Bronze, Silver and GOLD patterns!

[steve jones]

Strop I had in my mind that perhaps the first "culprit" was the Yellow Dot...certainly not a pure reactive - but guilty by association I would think! But then a ball specialist would be much, much wiser than I am on the topic....Lawrie for instance?

Steve

 

[Troyza]

Jim, you took the golf allusion too literally. The concept was to have different conditions for every lane played. I don't think by any means was anyone trying to say a 300 was anything at all like a hole in one (which can actually be calculated by some degree, in terms of distance & club used anyways)
& there are actually 2 similarities between the sport. You forgot both work on a pendulum system, the bio-mechanics is VERY similar, or so sources say. But thats a completely different topic, lol. Just saying, I don't think it was as laughable as you suggest, but that's just my opinion.
Besides, if everyone used logic around here, there'd be a lot less discussion.

 

[Brenton_Davy]

Strop I had in my mind that perhaps the first "culprit" was the Yellow Dot...certainly not a pure reactive - but guilty by association I would think! But then a ball specialist would be much, much wiser than I am on the topic....Lawrie for instance?

Steve

Steve,

You are basically correct in that the Yellow Dot was the nearest thing to a reactive in the pre-urethane era, but more specifically, the "Bleeders". The true bleeders were a limited run of balls that whose covers were cured incorrectly. Word has it that Columbia used to cure many of their balls in an outside facility, so they all cured differently and the bleeders were an extreme example of this.

I guess the nearest thing to a pre-urethane "oiler" was the Brunswick LT-48, a highly porous rubber ball that really pushed the Durometer limits of minimum hardness. But the main characteristic of this ball was it's oil absorption, which was by far the greatest of the pre reactive era. Shame it also tended to make the shell illegally soft within 12 months.

I went through 4 in 3 years in the early 80's LOL, but they were the true performance ball of the era.

 

[steve jones]

The very reason Brenton why I wanted to bring John Petraglia to Australia for a Melbourne Cup way back then - along with a container of LT48's - we would have sold them all. Sadly John does not fly.

As for balls - well in the dark recesses of my mind [which lately has proven to be very suspect insofar as accurate recall is concerned] I want to remember the Excaliber ball as a very guilty party to the scoring blow out - but then I could have the name wrong so I'm not sure. I just recall the Asian Zone FIQ in Perth [1990 something - early?] where this one ball dominated and I think it was it's first real major test - at least in this country - and the Aussie team were well fitted out with them. But once again I can't rely too much on memory.

Steve

 

[jimcross]

Now that we have firmly identified a very major factor in the increased frequency of 300 games, and as an aside to that, the availability of a range of those items to a limited number of people ( for a range of mainly economic reasons ), giving them an advantage which can probably not be cancelled out by different, even 'easier' lane conditions, can we revert to a 300 being a 300? There never was a time when all 300s were equal, and I feel confident in predicting., that there never will be.

 

[jimcross]

Just found that link to TBA 300 game list. So,--the up to date info is :-
From 1961 / 1971--------- 16 300s
1972 / 1982--------- 32 300s
1983 / 1993--------- 282 300s
1994 / 2004---------1096 300s
2004 / 2009--------- 951 300s

Lane conditions are the key to 300 games. True or false ???

 

[Troyza]

It's just technology in general, the technology of the sport has increased so much that perhaps we are losing what 'sport' is actually left in the game of tenpin.
From lane oilers, to ball technology, playing surfaces.. hell, even having comfortable surroundings can help someone keep their concentration.
With all that said, it does take something special to stay concentrated enough to bowl a 300, despite how apparently easy the sport has become. It's not like there are 20 bowled each week, in every center, for example.

 

[jimcross]

It's just technology in general, the technology of the sport has increased so much that perhaps we are losing what 'sport' is actually left in the game of tenpin.
From lane oilers, to ball technology, playing surfaces.. hell, even having comfortable surroundings can help someone keep their concentration.
With all that said, it does take something special to stay concentrated enough to bowl a 300, despite how apparently easy the sport has become. It's not like there are 20 bowled each week, in every center, for example.

Exactly, and this is no reason to degrade some of them. They are all affected by one or more of these high-tech 'improvements'. You can't degrade some without upping the value of others. Leave 300 games alone. Belmo, next time your'e relaxing in Nice, watch the girls or something. Stick to actual bowling - your'e very good at that.

 

[$$Pricey$$]

Exactly, and this is no reason to degrade some of them. They are all affected by one or more of these high-tech 'improvements'. You can't degrade some without upping the value of others. Leave 300 games alone. Belmo, next time your'e relaxing in Nice, watch the girls or something. Stick to actual bowling - your'e very good at that.

whats with the attack on belmo??

it was a good idea. whether it would work or not is a different story.
my point is at least belmo is thinking of ways to progess our sport and make it bigger and more public.
if everyone was as enthusiastic and proactive about growing bowling as a sport like belmo is (and im sure there are any others like that) instead of only coming on TB and discrediting everyone elses suggestions and ideas then i have no doubt that bowling would be in a much better position than it is at the moment.
but then again there is always at least one person that needs to come and ***** and moan about something (more like anything).:surrender:

 

[lordofthepins]

Just read all posts here ... This discussion could last for a decade with excellent points both sides..

If we are to devlelop and improve the "sport" of bowling, and if most of us would agree that begins with our humble league bowlers (to which I am proudly in that category) why not introduce the idea of a harder pattern to them... Perhaps like a lot of centres who have their own monthly in house tournaments (9 tap, scotch doubles whatever ), introduce the concept as a "sport league"... Educate them very gradually, into understanding that this is the next big step up for aspiring bowlers... Enlighten them into realising their 200 plus ave on THS is great, but now this is your next big challenge, your ave will drop, but stick at it, and u will be rewarded long term.. Can u imagine having to hit within a couple of boards all night at the backend to score well.. I'm shi*ing myself as I'm typing this with the very thought of it. I love my cushion on my THS, I need it lol.But over time, I'll push myself to be the best that I can be, this includes bowling on tougher shots.. Time/money and family mean I bowl locally... Thats fine, I know what I bowl on, but I also know that my game is not up to what many of you bowl on.. But I'm working at it..

Imagine once a month league on a quiet night of the week (or weekend day!!), promote the **** out of it within the centre, every centre could have a "sport league", from there u could have centre competitions, it may just work...That league could be as small as a 6 team league. Champions having options to play off against other centres "sport league champs". All ideas.

My centre has little odd tournies from time to time.. A once a month tough league might be a real eye opener, and gives them time to lick their wounds and then spend the next month hopefully working at their game, and possibly shooting big numbers back on their THS.. They get the best of both worlds.. Even a monthly league isn't too much time away from their normal lives..

Just have to make sure the pattern is challenging, not just a couple of feet oiled more, something relatively difficult, within their first game they would have a new found admiration for tournament bowlers out there...

my only thought on the gradings of a 300... Leave it alone, well alone.. Please take nothing away from a joe bowler if they shoot one. It takes skill, and luck (and a whole lotta for most league bowlers), and this maybe their highlight of their 20 yrs of bowling. Educate them on the lane conditions and raise aweness of harder patterns, getting involved in tougher leagues,but leave their singularly most important standout defining moment in their bowling to be remembered with happy memories, not tainted by "its only a bronze", or "its just a league 300"...

Just a thought, its late, off to bed. Goodnight all
LOTP

PS Love it when the av 150 bowler (who bowls straight down the middle) complains to everyone about how the centre has stuffed up the oil.. You have a giggle to yourself at their ignorance, but in truth, they just don't know any better. Sadly, they really are never exposed or made aware of oiling patterns, let alone bowling forums, where anyone can learn a lot, just by reading... Education is the key for respect, and the growth of higher end competitions out there for bowling

 

[WAC4504]

I think the idea has merit. I don't know how things are in Australia but here in the states the USBC is talking about the same sort of thing, 3 oil patterns, easy medium and difficult. I didn't bother to read the article though. As it is now the center has several different shot patterns already, the senior pattern has less oil than the mixed pattern and the mens only has the most. I believe that we should make league bowling a challenge to fit the equipment of todays bowler. In my personal opinion 300 games are getting moor and moor common place. I cant think right now of how to put his but, it's like the "300 game" has lost respect. I mean come on look at the balls we have today, no oil can stop us. Now that doesn't mean I don't want to bowl a 300, it just means I want this sport to be a challenge. Any way that's my 2 cent worth. Good luck and good bowling.
Bill

 

[jimcross]

I’m a bit surprised that this subject is still attracting diverse comment.
Let’s try to EXAMINE the suggestion, rather than REACT to it.

1.) Through THIS THREAD and others – Wood V/S Synthetic, and Only ONE BALL Allowed, is it the majority view that lane conditions, are the ONLY influence on high scoring?
I don’t think so.

2.) Is it even the view that lane conditions are the major
factor?

3.) What is the other main factor? Ball technology.

4.) Let us then say that it’s 50-50. Is that not reasonable?

5.) Is the ‘unusual’ high scoring confined to league type
bowlers, bowling on ‘easy’ house conditions?

6.) OR does it apply across the board to first level bowlers,
including the Pro Tour bowlers? – Look at the records
across the decades.

7.) Should we not just accept that conditions and
technology have made it easier, across the board?

8.) Practically, in the real world, how would anyone set
up a fair and verifiable system of assessment as to whether or not the lane conditions merited a Gold
Silver or Bronze 300?

9.) On an ‘automatic’, event type assessment, such as
was suggested, and Belmo, and other like bowlers
were bowling in the same league and just reached,
or didn’t make their average, and someone bowled
300, it would be a Bronze one. WHY?

10.) Maybe all the Pros and , say, ranked bowlers, or at
least ball sponsored ones, should all only ever get
Bronze 300s, because of that advantage? No, I’m
not serious!!

Let’s all get our feet back on the ground. Please ?

 

[bluey]

Anyone that thinks the ball technology is the major factor should speak to the people that bowled at Berri. Highest ave after qualifying was 189? New balls do carry better no doubt, but the oil condition can make it either very easy or almost impossible to hit the pocket. Most guys that can truly bowl will average high without reactives on a house pattern.

 

[jimcross]

Bluey, yes, I don't disagree with that.

Sometimes in different events, it's sometimes one, and sometimes the other, and maybe sometimes both.

Either way, 300s ARE easier to bowl than they used to be, and regardless whether people think that's good or bad, we're not going back. That's it.

On this thread, and on this subject, I think that if that if we want to " grade" them, we're on the wrong track. You can't downgrade some of them, without upgrading others, or vise / versa.

If we did grade them ( indeed could, fairly ), what, higher than gold are we going to call those bowled before , say, 1970 ? That's just a date plucked out of the air, to demonstrate.

I really think we should leave the 300s alone, or completely stop making any sort of a fuss over them.at all.

Yes / No ?

 

[Roysa]

are we then going to grade down a 300 if someone goes brooklyn for strike number 5 or 9 or 12 to the point that we will just call it a 279 or 299 instead. And what about the poor bugger who leaves a ringing 10 pin in the same frames, does he get graded up to a 300 cos he was unlucky??

Leave it as it is, if you are lucky enough to bowl one GOOD ON YOU!!! If you are lucky enough to bowl 10 or more EVEN BETTER!!!

Id like to think that if i ever bowled one and got a lucky break in there once or twice that might just cancel itself out in my lifetime of ringing 10's stone cold 7's.

As long as you are enjoying it keep rolling, if not stop whinging and stop bowling.

 

[Geoff300]

With current technology and lane conditions set in THIS country
it is far too easy to bowl large averages and lots of 300 games

With current Ball technology you can still make the game more about
skill by making lane pattern conditions such that requires a bowler to
be accurate

Presently it is a joke

If you think that is harsh then check the record books for anyone
who averages 220 here in aust and goes overseas and has to play
on real conditions, what do they average ???? 190 !!!!

Furthermore that really is the average they are capable of
not 220

Sorry for the reality check but it is true and been proven

 

[WACMEM]

Two days ago I posted my opinion, on this subject and was unable to return to the site. So I'll just say let the facts speak for them selfs.

 

[jimcross]

Anyone that thinks the ball technology is the major factor should speak to the people that bowled at Berri. Highest ave after qualifying was 189? New balls do carry better no doubt, but the oil condition can make it either very easy or almost impossible to hit the pocket. Most guys that can truly bowl will average high without reactives on a house pattern.

158-279-156. the following week 223-219-223. l'll be buggered if l can explain it.
__________________
Bluey

I can. Ball technology. The more Hi-Tec the ball, the more small differences in what you do are magnified, hence 158-279-156.

In 1961, when bowling a 187 league average, I thought the world was about to end when I bowled the Very Rare 175 low game. Mind you, 225s were equally rare at the other end. The balls didn't do much, but they didn't magnify your errors either. Generally speaking they didn't give you either more or less than you deserved.
Jim

 

[Easy Tiger]

It started with the balls. The balls got more advanced and to protect the lanes, more oil was applied. It was soon worked out that oil on the lane could be manipulated to increase (or decrease) scoring. Ball companies have battled to create better technology to combat lane conditions ever since and hence the explosion, probably from around the early 90s I guess. Less oil on the lane (overall) will most often equal less reliance on high tech gear, particularly with regards to coverstocks. Pull the oil and see how many supersoaker balls are used (at the same time, risking damage to the lane surface).

Anything that can create friction and good angular pocket entry will cause high scoring as carry will be better (largely dependent on the ball). If you can find a way to increase your room for error on the lane then it will magnify this scoring even further (largely dependent on the lane condition).

In summary - the balls created the monster, lane conditions are the solution as it is too late to slap more regulations on the balls for current technology.

So the lane condition idea of Bronze/Silver/Gold certainly has merit, but again not sure how it would be policed with regards to 300s and other achievement scores.

 

[bluey]

158-279-156. the following week 223-219-223. l'll be buggered if l can explain it.
__________________
Bluey

I can. Ball technology. The more Hi-Tec the ball, the more small differences in what you do are magnified, hence 158-279-156.

In 1961, when bowling a 187 league average, I thought the world was about to end when I bowled the Very Rare 175 low game. Mind you, 225s were equally rare at the other end. The balls didn't do much, but they didn't magnify your errors either. Generally speaking they didn't give you either more or less than you deserved.
Jim

I see you have been cutting and pasting Jim, the ball for the first game was a Hammer 3D offset, about 12-13yrs old. The ball for the second game was an even older Hammer Red Reactive, and the last game was 9 miss all the way after the Red Reactive started leaving corners. My big mistake for the night was forgetting what ball was in what bag after the weekend skins. The folowing week l checked my bag and put in the gear that best matches up to Boronia. Some balls read the lanes alot better than others in this house.