I don't understand some of the negative comments being left here. I thought the video was very clear about what what it was trying to show. Tamer clearly wasn't saying layouts don't matter, simply that surface is MORE important. I think we can all agree that is true. BTW this is coming from a guy that really loves playing with layouts and thinks they are definitely important.
This was a great video breakdown. Really does help to see the effect of the different sanding grits on the ball and how it changes the motion down lane. Thank you!
I'm speedom straighter bowler and my Fate w ReX pearl was almost useless at 1500 polish (had shop put that on when I drilled it instead reacta). Was planning on having it be a transition or later then that ball. Sat in my bag for over a month barely gettin a look here and there w no success till I hit it w 1500 trucuts, she's one my best balls now even on the fresh (THS).
Polish is bad for the majority of players honestly. If you need length as a 2 hander, or if the pattern is low volume, or if it is short, or if your name is EJ Tackett, then sure. Polish away. Most other players would benefit from 3000 grit or lower.
@@shaunmcisaac782 for the most part I agree w your reply, still small place for polish on stronger cover formulas. My Marvel Maxx w NeX Hybrid is bout only ball I keep polished cause formula so strong theres very little differences between 1000,2,3,4 up to polish in my experience. I tend to miss right when I miss and the polish gives it alil better chance to bounce back off the dry.
As a Vintage Full Roller layout is a much bigger difference in ball performance than surface. All surface can do is make a ball read the lane earlier or later, but surface will not "shape" the ball's movement through the lane. Layouts are the key to taking a simple sphere and creating imbalance in it so that it does different things through the lane. Even balls that have no core can be laid out in a way to make them have different shapes, something surface alone cannot do. I can take the same ball model at the same grit, put two totally opposite style layouts on them and they become like two totally different bowling balls.
Fair enough. Full roller is a unique style and has known elements to affect performance. This video is not all-encompassing for every style nor am I saying layouts don’t matter at all. Within a normal range for the typical bowler, 4” pin to pap has very little difference to a 5” for example.
@@TamerBowling Understood. Just wanted to give some additional information that could help the Full Rollers out there. Most PSO's just put the standard 3 3/8" Full Roller Leverage layout on balls, and for House Shots, that layout is a recipe for disaster. Maximum read of the front and bail down lane. There are many much better layouts for Full Rollers for house shots that will provide excellent performance and hit.
Correct. Layouts matter a bit more depending on how "out of normal" you are as a bowler. This is part of why PSOs need special layouts for 2 hander / no thumb players, even without the USBC rule change from a few years ago.
@@shaunmcisaac782 And one important point, when the USBC started allowing 3 oz of side weight on any side, now some very dynamic layouts, that could never be used in the past, are possible. As a Full Roller I can now make a pancake weight block ball perform like it has a dynamic core just by creating maximum focused side weight imbalance.
I noticed with my tilt wnd rotation i cant use a shiny/pearl ball. They go way straight, rstx2, all-road. So i took them down to 2000 lnocked the shine off and what a difference. My hubby is a no-thumber and does well with the pearl and or shiny.. i am trying to get him to try one of his with 2000 he has high speed and higher rotation. So we are definitely opposites
So one thing to think about with Surface adjustments vs layout - The surface of the ball changes with each throw until it gets to about 4700 grit equivalent via "lane shine". If you have a ball spinner at home, you can reset the surface fully to whatever you want each session. Takes like 5 minutes. You can do it by hand too of course, it just won't be as consistent. ----However---- The differences in ball motion based on LAYOUT won't change at all unless you plug and re-drill the ball. So if you're not going to maintain the surface at all, every ball you throw will eventually reach ~4700 grit and the LAYOUT is what is going to be something you can decide on.
That's right but like I added to another comment, surface can be adjusted just as quickly as it changes whereas most bowlers will get one shot at a layout.
I do agree the surface is important, I just think it’s a 50/50 importance with both. Also with matching up with a ball. You wouldn’t give a rev dominant bowler 500 grit on a ball and a speed dominant a really weak layout. I think surface adjustment is easier to adjust, but there comes a point where if you don’t match up layout and surface together with the purpose of the ball accounting for the bowlers style, you will never get desired results.
Thanks for the comment. I will say the data from studies do not support 50/50. I would say that between 2.5" and 5" pin to PAP, the delta is so minor, it really is in the realm of 5-10%. Also, surface can be adjusted all sorts of ways that people don't think of to create surprisingly wide ball motions from the same ball. For example, the ball reaction of a ball that is finished 500 then 2000 is very different from one that is finished 4000 then 2000. From the outside, 2000 is the end finish but the balls will react pretty differently.
When the really good bowlers learn what surfce does. I'm in trouble. But they refuse . Lmao. One guy i know will bowl a couple of 800 series. Until the heavy oil ball lane shines. Then cry balls only last a few games Lmao again.
Guys...it's extremely hard to compare surface adjustments when a) you dont know what your pads actually do on the ball, and b) when humans throw the ball and even the slightest difference in speed, rotation, axis rotation, can account for what you might see.
It’s actually quite easy. We aren’t machines. Throwbots don’t bowl for humans. All those slight differences are part of the equation, no reason to have an experiment in a lab.
@@TamerBowling You say it's "quite easy"....but don't explain why... And sorry but if we want to measure the effect of something something, the only way is to isolate the other parameters. An experiment is useless otherwise. The other thing is to do just a simulation of "what i see if i apply X pad on X ball". And even that you must show how the pad was applied. Most people apply it differently, different duration and pressure and that gives different results. So aside from our inconsistencies, as bowlers, there is this big parameter. You don't know what the pad actually left on the ball with the way you applied the pad, without a scanner. It is way too "ball park" and vague if certain methods arent used.
@@exesemas I did explain why. The answer is that we are not machines. Yes of course we can do “lab experiments” but as we see in pharmaceutical research (of which I make a living), the initial research may demonstrate efficacy and safety, but inevitably real world data turns up more than what is uncovered in those phase 1-3 trials. That’s because in the real world, you don’t actually isolate patients. They have what they have and they are still prescribed the medicine. So you get real world results. My point is a real world experiment with bowling surface is what I thought adds value to show you how accounting for real world factors, I.e., imperfection, what results are yielded.
@@TamerBowling I understand what you're saying, but, to use your example, in pharma trials we know what we give to patients, and we measure the results. Here, you don't know what grit the pad leaves on the ball, and you dont know whether the difference you saw, was due to the pad or your imperfect throw, or the lane condition etc. It all depends on what you are isolating to measure. Now if you say i am just simulating what i would SEE, in my judgement, by using X pad"....then that would a different story. :) I hope this helps.
@@exesemas I don’t want to be argumentative but I never said I’m doing a lab experiment. Your last statement is essentially a paraphrase or what I’m doing here. This is real life simulation. You have a bunch pads on you at the lanes. You scuff it, you get an idea of what happens, relatively speaking, to what you had before. If that’s the takeaway from the video, I’m more than happy.
Disappointed in this take. For a channel that has a test bowler with 40 degrees of tilt, it's extremely sad to hear you dismiss layouts. No one is discrediting the effect or importance of surface, this isn't an either/or conversation. For most bowlers within a normal range of tilt/rotation, they can get away with most layouts and be fine. Bryan is not one of them. If you want to prove layouts don't matter, then let's stop using those 5" pin to paps for Bryan, drill his next ball with a 3.5" pin to pap, a 90* drill angle, and pin down. Wanna take bets on how many times his ball bounces off the headpin and exits the deck on top of the 10? Yes, surface is the most important... But surface depletes with every shot, destroys the pattern, and requires regular upkeep, time, effort, and/or money. Things the main viewer demographic your channel targets, probably don't understand or do. No, people shouldn't run out, plugging their balls, to adjust their layouts by half an inch. But let's not pretend the layout isn't a vital factor when they buy their NEXT ball.
No need to be disappointed. The point is within a “normal range” of layout, the delta is very small. Going from 3 to 4” will be negligible in the sense that you can manipulate hand or surface and other things to bring within the same window. The video is more about surface and not an either or but I comment on layout because surface can impact a ball reaction much more. In fact the last demo of how you arrive at 2000 grit is almost like having a 5” pin ball vs a 3.5” pin. The data is there to support all the different factors and the impact they have.
Surface definitely depletes so if you're not maintaining the surface each session LAYOUT matters a lot more relatively speaking. That said, JR has a good video on how minute the differences are in layouts for most cases, including an overlay. Basically until the ball gets into the friction layout does zero for most balls. We are talking 1/10th of a board. But layout will have some change to how the ball goes through the pins. Below 180 this is irrelevant, just hit the pocket and make your spares. Above 220 this is crucial and is the difference between the 258 games and the "merely" 210, 220 games.
@@shaunmcisaac782 That's true surface changes pretty quickly but it can also just as quickly be refreshed. A key difference between surface and layouts is that you can have one ball and adjust surfaces as needed. You can not change layouts unless you have more than one of the same ball and for the vast majority of bowlers, this isn't practical.
@@shaunmcisaac782 I disagree completely. People who average above 220 are the least reliant on layouts, because they know exactly how to adjust their target, line, speed, tilt, rotation, in order to get the ball through the pins the correct way. Compound that by the fact that 220 average bowlers will make every spare if they don't, the loss is minimal. Bowlers 180 and lower, do not have the physical tools or often knowledge to change all of those factors to get the ball through the pins properly. They throw the ball the same way and if we're lucky they move their feet 1 board left or right to try and carry the corner. Most can't even tell you the difference between a flat or wrap 10, yet alone which way to move to fix it. These people need the layout, and need the ball to properly go through the pins. And again, these bowlers miss half their spares, so a ball that isn't properly going through the pins on the 1st shot is even more important because the alternative is often an open for those bowlers which drastically alters their scores. JR is trying to convince you all that because they're close to the same spot for 45 feet that it doesn't matter. Do you think the pins, or your score, care about what happens in the first 45 feet? They don't. The modern game of bowling is all about how your ball goes through the pins, whether it properly goes through all motions, slows down at the proper point, so that the ball gets into a roll and enters the pocket with the angle of entry and angle of impact most conducive to scoring. Ask any pro on tour what's most important to evaluating ball motion and staying ahead of transition, they all answer the same. How the ball exits the deck. No one gives a shit what the ball did in the first 45 feet, everything is about feeding the ball, to the proper break point down lane. Whether you do it from 10 or 30, everyone is targeting the breakpoint 45 feet down the lane, because 45+ is the part that matters.
I don't understand some of the negative comments being left here. I thought the video was very clear about what what it was trying to show. Tamer clearly wasn't saying layouts don't matter, simply that surface is MORE important. I think we can all agree that is true.
BTW this is coming from a guy that really loves playing with layouts and thinks they are definitely important.
Thanks. I didn’t expect the comment to be that provocative. Layouts have a place but this is a surface adjustment video primarily.
This was a great video breakdown. Really does help to see the effect of the different sanding grits on the ball and how it changes the motion down lane. Thank you!
Thank you Tamer! This was so helpful. I can see a CTD run! More for us know nothing junkies!
I'm speedom straighter bowler and my Fate w ReX pearl was almost useless at 1500 polish (had shop put that on when I drilled it instead reacta). Was planning on having it be a transition or later then that ball. Sat in my bag for over a month barely gettin a look here and there w no success till I hit it w 1500 trucuts, she's one my best balls now even on the fresh (THS).
Polish is bad for the majority of players honestly.
If you need length as a 2 hander, or if the pattern is low volume, or if it is short, or if your name is EJ Tackett, then sure. Polish away. Most other players would benefit from 3000 grit or lower.
@@shaunmcisaac782 for the most part I agree w your reply, still small place for polish on stronger cover formulas. My Marvel Maxx w NeX Hybrid is bout only ball I keep polished cause formula so strong theres very little differences between 1000,2,3,4 up to polish in my experience. I tend to miss right when I miss and the polish gives it alil better chance to bounce back off the dry.
As a Vintage Full Roller layout is a much bigger difference in ball performance than surface.
All surface can do is make a ball read the lane earlier or later, but surface will not "shape" the ball's movement through the lane. Layouts are the key to taking a simple sphere and creating imbalance in it so that it does different things through the lane. Even balls that have no core can be laid out in a way to make them have different shapes, something surface alone cannot do.
I can take the same ball model at the same grit, put two totally opposite style layouts on them and they become like two totally different bowling balls.
Fair enough. Full roller is a unique style and has known elements to affect performance. This video is not all-encompassing for every style nor am I saying layouts don’t matter at all. Within a normal range for the typical bowler, 4” pin to pap has very little difference to a 5” for example.
@@TamerBowling Understood. Just wanted to give some additional information that could help the Full Rollers out there. Most PSO's just put the standard 3 3/8" Full Roller Leverage layout on balls, and for House Shots, that layout is a recipe for disaster. Maximum read of the front and bail down lane. There are many much better layouts for Full Rollers for house shots that will provide excellent performance and hit.
Correct. Layouts matter a bit more depending on how "out of normal" you are as a bowler. This is part of why PSOs need special layouts for 2 hander / no thumb players, even without the USBC rule change from a few years ago.
@@shaunmcisaac782 And one important point, when the USBC started allowing 3 oz of side weight on any side, now some very dynamic layouts, that could never be used in the past, are possible. As a Full Roller I can now make a pancake weight block ball perform like it has a dynamic core just by creating maximum focused side weight imbalance.
I noticed with my tilt wnd rotation i cant use a shiny/pearl ball. They go way straight, rstx2, all-road. So i took them down to 2000 lnocked the shine off and what a difference. My hubby is a no-thumber and does well with the pearl and or shiny.. i am trying to get him to try one of his with 2000 he has high speed and higher rotation. So we are definitely opposites
So one thing to think about with Surface adjustments vs layout -
The surface of the ball changes with each throw until it gets to about 4700 grit equivalent via "lane shine".
If you have a ball spinner at home, you can reset the surface fully to whatever you want each session. Takes like 5 minutes. You can do it by hand too of course, it just won't be as consistent.
----However----
The differences in ball motion based on LAYOUT won't change at all unless you plug and re-drill the ball.
So if you're not going to maintain the surface at all, every ball you throw will eventually reach ~4700 grit and the LAYOUT is what is going to be something you can decide on.
That's right but like I added to another comment, surface can be adjusted just as quickly as it changes whereas most bowlers will get one shot at a layout.
I do agree the surface is important, I just think it’s a 50/50 importance with both. Also with matching up with a ball. You wouldn’t give a rev dominant bowler 500 grit on a ball and a speed dominant a really weak layout. I think surface adjustment is easier to adjust, but there comes a point where if you don’t match up layout and surface together with the purpose of the ball accounting for the bowlers style, you will never get desired results.
Thanks for the comment. I will say the data from studies do not support 50/50. I would say that between 2.5" and 5" pin to PAP, the delta is so minor, it really is in the realm of 5-10%. Also, surface can be adjusted all sorts of ways that people don't think of to create surprisingly wide ball motions from the same ball. For example, the ball reaction of a ball that is finished 500 then 2000 is very different from one that is finished 4000 then 2000. From the outside, 2000 is the end finish but the balls will react pretty differently.
Brian spins it a lot, too. 🤔
When the really good bowlers learn what surfce does. I'm in trouble. But they refuse . Lmao. One guy i know will bowl a couple of 800 series. Until the heavy oil ball lane shines. Then cry balls only last a few games
Lmao again.
Guys...it's extremely hard to compare surface adjustments when a) you dont know what your pads actually do on the ball, and b) when humans throw the ball and even the slightest difference in speed, rotation, axis rotation, can account for what you might see.
It’s actually quite easy. We aren’t machines. Throwbots don’t bowl for humans. All those slight differences are part of the equation, no reason to have an experiment in a lab.
@@TamerBowling You say it's "quite easy"....but don't explain why... And sorry but if we want to measure the effect of something something, the only way is to isolate the other parameters. An experiment is useless otherwise. The other thing is to do just a simulation of "what i see if i apply X pad on X ball". And even that you must show how the pad was applied. Most people apply it differently, different duration and pressure and that gives different results. So aside from our inconsistencies, as bowlers, there is this big parameter. You don't know what the pad actually left on the ball with the way you applied the pad, without a scanner. It is way too "ball park" and vague if certain methods arent used.
@@exesemas I did explain why. The answer is that we are not machines. Yes of course we can do “lab experiments” but as we see in pharmaceutical research (of which I make a living), the initial research may demonstrate efficacy and safety, but inevitably real world data turns up more than what is uncovered in those phase 1-3 trials. That’s because in the real world, you don’t actually isolate patients. They have what they have and they are still prescribed the medicine. So you get real world results.
My point is a real world experiment with bowling surface is what I thought adds value to show you how accounting for real world factors, I.e., imperfection, what results are yielded.
@@TamerBowling I understand what you're saying, but, to use your example, in pharma trials we know what we give to patients, and we measure the results. Here, you don't know what grit the pad leaves on the ball, and you dont know whether the difference you saw, was due to the pad or your imperfect throw, or the lane condition etc. It all depends on what you are isolating to measure. Now if you say i am just simulating what i would SEE, in my judgement, by using X pad"....then that would a different story. :) I hope this helps.
@@exesemas I don’t want to be argumentative but I never said I’m doing a lab experiment. Your last statement is essentially a paraphrase or what I’m doing here. This is real life simulation. You have a bunch pads on you at the lanes. You scuff it, you get an idea of what happens, relatively speaking, to what you had before. If that’s the takeaway from the video, I’m more than happy.
Disappointed in this take.
For a channel that has a test bowler with 40 degrees of tilt, it's extremely sad to hear you dismiss layouts.
No one is discrediting the effect or importance of surface, this isn't an either/or conversation. For most bowlers within a normal range of tilt/rotation, they can get away with most layouts and be fine. Bryan is not one of them.
If you want to prove layouts don't matter, then let's stop using those 5" pin to paps for Bryan, drill his next ball with a 3.5" pin to pap, a 90* drill angle, and pin down. Wanna take bets on how many times his ball bounces off the headpin and exits the deck on top of the 10?
Yes, surface is the most important... But surface depletes with every shot, destroys the pattern, and requires regular upkeep, time, effort, and/or money. Things the main viewer demographic your channel targets, probably don't understand or do.
No, people shouldn't run out, plugging their balls, to adjust their layouts by half an inch. But let's not pretend the layout isn't a vital factor when they buy their NEXT ball.
No need to be disappointed. The point is within a “normal range” of layout, the delta is very small. Going from 3 to 4” will be negligible in the sense that you can manipulate hand or surface and other things to bring within the same window.
The video is more about surface and not an either or but I comment on layout because surface can impact a ball reaction much more. In fact the last demo of how you arrive at 2000 grit is almost like having a 5” pin ball vs a 3.5” pin.
The data is there to support all the different factors and the impact they have.
Surface definitely depletes so if you're not maintaining the surface each session LAYOUT matters a lot more relatively speaking.
That said, JR has a good video on how minute the differences are in layouts for most cases, including an overlay. Basically until the ball gets into the friction layout does zero for most balls. We are talking 1/10th of a board.
But layout will have some change to how the ball goes through the pins. Below 180 this is irrelevant, just hit the pocket and make your spares. Above 220 this is crucial and is the difference between the 258 games and the "merely" 210, 220 games.
@@shaunmcisaac782 That's true surface changes pretty quickly but it can also just as quickly be refreshed. A key difference between surface and layouts is that you can have one ball and adjust surfaces as needed. You can not change layouts unless you have more than one of the same ball and for the vast majority of bowlers, this isn't practical.
@@shaunmcisaac782 I disagree completely.
People who average above 220 are the least reliant on layouts, because they know exactly how to adjust their target, line, speed, tilt, rotation, in order to get the ball through the pins the correct way. Compound that by the fact that 220 average bowlers will make every spare if they don't, the loss is minimal.
Bowlers 180 and lower, do not have the physical tools or often knowledge to change all of those factors to get the ball through the pins properly. They throw the ball the same way and if we're lucky they move their feet 1 board left or right to try and carry the corner. Most can't even tell you the difference between a flat or wrap 10, yet alone which way to move to fix it. These people need the layout, and need the ball to properly go through the pins. And again, these bowlers miss half their spares, so a ball that isn't properly going through the pins on the 1st shot is even more important because the alternative is often an open for those bowlers which drastically alters their scores.
JR is trying to convince you all that because they're close to the same spot for 45 feet that it doesn't matter. Do you think the pins, or your score, care about what happens in the first 45 feet? They don't. The modern game of bowling is all about how your ball goes through the pins, whether it properly goes through all motions, slows down at the proper point, so that the ball gets into a roll and enters the pocket with the angle of entry and angle of impact most conducive to scoring.
Ask any pro on tour what's most important to evaluating ball motion and staying ahead of transition, they all answer the same. How the ball exits the deck. No one gives a shit what the ball did in the first 45 feet, everything is about feeding the ball, to the proper break point down lane. Whether you do it from 10 or 30, everyone is targeting the breakpoint 45 feet down the lane, because 45+ is the part that matters.