The TRUTH About Top Weight

Ask Mo Pinel and the bowling industry's best your general questions, and get straight answers.

Moderators: Mo Pinel, ballspinner, MathIsTruth, purduepaul

Forum rules
Ask Mo Pinel and the bowling industry's best your questions, and get straight answers.
This forum is moderated exclusively by Mo & Friends.
Locked
mattypizon
Member
Member
Posts: 502
Joined: February 11th, 2011, 9:36 pm
THS Average: 203
Positive Axis Point: 4 7/8 right x 1 up
Speed: 20 off hand
Rev Rate: 360
Axis Tilt: 10
Axis Rotation: 55
Preferred Company: Radical, Storm, Motiv

The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by mattypizon » October 1st, 2015, 3:33 pm

Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:

If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?

Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.

Why is that?
Rev rate ~ 350
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up

Arkansas
BCU Graduate Layouts
BCU Graduate Layouts
Posts: 477
Joined: January 24th, 2012, 11:02 pm
Positive Axis Point: 4 1/2 Left x 3/4 Up
Speed: 18.5 off Hand
Rev Rate: 350
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 55
Heavy Oil Ball: Guru Mighty
Medium Oil Ball: Guru
Light Oil Ball: Torrid Affair
Preferred Company: Radical

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by Arkansas » October 1st, 2015, 6:24 pm

mattypizon wrote:Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:

If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?

Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.

Why is that?
Do you mean finger weight or top weight? The USBC Ball Motion Study placed Finger/Thumb Weight next to last in influence of the variables they tested. Right between Room Temp and Lane Temp. Top weight was just above Room Temp, so still not very influential.
James Talley

User avatar
snick
BCU Graduate Layouts
BCU Graduate Layouts
Posts: 756
Joined: August 31st, 2014, 8:00 pm
THS Average: 190
Positive Axis Point: 5.625" x 0
Speed: 17 off hand
Rev Rate: 360
Axis Tilt: 7
Axis Rotation: 55
Heavy Oil Ball: Radical Fix
Medium Oil Ball: Storm JoyRide
Light Oil Ball: Storm Tropical Breeze
Preferred Company: Storm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by snick » October 1st, 2015, 8:41 pm

I usually spin my layouts on a ball spinner in various orientations before drilling.
Not sure what effects (statics vs core) I'm seeing here, but the layouts that spin smoothest on my PAP are usually my favorites after drilling.
Benchmark Bowling Pro Shop
Byron

RH
PAP: 5.625" x 0
REVRATE: 360
SPEED: 17mph at release
AR: 55º
AT: 7º

ads
Member
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: November 22nd, 2014, 6:07 am
THS Average: 205
Positive Axis Point: 5 5/8 up 3/4
Speed: 14 mph off hand
Rev Rate: 300
Axis Tilt: 15
Axis Rotation: 60
Location: Hong Kong

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by ads » October 2nd, 2015, 12:13 am

snick wrote:I usually spin my layouts on a ball spinner in various orientations before drilling.
Not sure what effects (statics vs core) I'm seeing here, but the layouts that spin smoothest on my PAP are usually my favorites after drilling.
Interesting. Please tell me how you do that.
Adrian
Right handed
PAP: 5 1/8 up 3/4
Speed: 15.5 mph (Kegel Specto)
Rev: 350 RPM
Axis tilt: 18-20*
Axis rotation: 60*

User avatar
Mo Pinel
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 10054
Joined: January 26th, 2010, 6:10 pm
Preferred Company: MoRich, & now RADICAL BT

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by Mo Pinel » October 2nd, 2015, 1:16 am

mattypizon wrote:Ok now that my subject title got your attention please consider this:

If a ball has excessive post drilled top weight (say from a layout that places the pin above the fingers and cg near the fingers) can this have an effect on how the ball reacts?

Im familiar with the often stated "top weight and cg don't matter" but I for one have never liked the reactions of balls I've had with short pins placed above my fingers. Usually adding a P1 has helped.

Why is that?
Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.

mattypizon
Member
Member
Posts: 502
Joined: February 11th, 2011, 9:36 pm
THS Average: 203
Positive Axis Point: 4 7/8 right x 1 up
Speed: 20 off hand
Rev Rate: 360
Axis Tilt: 10
Axis Rotation: 55
Preferred Company: Radical, Storm, Motiv

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by mattypizon » October 2nd, 2015, 1:21 am

Haha that's awesome!!

But is that Common Core math?
Rev rate ~ 350
Speed 17.5 at foul line
Tilt 8*
Rotation ~ 55*
PAP 4 1/4 right x 1 up

MWhite
Member
Member
Posts: 457
Joined: July 4th, 2012, 11:29 pm
Location: Riverside Ca

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by MWhite » October 2nd, 2015, 9:53 pm

Mo Pinel wrote:
Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.

Static weights have less effect on balls that flare because what starts out as side weight moves 90 degrees off side weight if the ball flares 6+ inches.

Since the ball doesn't flare the same amount for everyone, I doubt you can set a hard number such as 7.8%.

User avatar
rrb6699
Member
Member
Posts: 791
Joined: June 22nd, 2013, 12:24 am
THS Average: 226
Positive Axis Point: 4 7/16 ovr, 3/4 up
Speed: 17.5 mph at pin deck
Rev Rate: 360
Axis Tilt: 15
Axis Rotation: 65
Heavy Oil Ball: Sur Lock, Frenzy 500grit, Guru Mstr, Alpha -all 15#
Medium Oil Ball: 16# Quantum Violet, Grenade, Blk Udot,15#-Mojave
Light Oil Ball: 15#: StarTrak Ureth -Sky Blue, 16# Grudge Hybrid/Solid
Preferred Company: Radical, MoRich, RotoGrip
Location: Central Florida

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by rrb6699 » October 3rd, 2015, 1:45 pm

ive always noticed some differences with top, finger/thumb, side weights.

just to approach this logically you would have to use a ball or balls with identical cores and same surfaces:

take ball 1 and set it up with 0 finger and thumb weights. if you could, and 0 top and bottom weights.

drill it with one ounce positive side weight then ball 2 with one ounce negative side weight. then tell me theres no difference in those two balls. do the same thing by isolating top/bottom weights and then finger/thumb weights.

the first thing you will notice before you throw the ball is how it rests on your hand wrist facing up with the side weights and finger and thumb weights. not so much with the top/bottom weights since that is pretty much centered.

I believe you will see a noticable direction of roll variance between the side weights. slightly less but noticable difference between finger and thumb weights. then less with top and bottom weights depending on how you release it.

now, I also agree ball coverstock/surface, core/layout relative to bowler's specs overcome a high percentage of the affects of static weights but for those same reasons (I would say coverstock/surface mostly) also amplify the affects of certain static weights.

the reason I believe this is I have bowled with balls at max static weights before -- and I have video to show this-- on my Guru Master at initial drilling it ended up with 1oz of finger weight. dont laugh it had 3.9oz top wt before drilling and ended up with 1oz finger after drilling for the layout I wanted. Well, someone mis-read my instructions and thought I wanted a P3 hole in it and to my surprise thats what I got. that put it at 2oz finger.

I decided to throw it and video it before plugging the P3 and drilling the fingers deep enough to bring the finger weight to just over 1/2oz now.

ill post the videos once I get a computer up and running again. overall it seems the more oil on the lane the more the finger weight made a difference. but on it reading friction, the ball's characteristics seem similar.

just what I observed in this instance.

rr

User avatar
Qman
Member
Member
Posts: 548
Joined: October 15th, 2012, 5:14 pm
THS Average: 185
Positive Axis Point: 4 1/8 1/2 up
Rev Rate: 280
Axis Tilt: 23
Axis Rotation: 20
Heavy Oil Ball: Roto Grip Sinister
Medium Oil Ball: IQ Tour Solid
Light Oil Ball: Rack Attack Pearl
Preferred Company: Radical/Storm/Roto Grip
Location: Montevideo Minnesota

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by Qman » October 4th, 2015, 4:09 am

I look at top weight and pin length to determine what best fits my needs. Longer pins 3-5, top weight 2.5 to 3.5 max. Am I close to what is average?
Adapt or perish!

PAP 4 1/8, 1/2 up
Axis Rotation 20
Axis Tilt 23
Rev rate 280
Speed Dominate / Rev Challenged
14-16mph at monitor

User avatar
MegaMav
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4513
Joined: April 27th, 2007, 5:00 am
THS Average: 230
Sport Average: 200
Positive Axis Point: 4 15/16 Over 3/8 Up
Speed: 15.25 MPH - Camera
Rev Rate: 350
Axis Tilt: 14
Axis Rotation: 40
Heavy Oil Ball: Radical - The Closer
Medium Oil Ball: Brunswck - Method Solid
Light Oil Ball: DV8 - Poison Pearl
Preferred Company: Radical Bowling Technologies
Location: Malta, NY

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by MegaMav » October 4th, 2015, 4:21 am

MWhite wrote: Since the ball doesn't flare the same amount for everyone, I doubt you can set a hard number such as 7.8%.
Why dont you put a number or a range on it then?
I hope you read the USBC ball motion study.
BallMotionResults.PNG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh

User avatar
Mo Pinel
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 10054
Joined: January 26th, 2010, 6:10 pm
Preferred Company: MoRich, & now RADICAL BT

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by Mo Pinel » October 4th, 2015, 4:40 am

MegaMav wrote:
Why dont you put a number or a range on it then?
I hope you read the USBC ball motion study.
BallMotionResults.PNG
That # is a mathematical calculation of how far the center of mass can be moved within a ball compared to how far the COM can be moved by using the allowable mass properties of the ball.

TomaHawk
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 355
Joined: July 19th, 2010, 3:28 pm
Preferred Company: Hammer

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by TomaHawk » October 20th, 2015, 3:06 pm

The USBC ball motion study is flawed, as far as I can tell, it does not take ball temp into consideration.

Also, a 7.8% swing is substantial when viewing the total distance the ball must travel, get to the pocket and strike. Top weight does several things, but most importantly, can create sustainable motion for certain types of bowlers.

MWhite
Member
Member
Posts: 457
Joined: July 4th, 2012, 11:29 pm
Location: Riverside Ca

Re: The TRUTH About Top Weight

Post by MWhite » October 21st, 2015, 3:31 am

Mo Pinel wrote:
That # is a mathematical calculation of how far the center of mass can be moved within a ball compared to how far the COM can be moved by using the allowable mass properties of the ball.
Mo Pinel wrote:Here's the fact. Changing from full max. negative statics to full max. positive statics will alter ball reaction 7.8% That's math, not opinion.
There is a big difference between calculating how far the center of mass can be moved, and how much ball reaction will change.

The ball motion study was at best an academic study, not based on real world conditions.
USBC wrote:The United States Bowling Congress, the national governing body of the sport of bowling, aims to ensure the integrity and protect the future of the sport by providing programs and services which enhance the bowling experience. Over the past twenty years, the technological advancements in bowling ball cover stocks and cores, coupled with improved lane surfaces and oiling patterns, have contributed to an increasing rate of honor scores and the overall scoring pace—thereby jeopardizing the credibility of the sport of bowling.
This gives the impression that they are interested in protecting the credibility of the sport of bowling.
USBC wrote:The lanes for the testing were AMF HPL 9000 synthetic lanes. The tests were performed with the Kegel Standard Sanction lane machine using Kegel Defense/C lane cleaner and Kegel Offence HV lane conditioner. The lane pattern applied to the lane surface is comprised of six two to two loads oiled from the foul line to eight feet and then buffed out until forty-nine feet. What this means is that lane conditioner is applied evenly from the second board on the left to the second board on the right for eight feet and then buffed evenly until forty-nine feet. This means we have thirty units of lane conditioner at eight feet from the foul line, eight units of lane conditioner at thirty-two feet from the foul line, and five units at forty-seven feet which is two feet before the end of the oiling pattern.
Great, oil the lanes in a way that doesn't represent the conditions where the increased rate of honor scores are being achieved.

Run the study on a THS (like 99% of the honor scores are shot on) and you will find the ball motion is significantly different.

But that might make the BPAA mad, and we know what happened last time the BPAA got mad.

Back in the 80/90's ABC/USBC should have protected the integrity of the sport rather than protect their paychecks.

If all the bowlers demanded walled up conditions, simply don't sanction the centers, and close the ABC/USBC doors, at least the records would still have meaning.

Locked