USBC New Ball Specs

You can post any bowling related topics here.

Moderator: Moderators

guruU2
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1048
Joined: March 31st, 2010, 7:27 pm
Location: Camp Springs MD

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by guruU2 » April 26th, 2018, 9:43 pm

Dustin wrote:I would still like to see studies about bringing back the old 4 lbs. pins.
So would I. From past experience 4 lb wood would not solve problems as it would create problems for women, youth and seniors. The heavier PBA Gold pins of a few years ago actually helped the higher rev players by keeping the pins low and thus actually helped the scoring for many. If a solution was the pin then we should simply go back to 3-6 PLASTIC coated single voided wood and probably see the scores drop 10%.

Integrity of the game is related to longevity of the pattern which broken down properly can result in higher scoring but not broken down properly can create dysfunctional scoring. Which one has more "integrity" is open to discussion. The scoring "problem" is related to the "pattern integrity" issue as they, can be an interrelated issue whether overtly stated or not.

If THE issue is scoring than make the balls 50 thousandths of an inch bigger and go back to single voided plastic coated pins and the issued would be resolved.

Bill Taylor, starting in the early 1960s, informed us small balls scored higher and the USBC (ABC) in allowing the use ofdouble voided pins would create scoring with questionable integrity. Knowledge of history is a valuable tool.
-Gary Parsons
If one does not know one's product, one can not manage nor promote the product one does not know.

TomaHawk
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 374
Joined: July 19th, 2010, 3:28 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by TomaHawk » April 26th, 2018, 9:49 pm

Baseball is always manipulating the playing conditions, maybe not the best example to depict.

Let's look at sports that have a standardized playing field, basketball and football. Just about everyone can dunk in the NBA, they didn't raise the rim. In football, what used to be a rare feet, the 50+ yard field goal is now common. They didn't move the goal post back. Neither sport changed the ball either, at least not at the professional level. But, at the intermediate level all kinds of different equipment exist.

So, if it is the professionals that require consistent equipment across the board in other sports, why does bowling continue to penalize Average Joe Bowler?

Pinbuster
Member
Member
Posts: 123
Joined: June 26th, 2009, 12:02 pm

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by Pinbuster » April 26th, 2018, 10:20 pm

This is a personal opinion but I believe that the bulk of the reason to give 3 oz of statics is that with so many amateurs drilling balls now days that no ability to weigh balls they have simply given up.

Also at nationals they are probably tired of weighing balls. Now they just will all pass. I've seen so many pissed off bowlers at nationals come in balls with 2 oz of side and when the ball was corrected they can't get a reaction. They may be ignorant of the lane condition but they believe the hole in the ball ruined it.

I also believe the 3 oz. is way too high. I've seen too many balls that when you added or took out side weight the ball reaction changed significantly. And the difference between 3 oz of positive side to a ball with 3 oz of negative would be significant.

Over all I find the rule changes non factors with the 3 oz. statics being lazy.

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: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by snick » April 26th, 2018, 11:36 pm

Allowing for filling of balance holes, the 3oz rule is practically mandatory to guarantee that the balls will remain legal.
Another side effect of the 3oz rule is that the concept of pin-in and pin-out balls is effectively finished.
Even "X-out" balls with very long pins are really no different than "perfect balls" with 3-4" pins, in terms of drilling flexibility and post-drilling core dynamics.
Benchmark Bowling Pro Shop
Byron

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

User avatar
EricHartwell
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 3637
Joined: April 5th, 2011, 12:24 am
Positive Axis Point: 4-3/4" and 1/2"up
Speed: 16 off hand
Rev Rate: 330
Axis Tilt: 12
Axis Rotation: 45
Heavy Oil Ball: Radical Tremendous
Medium Oil Ball: Motiv Villain, Hammer Nail, Brunswick True Motion
Light Oil Ball: Blue Hammer, Columbia Nitrous
Location: Michigan

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by EricHartwell » April 27th, 2018, 12:54 am

https://bowl.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?id=23622331019" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

cut and pasted from the Article on Bowl.com

"The specification requiring a bowling ball’s oil absorption rate to be more than 2:15 for the ball to be approved will take effect Aug. 1, 2020. Also, any ball models tested where the average oil absorption rate is under nine minutes and 30 seconds (9:30) will require additional balls to be tested."

9 minutes and 30 seconds seems to be the goal. Practically a regular urethane.

Brunswick has been bringing back Vintage ball releases. Now it seems that we are going back to those Vintage days of bowling. Hmm, did they have insight into what the USBC was going to do?

I would think that there will be people stocking up on their favorite balls of today. To bad my favorite ones have balance holes in them.
We will still see the oil suckers out there for quite a while. I'm guessing they will be pushed out of use with lighter oil patterns.
Eric Hartwell

Right Handed
PAP 4.75" up 1/2"
45* rotation
12* tilt
330 rev rate
16 mph off hand

crashin12x
Member
Member
Posts: 470
Joined: November 23rd, 2011, 5:56 am
Positive Axis Point: 5" x 7/8"
Speed: 15.7 MPH Off Hand
Rev Rate: 250
Axis Tilt: 18
Axis Rotation: 65
Preferred Company: Hammer, Ebonite and MoRich

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by crashin12x » April 27th, 2018, 7:39 am

This is USBC. I wonder what would be World Bowling's position would be. Or are they just going to follow suit?
LHB
PAP 5" over LEFT x 7/8" over UP
Tilt 18*
Speed 16 MPH (Off Hand)
Rev 250 RPM
Rot 65*

JMerrell
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1440
Joined: August 1st, 2010, 1:45 pm
Positive Axis Point: 5 1/8" x 1/2" up
Speed: 16 mph @ foul line
Rev Rate: 230
Axis Tilt: 20
Axis Rotation: 50
Location: Florence, Ky

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by JMerrell » April 27th, 2018, 12:02 pm

crashin12x wrote:This is USBC. I wonder what would be World Bowling's position would be. Or are they just going to follow suit?
World Bowling has operated as a separate entity. When USBC changed the ruling to no changing of ball surface once practice begins, World Bowling did not follow suit.

I think all the SHEEP work for Chad Murphy at USBC. :lol: :lol: :lol:
-JMerrell
"Simplify the Motion.....Maximize the Results"

User avatar
MeNoRevs
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 303
Joined: January 19th, 2010, 11:28 pm
THS Average: 120
Positive Axis Point: 5 3/4 x 1 ^
Preferred Company: I prefer them all
Location: Southern Maryland

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MeNoRevs » April 27th, 2018, 1:58 pm

JMerrell wrote:
World Bowling has operated as a separate entity. When USBC changed the ruling to no changing of ball surface once practice begins, World Bowling did not follow suit.

I think all the SHEEP work for Chad Murphy at USBC. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Why are they sheep? Its interesting what people will say about other people behind a keyboard.

You may not agree with what USBC did, but to say that I believe is irresponsible. You don't know what arguments or disagreements they had. You don't know what was proposed and turned down during this time (a la turning back the diff numbers).

User avatar
MeNoRevs
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 303
Joined: January 19th, 2010, 11:28 pm
THS Average: 120
Positive Axis Point: 5 3/4 x 1 ^
Preferred Company: I prefer them all
Location: Southern Maryland

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MeNoRevs » April 27th, 2018, 2:01 pm

EricHartwell wrote:https://bowl.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?id=23622331019

cut and pasted from the Article on Bowl.com

"The specification requiring a bowling ball’s oil absorption rate to be more than 2:15 for the ball to be approved will take effect Aug. 1, 2020. Also, any ball models tested where the average oil absorption rate is under nine minutes and 30 seconds (9:30) will require additional balls to be tested."

9 minutes and 30 seconds seems to be the goal. Practically a regular urethane.

Brunswick has been bringing back Vintage ball releases. Now it seems that we are going back to those Vintage days of bowling. Hmm, did they have insight into what the USBC was going to do?

I would think that there will be people stocking up on their favorite balls of today. To bad my favorite ones have balance holes in them.
We will still see the oil suckers out there for quite a while. I'm guessing they will be pushed out of use with lighter oil patterns.
You do know that there is not one ball on today's market that would fail today's oil soaking test? At least that is what has been told.

User avatar
MegaMav
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4528
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: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MegaMav » April 27th, 2018, 2:32 pm

MeNoRevs wrote: You do know that there is not one ball on today's market that would fail today's oil soaking test? At least that is what has been told.
All current balls are grandfathered in. I dont think your statement is 100% accurate.
“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh

User avatar
MegaMav
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4528
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: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MegaMav » April 27th, 2018, 2:34 pm

EricHartwell wrote: Brunswick has been bringing back Vintage ball releases. Now it seems that we are going back to those Vintage days of bowling. Hmm, did they have insight into what the USBC was going to do?
You do realize all of those coverstocks are modern covers and not the originals right?
Even the core shapes are modified. The Danger Zone remake doesnt have the Bismuth Graphite Nucleus.

USBC rules state:
Material

3. The density of any piece/component in a ball (e.g. core, coverstock, weight block, etc.) shall not exceed 3.80 g/mL (i.e., no pure metals or high density materials).
“When you prepare for everything, you’re ready for anything.” - Bill Walsh

User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1443
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by bowl1820 » April 27th, 2018, 3:00 pm

"The specification requiring a bowling ball’s oil absorption rate to be more than 2:15 for the ball to be approved will take effect Aug. 1, 2020. Also, any ball models tested where the average oil absorption rate is under nine minutes and 30 seconds (9:30) will require additional balls to be tested."

As I read it, If a bowling ball’s oil absorption rate is more than 2min 15sec the ball will be approved.

So if a ball had a absorption rate of say 5mins it would be approved for use, But if it had a absorption rate of 1min it wouldn't be. That seems pretty straight forward.

And if the "average oil absorption rate" for a ball is in between 2:15 & 9:30 they'll have to double check because your starting to push against the edge of the envelope.

I assume the oil absorption rates for balls will be kept secret (or at least not readily available to the public) like the coefficient of friction of balls which is not published and not be used in marketing etc.
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."

User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1443
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by bowl1820 » April 27th, 2018, 3:11 pm

MeNoRevs wrote: You do know that there is not one ball on today's market that would fail today's oil soaking test? At least that is what has been told.
MegaMav wrote: All current balls are grandfathered in. I dont think your statement is 100% accurate.
Take this for what you will, I don't know how accurate it is:

This was posted by a Luke Rosdahl over on BR.com the other day.

"It was apparently said by Chad in the media conference call last night that NO current cover falls outside the acceptable absorption range, the fastest absorption rate on the market right now is 2.38."

he also added this to a video he posted on youtube talking about the changes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upLo509wBdE
"
Luke Rosdahl
1 day ago (edited)
UPDATE: No currently approved or available ball on the market exceeds the oil absorption limits, so there will need to be no dialing back of cover strength. The line was just drawn to keep anything from going any further, so strengths of balls and covers will NOT be throttled or reduced by the new absorption specifications. "
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."

User avatar
MeNoRevs
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 303
Joined: January 19th, 2010, 11:28 pm
THS Average: 120
Positive Axis Point: 5 3/4 x 1 ^
Preferred Company: I prefer them all
Location: Southern Maryland

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MeNoRevs » April 27th, 2018, 3:26 pm

MegaMav wrote: All current balls are grandfathered in. I dont think your statement is 100% accurate.
This is what was told to us at the "Call in" for Pro Shops. I can only say what was told to us by the horses mouth.

User avatar
MeNoRevs
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 303
Joined: January 19th, 2010, 11:28 pm
THS Average: 120
Positive Axis Point: 5 3/4 x 1 ^
Preferred Company: I prefer them all
Location: Southern Maryland

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MeNoRevs » April 27th, 2018, 3:30 pm

bowl1820 wrote: Luke Rosdahl
1 day ago (edited)
UPDATE: No currently approved or available ball on the market exceeds the oil absorption limits, so there will need to be no dialing back of cover strength. The line was just drawn to keep anything from going any further, so strengths of balls and covers will NOT be throttled or reduced by the new absorption specifications. "
Didnt see you posted this. Thanks

JMerrell
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1440
Joined: August 1st, 2010, 1:45 pm
Positive Axis Point: 5 1/8" x 1/2" up
Speed: 16 mph @ foul line
Rev Rate: 230
Axis Tilt: 20
Axis Rotation: 50
Location: Florence, Ky

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by JMerrell » April 27th, 2018, 3:38 pm

MeNoRevs wrote: It's interesting what people will say about other people behind a keyboard.

Don't underestimate an American Veteran, given the chance I'd say the say thing to his face in Dallas at JOG.

You may not agree with what USBC did, but to say that I believe is irresponsible.
You are entitled to your opinion, even if it has no value to me!


You don't know what arguments or disagreements they had. You don't know what was proposed and turned down during this time (a la turning back the diff numbers).

Correct, that's because USBC chose not to issue any kind of proposal for those affected.......just a statement....this is how it's going to be.
-JMerrell
"Simplify the Motion.....Maximize the Results"

User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1443
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by bowl1820 » April 27th, 2018, 4:39 pm

MeNoRevs wrote:
This is what was told to us at the "Call in" for Pro Shops. I can only say what was told to us by the horses mouth.
Here's a link to the

USBC Equipment Specifications Media Conference (4-24-2018)
The Sport of Bowling – USBC

Listen in to today's media conference as USBC staff and members of the USBC Equipment and Specifications Committee answer questions about today's announcement regarding new equipment specifications.

https://www.facebook.com/usbc/videos/10156099212815336/

At about the 17 min. mark they start talking about the oil absorption

Also from the Changes FAQ:
2018BTS-FAQ.pdf
5. What is the reason for the oil absorption specification being set at no lower than
two minutes, 15 seconds (2:15)?

Today, the lowest approved ball is two minutes, 38 seconds (2:38). There have been no
submitted ball samples for approved models that have fallen below two minutes, 15
seconds (2:15), since USBC started testing for oil absorption (approximately 800 balls to
date).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."

Rockmd
Member
Member
Posts: 6
Joined: June 19th, 2017, 3:29 pm
Preferred Company: The Rock Shop

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by Rockmd » April 27th, 2018, 5:09 pm

Yeah this stinks for us pro shop ball drillers that use p1-or weight holes for fine running... doh..all balls before Jan 2020 will be grandfathered into the oil absorption rule. In 2040 the balls are gonna be worth a mint.. unless ofcourse centers start putting out less oil

User avatar
MeNoRevs
Pro Shop
Pro Shop
Posts: 303
Joined: January 19th, 2010, 11:28 pm
THS Average: 120
Positive Axis Point: 5 3/4 x 1 ^
Preferred Company: I prefer them all
Location: Southern Maryland

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by MeNoRevs » April 27th, 2018, 5:28 pm

Rockmd wrote:Yeah this stinks for us pro shop ball drillers that use p1-or weight holes for fine running... doh..all balls before Jan 2020 will be grandfathered into the oil absorption rule. In 2040 the balls are gonna be worth a mint.. unless ofcourse centers start putting out less oil
Why would they be worth so much? They can still make balls with the same absorbion rate as they do now?

User avatar
bowl1820
Trusted Source
Trusted Source
Posts: 1443
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 10:09 pm
Location: Central Florida

Re: USBC New Ball Specs

Post by bowl1820 » April 27th, 2018, 6:02 pm

From the FAQ
"The current slowest oil absorption time for a reactive resin bowling ball measured is two hours, 28 minutes, and 37 seconds (2:28:37). Though, most reactive balls fall within the range of three minutes to one hour. "

WOW, Two and a half hours!! They got post a ball list!
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."

Post Reply