Board index » General Forums » Ball Talk




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:08 pm Post Number: #1 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: February 8, 2015
Posts: 58
Reputation: 0
Reputation Power: 1
I was just wondering once you have built your arsenal what surface differences if any... Should your control ball have more or less surface than your benchmark ball.... Should your midlane have more or less surface than your benchmark or the Totally Strong more or less surface?...


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:48 pm Post Number: #2 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: March 17, 2016
Posts: 908
Reputation: -12
Reputation Power: 1
I am going to try to answer this and someone can correct me. My benchmark ball is a medium oil control ball and I keep it at factory finish. Your question probably needs a few more questions answered in order to answer it correctly. For me I will have 3 different "control balls" depending on what lane condition I am dealing with. Game Breaker 3 for oily, Hy-road for medium, rotogrip hustle for ligher oil. All 3 of these I keep at factory finish. The Gamebreaker 3 I don't have yet but if I use it on oil and it isn't strong enough, I can hit it with a pad to dull it a little. if you only have 1 control ball such as a hy-road and you want it on heavier oil you can lower the surface and if you have lighter oil you can polish it up a bit etc. Suppose your control ball is the hy-road the hy-road is 1500. Suppose your benchmark ball is a hammer bad intentions hybrid which is at 3000. Altering the surface of the hammer up just makes it go a little longer and, taking surface off will just make it hook sooner. You might have a radical ridiculous as your benchmark ball and it is 500 and compound. I don't think it makes a difference if your benchmark ball has more or less surface then your control ball. It really depends on where you want to play. If your benchmark ball is pretty dull and if you switch to your control ball it won't make it to the pocket, then you might want to take the surface down on the control. The control ball is designed not to be Jumpy when it hits friction.

So to sum all this up. I personally don't think the control ball should have more or less surface then the benchmark ball. It should have apriopate (spelling) surface needed to were you want to use it out on the lane and when.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:56 pm Post Number: #3 Post
Offline
BCU Graduate Layouts
User avatar

Joined: April 4, 2011
Posts: 3236
Location: Michigan
Reputation: 279
Reputation Power: 3
jobowl wrote:
I was just wondering once you have built your arsenal what surface differences if any... Should your control ball have more or less surface than your benchmark ball.... Should your midlane have more or less surface than your benchmark or the Totally Strong more or less surface?...

Good Question

The way you are describing the surfaces, putting more surface on the stronger/earlier layouts and shinier on the weaker/longer layouts.
Not a bad idea to have a natural progression of stronger to weaker setup.
But, it depends on the balls natural coverstock characteristics.
For instance I have a skid snap ball with a control layout on it. It plays crazy skid snap with a shine on it even with the control layout. I use a 1000 grit surface and end up with a Benchmark type reaction.

Ball surface is an ever changing parameter. Dull surfaces shine up over time, shiny polished surfaces get dull. Some balls play well with lane shine. While others need constant attention every 3 or 4 games touching up the surface to keep the reaction where you like it.
Surface depends on what works for a particular ball to give the the length and shape you need or want on a given condition.
I've been bowling in a Sport league where the pattern is changed every 4 weeks So I am changing surfaces on several balls at least once every 4 weeks. Sometimes more when I didn't choose the surfaces correctly. Learning how different balls react with different surfaces takes time and effort.

_________________
Eric Hartwell

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


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Fri Feb 02, 2018 3:43 pm Post Number: #4 Post
Offline
Certified Coach

Joined: December 13, 2014
Posts: 1113
Location: San Juan, PR
Reputation: 195
Reputation Power: 2
Have your pads ready when it’s time for the tournament practice shots, if allowed always adjust if needed. If it’s the same house/same pattern all the time you will find something that works and you can just maintain. Always wipe your ball before every shot and clean it inmediately after the games are done. Extract the oil every season.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:15 pm Post Number: #5 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: March 8, 2012
Posts: 18
Reputation: 0
Reputation Power: 1
I don't mean to hijack this thread but I have a question that is related to this discussion - Does anyone know why polished balls tend to snap more on the backend than balls with more surface?

My belief has been that since polished balls generally experience less friction in the oil than duller balls, they don't lose axis rotation as quickly as the ball rolls down the lane. That means when a polished ball reaches the end of the pattern its axis rotation should be greater than a similar ball with a rougher surface (assuming they were both thrown exactly the same). And it's this higher axis rotation at the back part of the lane that results in a sharper reaction by the polished ball (as long as there is enough friction to slow the ball's forward speed to enter the hook phase).

Is that right or is there more to it than this?


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:04 am Post Number: #6 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: November 21, 2014
Posts: 653
Location: Hong Kong
Reputation: 17
Reputation Power: 1
flagator07 wrote:
I don't mean to hijack this thread but I have a question that is related to this discussion - Does anyone know why polished balls tend to snap more on the backend than balls with more surface?

My belief has been that since polished balls generally experience less friction in the oil than duller balls, they don't lose axis rotation as quickly as the ball rolls down the lane. That means when a polished ball reaches the end of the pattern its axis rotation should be greater than a similar ball with a rougher surface (assuming they were both thrown exactly the same). And it's this higher axis rotation at the back part of the lane that results in a sharper reaction by the polished ball (as long as there is enough friction to slow the ball's forward speed to enter the hook phase).

Is that right or is there more to it than this?



I echo your thought but add to the criteria "same ball with different surfaces".

_________________
Adrian
Right handed

(Sep 2018)
PAP: 5 1/8 up 3/4
Speed: 15.5 mph (Kegel Specto)
Rev: 350 RPM
Axis tilt: 18-20*
Axis rotation: 60*


(Old)
PAP: 5 5/8 up 3/4
Speed: 14 mph off hand
Rev: 300 RPM
Axis tilt: 15*
Axis rotation: 60*


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:08 pm Post Number: #7 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: March 8, 2012
Posts: 18
Reputation: 0
Reputation Power: 1
Oh, yes that's what I meant to say. I was assuming the same ball was being used, just changing the surface.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:44 pm Post Number: #8 Post
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: July 9, 2012
Posts: 1334
Location: Central Florida
Reputation: 462
Reputation Power: 5
flagator07 wrote:
I don't mean to hijack this thread but I have a question that is related to this discussion - Does anyone know why polished balls tend to snap more on the backend than balls with more surface?


This question relates to the old adage "A sanded ball hooks less but earlier than a smooth ball and a smooth ball hooks later but stronger than a sanded ball."

This is because a sanded ball has less surface contact (a smaller footprint) than a smooth ball when in contact with the lane surface.

Image

Coarser sanded balls can bite through the oil earlier (see friction sooner), because the ridges are deeper and can get through the layer of oil on the lane.

But because the coarse sanding lines are also fewer & farther apart, less of the actual coverstock material touches the lane surface (smaller foot print). So the ball doesn't make as strong of a move, doesn't snap as hard as the smooth ball.

Smoother/Finer sanded balls on the other hand have ridges that are not as deep, So don't make contact with the lane surface (see friction later) as soon as a sanded ball.

But because the finer surface texture ridges which are closer together, more of the actual coverstock material touches the lane surface (larger foot print) when it does contact the lane (so there's more friction).

So coupled with the energy it has retained skidding on the oil, it would make a stronger move when it sees the friction than the sanded ball does.

_________________
Click my green + rep button if this helps!
"REMEMBER, it isn't how much the ball hooks, it's where."


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2018 9:08 pm Post Number: #9 Post
Offline
Member

Joined: March 8, 2012
Posts: 18
Reputation: 0
Reputation Power: 1
I'm glad you posted because that's what I used to think. It makes complete sense to me that a ball with a coarser surface will have greater friction in the oil, because the oil can flow between the peaks of the ball surface, allowing more of the ball to touch the lane. However in the dry, my (perhaps flawed) understanding of friction is that more surface area doesn't translate into more friction and both balls should have a similar amount of friction once out of the oil.

Here's a quote I found on a physics website that explains the reasoning:
"Although a larger area of contact between two surfaces would create a larger source of frictional forces, it also reduces the pressure between the two surfaces for a given force holding them together. Since pressure equals force divided by the area of contact, it works out that the increase in friction generating area is exactly offset by the reduction in pressure; the resulting frictional forces, then, are dependent only on the frictional coefficient of the materials and the FORCE holding them together."

Can anyone confirm if this is accurate?


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Arsenal Surfaces
 Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:04 pm Post Number: #10 Post
Offline
Certified Coach

Joined: December 13, 2014
Posts: 1113
Location: San Juan, PR
Reputation: 195
Reputation Power: 2
Keep on the coverstock discussion, I find it very interesting and do not wish to hijak it.

That said, I believe the core has something to do with it too since on a polished ball the skid phase is longer, the core will start to influence the ball motion later when it starts to hook and will probably stand up more suddenly when the coverstock finally reaches the dry. What I am saying is that friction will affect it later and more suddenly.


Top 
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

Board index » General Forums » Ball Talk


 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: