pit or some lucky pinfalls? Were these games that
spectators would say, "Wow. I've never seen anything quite like that." Or
were any of them games where spectators would say, "What a lucky bastard!
I've never seen so many lucky pinfalls in a single game!".?

The reason I ask is that I'm having a difficult time wrapping my mind around
it - statistics or no. I watched a straight-ball bowler with a 159 average
get a 300 a couple of weeks ago. That had nothing at all to do with a wall.
And, comparatively, my coach had a 236 average on his last scratch league
(average within four pins of that over four years) and never had a 300 nor
an 800. That 236 is just what he was bowling pretty much every game. One
of the local pros who spent the last couple of years on the tour only bowled
6 pins under his average on tour compared to his highest league average. -
So, since I don't have the same experience that you do, all I can do is
compare data. - And, as you can probably see from what I just said, that
data isn't making much sense to me.




             
Date: 16 May 2005 11:40:11
From: Gator
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Why is it that when someone presents data to you that you have to find a way
to discredit? You sound like a double talk specialist. By that I mean you
ask for data, it is given to you and then you don't acknowledge it you
simply say I need data because your words don't make sense. There are many
other posters here who have made great observations about how equipment,
technology and skills have all evolved and that certainly has something to
do with it. I bowl in several leagues where we have 100+ bowlers involved
and in 4 years have seen 2 300 games.

Last comment. Your note about a 159 avg straight ball bowler rolling a 300.
Just like the rest of your garbage I doubt that's true.

"twobirds" <notareal@eaddy.com > wrote in message
news:jsudnauC9vYzwBXfRVn-hQ@bresnan.com...
> Jeff Rife wrote:
> > twobirds (notareal@eaddy.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> >> The days when a 300 wouldn't happen in a whole season are gone. No
> >> amount of lane conditioner or any special patterns are likely to
> >> change that.
> >
> > Tell that to the people who are bowling in the ABC tournament.
> >
> > We are 13 weeks into a 20 week tournament where there are 13,222 5-man
> > teams. If each person on each team bowls all events (which is almost
> > always true), they bowl 9 games during the tournament. That's a
> > total of 594,990 games. Since we are 65% of the way through, about
> > 386,743 games would have been bowled by now.
> >
> > There have only been *seven* 300 games so far. That's one every
> > 55,249 games bowled.
> >
> > With 35-week leagues, a league would have to have over 500 members to
> > end up with *one* 300 game at that pace. So, a sufficiently hard
> > pattern would easily cause no 300 games to be rolled in a league in a
> > season, and it would be likely that there would be none in the entire
> > *house*, even with 5 leagues per week, each with 100 bowlers.
> >
> > Note, too, that it wouldn't be a mistake to assume that the 66,110
> > people that bowl in the ABC tournament probably are better than the
> > "average" bowler in the 1-2 million sanctioned bowlers. So, it's
> > even more likely that an "average" house won't see any 300 games in a
> > year with a tough pattern.
>
> I'm not going to snip here... and a short (for me) reply:
>
> You said 7 300s so far with the astranomical number of games. Those who
> threw those seven... What can be gathered for information about them?
Have
> they had 300s before? Was this the first for any of them? Or were those
> their 5th or 10th 300 game? The games themselves... Are we talking about
> every pin in the pit or some lucky pinfalls? Were these games that
> spectators would say, "Wow. I've never seen anything quite like that."
Or
> were any of them games where spectators would say, "What a lucky bastard!
> I've never seen so many lucky pinfalls in a single game!".?
>
> The reason I ask is that I'm having a difficult time wrapping my mind
around
> it - statistics or no. I watched a straight-ball bowler with a 159
average
> get a 300 a couple of weeks ago. That had nothing at all to do with a
wall.
> And, comparatively, my coach had a 236 average on his last scratch league
> (average within four pins of that over four years) and never had a 300 nor
> an 800. That 236 is just what he was bowling pretty much every game. One
> of the local pros who spent the last couple of years on the tour only
bowled
> 6 pins under his average on tour compared to his highest league
verage. -
> So, since I don't have the same experience that you do, all I can do is
> compare data. - And, as you can probably see from what I just said, that
> data isn't making much sense to me.
>
>




      
Date: 15 May 2005 15:02:17
From: Ryan Press \(NI\)
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Heh, I'm a youngster (well, not as much anymore lol), but through no fault
of my own, rather living in a pishy country bowlingwise, I dont see the
great wall of china shots as much as most countries, and get SOOO frustrated
when i read the discussion boards and forums on the net, and hear of bowlers
with half my ability (not trying to sound too big headed by the way!) having
shot higher series's and games...

I've been bowling 10 years +, have represented my country at junior, youth
and full adult international competitions on MANY occasions, including as
national champion at the European Cup for Individuals, and the world
championships.... I have also won tournaments internationally... I run a
proshop, and manage a successful youg team....

I STILL HAV'NT HAD A 300!!!
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr lol and have a high
series of 771...

I'm constantly hearing of bowlers from England shooting 300s and 800s, yet
any time i've played the same tournament as them they havn't beaten me...

Sorry for the rant/story...

Ryan


"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote in message
news:FUBhe.628$h86.556@tornado.socal.rr.com...
> Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop operator
> and PBA member (not sure if he still has his card). Al is old enough to
> remember when there hadn't been a 800 shot "ever" at Nationals, when you
> get a "gold" ring for a 300 game as well as money from local businesses,
> 800's were very, very, very rare, and "no" sanctioned 900's had been
> recorded! Al carried a 200 average back when that meant something. There
> is nothing to strive for when strikes are literally given to you. If
> there is no need to be accurate, there is no challenge... If there is no
> challenge, there is no sport... period!
>
> twobirds wrote:
>
> >Al Whiteman wrote:
> >
> >
> >><snip>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
> >>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
> >>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
> >>>
> >>>-aki
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch
> >>because they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey"
> >>but haven't shot 800.
> >>That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Seems like it would be worse if they were bragging on thier 800s, eh?
Seems
> >odd that you would think that the fact that they are "bitching" about not
> >having an 800 yet emphasiases the destruction.... Seems to me that the
> >youngsters you mention still have something to strive for and therefore
will
> >keep bowling. That would logically highlight the fact that the sport has
a
> >future in those youngsters.
> >
> >
> >
> >




       
Date: 16 May 2005 04:23:13
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
You are absolutely correct. I have three 300 games and a high series of
793 and I have no doubt that you could kick my ass... especially these
days with only bowling a single league... but I'd give it all up to bowl
on a real shot again.

Ryan Press (NI) wrote:

>Heh, I'm a youngster (well, not as much anymore lol), but through no fault
>of my own, rather living in a pishy country bowlingwise, I dont see the
>great wall of china shots as much as most countries, and get SOOO frustrated
>when i read the discussion boards and forums on the net, and hear of bowlers
>with half my ability (not trying to sound too big headed by the way!) having
>shot higher series's and games...
>
>I've been bowling 10 years +, have represented my country at junior, youth
>and full adult international competitions on MANY occasions, including as
>national champion at the European Cup for Individuals, and the world
>championships.... I have also won tournaments internationally... I run a
>proshop, and manage a successful youg team....
>
>I STILL HAV'NT HAD A 300!!!
>Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr lol and have a high
>series of 771...
>
>I'm constantly hearing of bowlers from England shooting 300s and 800s, yet
>any time i've played the same tournament as them they havn't beaten me...
>
>Sorry for the rant/story...
>
>Ryan
>
>
>"Tony R Smith" <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>news:FUBhe.628$h86.556@tornado.socal.rr.com...
>
>
>>Sir, with all due respect... Al Whiteman is a retired pro shop operator
>>and PBA member (not sure if he still has his card). Al is old enough to
>>remember when there hadn't been a 800 shot "ever" at Nationals, when you
>>get a "gold" ring for a 300 game as well as money from local businesses,
>>800's were very, very, very rare, and "no" sanctioned 900's had been
>>recorded! Al carried a 200 average back when that meant something. There
>>is nothing to strive for when strikes are literally given to you. If
>>there is no need to be accurate, there is no challenge... If there is no
>>challenge, there is no sport... period!
>>
>>twobirds wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Al Whiteman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Personally, I getting sick and tired of hearing people who's only
>>>>>bowled for a year complaining that they ONLY average a 190 and
>>>>>have ONLY one 300 to show for it.
>>>>>
>>>>>-aki
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>What bugs me even more, are the kids, 14 & 15 yrs old that bitch
>>>>because they have been bowling for 2 years and only have one "trey"
>>>>but haven't shot 800.
>>>>That REALLY emphases the destruction of our sport
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Seems like it would be worse if they were bragging on thier 800s, eh?
>>>
>>>
>Seems
>
>
>>>odd that you would think that the fact that they are "bitching" about not
>>>having an 800 yet emphasiases the destruction.... Seems to me that the
>>>youngsters you mention still have something to strive for and therefore
>>>
>>>
>will
>
>
>>>keep bowling. That would logically highlight the fact that the sport has
>>>
>>>
>a
>
>
>>>future in those youngsters.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>


        
Date: 16 May 2005 06:14:52
From: Evil Joe Schmuckatelli
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Mon, 16 May 2005 04:23:13 UTC, Tony R Smith <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com >
wrote:

> You are absolutely correct. I have three 300 games and a high series of
> 793 and I have no doubt that you could kick my ass... especially these
> days with only bowling a single league... but I'd give it all up to bowl
> on a real shot again.

I don't suppose this is the time to mention our Gold Pin league... with the
PBA shot and heavy gold pins...?

;-)

(Bit of a drive down to Chula Vista, though.)


--
------------------------------------------------+------------------
"One World, One Web, One Program." -- Microsoft


         
Date: 20 May 2005 22:23:51
From: Michael W. Lee
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
"Evil Joe Schmuckatelli" <joeschmuck@KILL.SPAMFORD.WALLACE.NOW > wrote in
message news:bqxLzydo2Rsp-pn2-KwF4jR4dQdsx@littlebox...
> On Mon, 16 May 2005 04:23:13 UTC, Tony R Smith <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You are absolutely correct. I have three 300 games and a high series of
>> 793 and I have no doubt that you could kick my ass... especially these
>> days with only bowling a single league... but I'd give it all up to bowl
>> on a real shot again.
>
> I don't suppose this is the time to mention our Gold Pin league... with
> the
> PBA shot and heavy gold pins...?
>
> ;-)
>
> (Bit of a drive down to Chula Vista, though.)
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------+------------------
> "One World, One Web, One Program." -- Microsoft


         
Date: 17 May 2005 01:25:25
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Yeah, I won't be doing that anytime soon. ;-)

Evil Joe Schmuckatelli wrote:

>On Mon, 16 May 2005 04:23:13 UTC, Tony R Smith <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>You are absolutely correct. I have three 300 games and a high series of
>>793 and I have no doubt that you could kick my ass... especially these
>>days with only bowling a single league... but I'd give it all up to bowl
>>on a real shot again.
>>
>>
>
>I don't suppose this is the time to mention our Gold Pin league... with the
>PBA shot and heavy gold pins...?
>
>;-)
>
>(Bit of a drive down to Chula Vista, though.)
>
>
>
>


         
Date: 16 May 2005 14:47:24
From: JohnO
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
>
> I don't suppose this is the time to mention our Gold Pin league... with
> the
> PBA shot and heavy gold pins...?
>
> ;-)
The oil is going to be the hard part, I can tell you from experience that
the gold pins aren't much different from 3.6 pins. They fly different, but
you gain just as much as you lose, especially if the backends are clean. One
thing...if your ball is still sliding when it hits, you're doomed. :-)

-John O




          
Date: 17 May 2005 06:06:06
From: Evil Joe Schmuckatelli
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Mon, 16 May 2005 14:47:24 UTC, "JohnO" <johno@@&%heathkit##.com > wrote:

> One thing...if your ball is still sliding when it hits, you're doomed. :-)

Now I'm confused. I thought that was a good thing.

"While it is certainly the goal of a bowler to have the ball all but finished
with skid by the time it hits the pins, there is another consideration --
ending the skid stage too soon. After the rotational motion takes over from
skid, the direction of the side-roll begins to align itself with its forward
progress and direction; and as it continues to do so, if given the time and
distance, it will lose its ability to impart optimum action on the pins (this
commonly referred to as 'the ball rolled out'). Certainly, a bowler doesn't
want this to happen. Therefore, just getting the ball to stop skidding
strongly and start hooking is not the complete answer to attaining optimum
ball reaction."

-- Tom Kouros, "Par Bowling: The Challenge", p.282

--
------------------------------------------------+------------------
"One World, One Web, One Program." -- Microsoft


           
Date: 17 May 2005 11:45:37
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Read what you have written, Joe... It talks about ending skid "too
soon". The progression is skid, hook, and roll. When the ball stops
skidding the CG tries to align itself with your track (hook stage). The
time it takes for your ball to go from the end of the skid stage to CG
on your track (roll out) is the "sweet spot" where the ball imparts the
most energy to the pins. You don't what to hit the pocket in either the
skid stage or the roll out stage... both of which will result in deflection.

Evil Joe Schmuckatelli wrote:

>On Mon, 16 May 2005 14:47:24 UTC, "JohnO" <johno@@&%heathkit##.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>One thing...if your ball is still sliding when it hits, you're doomed. :-)
>>
>>
>
>Now I'm confused. I thought that was a good thing.
>
>"While it is certainly the goal of a bowler to have the ball all but finished
>with skid by the time it hits the pins, there is another consideration --
>ending the skid stage too soon. After the rotational motion takes over from
>skid, the direction of the side-roll begins to align itself with its forward
>progress and direction; and as it continues to do so, if given the time and
>distance, it will lose its ability to impart optimum action on the pins (this
>commonly referred to as 'the ball rolled out'). Certainly, a bowler doesn't
>want this to happen. Therefore, just getting the ball to stop skidding
>strongly and start hooking is not the complete answer to attaining optimum
>ball reaction."
>
> -- Tom Kouros, "Par Bowling: The Challenge", p.282
>
>
>


            
Date: 17 May 2005 17:28:27
From: Joe Schmuckatelli
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
On Tue, 17 May 2005 11:45:37 GMT, Tony R Smith
<tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com > wrote:

>Read what you have written, Joe... It talks about ending skid "too
>soon".

Right -- I think I read that the same way you do; that it's a Good
Thing (tm) for the ball to hit the pins after it starts to hook but
before it rolls out; ergo, it's still sliding. Yet John wrote that
"if your ball is still sliding when it hits..." Maybe I'm just
splitting hairs too fine. <shrug >


--
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------
"One World; One Web; One Program." -- Microsoft


             
Date: 18 May 2005 00:40:51
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
No, the balls stops skidding and then the CG migrates to the track...
once the CG has made it to the track it has rolled out. The point where
the ball transitions from skid to roll is often referred to as the break
point. Regardless of the amount of hand you have, the ball surface, lane
condition, etc. the break point is easily seen as a sudden change in
direction (the ball may arc during the skid stage). From the break point
to the roll (or more correctly, roll out) stage is the hook stage...
this is the sweet spot. Hitting the pocket during the hook stage will
result in the best carry.

Joe Schmuckatelli wrote:

>On Tue, 17 May 2005 11:45:37 GMT, Tony R Smith
><tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Read what you have written, Joe... It talks about ending skid "too
>>soon".
>>
>>
>
>Right -- I think I read that the same way you do; that it's a Good
>Thing (tm) for the ball to hit the pins after it starts to hook but
>before it rolls out; ergo, it's still sliding. Yet John wrote that
>"if your ball is still sliding when it hits..." Maybe I'm just
>splitting hairs too fine. <shrug>
>
>
>
>


             
Date: 17 May 2005 18:04:35
From: Darby
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes

"Joe Schmuckatelli" <joeschmuck@KILL.SPAMFORD.WALLACE.NOW > wrote
> On Tue, 17 May 2005 11:45:37 GMT, Tony R Smith
> <tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>>Read what you have written, Joe... It talks about ending skid "too
>>soon".
>
> Right -- I think I read that the same way you do; that it's a Good
> Thing (tm) for the ball to hit the pins after it starts to hook but
> before it rolls out; ergo, it's still sliding. Yet John wrote that
> "if your ball is still sliding when it hits..." Maybe I'm just
> splitting hairs too fine. <shrug>
>
Does that mean "skid, hook, roll" is no longer how it's done? Maybe that's
where my average went. I'm still trying to do that and my ball is not doing
that!
Dar




              
Date: 18 May 2005 16:52:08
From: Phil Paskos
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes

Doesn't any body call this mid-roll anymore? I always mark the axis with a
small pin hole. Throw the ball in practice with a piece of tape at this
point and you will see where the ball starts it's mid-roll. Very valuable
tool. Not legal in tournament or league play though. Altering the surface of
the ball?
If you mark and throw the ball well, the mark will appear stationary on
the ball until it begins it's mid-roll. That's when the ball should hit the
pocket. The mark usually will move down and toward the pocket.

Comments?

Phil P

>> Right -- I think I read that the same way you do; that it's a Good
>> Thing (tm) for the ball to hit the pins after it starts to hook but
>> before it rolls out; ergo, it's still sliding. Yet John wrote that
>> "if your ball is still sliding when it hits..." Maybe I'm just
>> splitting hairs too fine. <shrug>
>>
> Does that mean "skid, hook, roll" is no longer how it's done? Maybe that's
> where my average went. I'm still trying to do that and my ball is not
> doing that!
> Dar
>




             
Date: 17 May 2005 19:57:29
From: JohnO
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
> wrote:
>
>>Read what you have written, Joe... It talks about ending skid "too
>>soon".
>
> Right -- I think I read that the same way you do; that it's a Good
> Thing (tm) for the ball to hit the pins after it starts to hook but
> before it rolls out; ergo, it's still sliding.

I don't read it that way. Rolling out is (my impression, anyway) is when the
ball quits going right-to-left, and starts going straight again.

-John O




            
Date: 17 May 2005 12:40:46
From: JohnO
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
> You don't what to hit the pocket in either the skid stage or the roll out
> stage... both of which will result in deflection.
>

That's what I used to see from certain bowlers, they end up in 10-pin hell.
You can get away with this on the 3.6 pins, but the 3.10 pins will kick your
butt.

In any case, watch what carries and what doesn't. I saw the slow rollers get
frustrated, as well as the guys with a ton of hand and too much speed.

-John O





      
Date: 15 May 2005 04:21:46
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> Al carried a 200 average back when that meant something. There
> is nothing to strive for when strikes are literally given to you. If
> there is no need to be accurate, there is no challenge... If there is no
> challenge, there is no sport... period!

Tell me about it.

I *sucked* this season. I did so many different things horribly wrong so
many times, it was sad. Even so, I managed a 202 composite average across
all my leagues.

--
Jeff Rife


   
Date: 14 May 2005 14:05:28
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: Roto grip speaks out about USBC proposed changes
HarleyVA@nospam.net (bounce@bounce.net) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> Many of the smaller ball
> manufacturers will simply go out of business. With all the research
> and marketing they already have to endure, their profit margins are
> already thin. Remember when the three biggest ball manufacturers
> were AMF, Brunswick and Ebonite? Now there's literally dozens of
> manufactuers (although some of them are partners with the larger
> companies). That gives the consumer more choices and keeps
> prices competitive. That may become a thing of the past as the
> larger companies will be the only ones that can endure the high
> cost of retooling their plants.

It's nice to see that the larger companies are starting to come out against
these rules. They do stand to gain a lot of money if people give in and
buy new equipment, so they are trading cash for respect. That shows some
real character.

--
Jeff Rife