Unfortunately, this is the proposed change as it is currently worded.

Proposed change #3
USBC proposes a new rule allowing only a “dry towel” to be used to clean bowling balls during competition and prohibiting liquid cleaners of any kind to be used during competition. Additional information: This proposal remains unchanged with a proposed effective date of August 1, 2019.

Without an exception, to me the USBC is saying "deal with it".

Mark

If I'm getting my head handed to me, is that still considered competition? LOL!

We can still use liquid cleaners before competition starts. Could this rule change be directed at the cleaners that have solids in them that seem to scuff the surface a little like Storms' Reacta Skuff?

To me a cleaner that changes the surface should not be used during competition.

I have a few balls with balance holes. The BH was put there because it was necessary to meet static weight limits. Plugging the BH will make these balls illegal and re-drilling might end up making the ball a dud.

The implementation time line is forward enough where I probably won't be using them anymore but it means I won't be able to dust an old ball off once in awhile to see if it still works.

When the ball comes back with gooey black substance on it, there is no way a dry cloth can clean it. OK, then I take 10-15 mins to clean my ball, too bad to the others.

So my laptop is being weird right now... So as a two handed bowler who doesn't use his thumb this would mean that I would only be allowed two holes in the ball?

Currently, you’re actually permitted to have up to 12 holes!

– You can have up to five holes for gripping purposes (one for each finger and one for the thumb, all for the same hand). Although you’re not required to use all five holes on every shot, you must be prepared to demonstrate that you can.

– You can have one hole for balance purposes (a weight hole), not to exceed one and a quarter inches (1 ¼) in diameter.

– You are allowed one vent hole for each finger and/or thumb hole, not to exceed ¼ in in diameter. A vent hole is any non-gripping hole that intersects with a gripping hole at any depth.

– You are allowed one mill hole for inspection purposes not to exceed 5/8 of an inch in diameter and 1/8 of an inch in depth.

Any hole not used for its intended purpose is considered a balance hole and would be a violation of the rule.

________

Under the proposed rule, only the balance hole is being eliminated.

________

Since you only use 2 holes, that's all you need. However, if you can demonstrate that you can actually use other holes, they would be available.

mixed emotions....almost all my stuff has a flare reducing hole, some have a flare INCREASING hole. If balance holes are eliminated all together I will have to do more research before selecting a piece to be punched. I suppose if everyone else has the same spec to deal with I will have to conform, but what about the mountain of equipment I currently can make use of, even if only on "special" occasions?

I am going to throw this out there for those they may have missed this article.

https://www.11thframe.com/news/article/1...latest-proposed

I find it sort of interesting that these two points are made in the article.

"5) a lack of checking lanes for legal oiling conditions" as a reason for higher scores.

"Give out 300 and 800 awards again only on conditions that meet “Award Requirements.” This could be an 8, 9, or 10:1 ration with a minimum of 6, 7, or 8 units of oil on the outside boards to where the machine starts to buff" as a solution.

I like the intent, but if regulation of conditions is already a problem who is going to go around to all these award leagues and check for compliance? I do like how there is wiggle room so different centers could account for different or older surfaces.

However, I also question whether bowlers would really migrate to the award leagues for the awards over their egos. Additionally, his idea of charging bowlers more for bowling in more leagues could backfire. If that were to happen, I'm only going to bowl in an award league because I want my money to go to an award I could earn. There could also be a limitation for those who can only bowl league at certain times or nights and if no award leagues are offered then, someone might not bowl leagues at all if they know their sanction money is going to awards they cannot earn.

Again, I like the idea. However, I think that any idea that relies on a prediction of human behavior and reaction to the change worries me.

Mark

Where I bowl, whenever the lane pattern is changed to make the shot more realistic, the whiners go right to the mechanic, desk or even management to vent. Not a single person schedules another day of practice. The idea that 'stake-holders' will regulate themselves, won't work.

USBC is long over-due in making these changes. There may be other changes necessary to make the game credible again. If you ask me, USBC also needs to visit places 'quietly' where averages are statistically out of line to see why.

I always claim to have a 187 lifetime average, even while I've averaged over 200 in at least one league since 1968. I base any average over 187 on my ability to take advantage of ball or lane pattern technologies. Put a hard rubber ball in my hand on a 60 foot long oil pattern and I 'think' I can still average in the high 180's.

I'm not suggesting that conditions become that demanding again, but what USBC is proposing, is minor compared to what 'could' be done to make the game credible again. Of course, we could just put asterisks next to our honor scores and averages :-)