Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Which layout is right for me?

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 4th, 2010, 11:45 am

So I think I'm getting the hang of this now. I wanted some practice and my Tuesday partner wants to re-drill some of his gear, so here goes.

What hand you bowl with
Speed (please specify if its on the monitor or at the foul line)
Rev Rate
Initial Axis Rotation
Initial Axis Tilt
What surface you want the ball for (wood or synthetic)
What lane condition you are bowling on most of the time
Do you think you are speed or revolutions dominate?


Right-handed
19 mph from hand (video)
315 rpm
75°

Different surfaces and lane conditions
Slight speed dominance

So with that information this is what I deduced.
Sweet Spot = 80° ±25
3" - 4" Symmetrical
4 1/2" - 5 1/4" Asymmetrical
1.75:1 - 1:1.5 Ratios

He has a new Invasion, two Hy-Roads and a Dark Star. So these are the layouts I was going to use for him.

Invasion - Angular and earlier 1.75:1
35° x 4 1/2" x 20° P4

Hy-Road 1 - Benchmark 1.3:1
45° x 3 x 35° P4

Hy-Road 2 - Length and angular 1.5:1
60° x 3 3/4" x 40° P2

Dark Star - Control 1:1.3
45° x 3" x 60° P1

I'm not entirely sure about Hy-Road 2, I think that might tend to be a stronger ball instead of angular like he wants. He seems to come up the back of the ball well enough, but has trouble with driving through the pins, lots of ten pins. Let me know if I am close or very wrong!
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

The Kid
Member
Member
Posts: 347
Joined: July 30th, 2010, 5:26 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by The Kid » August 4th, 2010, 5:15 pm

The only question I have is how he plans on getting an angular reaction out of a Hy-Road...

It was designed with the opposite intent: smooooooth breakpoint. It's symmetric and the cover isn't as responsive to friction as say the Reign's cover (R2S hybrid vs R2S pearl I believe).

Just my two cents.

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 4th, 2010, 6:02 pm

I think your ratio range is a hair low. From what I have in my notes, the benchmark ratio would be the 1.75:1. Then the range would go both above and below that. (I am not talking about your posted layouts. I was just pointing out the ratio range which you listed as 1.75:1 to 1:1.5.) Here are some previous posts with some bowlers with very similar specs. Speed dominant bowlers, with above 70* rotation,and a 7* tilt. (see #2 and #6)
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=354" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
you will notice the first layout was intended for a little length (higher sums, mild wt. hole, 1.5:1 ratio. The second was intended to be a fairly strong 2.2:1 ratio. I included these so you could have ideas of possible layouts with these specs. (also for clarifying the range for calculating possible layouts)

See #5 viewtopic.php?f=15&t=674" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
see # 10 viewtopic.php?f=15&t=531" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I have many more of Mo's examples as this seems to be very common for bowlers with these specs to request help. They all say the same thing though. With the 7* of tilt without the high rotation, you would increase these ratios 3:1 to 2:1 because of the low tilt..

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 4th, 2010, 6:54 pm

Mo says: We're getting into PDW territory.
This guys shot doesn't really look like webbers shot. It does look like he gets behind the ball, but the video screenshot overlay was consistent at around 75*. He seems to have a good deal of forward roll. Does this mean that I have analysed it incorrectly, or am I worrying about nothing because there are so many different releases to get the same result?

Help me understand this. Increasing the ratios to 3:1 - 1:1 would help maintain axis tilt, correct? This allows the ball to retain it's energy further down the lane so that when it does make it's move it still has the energy to do it. So control ratios like 1:1.5 would create too much forward roll? Would I also require changes in pin length to help maintain tilt instead of bleeding it off? Or is 4 1/2 - 5 (Asymmetric) and 3-4 (Symmetric) still ok?

The guy tends to have difficulty with the ball continuing through the pin deck and carrying. Most of his gear at the moment is drilled at least 5" and he always complains of standing too far right. I'd like to see him with some more aggressive layouts but he's balked at it. I think I can convince him though because he's kind of hit bottom with his game recently.

Edit: I went and checked the video again, and then read the info on tilt and rotation again. The tilt causes the look of forward roll, but his rotation is very high with the way he gets his fingers and hand around the ball. So at least I had that correct. :D
Last edited by Laniarty on August 4th, 2010, 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 4th, 2010, 7:01 pm

So I'm looking at:

40 x 4 1/2 x 20 heavy (asym) 2:1
50 x 5 x 30 benchmark (asym) 1.65:1
55 x 3 3/4 x 45 light (sym) 1.2:1

Correct?
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 4th, 2010, 8:34 pm

Laniarty wrote:So I'm looking at:

40 x 4 1/2 x 20 heavy (asym) 2:1
50 x 5 x 30 benchmark (asym) 1.65:1
55 x 3 3/4 x 45 light (sym) 1.2:1

Correct?
To retain low tilt, you have the Pin distances backwards. On LOW tilt, you want shorter pin to pap asymmetrical. longer pin symmetrical. 3 3/8 will cover more boards on asymmetrical. 4 inch pin to pap will go longer,etc.

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 5th, 2010, 2:57 am

Ok. So attempt number 3 heh.

Because of the low tilt and high rotation we reduce the sweet spot to 80*, then the slight speed dominance reduces it to 70*.
3-4 Sym
3 3/8-4 1/2 Asym

Benchmarks would be:
45 x 4 x 25 P4
45 x 3 1/2 x 25 P4

So for heavier oil we would use 30 x 3 3/8 x 15 and lighter oil 55 x 4 1/2 x 50. Sym's would be 30 x 3 x 15 and 55 x 4 x 50.

I feel like that is right but I'm so confused now. :(
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 5th, 2010, 5:14 am

I would say you are catching the hang of total sums and why correct ratios are necessary for calculating layouts. Just keep watching Mo, take notes of what he says, read old posts, and it will get easier.If you read enough old posts you will realize we were all more confused than you at one time. As far as Pin to Pap distances, I think you could study the last 3 entrys on this one.
See these three posts #23,#24,&#25:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=638&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
actually from your questions, the whole thing might interest you. You might want to read #1-#25. Militant02 was asking a lot of the same questions as you.

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 5th, 2010, 6:39 am

Ok so my next question is about heavy oil balls. The layout I gave above of 30 x 3 3/8 x 15 is a 2:1 ratio, but the val angle falls outside the recommended safe area of 20*-70*. However if I want to maintain a higher ratio with my lower total sums I haven't got a choice.

Would a more aggresive ball type, like the Invasion, make up the difference if I were to increase the total sums to something like 55 or 60 instead of the -25 that gives me 45?
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 5th, 2010, 8:18 am

Some solutions I've been working on myself.

45 x 3 3/8 x 20 P4 - 2.25:1 - Heavy
50 x 4 1/2 x 25 P4 - 2:1 - Benchmark
55 x 3 3/8 x 35 P2 - 1.6:1 - Medium/Light (Sym)
55 x 3 3/4 x 45 P1 - 1.2:1 - Toast (Sym)

Only -10* on the heavy oil drilling to get into the safe zone, however surface and coverstock strength I feel can make that difference. 2:1 for the benchmark from this thread and the ones you have linked to me seems to make more sense. I feel like I have a much firmer grasp on ratios and pin distances now. Pin distances not dictating length as much as val angle took some time for me to get out of that habit :) .
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 5th, 2010, 12:16 pm

Laniarty wrote:Some solutions I've been working on myself.

45 x 3 3/8 x 20 P4 - 2.25:1 - Heavy
50 x 4 1/2 x 25 P4 - 2:1 - Benchmark
55 x 3 3/8 x 35 P2 - 1.6:1 - Medium/Light (Sym)
55 x 3 3/4 x 45 P1 - 1.2:1 - Toast (Sym)

Only -10* on the heavy oil drilling to get into the safe zone, however surface and coverstock strength I feel can make that difference. 2:1 for the benchmark from this thread and the ones you have linked to me seems to make more sense. I feel like I have a much firmer grasp on ratios and pin distances now. Pin distances not dictating length as much as val angle took some time for me to get out of that habit :) .
I think your benchmark Pin to Pap is on an asymmetrical ball. That seems like too long of a pin for 7* of tilt to me.( a 4 1/2 inch pin to pap (asymmetrical) will lose tilt very early)
To retain 7* of tilt on your symmetrical layouts,(especially when you are after length with the drillings) I think you would want to use longer pins. Longer pins will retain your tilt on symmetrical.
As far as running out of room on the lower end of your sums, Mo has said lower tilt with higher rotation does tend to cancel each other out a little.

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 5th, 2010, 2:10 pm

I feel like I'm sometimes throwing sand in the wind with how accurate I am, but here goes.

Heavy (Asym): 40 x 3 3/8 x 15
Benchmark (Asym): 50 x 4 x 25
Light (Sym): 60 x 4 x 35

My question at the moment is should my benchmark pin distance be something more like 2 1/2 to control flare?
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

User avatar
MegaMav
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4523
Joined: April 27th, 2007, 5:00 am
THS Average: 230
Sport Average: 200
Positive Axis Point: 5.25 Over 5/8 Up
Speed: 15.25 MPH - Camera
Rev Rate: 350
Axis Tilt: 20
Axis Rotation: 45
Heavy Oil Ball: Radical - The Closer
Medium Oil Ball: Brunswck - Forest Quantum
Light Oil Ball: DV8 - Poison Pearl
Preferred Company: Radical Bowling Technologies
Location: Malta, NY

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by MegaMav » August 5th, 2010, 2:20 pm

Laniarty,

Have you read the sweet spot guide on the wiki?

http://wiki.bowlingchat.net/wiki/index. ... etSpot.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 5th, 2010, 2:45 pm

Yes, I've read pretty much everything on the wiki. Most of it deals with angles and ratios, ie sweet spot. The article you linked me in particular confuses me because tilt and rotation are bundled together in high and low categories, and not if they are opposites.

Eg:
To retain Axis Rotation and Axis Tilt...
To burn off Axis Rotation and Axis Tilt...
So I think I am getting confused in dealing with low tilt and high rotation.

Bowler example 9 has similar problems I do with tilt vs rotation...
Ball Speed: 16mph (off my hand)
Rev Rate: 240
Initial Axis Rotation: 75° - 80°
Initial Axis Tilt: 7°
Sweet Spot: 80°
Range of Angles: 55° - 95°
Ratio: 2:1 – 1:2
Symmetrical: 50° x 3¼” x 30°
Asymmetrical: 50° x 4½” x 30°
SO when I started I was using this as an example.

Slight speed dominance took the sweet spot down to 70 or 75*. I was told by elgavachon to look at a benchmark range of 1.75:1. But then later in the same post...
I have many more of Mo's examples as this seems to be very common for bowlers with these specs to request help. They all say the same thing though. With the 7* of tilt without the high rotation, you would increase these ratios 3:1 to 2:1 because of the low tilt..
So with the high rotation that brings the ratio range down to 2:1 - 1:1? However the example in the wiki gave me benchmark pin lengths of 3 1/4 (Sym) and 4 1/2 (Asym) but I was told 4 1/2 would give me too much length...
I think your benchmark Pin to Pap is on an asymmetrical ball. That seems like too long of a pin for 7* of tilt to me.( a 4 1/2 inch pin to pap (asymmetrical) will lose tilt very early)
To be fair I feel like I'm running myself in circles. :(
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 5th, 2010, 6:08 pm

Laniarty wrote:Yes, I've read pretty much everything on the wiki. Most of it deals with angles and ratios, ie sweet spot. The article you linked me in particular confuses me because tilt and rotation are bundled together in high and low categories, and not if they are opposites.

Eg: So I think I am getting confused in dealing with low tilt and high rotation.

Bowler example 9 has similar problems I do with tilt vs rotation... SO when I started I was using this as an example.

Slight speed dominance took the sweet spot down to 70 or 75*. I was told by elgavachon to look at a benchmark range of 1.75:1. But then later in the same post... So with the high rotation that brings the ratio range down to 2:1 - 1:1? However the example in the wiki gave me benchmark pin lengths of 3 1/4 (Sym) and 4 1/2 (Asym) but I was told 4 1/2 would give me too much length...
To be fair I feel like I'm running myself in circles. :(
sorry were running you in circles . let me see if I can clarify things a little.
In post #3 (of this topic) the 3rd quick link that I gave you, was where Matt got bowler #9 in the WIKI. He added that bowler way back when he was a rookie, and some of that information was his interpretation to try and help us, ( but not direct from Mo)
The ratio range(2:1- 1:2) in the wiki was Matt's not Mo's.
To my knowledge Mo has never read that article and o.k.ed it. It is one of the best tools we have, but not etched it stone.

Here is what Mo actually said:
Mo said:
"Everything looks great until I look at the angle ratio. I like 50 / 3 1/4/ 30.
Lot's of good discussion here. Most of my requests seem to involve low tilt players looking for continuation. I wanted a sum of 80* with a 1.7:1 ratio to control the snap. The math comes out this way. If he had less rotation, I would have gone with a larger angle ratio between 2 and 3 to 1. The 3 1/4" pin to PAP distance will help retain axis rotation and tilt and help him cover more boards. I was keying in on the low tilt".

As far as my quote later, That was out of my head. I didn't realize I was just repeating Mo. I did not mean for you to raise your ratios. you
have high rotation. That quote was just to further your knowledge so you would realize why Mo had lowered the ratios of a bowler with specs similar to yours. This is standard with Mo. Not unique to this recommendation. I think you overlooked where I said "without the high rotation".
The pin to pap range Matt gave in the wiki is backwards I think. If you look at the quote I gave you, Mo said he liked 50* 3 1/4 30* to retain tilt which would definitely make it an asymmetrical layout recommendation. ON THE WIKI THEY ARE REVERSED. PROBABLY A PRINTING ERROR since Matt does a great job of keeping notes. This article he posted was ahead of its time. THANKS AGAIN MATT.
A 4 1/2 pin asymmetrical is in your range; however I think Mo would use it on a long control layout. Not on a benchmark. I think your benchmark pin to pap with 7* of tilt would be between 3 1/4-4 inches. Just my opinion.
Also, I think Paul said rotation will burn off quicker than tilt. That is why Mo keys in on the tilt and decreases the ratios for the rotation.

P.S
Here is another example of a bowler with very similar specs to yours. He is slightly less speed dominant than you so Mo went with 85* for his sums.
Last edited by elgavachon on August 6th, 2010, 1:26 am, edited 8 times in total.

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 5th, 2010, 8:37 pm

Sorry I just re-read what I had wrote and realized I gave you the wrong thread from Athery. here is the one I meant to give you:
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=599" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

elgavachon
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3168
Joined: January 18th, 2010, 9:21 pm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by elgavachon » August 6th, 2010, 1:05 am

also I missed some of your questions the first time I read it.
Please re-read Post#15 where I did some editing.

User avatar
Laniarty
Member
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 10:54 pm
Preferred Company: Storm

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Laniarty » August 6th, 2010, 6:31 am

Thanks that helped a lot. :)
Right handed ~450 rpm 16 mph 12° tilt 65° rotation
Virtual Gravity Nano - 35x4.5x45
Critical Theory - 70x4x40
Prodigy - 60x3.5x30
607A - 85x2.5x35
Slingshot - 60x5x40

User avatar
MattInTheHat
Member
Member
Posts: 420
Joined: January 21st, 2010, 3:33 pm
THS Average: 201
Positive Axis Point: 4 9/16 -> 15/16 ^
Speed: 17-17.5 off hand
Rev Rate: 270
Axis Tilt: 17
Axis Rotation: 75
Heavy Oil Ball: TR2
Medium Oil Ball: QZ1 / TX1
Light Oil Ball: RX1
Preferred Company: Motiv
Location: TX

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by MattInTheHat » August 6th, 2010, 3:21 pm

Whew, this is a good discussion! A few weeks ago I had gone through some of my guide and had the thought that some of the example bowlers didn't look quite right, that is something I would like to correct. I think there are enough Mo approved examples on the forum now that I can replace some of the non-Mo approved one's that I put in there. I also want to chat with elga at some point as you seem to have some of the best notes on ratios and links to examples, which I would like to add to the guide. Right now though it's a case of time, I was out of town 4 days last week, have been out of town 2 days this week with 1 more coming up, and will probably be going out of town a couple days each week for the next couple of months, not to mention I have a few in town jobs to keep up with. But I promise I will eventually get to it!

In regards to the pin to pap range being reversed in bowler example 9, you are correct I transposed the symmetrical and asymmetrical pin distances. Every ball that person has is symmetrical so I was in that mindset, but I need to remember that unless otherwise stated Mo always answers in terms of asymmetrical balls! Sorry for the confusion Laniarty.

In the meantime, if anyone wants to send me anything, whether it be corrections, things to add, or things to remove, please feel free. I will take no offense, that guide is a collection of info from this site and while much of it is from Mo approved posts (or a select few others), there is stuff in it that isn't directly from Mo or is my interpretation of the things I read and therefore could be incorrect. Nobody likes being wrong but with a guide like this having the wrong information is worse then being corrected, so please speak up about it!

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

Re: Layouts for a mate, tell me if I am correct

Post by Mo Pinel » August 11th, 2010, 1:21 pm

MattInTheHat wrote:Whew, this is a good discussion! A few weeks ago I had gone through some of my guide and had the thought that some of the example bowlers didn't look quite right, that is something I would like to correct. I think there are enough Mo approved examples on the forum now that I can replace some of the non-Mo approved one's that I put in there. I also want to chat with elga at some point as you seem to have some of the best notes on ratios and links to examples, which I would like to add to the guide. Right now though it's a case of time, I was out of town 4 days last week, have been out of town 2 days this week with 1 more coming up, and will probably be going out of town a couple days each week for the next couple of months, not to mention I have a few in town jobs to keep up with. But I promise I will eventually get to it!

In regards to the pin to pap range being reversed in bowler example 9, you are correct I transposed the symmetrical and asymmetrical pin distances. Every ball that person has is symmetrical so I was in that mindset, but I need to remember that unless otherwise stated Mo always answers in terms of asymmetrical balls! Sorry for the confusion Laniarty.

In the meantime, if anyone wants to send me anything, whether it be corrections, things to add, or things to remove, please feel free. I will take no offense, that guide is a collection of info from this site and while much of it is from Mo approved posts (or a select few others), there is stuff in it that isn't directly from Mo or is my interpretation of the things I read and therefore could be incorrect. Nobody likes being wrong but with a guide like this having the wrong information is worse then being corrected, so please speak up about it!
This one took forever to read. Elgavachon and MattInTheHatt have done a good job. Let me say, low tilt requires pin to PAP distances that retain tilt, namely 2 to 3 1/2" on asymmetricals and 4 1/2 to 6" on symmetricals. Low tilt with low rotation requires high angle ratios and low tilt with high rotation requires med. angle rotations to help control the skid/snap.

Post Reply