Before the Junior Nationals many of this States President Shield bowling equipment was checked, it was found that a couple of balls were oversize, I got both of these balls into the shop and checked them with my rings, one was OK and the other was tight.
In the case of both balls, if I turned the ball and placed the rings in a different place they were OK, turning them again they were not, meaning the balls were out of shape and not necessarily oversize. We resurfaced one of the balls to appease the powers to be, and left the other alone.
Both balls were from different manufacturers and it not important as to which one they were. I am sure that ball manufacturers have quality controls in place that are efficient enough. But be aware that heat will affect the size of the ball, age and wear will affect the shape, putting your ball in the boot of your car on a hot day will affect the size and hardness of your ball etc.
And simply bowling with the ball will affect the hardness of the ball, especially if it is a reactive or particle ball, as these balls rely on creating friction, and friction creates heat. Try placing a durometer on a ball after you have bowled a game or two with it, and I am sure you will find the ball comes under the minimum 72 hardness rule.
However if we check that same ball before you bowl, we would find it to be OK.
My argument is this, that the majority of proshops in Australia do not have rings or durometers for testing the size and hardness of bowling balls, in Victoria I am one of maybe 2 or 3 people that have rings and a durometer, I do check balls at random for size and durometer hardness, but mainly for curiosity. And understand that proshop's rarely check for size or hardness, as this is part of the Quality Control of the manufacturer.
During the Asian Schools Games in 2002, we checked for static weight and little else, this was the recommendation of the WTBA/ASF technical delegate, we did check for approved balls as of that date, as some were checked in that were under the approved date.
We checked 500 plus balls for that tournament, and although we found some to be illeagal, no-one was penalised because competition had not started yet, any errors were corrected and rechecked again.
Personally I don't place a great deal of importance on the size of the ball or hardness of the ball, whether or not someone bowls well depends mainly on the bowler, but also the dynamic properties & friction characteristics of the ball, and more importantly the lane pattern and condition of the lane. Rather than us believing that the size or hardness, and even the static balance of the ball is why we score high.
The TBA acknowledge that the bowlers were not at fault, and chose to not penalise them, because this is a grey area in equipment checks, we realise we need to be tolerent with checking equipment for these specifications, and I wholeheartedly agree. Make them aware of the problem, give them a warning or yellow card them, but I don't see any justification for disqualification.
I understand that we need to have rules, and the specifications of the ball are part of that rule, but we need to be tolerant with how we deal with infringments to that rule.
Many years ago we believed that maximum side weight and finger weight was the most advantage we could have with a ball, and putting an extra 1 ounce would give us more of an advantage, we all bowled with 16lb balls because we thought that the heavier the better, eventually some of us tried and tested this theory but realised this was not true. Drilling the ball to suit our technique, and it was simply the way we bowled that made us better than one another.
We still check equipment with that old age mentality, we still believe bowlers put lead in their bowling balls, and use MEK to soften the hardness of the shell. Well we don't need to do that anymore, the surface friction as well as the dynamic properties of the modern balls exceed the limits we set back then, you can now simply buy a hook in a box.
We need to ask was the bowler clearly trying to gain an advantage with having:
1. An oversize ball
2. Finger inserts sitting above the surface of the ball by a millimetre
3. A ball with a softer hardness because of wear
4. A 1/8 ounce of extra static weight
5. A ball slightly out of roundness
6. Too much cracking around the holes
The list goes on.
The six pound balls Philby mentioned are not unusual, light weight balls go out of round because bowlers throw them half way down the lane and this creates enourmous damage to the coverstock and the shape, eventually they have to be thrown out. However it is unlikely that someone will bowl a 300 game with one.
The warning to all bowlers that compete in tournaments or league, have your equipment checked for legality, it will make you feel better knowing there is no problem with your equipment. And it will make the ball driller happy knowing that when you bowl a high game the ball is OK, and not be embarassed knowing they drilled the ball and someone half way across the country found it to be non compliant.
Hope this gives everyone another view of the question, and again I must apologise for the long post.
Regards,
Patrick Birtig
