In the ‘60s, one of the things I used to do was roll out a piece of plasticine into a little roll, about 1/16 inch diameter, and about an inch long and press it lightly onto the lane, lengthways along the join between 2 boards near the arrows. I then used to bowl the ball with the aim to flatten it out. I expected to achieve that, and did, the majority of deliveries. ( I’ve got no idea what percentage.)
As that was close to 50 years ago, and being 77 as opposed to 27, I find some minor differences in what the body will do, so I assumed that would be a bit much to ask to-day.
Added to this were opinions apparently well based and informed, principly from Brenton and Robbie, and concerning targets sixteen times bigger than that, that even if your eyes ‘saw’ the target board hit, it almost certainly hadn’t happened.
I can’t be bothered re-posting the reasons – they are all posted earlier.
Before I remembered my ‘plasticine trick’ way back, I had thought I would go down to Ballina Bowl, and get on lane 12 ( last lane) and have someone stand beside the arrows and watch closely while I bowled balls at a designated board. Then I thought “ what the hell” I’ll just be told that everyone’s eyes are subject to the same illusions, and they only thought they saw what I thought I saw.
So I looked in the workshop and actually found an old piece of plasticine. I wasn’t game to roll it out thin, so I settled for ¼ inch. Robbie, I actually measured it with a micrometer – it was actually 6thou undersize. Anyhow, it was only 4 inches long, so I cut it into 4 pieces – 10 would have been ideal.
So this morning I went down to the bowl and got on lane 12. In an earlier post, I explained that I didn’t see the ball much before it reached the target distance, or until it was well down the lane approaching the pins, but I had no idea what these distances were. So, in order to set this experiment up properly, I set out the following relevant measurements and distances.
Foot rear of foul line at delivery ------------------------ 45cm.
Target board ( beside arrows) to foot ( as above ) -----Approx 5 metres ( dependant on arrow )
Ball seen in focus -------------------------------------------Approx 40cm before target board section
( board section means a section of board approx 2 ½ inches long, on which I focus)
Ball next sighted after passing target board --------------Approx 7 metres from headpin.
Eye Height ( from approach / lane surface ) -------------Approx 1.15 metres.
So, having warmed up – can’t hit a 3 board target to start, because of arthritis in fingers –
This is what I did.
Placed first plasticine roll along board join between board 8 and 9, and adjacent to 2nd arrow. – Bowled ball, flattened plasticine.
Bowled another ball, then placed next piece of plasticine, bowled again and so on, until all 4 rolls had been bowled at once. I have 4 odd shaped, flattened, pieces of plasticine, average size about 1 ½ inches by 5/8 inches, from a fairly close rectangle to an elongated pear shape.
Now, of course I wouldn’t do that all the time, but I have always felt that I was focussing and bowling to this accuracy, and I knew not just what board, but what part of it I hit. When I miss, I know that I miss, and, JUST AS IMPORTANTLY by how much. When I miss, or when I hit, but from different alignment, either from ‘drifting’ on approach, or swing of arm slightly out to in or vice versa, and then when I look up to see the ball, it is usually going where I expect from the error in delivery I have already seen.
So, I can hit a ¼ board fairly consistently. I always felt that I knew that, but seeing the kerfuffle I caused saying I could consistently hit one board, frankly, I wasn’t game to say so.
Why did I include the height of eye measurement above?
I’m so pleased you asked.
I think it was Robbie who said that it was not possible to see a ball roll over a target, as the ball itself was in the way, or something like that. ( I hope I’m not misquoting him )
Whoever said it, this is not so. When I bowl the ball, I am looking at, in a very exact focus, that part of the board which is the target. It is in sharp focus and everything outside that is progressively less sharp. At this time, I am AWARE of the ball, virtually as a moving ‘shape’ only. When it reaches around 40cm from the target, it enters the sharp focus area. I watch it for that instant then lose sight of it almost at once. Somehow, in that ‘snapshot’ type instant I have also noted it’s angular direction, leading me to expect a good, light, or high hit. I’m usually right.
The eye height V/S “seeing’ the ball ?? That eye height, at 5 metres from the target produces an angle of sight of around 15 degrees. At that angle, the board at 5 metres is easy to see. At 5 metres, at that angle the lower curvature of the ball is also easy to see, leaving only a section of around an inch or less which you need to estimate the centre of, to accurately ‘see’ the track section.
Anyone can try it. Place a ball on a lane, at arrow distance. Stand 30 / 40 cm behind foul line, lower your eyes to just over a metre and see for yourself.
Anyhow, after all that, and the fact that I can consistently hit a very small target, it is obvious that accuracy is the minor partner in scoring. When I fix my spare problem – and I will, I still doubt that I would average much more than around 205, going on past experiences.
Makes me wonder though. What if someone who currently averages high ( not just on ‘gimme’ conditions) and compared to me sprayed the ball around, also incorporated that sort of accuracy into their game. Would probably have to be a stroker, not a cranker, though.
