Radical Guru vs. Well... Everybody!

[jason_doust]

Here's a new take on ball comparison videos. I'm definitely not set up to do this level of preview work! In fact, almost nobody is!

What if you had Throbot demonstrate your ball? And what if you got Throbot to throw competitor's products to compare? Well, you'd have to be pretty confident in your product to publish.

This is very interesting...

http://radicalbowling.com/news/perception-versus-reality

I've drilled and seen Chris Thomas' Radical Guru in action and I have to say, I'm very impressed. Ken McLachlan is the Australian distributor and he sent me this link. It's impressive stuff.

Cheers,
Jason

 

[AJD]

Agree, very interesting to watch. And the way the video overlaid the lines was good.

But, from a marketing perspective, I think there is an underlying assumption that all the balls are meant to be drilled the same and thrown the same. i.e. the layout used may not have been the optimal layout (or the throw/RPM may not have been the optimal throw) for that particular ball. Taking this into account - I ask myself, are they comparing apples and oranges? Could a different layout on a couple of the balls produced a more equal comparison? Could a different RPM on a couple of the balls produced a more equal comparison? What is the "sweet spot" (layout, RPM, throw) for each of these balls?

Jason - are these valid considerations, or am I tilting at windmills?

 

[jason_doust]

These are some of the many variables, but it's difficult to imagine how to make the comparison more fair. Using different layouts on different balls would definitely be apples vs oranges. The Radical guys have been rigorous in their methodology and diligent in their execution. I called the Reax2 as my personal best ball of the year last year. Ken reckons this one is even better and having seen Chris's, I'm inclined to agree. If I were bowling seriously ATM, I'd definitely punch one up and shine it.

 

[Brenton_Davy]

This is probably the first true comparison video I have seen. It would be even better if the USBC were to use their facilities to do a full comparison between all the manufacturers at each performance level at different rev rates, speeds, tilts and lane conditions.

 

[Brian Spillman]

31.6ml of oil and 42 feet. Like we'll ever see that in Australia. lol

 

[RobbieB]

Flat oil. Considering there is usually none on half the lane (10-10) it's no wetter than 42' medium house shot at most centres in terms of oil per board. Gotta have that lake in the middle!
There's a thread on bowlingchat discussing the test.

 

[Troyza]

31.6ml of oil and 42 feet. Like we'll ever see that in Australia. lol

It's more about where the oil is placed on the lane, not the actual volume. Whilst volume is important, as Robbie above said - there's not much difference between having 32 ml of oil spread all over a lane, in comparison to 22ml of oil bunched up in the middle, other than having no free hook on the 32ml pattern. But your ball isn't swimming as the volume would imply.

 

[GeorgeF]

I don't know why they would choose the sinister over the hypercell if they were comparing overall hook. Seems a little biased

 

[Brenton_Davy]

I don't know why they would choose the sinister over the hypercell if they were comparing overall hook. Seems a little biased

I think they were comparing like for like in terms of length. Hypercell probably compares length wise more to the Reax