Why didn't this work for me?

Which layout is right for me?

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
fufu
Member
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: January 29th, 2010, 10:39 pm
THS Average: 230
Positive Axis Point: 5 right, 3/8 up
Speed: 16
Rev Rate: 320
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 55

Why didn't this work for me?

Post by fufu » February 4th, 2010, 11:49 pm

Recently I plugged my virtual gravity for a span change. In the process I decided to change the layout a little. The previous layout was 40 x 5.25 x 35. The new layout is 40 x 3 7/8 x 25.

The old layout gave the ball a fair midlane read with a stand up arching motion on the backend. The new layout gave the ball less midlane read, a flip on the back, then an immediate forward roll.

Now before you say it was rolling out, there was plenty of oil on the lane. I tried the surface at 1000 paper (2000 abralon) and 2000 paper (4000 abralon). It was fair at 2000 but terrible at 4000.

In an effort to understand the dual angle system more, why did this not work for me?
http://www.rotogrip.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.facebook.com/Round-Holes-No ... 602077080/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by Mo Pinel » February 5th, 2010, 12:08 am

fufu wrote:Recently I plugged my virtual gravity for a span change. In the process I decided to change the layout a little. The previous layout was 40 x 5.25 x 35. The new layout is 40 x 3 7/8 x 25.

The old layout gave the ball a fair midlane read with a stand up arching motion on the backend. The new layout gave the ball less midlane read, a flip on the back, then an immediate forward roll.

Now before you say it was rolling out, there was plenty of oil on the lane. I tried the surface at 1000 paper (2000 abralon) and 2000 paper (4000 abralon). It was fair at 2000 but terrible at 4000.

In an effort to understand the dual angle system more, why did this not work for me?
It may not have worked on that condition. I promise I will explain the difference in the reaction, but first I need your ball speed (and where), your rev rate, your axis rotation and axis tilt. Also, a better description of the pattern (Length, front to back taper, volume). Awaiting your info. Your change in reaction does NOT surprise me one bit.

User avatar
fufu
Member
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: January 29th, 2010, 10:39 pm
THS Average: 230
Positive Axis Point: 5 right, 3/8 up
Speed: 16
Rev Rate: 320
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 55

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by fufu » February 5th, 2010, 5:09 am

Ball speed: 17-17.5 at the quibica or around 19-20 in the heads
Rev rate: 325
Tilt: 13
Axis Rotation: 40

Lane condition:
Surface: Anvil(10-15 years old)
Condition: 40' house pattern, oiliest house I've ever bowled in. Definitely walled, but not wet/dry just tapered. The backends are soft and I've always had trouble pitching one thru the breakpoint in this place.

Good enough Mo?
http://www.rotogrip.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.facebook.com/Round-Holes-No ... 602077080/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by Mo Pinel » February 5th, 2010, 12:59 pm

fufu wrote:Recently I plugged my virtual gravity for a span change. In the process I decided to change the layout a little. The previous layout was 40 x 5.25 x 35. The new layout is 40 x 3 7/8 x 25.

The old layout gave the ball a fair midlane read with a stand up arching motion on the backend. The new layout gave the ball less midlane read, a flip on the back, then an immediate forward roll.

Now before you say it was rolling out, there was plenty of oil on the lane. I tried the surface at 1000 paper (2000 abralon) and 2000 paper (4000 abralon). It was fair at 2000 but terrible at 4000.

In an effort to understand the dual angle system more, why did this not work for me?
Ball speed: 17-17.5 at the quibica or around 19-20 in the heads

Rev rate: 325
Tilt: 13
Axis Rotation: 40

Lane condition:
Surface: Anvil(10-15 years old)
Condition: 40' house pattern, oiliest house I've ever bowled in. Definitely walled, but not wet/dry just tapered. The backends are soft and I've always had trouble pitching one thru the breakpoint in this place.

Good enough Mo?
First of all, thanks for a good job of getting the information needed for an accurate discussion. I hope everyone understands that full information is necessary to complete a discussion with the desired results.

In looking at the problem, two things stand out. One is that you only have 40* of axis rotation when the norm is around 55*. The other is the soft back ends on a walled up condition.

Here's what happened. The VG is asymmetrical and, therefore, will show flare characteristic based on that. The change from a 5.25" pin to PAP distance to a 3 7/8" pin to PAP distance resulted in the ball snapping rather than the stand up arcing motion on the back end. The change in the sum of the angles from 75* to 65* resulted in the ball transitioning faster and STOPPING HOOKING( not rolling out) sooner. The change in the angle to the VAL from 35* to 25* resulted in a shorter hook zone.

Now, here's my thoughts on a "Dual Angle Layout" that will work. Since your ball speed and rev rate watch and you have less than average axis rotation, I like a sum of the angles of 105*. Since you have that leeser axis rotation, I would choose 70* drilling angle and a 35* angle to the VAL. Because of your axis rotation, I would use a 3 1/2" pin to PAP distance. Please drill up the VG this way and throw it. Adjust the surface to get the break point at the right distance down the lane, then decide on a balance hole location and size (if necessary) to get the exact reaction desired. Result: 70 / 3 1/2" / 35 (2:1 angle ratio)

I spent a lot of time on this question as an example of how to analyze the circumstances to achieve a great layout for a certain pattern. "Dual Angles" are very accurate and the success you achieve will depend on the decisions made. It is always better than "ouija board" layouts and hand grenades at 20 paces!

User avatar
fufu
Member
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: January 29th, 2010, 10:39 pm
THS Average: 230
Positive Axis Point: 5 right, 3/8 up
Speed: 16
Rev Rate: 320
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 55

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by fufu » February 5th, 2010, 1:26 pm

Thanks Mo. Is there a condition which I could or should use a 25* VAL angle? I've documented all the dual angles on my equipment. I'm going to post my entire arsenal, with layouts later tonight in the equipment forum. It seems that 30-40* VAL angles are my faves.......
http://www.rotogrip.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.facebook.com/Round-Holes-No ... 602077080/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

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

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by Mo Pinel » February 5th, 2010, 1:42 pm

fufu wrote:Thanks Mo. Is there a condition which I could or should use a 25* VAL angle? I've documented all the dual angles on my equipment. I'm going to post my entire arsenal, with layouts later tonight in the equipment forum. It seems that 30-40* VAL angles are my faves.......
Please make sure you read my entire post as I was writing and editing as I went. I am definitely SLOW on a computer.

Small angles to the VAL will work for you on long patterns and carrydown when there is less back end diatance. The 30-40* VAL angle success results from your axis rotation.

User avatar
fufu
Member
Member
Posts: 451
Joined: January 29th, 2010, 10:39 pm
THS Average: 230
Positive Axis Point: 5 right, 3/8 up
Speed: 16
Rev Rate: 320
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 55

Re: Why didn't this work for me?

Post by fufu » February 6th, 2010, 12:54 am

Mo Pinel wrote: Please make sure you read my entire post as I was writing and editing as I went. I am definitely SLOW on a computer.
Mo, I must've replied will you were editing/replying b/c the last two paragraphs were not there when I replied before.

I can adjust my axis rotation, but believe it or not, the closer I get to 60* the worse my carry is.

I figure my "ideal" angle range was 95 or so.

As for the VG, it is gone to a new home. It was a good ball, but nothing special. :D

Thanks for taking the time to reply and discuss all these topics with us!

Andrew
http://www.rotogrip.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://www.facebook.com/Round-Holes-No ... 602077080/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post Reply