Knowing what the optimum entry angle is doesn't make the ball hook in such a way that it will follow that though.



His calculations tell you where to set the ball down and what board at the arrows you have to roll over to get to a specific point down the lane. It doesn't make the ball hook in a certain way to follow the line that would be a 6 degree angle to the pocket. The chart just shows where the ball should be set down and where it should cross the arrows to reach a point further down the lane, if the ball goes perfectly straight.

So again, what makes the ball hook in such a way to follow that 6* line to the pocket? What if you have 0 axis rotation? What if you have 90* axis rotation?



How do you know your entry angle isn't 3 degrees or 4 degrees or 5 degrees?

I'd say 4 or 5 is pretty close to 6, considering there are 360 to choose from, theoretically. technically 180 are possible...

There aren't 360 to choose from. The range is usually between 1 and 7.

actually maybe closer to 210, if you could stop the ball by the 2 or 3 and make it back up

There's a diference between what's possible and what a normal strike line looks like

From the link I posted earlier, they studied the entry angle of different bowlers of different calibers.

Average entry angle for a 139 and below average bowler was 1.4 degrees.

The average entry angle for a pro was 5.9 degrees.

The average entry angle for a 190 to 199 average bowler was 3.6 degrees.

There was also another study that calculated carry percentage, and 6 degrees carried better than 5 or 4 or 3.

OK, so you have just confirmed why Joe is using the 6* angle.

No where in any of his calculations does he state that the ball will turn on that 6* line, as you repeatedly ask, regardless of oil pattern. He simply states that the 6* angle line is the optimum strike angle.

And, you seem to be confusing the 6* angle line with the breakpoint, which it isn't. However, the farther from the pocket your ball turns, the closer your breakpoint will be to the 6* line. But, they are not the same.

He calculates his hypothesis by saying: if your ball hits the 6* line at the 7.5 board, then it hits the line at 52.27 feet to continue and get a strike. This is a simple calculation. But, to maintain that consistent line, and depending how your ball rolls, Joe calculates you can either roll the ball from the 4 board at the foul line and target the 5 board at the arrows, (which is rolling straight up), or you can target the 15 board at the arrows, but you have to start your ball on the 18 board at the foul line, (assuming you have more revs). He gives you all of the movement, left or right on the lane, board by board, depending on how your ball rolls.

You again, ask for additional variables, by adding in lane conditions. I contend that on a longer oil pattern, you won't hit the 6* line on the 7.5 board. It most likely will be closer to the 12 board as cg indicated. Then his 12.5 board chart accounts for the ball having more length, and he calculates it hits the 6* line at 56.48 feet down the lane. And, again, he calculates where the optimum target at the arrows and at the foul line lay down will be. And, he moves from the 6 board at the arrows to the 23 board, and can calculate where to lay the ball down, and where to stand, depending on your revs or style.

My take on his calculations is look at ball line charts, as he presented, and you added your pink line. There are many different arcs for many different balls, and no one rolls the ball the same way. He has taken a ball line, and it doesn't matter which one. And, he pivots that line at either of 2 spots, the breakpoint and the pocket impact. If the ball hits the pocket at the 6* angle on board 7.5 or on board 12.5, he pivots the ball line on the breakpoint to cross a target at the arrows and start position. If you have a different arc than the ball line shows, hold that line constant at the pocket impact, and again pivot the ball line to get your optimum target and start.

Many people have comfort with a target, but won't know where to stand to use that target for a strike. Also, many people will move their feet, then not know what target to aim at. Based on the ball arc and the 6* hypothetical angle, Joe's chart will calculate both.

Why are you making this so hard?

Saying this, I know I will figure out where to stand and what target to aim for intuitively, and you certainly will too. But, many people struggle with where to stand and what to target. Joe's calcs give them a quicker starting point rather than losing several balls trying to figure it out on theirown.

He has calculated every move of feet and targets that you probably do in your head. And, I bet they are pretty close. I've tested it.

What the ideal entry angle is, is not in question.



The points he came up with are the points on the lane that if connected, would draw a 6* line to the pocket. He then targets those points. If the ball actually reaches those points, you're going to miss the pocket.



I'm not confusing them at all. And the ball breaking farther from the pocket does not mean the angle will be closer to 6*. If the ball created all of it's angle at one particular spot, then yes, you'd be correct, but a ball doesn't do that. There are a lot of variables that come in to play when you're trying to get to that 6* angle. If a more aggressive ball starts hooking at 35 feet and a skid Flip ball starts hooking at 45 feet, the skid Flip ball could be much more inside the more aggressive ball and achieve a 6* entry angle while the more aggressive ball still might not.



52.27 feet? Can you tell the difference between 52.27 feet and 51.16 feet? And can you tell if the very center of the ball rolled over 7.5 or 8.25 at that point? And can you tell if your ball continued to follow that 6* line to the pocket? I know I can't.



There's absolutely no contention that his chart gives you a place to target, given the spot to aim and where the ball is set down. It draws those lines.. absolutely. But that's all it does. Playing any of those lines does not make it any more probable to achieve a 6* entry angle than anyone had before.



I contend that most bowlers won't hit a 6* entry angle at all. Dennis, if you take yourself as an example, I would contend that you never achieve a 6* entry angle, using this chart or not. From the videos you've shared and what you've told us about the equipment you like, you tend to be speed dominant and you like duller surface, earlier rolling equipment. If you wanted to increase your entry angle, I think you'd need to become more balanced in your speed to RPM ratio and you'd have to use equipment that stored more energy so it could break at a sharper angle.

Does that mean that someone couldn't use the chart, keep picking lines until they found one where they could hit the pocket? No.. I'd imagine that I could use it and find one of the lines to hit the pocket. Does that in any way shape or form mean that my entry angle was 6 degrees? Absolutely not.



All he's calculating is where you need to lay the ball down and what board at the arrows you have to cross in order to throw the ball in a straight line to a point down the lane. He's creating a line that will intersect the 6* line. It will not make the ball path merge with the 6* line.



His drawing is just a drawing. It doesn't mean a ball behaves in that way. His chart creates straight lines that do not end up at the pocket. If you do not throw the ball with the right ball speed, axis rotation, axis tilt and RPM's, you're never going to achieve a 6* entry angle. This chart makes it no more or less likely. Modifying how you throw the ball will do that.



Again, it only tells you how to hit a point down lane, in a straight line. That's all it does.



I'm not making it any harder than it is. Why are you guys over simplifying how a steeper entry angle is acheived?

Again, there's no contention that his chart shows you where to stand and what to aim at if you want to hit a certian point down the lane, but hitting a point on that line will not make the ball follow that line. And in fact, if you do actually hit that point in a straight line, the ball absolutely won't follow it. My contention is that if you actually do hit the down lane target in a straight line, you'll miss the pocket all together. But again, you can't possibly tell if you hit the 7.5 board at 52.27 feet anyway.

And here is a diagram of the last 17 or so feet to the head pin. On a 38 foot house shot, the oil would have ended 5 feet before the beginning of this section of the lane. That means that the ball would more than likely start hooking by the beginning of this diagram.

Most bowlers balls will start to hook to the pocket and stay inside this line the entire time because they don't generate enough angle with the ball they throw and the way they throw it.

Now if you go back to Joe's example of bowling on the Scorpion, he ended up playing almost straight up the boards, with the ball getting as far right as, I think, 10. Now the beginning of my image is at about 43 feet, so by this time, the ball is in the dry and it's going to be seeing friction and it's going to be starting to move towards the pocket. More than likely, with the ball entering the dry at this angle and on about the 10 board, it seems probable to me that his shots were hitting the pocket at an angle of something less than 6 degrees.

Here's another image. The red line is straight up 10 and the yellow line is what I'd see as the probable ball path, which is has a less than 6* entry angle.

This thread is so frustrating.

The targeting system doesn't help you get lined up. It doesn't help you get a certain amount of entry angle.

What it is is 5 sets of lines that intersect 5 points, respectively. If you want to know where to aim to hit one of those 5 points, while standing on a certain board, it helps.

No more, no less.

I'll be honest. The targeting system I use, based on breakpoints, would benefit from a guide like this that let me know where I need to put my target to hit a certain breakpoint from a certain stance board. It wouldn't be this system, because my breakpoint is never (intentionally) on the line being used for targets, but the premise (aiming at a certain point and having a chart to help you keep aiming at that point as you move laterally) is sound.

I just don't like that it is being presented as a way to achieve 6 degrees of entry angle. I don't know if that was the intention, but that's how it's coming off, and it's simply not true.