As I've mentioned before, I bowled regularly in the late '70s, then took a long break from the sport before returning this year. I've been reading up on it and observing as much as I can, but I'm still a little perplexed about the direction bowling has taken during my hiatus. Perhaps those of you who've stayed more in touch over the years can help to clear up some things for me.

First of all, I keep hearing that the modern player needs an "arsenal" of high-tech balls to be competitive on modern lane conditions. Question is, when, how and why did lane conditions change? The move to synthetics is easy to understand from an economic standpoint, but what about oiling patterns? Were these changed due to the new lane materials, or was it done in response to developments in bowling ball technology (beginning with the advent of urethane balls in the early '80s)? Or did bowling balls change to suit the new lane conditions? I realize that now it's all a big cycle (or "circle j3rk", if you like) that keeps going around, but I'm curious as to where it got started.

That brings me to another question: just what was a typical condition in the mid or late '70s, anyway? I know they used less oil, but how about the pattern? Did "house" patterns differ from "pro" patterns as they do today? Was it all just "flat oil?" All I remember about the old days, at the handful of places where I bowled, is that the lanes were dryer and even a polyester ball would hook a little at the back part of the lane. I definitely don't remember my ball (still polyester to this day) coming back all slimy with oil like it does now.

Dave, you and I left the game at about the same time. I came back a little sooner. But, we both were confused by the changes in the game.

From my research, I point to synthetic lanes as the start of the spiral. Simultaneously, the balls went from rubber, to polyester to urethane. Instead of flat top weight, they also developed offset internal weights in 2 piece balls, all of which turned a lot more then the original rubber.

The game started to produce higher and higher scores with this newer equipment, as the USBC Honor scores attest to. To compete with this, oil patterns were developed to reduce the high scores. I recently found out the first was a 24 foot oil pattern in the 80's. I think I missed that.

There are numerous oil patterns today, as there are differing amounts of oil to spread in those patterns. House shots are typically 37-39 feet in length, and have oil concentrated in the center, mostly in a XMas tree form. That is why many say the outside dries up as oil is spread and used during bowling. It had less oil to begin with. Sport patterns, tournament patterns and PBA patterns spread the oil in a flatter pattern so there is a more evenly spread across the lane.

The XMas tree pattern, allows bowlers today to play an inside line by rolling out to the dryer area, and "bank" the ball off the dry spot to come back to the pocket. Couldn't do that in the 70's. But, now you can.

To add to your confusion, the ball manufacturers created different coverstocks on their balls, reactive solid, particle, pearlized, and a bunch of patented names for every ball line. So, as a result, the balls have become more specific to the lane surfaces. One coverstock works better on a particular oil pattern than another. Hence, the need for an arsenal, a different ball for a different lane condition. That is an education in itself, and is specific to each bowler as there are different styles.

In the mid 70's, there was very little difference between what the league bowler and the pro player had in lane conditions. Whatever oil was spread was flat, and was used to protect the lanes finish of lacquer on wood.

Who has suffered? Well the scores are not able to be compared any longer. A 300 on an average house shot really is not the same as a 300 on a sport shot. The sport shot presenting a greater degree of difficulty. Whereas, is the 60's-70's, a 300 in league was pretty equivalent to a pro 300. A 190 bowler in the 70's is like a league 220 today. The scoring threshhold has risen. There are still good and average bowlers, as in the past. Their scores are just higher.

Who has gained? The ball manufacturers have. A new and improved ball comes out every few months by every manufacturer. Where a bowler in the 70's had their favorite ball that fit like a glove, and had it for years, today the bowler carries 3 or 4, and only of the newer line releases.

The days of Buzz Fazzio leading the PBA with a 196 average are gone. That threshhold is now 240.

A lot of people call this progress and technological advancement. I just wonder.

The only consistency is I have a ball, there is a lane, and there are pins at the end. Knock them all down in the fewest number of rolls. Ideally, only 12.

Good bowling.

Check this out. http://www.pba.com/resources/oilpatterns/laneconditions.asp?ID=5

Knowledge of what potential could be had in the game was not there in the 70s. No one in those days could have guessed that it would evolve into what we see today.

There are so many advancements that its not going to be fair to pin point one or even two. What about the new fangled lane machines? The oils used today? How those oils are applied? The lane surface? You cannot even begin to measure the differences there. Just as you cannot compare bowling balls to what they had in the 70s. And shoes....yes shoes. The shoes are more sophisticated with the ability to change soles and heels. Wrist braces and such are more advanced and varied.

Now you have to take into account the lessons we've learned about the bio mechanics that produce the optimum results. In the 70s and 80s, you didn't have computerized analyzation of every step you take and every foot your ball is on the lane. If you could find people to teach you about bowling you were lucky. But you sure as .....didn't just pay money and get a qualified coach to teach you some of these things. Today, we know what you should be doing on the first step, the first ball movement step, the power step and the finish step. All that is concrete and a known quanitity. Fixing bad timing is now as easy as the student makes it. USBC is now working on foot pressure per step and hand pressure throughout the swing process. Those elevated Jrs coming out of good programs are already armed with this information and have polished their game far more then those of similar age in the 70s and 80s.

You cannot just point a finger at easier lane conditions or reactive balls. Its more then that. All sports are like this. New fuels, engines and tires in car racing. New suits in swimming. Bikes and helmets and suits in cycling. Its advancing technology and you cannot stop it. Bowling is not immune. You cannot go back, you can only go forward and adjust your game and experience of the game for today.

Its useless to dwell on how the game used to be. There used to be a 4 minute mile too. People used to be perfectly capable of cooking without a micro wave. Or watching TV without a cable or satallite. All that's there now is for those still involved to keep the game going and bringing in new bowlers and enthusiasts.

Erin

Boy, this subject sure seems to get people riled up. I've noticed that on some other sites, too.

I wonder, though, if the whole high-tech aspect isn't turning some people OFF to competitive bowling. In my limited experience at the local lanes, it seems the only people having fun are the recreational bowlers. The league guys don't look like they're enjoying themselves at all--but I'd be crabby, too, if I had to haul 100 lbs. of bowling balls to practice or league

How many people are in leagues now vs. 30 years ago? I don't know the answer, but it might be worth looking at the numbers to see if the game has more appeal now than it did then. But there's definitely fewer bowling alleys and less bowling on TV than there used to be.

Don't know about you, but in Chicago, where I grew up, there were many second floor bowling lanes, without elevators. I couldn't think of lugging a 4-ball roller up the stairs.

Erin makes a few good points. The game has evolved technologically. And, in a way that wouldn't have even been thought of in the past. Lanes, balls, oils, and techniques have all evolved. It's a competition now between the Ball Cos. to see who can come up with the newest and best.

Also, the Coaching is so much more organized and available. Junior leagues are developing kids rapidly in the proper techniques. My Junior league had a moderator, who was a parent, not certified in any way. But, did try to instruct in the best way she knew.

As I got older, a local Pro would stop by and work with a few of the better kids.

It wasn't until high school that I actually had a formal instructor, and bowled competitively. Today's kids are ready for competition before high school.

Bowling is not like other sports. Equipment is going to change. Baseball, football and others have specs for their balls, that takes an act of God to change, but other things have evolved. Just not as much as bowling.

Coming from a long layoff, it is shocking to see the change in the game. And, there needs to be some understanding of how it evolved to this point. both Erin and I are not criticizing, but trying in 1 post to bring you up to speed.

There will always be questions about before and today everywhere. Who was the better home run hitter, Aaron or Ruth as an example.

Hope we brought you up to speed real quickly. Now, go out and buy 4 balls.

Maybe we hear about all this "I remember how it used to be" because bowling is one of those exceptional sports that you can enjoy for most of your life. Therefore people bowl for 10 to 50+ years without stop. Unlike say football or gymnastics which you have a short window of time to play and then your body just can't do it anymore.

But change is inevitable. There are a lot of reasons why there are less league bowlers and it doesn't just have to do with the "easy" lane conditions. People's activities are different now. Video games, movies on demand, long commutes the list is very long. I wonder if adult baseball and softball leagues have dropped too.

There's less bowling centers because in most urban areas the land prices went up so much that it was worth more as apartments then one bowling center. Its hard to make a profit with a bowling center in a city area. You have to raise prices then you get all the old timers "I remember when I used to pay .25 a game, I'm not paying $4.25"

Erin, you are arguing an arguement that isn't there. After a long layoff, and not keeping up with bowling evolution, it is shocking to see the change. It is also perplexing that your old equipment doesn't work any more. And, it is most troubling to try to catch up on bowling's development over those missed years.

When a returnee is asked how a ball should be drilled, one doesn't even know there are options. Let alone types of balls, coverstock differences, and more. There is so much to learn and in a relatively short time.

You have had the benefit of living through this transition, and have had the training to explain it. You have years of experience. Now, try to put all of that knowledge into a returning bowler in a few weeks. I say it's impossible. After four years of return, and trying my best to be instructed, learn the terminology and technology, I find there is still alot more to learn. And, I am not even talking about the mechanics. Some out there may even have to unlearn what was commonplace years ago.

I'm not saying this is bad. Sometimes I feel like "Encino Man" who has just been uncovered from a multi-year rest. Others do too.

NewYorkDave, Greetings from Little Rock, Ark. And It's a pleasure for me to come across al player who comments on the game of bowling, in the 70's. In my humble opinion, and I know this won't fly with some of the younger players, the decade of the 70's was the best era in the sport. Heck bowling centers themselves began to change,from early to mid 70's, from the old smoke filled 'basement' type atmosphere, to the more modern 'family recreation center' . The early 70's also marked the widespread use of the 'urethane' lane finish. I believe also, that the early 70's signaled the high performance ball revolution, beginning with the likes of columbias legendary 'yellow dot', brunswicks 'LT48', columbias infamous leagle 'soaker', the 'shor-d-pro', Ebonites 'magnum' series, and leading up to the balls that would first revolutionize the game: the urethane'roto' line, to AMF's 'angle. And many more. And even WITH those early performers a basic 200 average was considered almost unearthly. I can also recall the 70's introduced the 'lucky lane king' oiling machine. And no, it didn't strip, or lay down the 'chameleon' or the 'viper' , or the 'shark....etc. but what it did was lay down the shot that would , in the early 80's be ruled illegal by the american bowling congress. And that is that 'swirled' dry gutter shot with heavily oiled from around 5 to 5. Heck there were 'double shift' leagues in any house you went into, on practically every night of the week. League bowlers were valued by proprietors, unlike some markets today, where open play is valued more.

I apologise to the board for rambling on about this, But I firmly believe, and I still love this game today, that bowling will never be as good again, as it was in the decade of the 70's. And as a player who's been in this game for 40 years (started when i was 8, with a 5 year layoff after 39 consecutive years of competition. Started back last season) I certainly miss those days.

But hey, that was then, and this is now. the game is still great, imo, in a little different way.

My apologies, once again, to the board for this lengthy reply, and to you too, NewYorkDave, for rambling so long that i'm sure I forgot your original questions!..........sorry

I went through it all, first breaking the 200 ave barrier in 1979 (206, done with a yellow dot after I moved out of the bronx, while I lived in the bronx, best I booked was 186) In the late 70's, I used mostly white dots and where there was oil, a yellow dot, ocassionly used a AMF 3-dot when they were very dry, and a LT-48 when the yellow dot didn't hook. in the early to mid 80's I used a Red u-Dot 90% of the time, and when the short oil wall came out, I used a Blue Pearl Hammer. Average wise, I was always over 200 after 1979.

I can tell you this, the oils used today are far thicker than the oils used in days gone by.... You always had carrydown, except the amount of oil laid out these days makes the backends tighter when it does carry down...

Also, the way the ball is released is different from yesteryear, you could hit up on the old urthenaes and plastics and rubber and not get over reaction. My best shots today feel like I did absolutely nothing to the ball and the ball should leave a 5-7 or worst.... The balls today want to hook, so, as far as I'm concerned, the more I try to hook them, the less hook I get. when I don't try and hook it is when I get the strong backend reaction where the ball saves it energy for the pins and isn't DOA.

There has to be some middle ground where the lanes are not impossible, and yet at the same time, punishes bad shots.

Hey guys, it's good to know that I'm not alone when I remember the '70s as a "golden age" of bowling compared to today. I was an adolescent and teenager then, so I'm never sure if I'm remembering things as they really were, or just romanticizing the world of my youth. I suppose the truth lies somewhere in between.

Portsider's observations of how busy bowling alleys were back then jibes with my own. On Saturdays, the leagues owned the place, all day long. The place was wall-to-wall with people on evenings and weekends, whether for league or open bowling. It wasn't unusual for open bowlers to have to wait for lanes. Nowadays, I can go to one of the biggest houses in my area to practice on a Saturday afternoon and find fewer than ten lanes in use. While it's nice to not have to wait, the sight of all those dark lanes and the nearly-empty lounge and snack bar is a bit depressing when I remember how lively the place would have been on the same day 30 years earlier.

I wouldn't necessarily blame the proprietors for the drop in league bowling. I think it has more to do with shifts in American social and recreational habits. We may sneer at "glow bowling" and other such gimmicks--but for all I know, that market might be the only thing keeping some houses profitable enough to remain open. I do agree that proprietors should never, ever forsake league bowlers, though. That would be shooting themselves in the foot, because fads like "glow bowling" come and go but it's the "serious" bowlers that represent the most dependable return customers.

PS: Bronxite, did you ever bowl at the legendary Gun Post lanes? I've never been, but I've heard of it.