The man who broke bowling(gq.com)
gq.com
The man who broke bowling
https://www.gq.com/story/jason-belmonte-bowling-profile
119 コメント
We need people like this that self-teach "in the wild" to break down expectations and learn what's possible. This is how revolutionary leaps are made in a field; Eddie Van Halen with guitar is a classic example.
Having people do these long commitments to independently reinvent techniques, with the prevailing odds being worse alternatives to what already exist, is financial insanity under the current regime of only rewarding people for value they can capture.
One example of a reward model that could facilitate this kind of activity would be a universal basic income. We admit we have no idea /where/ value comes from in the first place, we acknowledge that it is not always entirely capturable in the second place. Ergo, a fraction of the stream is rerouted uniformly through all the other actors.
One example of a reward model that could facilitate this kind of activity would be a universal basic income. We admit we have no idea /where/ value comes from in the first place, we acknowledge that it is not always entirely capturable in the second place. Ergo, a fraction of the stream is rerouted uniformly through all the other actors.
> you must relearn correct technique from the beginning (actively get worse at bowling)
Yeah that's what's happening with me in tennis. As a kid I never really took any formal coaching, just learnt from my brother and started rallying with people.
Recently, I decided to start playing again, so I went to a coach and I am learning the correct technique from the beginning. Have to constantly correct and rewire my automatic reactions.
It feels really good to learn something you're bad at, and then seeing your brain slowly automating the new stuff over time.
Yeah that's what's happening with me in tennis. As a kid I never really took any formal coaching, just learnt from my brother and started rallying with people.
Recently, I decided to start playing again, so I went to a coach and I am learning the correct technique from the beginning. Have to constantly correct and rewire my automatic reactions.
It feels really good to learn something you're bad at, and then seeing your brain slowly automating the new stuff over time.
I see this play out every year with the kids in wrestling. A strong kid comes in and hits a particular move to beat all the other new wrestlers. It's the most obvious move in the world and is easily countered by anyone with experience. Some never get past it and never get better. It's maddening when it's the kid on your team, because they are often the best athlete as well, and they're now losing to much weaker kids who have paid attention in practice for a year.
See also swimming. A lot of people, myself included, know how to “swim” freestyle. But the difference in technique between trained and untrained is stark if you know what to look for.
It takes a lot of effort to unlearn the improper technique and learn what to do. At the same time, it’s difficult doing longer distances because of muscle memory.
It takes a lot of effort to unlearn the improper technique and learn what to do. At the same time, it’s difficult doing longer distances because of muscle memory.
Hmm really? I feel like freestyle is just “lengthen your stroke (or go yolo windmills for sprints) and kick”
Yep. “Lengthening the stroke” is the end result. But body rotation, head position, engaging your core/abs, how your arms enter and pull through the water all make it so much more fluid. Even the angle of your elbow and hands.
I’m certainly no expert, but I see so many people that swim with their head completely out of the water. It drops the hips and legs, increases drag and expends so much more effort. The result is yolo thrashing through the water. Compare to Olympic swimmers who seem to effortlessly glide through the water.
I’m certainly no expert, but I see so many people that swim with their head completely out of the water. It drops the hips and legs, increases drag and expends so much more effort. The result is yolo thrashing through the water. Compare to Olympic swimmers who seem to effortlessly glide through the water.
Eh. If your head is out of the water you’re doing more of a doggy paddle than a front crawl, caveats to water polo players. I would say that is an entirely different way to swim.
“Freestyle” is whatever you want, although people generally will choose front crawl for almost every situation*
Edit: to clarify, if you’re not rotating your shoulders and are doing a doggy paddle, you’re going to be moving so inefficiently that you’ll probably drown over a short distance if you cannot rest. That’s barely “swimming”. And is a far cry from amateur bowling and tennis imo.
“Freestyle” is whatever you want, although people generally will choose front crawl for almost every situation*
Edit: to clarify, if you’re not rotating your shoulders and are doing a doggy paddle, you’re going to be moving so inefficiently that you’ll probably drown over a short distance if you cannot rest. That’s barely “swimming”. And is a far cry from amateur bowling and tennis imo.
That’s kinda my point though. At my gym, about half of the people I see in the pool are so inefficient that they barely can swim 25 yards without getting exhausted. But to them, they’re “swimming”.
I know you mentioned amateurs, but I’m really considering the average person who can “do the thing” (swim, golf, bowl, play tennis) vs someone who has even spent a little time trying to figure out the proper technique.
Hell, Tiger Woods dominated the tour and then spent time trying to work on his swing (before his life spiraled out of control).
Also, re-reading the original comments I was replying to, I wanted to clarify that I fell into the “flail around and try to get across the pool” category. I improved my technique considerably even though it’s not proper. I’m at the point where if I really want to improve, I need to unlearn my “good enough” skills and re-learn it properly. Unfortunately, it’s hard to do 1000+ yds nonstop the “right” way right now, so my warm ups are a lot of 50s and 100s where I go slow and focus. Then I can do maybe 50% of a longer interval “properly”
I know you mentioned amateurs, but I’m really considering the average person who can “do the thing” (swim, golf, bowl, play tennis) vs someone who has even spent a little time trying to figure out the proper technique.
Hell, Tiger Woods dominated the tour and then spent time trying to work on his swing (before his life spiraled out of control).
Also, re-reading the original comments I was replying to, I wanted to clarify that I fell into the “flail around and try to get across the pool” category. I improved my technique considerably even though it’s not proper. I’m at the point where if I really want to improve, I need to unlearn my “good enough” skills and re-learn it properly. Unfortunately, it’s hard to do 1000+ yds nonstop the “right” way right now, so my warm ups are a lot of 50s and 100s where I go slow and focus. Then I can do maybe 50% of a longer interval “properly”
It's really easy to put a lot of effort into going nowhere with your head up out of the water. In water polo we used to take advantage of that on occasion to make it look like an opponent behind us was holding us by the suit. Stop reaching forward enough, let your hips sink, and just paddle like mad.
Is that’s thing? Do water polo players not wear skin tight suits?
It is very much a thing. Most (fit) human beings are somewhat concave at points around their waist, have some level of squishiness in their sides and lower back, and don't particularly enjoy embedding a drawstring as far into their flesh as it will go. Not to mention the leg holes, which don't give you nearly the same purchase, but don't have drawstrings and wrap around relatively soft flesh. If you want to grab someone by the speedo, you can grab someone by the speedo, with the best grab going through the waist and a leg hole, give you complete control over your victim's waist.
It's why there are different suits for water polo vs swimming. The water polo ones can be put through a lot more abuse than the swimming ones, which put under the same conditions have a tendency to tear in half, and they have less stretchy waistbands to make grabbing harder (but far from impossible).
It's why there are different suits for water polo vs swimming. The water polo ones can be put through a lot more abuse than the swimming ones, which put under the same conditions have a tendency to tear in half, and they have less stretchy waistbands to make grabbing harder (but far from impossible).
Yes, this pattern is extremely obvious in tennis--you'll often encounter rec-level players who manage to win a lot of matches against players of lower ability by hitting nothing but slow floaters/moonballs/chip shots. Because they use those shots exclusively (because they're often effective at lower levels!), they plateau, and never develop the full range of tennis skills they need to compete against more well-rounded players.
Yet another reason I love HN. I have not bowled in 40 years, but I read the entire article and will look for more written by the author.
I read your comment, and the linked article, and will enjoy thinking about it all day.
I read your comment, and the linked article, and will enjoy thinking about it all day.
I had the same thought regarding that article, and I think it's worth emphasizing that even the bowler in the GQ article risked being an "expert beginner" but managed to escape the trap:
"As such, Advanced Beginners can break one of two ways: they can move to Competent and start to grasp the big picture and their place in it, or they can ‘graduate’ to Expert Beginner by assuming that they’ve graduated to Expert."
...and then from the OP:
> When Belmonte first joined the PBA, he reveled in his power game: Let’s break some pins, he remembers thinking. But as he watched some of the game’s finest up close, he realized something: “These guys had the ability to make the ball dance. They could make the ball dance to any tune the lane was asking for. And I couldn’t do that.”
> He worked to decrease his rev rate, his velocity, the number of moving parts to his game. And he slowed his approach, eliminating a “kangaroo hop” designed to generate power, and delivering the ball from a position of greater stability and balance. “I noticed my ball was still striking with 20 percent less revolutions, and my ball was still sending messengers. But I was more consistently in the pocket. And I realized, I don’t need to break a pin every round.”
So despite the "expert beginner" article using the author's own bowling experience as an anecdote of what not to do, it's not trying to say you should always follow the crowd and blindly trust the prevailing wisdom; rather, it's saying that you should seek to understand your faults and grasp the bigger picture, and not automatically assume that minor expertise necessarily implies major expertise.
"As such, Advanced Beginners can break one of two ways: they can move to Competent and start to grasp the big picture and their place in it, or they can ‘graduate’ to Expert Beginner by assuming that they’ve graduated to Expert."
...and then from the OP:
> When Belmonte first joined the PBA, he reveled in his power game: Let’s break some pins, he remembers thinking. But as he watched some of the game’s finest up close, he realized something: “These guys had the ability to make the ball dance. They could make the ball dance to any tune the lane was asking for. And I couldn’t do that.”
> He worked to decrease his rev rate, his velocity, the number of moving parts to his game. And he slowed his approach, eliminating a “kangaroo hop” designed to generate power, and delivering the ball from a position of greater stability and balance. “I noticed my ball was still striking with 20 percent less revolutions, and my ball was still sending messengers. But I was more consistently in the pocket. And I realized, I don’t need to break a pin every round.”
So despite the "expert beginner" article using the author's own bowling experience as an anecdote of what not to do, it's not trying to say you should always follow the crowd and blindly trust the prevailing wisdom; rather, it's saying that you should seek to understand your faults and grasp the bigger picture, and not automatically assume that minor expertise necessarily implies major expertise.
>Bowling technique is used as an example of something you can abuse in order to get quick wins and easy improvement on bowling ability, yet quickly hit a skill ceiling and you must relearn correct technique from the beginning (actively get worse at bowling) if you wish to reach an advanced level.
I had to bite the bullet on this a few years ago for my league. I grew up doing 5-pin and when switching to 10-pin the timing of everything was messed up due to how I threw and I didn't want to make the change. Finally someone convinced me to do it a few summers ago and had some bad slumps due to it. The improvements finally really showed this past season with significantly better consistency though.
I had to bite the bullet on this a few years ago for my league. I grew up doing 5-pin and when switching to 10-pin the timing of everything was messed up due to how I threw and I didn't want to make the change. Finally someone convinced me to do it a few summers ago and had some bad slumps due to it. The improvements finally really showed this past season with significantly better consistency though.
There's other such things, such as the Fosbury flop. However, it's a high risk, high reward endeavor, because you don't necessarily know in advance that it's a better approach. There's a survivorship bias here, there's any number of people with eclectic techniques that ended up not being any better than the "standard" technique even after tons of practice. You also shouldn't use "but maybe it's a better technique" when using a known dead end, which will be a very tempting play for a lot of people. No, you're not going to take the known-broken bowling technique and be the one to rehabilitate it after millions of other people.
There is a guy who has done some great videos on youtube. Search for "banned techniques in track and field", that should get you there. Among them are the forward flip in the long jump (possibly better), the shotput cartwheel (better at some levels), and others.
What even is a “known broken” technique — how do you establish that some technique “can’t work” rather than “just haven’t found a good execution” so far?
Of course, there’s risk involved in straying off the beaten path and trying new things — not denying that.
Of course, there’s risk involved in straying off the beaten path and trying new things — not denying that.
"What even is a “known broken” technique — how do you establish that some technique “can’t work” rather than “just haven’t found a good execution” so far?"
If you insist on 100% certainty, nothing.
If you are satisfied with "millions upon millions of people have used this and it has been broadly revealed to be a dead end", then bowling certainly has a known-bad technique that is very appealing to people just picking up the ball for the first time.
But if you really, really want that 100% certainty, then by all means go forth and base your decisions about what to focus on on that.
If you set the bar at anything even remotely less than 100% certainty, though, you'll find there are known-bad techniques. Heck, there are techniques that aren't just known to not work, they are known to lead to injuries with high reliability; see the lifting world, for instance. There's a difference between being an iconoclast and refusing to learn from the experiences of others. From the outside they may look similar but they are not the same.
If you insist on 100% certainty, nothing.
If you are satisfied with "millions upon millions of people have used this and it has been broadly revealed to be a dead end", then bowling certainly has a known-bad technique that is very appealing to people just picking up the ball for the first time.
But if you really, really want that 100% certainty, then by all means go forth and base your decisions about what to focus on on that.
If you set the bar at anything even remotely less than 100% certainty, though, you'll find there are known-bad techniques. Heck, there are techniques that aren't just known to not work, they are known to lead to injuries with high reliability; see the lifting world, for instance. There's a difference between being an iconoclast and refusing to learn from the experiences of others. From the outside they may look similar but they are not the same.
> you must relearn correct technique from the beginning (actively get worse at bowling)
I was told I'd need to do that with typing.
I started out two-finger hunt-and-peck at age 7 on a TI 99/4A, and gradually added more fingers. Using my pinky for Shift, in particular, was a gateway to using my middle fingers for letters too. I didn't take any speed tests at the time, but retrospectively I'd guess I was around 8-10wpm.
By the time I got to middle school and took a typing class with Mavis Beacon emphasizing home-row and stuff, I was already faster than the kids leaving the class from the previous semester, on the order of 20wpm. I did the exercises but I didn't really change my style much, and left the class typing roughly the way I started, but with more awareness of how I was "supposed" to do it. Feh.
Then in high school, I learned about BBS's and modems, got my own modem, and found a local multi-line BBS with multi-user chat. And that created a heck of an incentive -- the faster I could type, the more I could participate in the present conversation rather than what happened 2 minutes ago.
Social connection was thus linked to typing speed, and for a 9th-grader it's hard to find a more powerful motivator than that. I found myself adding fingers and breaking the 60wpm mark before the summer was out. No more hunting, still basically pecking, but pecking with 3 or 4 fingers on each hand.
These days my typing style superficially resembles a home-row style; my wrists rarely move, but I perch over QWEF/QERG and JIO' rather than ASDF and JKL; like Mavis would've liked. I find the slightly higher perch gives me easier access to the symbols on the number keys and functions in the F-key row. I sit comfortably around 80wpm on plain text, and handily outrace home-row typists on code or anything with a lot of symbols.
Moreover, the division between hands simply isn't. When typing with two hands, the letters in the middle, YGHVBN, are fair game for either hand. But if I have to reach for something, or if my right hand is on the mouse, I'll reposition my left to WRTH or thereabouts, and it feels perfectly natural to roam around the whole keyboard as needed.
Thus my keybindings in games and CAD are probably horrifying to a home-row typist, but since I'm not wasting half my left hand's reach with tab/caps/shift, I have a lot more useful keys available to me in keyboard+mouse mode. I have CAD bindings from QAZ all the way to IKM, with only OPL off-limits. (And frankly, my left hand is on a SpacePilot half the time anyway. When I bounce it back to the keyboard, it's not required to settle into any particular home position, because the whole board "feels like home" for either hand.)
I've never felt a desire to unlearn my evolved style and start over with home-row; I believe it to be demonstrably inferior for the sort of things I actually do.
I was told I'd need to do that with typing.
I started out two-finger hunt-and-peck at age 7 on a TI 99/4A, and gradually added more fingers. Using my pinky for Shift, in particular, was a gateway to using my middle fingers for letters too. I didn't take any speed tests at the time, but retrospectively I'd guess I was around 8-10wpm.
By the time I got to middle school and took a typing class with Mavis Beacon emphasizing home-row and stuff, I was already faster than the kids leaving the class from the previous semester, on the order of 20wpm. I did the exercises but I didn't really change my style much, and left the class typing roughly the way I started, but with more awareness of how I was "supposed" to do it. Feh.
Then in high school, I learned about BBS's and modems, got my own modem, and found a local multi-line BBS with multi-user chat. And that created a heck of an incentive -- the faster I could type, the more I could participate in the present conversation rather than what happened 2 minutes ago.
Social connection was thus linked to typing speed, and for a 9th-grader it's hard to find a more powerful motivator than that. I found myself adding fingers and breaking the 60wpm mark before the summer was out. No more hunting, still basically pecking, but pecking with 3 or 4 fingers on each hand.
These days my typing style superficially resembles a home-row style; my wrists rarely move, but I perch over QWEF/QERG and JIO' rather than ASDF and JKL; like Mavis would've liked. I find the slightly higher perch gives me easier access to the symbols on the number keys and functions in the F-key row. I sit comfortably around 80wpm on plain text, and handily outrace home-row typists on code or anything with a lot of symbols.
Moreover, the division between hands simply isn't. When typing with two hands, the letters in the middle, YGHVBN, are fair game for either hand. But if I have to reach for something, or if my right hand is on the mouse, I'll reposition my left to WRTH or thereabouts, and it feels perfectly natural to roam around the whole keyboard as needed.
Thus my keybindings in games and CAD are probably horrifying to a home-row typist, but since I'm not wasting half my left hand's reach with tab/caps/shift, I have a lot more useful keys available to me in keyboard+mouse mode. I have CAD bindings from QAZ all the way to IKM, with only OPL off-limits. (And frankly, my left hand is on a SpacePilot half the time anyway. When I bounce it back to the keyboard, it's not required to settle into any particular home position, because the whole board "feels like home" for either hand.)
I've never felt a desire to unlearn my evolved style and start over with home-row; I believe it to be demonstrably inferior for the sort of things I actually do.
I use eadf keybinds instead of wasd for first person shooters, as it's a _much_ more neutral hand position without having to rotate the keyboard like a lot of players otherwise do.
Why in the world would an online article not include a short gif or an embedded video showing the bowling technique? Is gq.com primarily a print medium?
FWIW, I watched a couple of his throws on YouTube and indeed, I've never seen someone bowl like that. Neat stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfEKI5iL-Ok
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfEKI5iL-Ok
I tried bowling like this when I was a teen, trying to get massive spin on the ball. I never got to a point where I could be consistent with spin and went back to using my thumb. Seeing a pro do it (and be successful) might have encouraged me to keep trying it.
Yes, GQ is a monthly magazine.
It seems you're right, but the Q is for quarterly.
Historically it was a quarterly. But they rebranded to GQ and around the same time increased print frequency.
Even if they are primarily a print magazine, they could include a lentricular print showing the technique. I am not sure if I am serious here tbh.
That would indeed be neat, but it would significantly raise the per-unit cost of the magazine.
In skating magazines we had the same issue, so we posted rows of still frames of the action. It might not help us here, but if you want to learn to kickflip...
Even better: do it at the edge of the page, with subsequent photos on subsequent pages in the same position.
They do have a significant digital media staff; like most print publications they typically augment their print content with video content, podcasts, etc.
They could embed an animated epaper display into the magazine.
I think a flip book animation could be actually feasible and do more than three frames
Primary sources are anathema to mainstream media. It's not just political articles, it's the whole damn profession. If you can watch ten seconds of him bowling you don't need to spend ten minutes on the article.
Maybe because it's not so different from the usual technique as the article wants you to believe. Unless you're a bowling expert you wouldn't even notice it.
>Unless you're a bowling expert you wouldn't even notice it.
Having just watched a clip of it, I'm very skeptical of this remark.
Having just watched a clip of it, I'm very skeptical of this remark.
I’m a good control. I watched the video linked in the comments and couldn’t tell the difference until I read the article and rewatched it again.
I clicked the video without reading anything but your comment, and, well, he's using both hands... I'm sure you missed it, but I'm not sure you're a good control.
I think your mistake is that you don't know what bowling looks like to begin with. Skip to the regular guy at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfEKI5iL-Ok&t=50s - he looks like he's melodramatically performing in _Swan Lake_ with his spare arm swinging way out. (Which is less dramatic than many bowlers.) Then go back to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfEKI5iL-Ok&t=25s and see how he's just sort of hunched over and casual.
Just watched it on youtube. He doesn't use the fingerholes but I wouldn't expect all pros use them. The second hand just remains on the ball longer before the throw. My verdict: not that different
It took me a few watches to notice the difference myself even after being aware of the difference
Arguably a language issue. What exactly is the threshold to be called "bowling expert"? You apparently consider the knowledge to regard the difference as obvious more baseline than expert, perhaps not even considering anyone "expert" who wouldn't feel at home commenting bowling on TV. Perhaps that threshold isn't all that unreasonable in American English (no idea how widespread the game is over the demographic spectrum). But there are plenty of people who'd consider baseline bowling knowledge to know that it's a game where you throw a ball at pins and if you can correctly name the number of pins you're already on the threshold of beyond baseline.
Yeah, technically you might still name levels of expertise below "expert" that would clearly see the difference, but that's not how the term is colloquially used. From the baseline perspective, shades of expertise are experts-only. In any field.
Yeah, technically you might still name levels of expertise below "expert" that would clearly see the difference, but that's not how the term is colloquially used. From the baseline perspective, shades of expertise are experts-only. In any field.
Bowling with two hands versus bowling with one hand is not an obvious difference?
It’s a completely different technique. I have only attempted it a couple of times, never successfully. It’s the backwards bicycle of bowling.
From a lay perspective, the difference is subtle. For a professional bowler, it probably looks night and day.
Don't lay people hold the ball using the finger and thumb holes with just one hand? The way he throws is completely different from any technique I've seen anyone play in regular bowling (though similar techniques may be more common in competitive bowling, so perhaps that's where the difference is coming from?)
Says someone who's clearly never bowled . . .
Wow, just watched a clip and was reminded of my time on my high schools varsity bowling team in 2001. Long story short, I was cut from the team because I used this exact technique of not putting my thumb in the hole. The coach’s verdict was “I couldn’t develop to a meaningful player who refused to learn the proper technique” and ultimately cut.
Now, I wasn’t an exceptional bowler, and I swore off bowling after that, but this article and YouTube clips bring back memories.
Note: for people with small hands like myself, it’s difficult to thumb a bowling ball in a manner that is conducive to curving the ball. As an adaptation, the “two handed approach” is a side effect of keeping the ball steady before delivery.
Now, I wasn’t an exceptional bowler, and I swore off bowling after that, but this article and YouTube clips bring back memories.
Note: for people with small hands like myself, it’s difficult to thumb a bowling ball in a manner that is conducive to curving the ball. As an adaptation, the “two handed approach” is a side effect of keeping the ball steady before delivery.
I had to look up the technique. So cool!
https://youtu.be/11da-YAOXBI
https://youtu.be/11da-YAOXBI
There is a slow motion view from the side at 4:13.
https://youtu.be/11da-YAOXBI?t=253
https://youtu.be/11da-YAOXBI?t=253
The way he gets tha ball to swerve at the last second every time is incredible.
Part of that is the pattern of oil on the alley. There's oil spread on the first half or so of the lane; when the ball comes out of the oil, the traction greatly increases and the ball hooks.
https://starrcards.com/cheetah-bear-or-shark-playing-hidden-...
https://starrcards.com/cheetah-bear-or-shark-playing-hidden-...
I can’t believe this is new to me:
> If you’re not impressed, if you happen to think that because you can fire a 250 at your local Bowlero, you can compete on the PBA Tour, let’s make one thing clear. Your local lanes are oiled in a way that helps turn misses into strikes, and when coupled with recent advances in bowling ball technology, have produced an abundance of 300 games among amateurs. But the oil patterns on the tour, unlike those at your local house, are devilishly difficult: the comparison is akin to logging a hole in one at your local putt-putt course, the contours guiding the ball toward the hole, versus sinking a downhill double breaker at Augusta. In other words, there is no comparison.
> If you’re not impressed, if you happen to think that because you can fire a 250 at your local Bowlero, you can compete on the PBA Tour, let’s make one thing clear. Your local lanes are oiled in a way that helps turn misses into strikes, and when coupled with recent advances in bowling ball technology, have produced an abundance of 300 games among amateurs. But the oil patterns on the tour, unlike those at your local house, are devilishly difficult: the comparison is akin to logging a hole in one at your local putt-putt course, the contours guiding the ball toward the hole, versus sinking a downhill double breaker at Augusta. In other words, there is no comparison.
Wikipedia is actual more clear about this technique
>The two-handed approach should not be confused with the two-handed delivery. Just prior to the release of the ball, a bowler using a two-handed approach removes their supporting hand, effectively delivering the ball with only one hand. They are considered a one-handed bowler by governing bodies …
>An actual two-handed delivery involves using both hands simultaneously to give force to the ball and is extremely rare in adult competition; it is mostly seen with young children first learning the game.
>The two-handed approach should not be confused with the two-handed delivery. Just prior to the release of the ball, a bowler using a two-handed approach removes their supporting hand, effectively delivering the ball with only one hand. They are considered a one-handed bowler by governing bodies …
>An actual two-handed delivery involves using both hands simultaneously to give force to the ball and is extremely rare in adult competition; it is mostly seen with young children first learning the game.
The article mentions this:
> Belmonte’s technique is, technically, a one hander—his left hand leaves the ball a split second before he releases it with his right.
> Belmonte’s technique is, technically, a one hander—his left hand leaves the ball a split second before he releases it with his right.
I find it super interesting when a new efficient technique breaks into professional sports. As it is described in the article, there is always push back from the establishment, with even accusations that the new technique is cheating, then in some cases the rules are changed to ban the new technique and in some cases the technique makes its way into mainstream. Some interesting examples from the top of my head:
- V-style in ski jumping: when it appeared in professional ski jumping in the 80s it was considered inappropriate by judges, and athletes had to avoid it to not be penalized with low style points. But at some point in the 90s it became so much superior in distances achieved that athletes started winning with that even after penalties, so it became recognized as valid by judges and took over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski_jumping_techniques#V-style
- Fosbury flop in high jump: this one didn't receive much push back, it was kind of a Columbus egg, once Dick Fosbury won the gold in the 1968 Mexico Olympics, it spread quickly and in no time all major athletes were using the technique. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fosbury_flop
- front flip on long jump: this one was quickly banned from competition, due to safety concerns. It is theoretically more mechanically efficient and has potential to produce longer jumps, but since it was never allowed to be perfected in high level competition we will never know how far it could go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_jump#Action_in_the_air_an...
- dunking free throws in basketball: this is other one that was quickly banned. Once a young Wilt Chamberlain demonstrated he could in fact dunk from behind the free throw line in a low league sort-of demonstration game, a rule banning it was created in the low leagues, and when Chamberlain made into the NBA the rule soon followed. https://www.sbnation.com/2022/3/26/22996516/wilt-chamberlain...
- V-style in ski jumping: when it appeared in professional ski jumping in the 80s it was considered inappropriate by judges, and athletes had to avoid it to not be penalized with low style points. But at some point in the 90s it became so much superior in distances achieved that athletes started winning with that even after penalties, so it became recognized as valid by judges and took over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski_jumping_techniques#V-style
- Fosbury flop in high jump: this one didn't receive much push back, it was kind of a Columbus egg, once Dick Fosbury won the gold in the 1968 Mexico Olympics, it spread quickly and in no time all major athletes were using the technique. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fosbury_flop
- front flip on long jump: this one was quickly banned from competition, due to safety concerns. It is theoretically more mechanically efficient and has potential to produce longer jumps, but since it was never allowed to be perfected in high level competition we will never know how far it could go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_jump#Action_in_the_air_an...
- dunking free throws in basketball: this is other one that was quickly banned. Once a young Wilt Chamberlain demonstrated he could in fact dunk from behind the free throw line in a low league sort-of demonstration game, a rule banning it was created in the low leagues, and when Chamberlain made into the NBA the rule soon followed. https://www.sbnation.com/2022/3/26/22996516/wilt-chamberlain...
On the pushback.
It is easy to understand. A LOT of people have invested A LOT of their life into learning something. And now somebody comes and basically says "the thing you were doing is worthless now". And assuming most people identify with what they do, what they are also hearing is "you are worthless now".
There is for example a new theory that the cancer is not, in fact, a genetic disease. That it is actually a metabolic dysfunction of certain cells and the genetic abnormalities are A CONSEQUENCE of the metabolic dysfunction (driven by huge increase in free radicals). Here more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow
But a huge number of people have devoted their entire lives to fighting cancer based on assumption that it is a genetic disease. And when you come with a proposition like that, almost all people become deaf to your arguments and the only thing they hear is danger to your identity.
It is easy to understand. A LOT of people have invested A LOT of their life into learning something. And now somebody comes and basically says "the thing you were doing is worthless now". And assuming most people identify with what they do, what they are also hearing is "you are worthless now".
There is for example a new theory that the cancer is not, in fact, a genetic disease. That it is actually a metabolic dysfunction of certain cells and the genetic abnormalities are A CONSEQUENCE of the metabolic dysfunction (driven by huge increase in free radicals). Here more information: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow
But a huge number of people have devoted their entire lives to fighting cancer based on assumption that it is a genetic disease. And when you come with a proposition like that, almost all people become deaf to your arguments and the only thing they hear is danger to your identity.
The butterfly stroke in swimming was originally a faster variant of the breaststroke, demonstrating another possible response of the establishment: containerized adoption.
Another one: Soccer (football) style kicking for field goals in American Football. Pete Gogolak introduced it to the AFL in the 60s and by 1980 the traditional kicking style had disappeared entirely.
Video of the long jump somersault:
https://youtu.be/RJ6ySgqjONI
Wouldn't it make sense at some point to add more pins or make the alley longer, or something?
Right now the only “excitement” one get from watching bowling is when one of the player fails at performing a strike.
Right now the only “excitement” one get from watching bowling is when one of the player fails at performing a strike.
They already do something - the oil patterns they use on the lanes is considerably different for open/league bowlers compared to competitive bowlers.
However the professional bowlers will have the skill, experience and equipment to deal with all the different oil patterns.
However the professional bowlers will have the skill, experience and equipment to deal with all the different oil patterns.
They do the oil thing because that's one thing that doesn't require a change in rules. But strikes should happen less than 10% of the time for the sport to be enjoyable to watch. It's way more interesting to see a professional bowler strike 2 pins than 10.
There have been rule changes to equipment at different levels to help counteract some of the issues with two handed bowlers, and modern bowling balls.
(Note: I bowl in leagues in the UK, so definitely not at a competitive level).
Back in August 2020 balance holes were banned by the USBC (and therefore applied internationally), which would have a greater impact on two handed bowlers - as they don't insert a thumb in the ball, it gave them the potential for two balance holes instead of one. Currently every hole drilled into the ball must be used during the release of the ball.
More recently certain competitions (PBA mostly) are restricting the use of urethane balls to ban any balls which don't meet a minimum level of hardness. This hasn't been applied at a wider level yet, although it may have an impact over time.
https://www.pba.com/2023/june/2023-pba-hardness-report
So things are changing, but it's mostly reactionary rule changes as new problems are being discovered.
(Note: I bowl in leagues in the UK, so definitely not at a competitive level).
Back in August 2020 balance holes were banned by the USBC (and therefore applied internationally), which would have a greater impact on two handed bowlers - as they don't insert a thumb in the ball, it gave them the potential for two balance holes instead of one. Currently every hole drilled into the ball must be used during the release of the ball.
More recently certain competitions (PBA mostly) are restricting the use of urethane balls to ban any balls which don't meet a minimum level of hardness. This hasn't been applied at a wider level yet, although it may have an impact over time.
https://www.pba.com/2023/june/2023-pba-hardness-report
So things are changing, but it's mostly reactionary rule changes as new problems are being discovered.
less than 10% of the time? Different pins and a very short pattern maybe could achieve that, but I strongly disagree.
I think that would decrease even further the popularity of bowling as a spectator sport. It would just be confusing to a casual player why the pros are getting similar scores to a player who bowls once a year.
However, if you think you’d like that, maybe look into candlepin bowling. I think their strike rate is above that, but not far above it. An interesting game, id like to try it. I’ve got a few duckpin lanes near me, but candlepin seems like it is specific to a few locations.
I think that would decrease even further the popularity of bowling as a spectator sport. It would just be confusing to a casual player why the pros are getting similar scores to a player who bowls once a year.
However, if you think you’d like that, maybe look into candlepin bowling. I think their strike rate is above that, but not far above it. An interesting game, id like to try it. I’ve got a few duckpin lanes near me, but candlepin seems like it is specific to a few locations.
Switch Sports has the right idea by including moving elements, ramps and cliffs.
I thought you were referencing a real world thing for a moment…
Is that a show on ESPN The Ocho?
Why must every sport change itself to become a TV spectacle equal in magnitude to the Superbowl? Is a sport that its players love a failure?
> Wouldn't it make sense at some point to add more pins or make the alley longer, or something?
The required construction costs would almost certainly bankrupt 90% of the facilities, and kill the game
The required construction costs would almost certainly bankrupt 90% of the facilities, and kill the game
Bowling is developing into "big balls golf." You try to read and guess oil conditions, with the oil pattern being different at different venues, and the pattern change by every previous bowl of the day. An innovation that would make it more interesting to watch would be a way of showing these differences to the audience.
Golf is both way harder and way more varied than bowling though.
A golfer who does an eagle on a par 4 is a lot more enjoyable to watch than a bowler who doesn't screw up a strike (regardless of oil conditions).
A golfer who does an eagle on a par 4 is a lot more enjoyable to watch than a bowler who doesn't screw up a strike (regardless of oil conditions).
I feel like people are missing the analogy — the golf equivalent of bowling would be like if most players hit a hole-in-one off most holes. Yes, it would be boring. I'm biased, though — my sport of choice is one in which both teams can spend 90 minutes failing to score a single 'point' and still deliver plenty of entertainment.
That's sort of what I was saying? Bowling would be a lot more interesting to watch if it were possible to actually see and appreciate the changing conditions of the alley, as a spectator.
Don't they show this with the blue coloration in the oil?
It's called candlepin.
>> Your local lanes are oiled in a way that helps turn misses into strikes, and when coupled with recent advances in bowling ball technology, have produced an abundance of 300 games among amateurs
Sorry, is this real? I haven't gone bowling since I broke my wrist in an accident 20 years ago. I was never a great bowler before that, but it never crossed my mind that the bowling alley would somehow conspire to help me get a high score. If anything, bad shoes and too much wax would send me sliding. I know most of the good old bowling alleys died, and got replaced by these new urban work/life/bowling/sushi places that charge $50 a game, but are they really putting special grease patterns down to let the sensitive children walk away happy for instafucking more strikes? Is that a real fucking thing?
Sorry, is this real? I haven't gone bowling since I broke my wrist in an accident 20 years ago. I was never a great bowler before that, but it never crossed my mind that the bowling alley would somehow conspire to help me get a high score. If anything, bad shoes and too much wax would send me sliding. I know most of the good old bowling alleys died, and got replaced by these new urban work/life/bowling/sushi places that charge $50 a game, but are they really putting special grease patterns down to let the sensitive children walk away happy for instafucking more strikes? Is that a real fucking thing?
The wax is on the lane, only way you’d get it on your shoes is if you walk on the lane which you don’t.
The pattern thing is a bit more complicated, veritasium has a video on it (and on bowling balls).
Wax was introduced to protect the lanes, however players fairly quickly learned to use the wax, as it allows hooking more easily and severely, which makes hitting the right location at the right angle much easier. Bowling alleys will then use different patterns for different purposes e.g. a local alley will use a more forgiving pattern, while pro alleys will use a “sport pattern” from a variety of standard patterns (or possibly in-house) to tune the difficulty and for more interesting shots.
House patterns are actually a lot simpler than pro patterns, usually it’s a simple sideways gradient (more in the center, less on the sides) going straight down to halfway to 2/3rds the lane. Aside from player satisfaction (it punishes mistakes less), a factor of them was simply saving oil.
This is not new, complex patterns were first experimented with by the PBA in the 90s (spraying lanes by hand) to make shots harder, as the balls had advanced too much. Though it only became an official feature in the 2000s as machines became capable enough to print specific patterns, reliably.
This means reading wax patterns has become an important skill of pro bowl.
In essence it’s the opposite of what you think, sport lanes and events use patterns specifically designed to be more difficult on purpose.
The pattern thing is a bit more complicated, veritasium has a video on it (and on bowling balls).
Wax was introduced to protect the lanes, however players fairly quickly learned to use the wax, as it allows hooking more easily and severely, which makes hitting the right location at the right angle much easier. Bowling alleys will then use different patterns for different purposes e.g. a local alley will use a more forgiving pattern, while pro alleys will use a “sport pattern” from a variety of standard patterns (or possibly in-house) to tune the difficulty and for more interesting shots.
House patterns are actually a lot simpler than pro patterns, usually it’s a simple sideways gradient (more in the center, less on the sides) going straight down to halfway to 2/3rds the lane. Aside from player satisfaction (it punishes mistakes less), a factor of them was simply saving oil.
This is not new, complex patterns were first experimented with by the PBA in the 90s (spraying lanes by hand) to make shots harder, as the balls had advanced too much. Though it only became an official feature in the 2000s as machines became capable enough to print specific patterns, reliably.
This means reading wax patterns has become an important skill of pro bowl.
In essence it’s the opposite of what you think, sport lanes and events use patterns specifically designed to be more difficult on purpose.
The video referenced is here:
https://www.veritasium.com/videos/2021/9/25/the-fascinating-...
Thank you, this is a really great answer! I had no idea this was already being done in the 90s. I think it was kind of commonly acknowledged in the late 90s (among stoned kids at the bowling alley) that the new balls were making the game too easy... but I had no idea that the official lanes were trying to compensate for that!
>> The wax is on the lane, only way you’d get it on your shoes is if you walk on the lane which you don’t.
Growing up (shout out to Bayshore, Corbin, and Hollywood Lanes) I twisted my ankle on a lot of stray spots..
One thing I miss about the game. I miss marking on paper like my Dad taught me. I learned to bowl at the UCLA Students Union bowling alley. Adding TVs that did the scoring took away half the fun for me as a nerd.
>> The wax is on the lane, only way you’d get it on your shoes is if you walk on the lane which you don’t.
Growing up (shout out to Bayshore, Corbin, and Hollywood Lanes) I twisted my ankle on a lot of stray spots..
One thing I miss about the game. I miss marking on paper like my Dad taught me. I learned to bowl at the UCLA Students Union bowling alley. Adding TVs that did the scoring took away half the fun for me as a nerd.
For the casual, this sounds like it makes the game much more even and fun. Knowing about it makes me want to try out the difference between waxing styles.
Yes, it’s not a uniform layer. Most of them have less grease near the edges, but there are different grease patterns
This is absolutely real, and I am impressed they included that. It is called a "walled shot" I used to work as a bowling mechanic when going through college. The lanes in PBA bowling have to have a minimum amount of oil. There should be more oil in the middle and less on the boards towards the gutters.
However every single house has no oil at all on the boards towards the gutter. This allows the balls when thrown with a hook to boomerang back and smash the pins.
I always wanted to make it a PBA shot, but the managers said no absolutely not! Bowlers equate how good a place is with how good they bowl! They get angry and superstitious about everything. Like they would think the head mechanic oiled the lanes better than 19 year old me but it was really done entirely by the machine. So if you gave them a regulation shot, and they started bowling worse, they would go to an easier house.
Edit: It is not just the high end recreational bowling centers serving sushi, it is all of them. They change the pattern if hosting a PBA event.
However every single house has no oil at all on the boards towards the gutter. This allows the balls when thrown with a hook to boomerang back and smash the pins.
I always wanted to make it a PBA shot, but the managers said no absolutely not! Bowlers equate how good a place is with how good they bowl! They get angry and superstitious about everything. Like they would think the head mechanic oiled the lanes better than 19 year old me but it was really done entirely by the machine. So if you gave them a regulation shot, and they started bowling worse, they would go to an easier house.
Edit: It is not just the high end recreational bowling centers serving sushi, it is all of them. They change the pattern if hosting a PBA event.
>> Bowlers equate how good a place is with how good they bowl! They get angry and superstitious about everything.
Fuck man. This like, lifts the veil from my eyes. It almost ruins my life a little.
I was never a good bowler. But there was this one day. See, I had been driving through Mobile, AL, a year earlier, and started talking to the girl at the front desk of the hotel. We were both kids, I was 19, and she was reading Emerson, and we ended up spending the whole night in the park talking about poetry. A year later I flew there and met her again. And I was just absolutely enamored and so in love with her. That first day she picked me up at the airport, we just were so crazy to see each other. The next day we didn't know what the hell to do so we went and had Waffle House for breakfast and passed by the bowling alley, so we went bowling.
It was the only time in my life I ever threw over 200. I think I got close to 250. We only hung out there for that one game, but something went click in my head.
Something went click that, any time since that morning that I've ever needed to just believe in something, or fix something, or make something work, or sink a pool shot, I just close my eyes and think of that feeling I had with her when every ball I threw was a strike and she kept cheering. It surprised me that something so good was even in my own body.
I think that bowling moment became to me the closest to what other people get when they say they feel something when they pray.
And now you're saying it was probably fake... just laid down on the wax. That's fucked up, man. That was like, a peak experience.
I think I need to do some molly.
Fuck man. This like, lifts the veil from my eyes. It almost ruins my life a little.
I was never a good bowler. But there was this one day. See, I had been driving through Mobile, AL, a year earlier, and started talking to the girl at the front desk of the hotel. We were both kids, I was 19, and she was reading Emerson, and we ended up spending the whole night in the park talking about poetry. A year later I flew there and met her again. And I was just absolutely enamored and so in love with her. That first day she picked me up at the airport, we just were so crazy to see each other. The next day we didn't know what the hell to do so we went and had Waffle House for breakfast and passed by the bowling alley, so we went bowling.
It was the only time in my life I ever threw over 200. I think I got close to 250. We only hung out there for that one game, but something went click in my head.
Something went click that, any time since that morning that I've ever needed to just believe in something, or fix something, or make something work, or sink a pool shot, I just close my eyes and think of that feeling I had with her when every ball I threw was a strike and she kept cheering. It surprised me that something so good was even in my own body.
I think that bowling moment became to me the closest to what other people get when they say they feel something when they pray.
And now you're saying it was probably fake... just laid down on the wax. That's fucked up, man. That was like, a peak experience.
I think I need to do some molly.
You are thinking the oil has more of an effect than it actually does.
Even on an easy house shot you're not automatically have a 200 average. You still need to have a good spare game. I guarantee throwing that one 250 game was more luck than it was the oil pattern especially if you were using a house ball. Going from an easy house shot to a pro sport shot is usually a 20 pin drop on your average if you don't know how to bowl the sport pattern which is only about 1 or 2 extra open frames in a game than normal.
I get that feeling that everything is going right and I can't miss strikes the odd time too but it's always because I'm better focused and not missing my spot. Bowling is more dependent on repetitions and throwing the ball the same way every time before you can even think about averaging 200+.
> Bowlers equate how good a place is with how good they bowl! They get angry and superstitious about everything.
This isn't true and it's not always superstition. Some houses score higher and that's true, but there's factors that go into that like the pins, how well they ricochet, the oil pattern, how well the pattern sticks, etc. there's a million reasons a shot plays different. Even humidity and ambient temperature affects the oil and you have to bowl different in the summer vs winter!
Casual bowlers will 100% rather bowl at a place with a higher score, but sometimes a house is just way too hard. It's frustrating as a bowler if you have a 195 average and another house you can barely carry 180 because it has a harder pattern. It's even more frustrating when they have a harder pattern and don't tell anyone. The pros usually know what pattern they're bowling on and can analyze it beforehand. I quit bowling at a house because my average was consistently 15 pins lower, and I needed a separate set of balls to bowl there to have any chance because they put too flat of a pattern on. It's not fun or helpful to bowl on conditions you won't encounter anywhere else because there's no room to improve. It's like learning custom made in-house programming languages and tools that don't exist outside of your company.
Even on an easy house shot you're not automatically have a 200 average. You still need to have a good spare game. I guarantee throwing that one 250 game was more luck than it was the oil pattern especially if you were using a house ball. Going from an easy house shot to a pro sport shot is usually a 20 pin drop on your average if you don't know how to bowl the sport pattern which is only about 1 or 2 extra open frames in a game than normal.
I get that feeling that everything is going right and I can't miss strikes the odd time too but it's always because I'm better focused and not missing my spot. Bowling is more dependent on repetitions and throwing the ball the same way every time before you can even think about averaging 200+.
> Bowlers equate how good a place is with how good they bowl! They get angry and superstitious about everything.
This isn't true and it's not always superstition. Some houses score higher and that's true, but there's factors that go into that like the pins, how well they ricochet, the oil pattern, how well the pattern sticks, etc. there's a million reasons a shot plays different. Even humidity and ambient temperature affects the oil and you have to bowl different in the summer vs winter!
Casual bowlers will 100% rather bowl at a place with a higher score, but sometimes a house is just way too hard. It's frustrating as a bowler if you have a 195 average and another house you can barely carry 180 because it has a harder pattern. It's even more frustrating when they have a harder pattern and don't tell anyone. The pros usually know what pattern they're bowling on and can analyze it beforehand. I quit bowling at a house because my average was consistently 15 pins lower, and I needed a separate set of balls to bowl there to have any chance because they put too flat of a pattern on. It's not fun or helpful to bowl on conditions you won't encounter anywhere else because there's no room to improve. It's like learning custom made in-house programming languages and tools that don't exist outside of your company.
Well, thanks for the insights...
>> I guarantee throwing that one 250 game was more luck than it was the oil pattern especially if you were using a house ball.
I'm not sure it was luck. I'm a much better pool shooter, so I can tie the feeling to that. Sometimes you get a feeling in your bones that you can't miss, and it comes on, and they could blindfold you. And as soon as it comes it goes. It's something in yourself when you take in the whole topography of the thing, see all the shots ahead of you, and you feel like you can't miss. One, two, three, four. Like if you sat there and thought it out, you'd just screw it up. When you're doing something just right, you know you're going to make it, you don't even have to watch after you let go. That's the feeling, and I don't think it's luck. But it does need a pretty girl watching.
>> I guarantee throwing that one 250 game was more luck than it was the oil pattern especially if you were using a house ball.
I'm not sure it was luck. I'm a much better pool shooter, so I can tie the feeling to that. Sometimes you get a feeling in your bones that you can't miss, and it comes on, and they could blindfold you. And as soon as it comes it goes. It's something in yourself when you take in the whole topography of the thing, see all the shots ahead of you, and you feel like you can't miss. One, two, three, four. Like if you sat there and thought it out, you'd just screw it up. When you're doing something just right, you know you're going to make it, you don't even have to watch after you let go. That's the feeling, and I don't think it's luck. But it does need a pretty girl watching.
I get that feeling too. It comes and goes when it wants and I can't force it to happen or channel it into anything useful. On days I bowl when it happens I consider myself lucky.
If I could control it I'd be a pro bowler.
If I could control it I'd be a pro bowler.
I've never been to Mobile, but I don't see why an alley there should have been more forgiving than the national average. And you still had to roll the ball.
I ran a couple of decent times at the Philadelphia Marathon in the 1980s. I believe that there was a slight net loss in elevation, for it started in Upper Dublin township then and finished downtown. Have I ever felt bad about claiming an OK time on a slightly downhill course? No.
I ran a couple of decent times at the Philadelphia Marathon in the 1980s. I believe that there was a slight net loss in elevation, for it started in Upper Dublin township then and finished downtown. Have I ever felt bad about claiming an OK time on a slightly downhill course? No.
If you are bowling with a house bowling ball, and not hooking it extensively you would have done just as well on any lane. The lane did not do it for you. The balls used by league bowlers are highly reactive and they generate spin in the oil. Once they hit that dry part on the outside they fly into the pocket for strikes.
If you came off the street, picked up a ball of the rack, and bowled a great game it was all you.
If you came off the street, picked up a ball of the rack, and bowled a great game it was all you.
I had a freak >200 game once when I will usually be happy with like 120. All at the same place so I doubt they changed their maintenance routines just that one.
I imagine the oil/wax makes more of a difference if you’re an amateur who can get close to 300 already.
I imagine the oil/wax makes more of a difference if you’re an amateur who can get close to 300 already.
The lanes don't play the game for you. You played well to the conditions of the day. You can be happy in that.
you'll find more about it if you google "oil pattern bowling". it's obviously though a micro optimization only professional players will be able to utilize.
Xtra Slow Motion - Jason Belmonte's Bowling Release
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEI69YFm9uo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEI69YFm9uo
As a serious bowler I wouldn't say Belmo broke bowling - he's saving it.
Two handed bowling isn't unfair and it's not easier than one handed bowling. I've tried it on multiple occasions but it's really hard to generate the speed required to throw 500+ revs.
Furthermore, if it was so easy everyone would switch it to because it's clear that it won't get banned.
Two handed bowling isn't unfair and it's not easier than one handed bowling. I've tried it on multiple occasions but it's really hard to generate the speed required to throw 500+ revs.
Furthermore, if it was so easy everyone would switch it to because it's clear that it won't get banned.
I don't see this one here yet: the two-handed, underhand free throw in basketball.
I'm happy to have a more knowledgeable person correct me (not having been a player, ever), but AFAIK this is a known-good technique. It's perfectly legal, but players feel it makes them look like a sissy.
I'm happy to have a more knowledgeable person correct me (not having been a player, ever), but AFAIK this is a known-good technique. It's perfectly legal, but players feel it makes them look like a sissy.
I don't think its good technique. the release point is low, its harder to put the correct spin on the ball, harder to use your legs correctly.
History today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11da-YAOXBI
the inertia on that curve is crazy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11da-YAOXBI
the inertia on that curve is crazy
I have never been able to "bowl legitimately."
I've had holes drilled into multiple balls which were supposed to allow me to bowl comfortably with thumb inserted. I always ended up taking my thumb out of the ball and palm it instead, with my hand positioned in the opposite direction from normal. My latest ball is a bit lighter than the average one... 13 pounds... and there are only two holes which are drilled slightly deeper than normal. I don't know how many RPMs I'm putting on it, but it's definitely spinning faster than most people I've bowled with. After having watched a video, this guy looks to be doing much the same thing except he's stabilizing the ball with his other hand.
I learned to bowl this way from a friend of mine over 25 years ago and it's been a favorite ever since. My mom was a member of a bowling league at one point and I absolutely wore out her 11 pound ball when she stopped playing competitively.
I've had holes drilled into multiple balls which were supposed to allow me to bowl comfortably with thumb inserted. I always ended up taking my thumb out of the ball and palm it instead, with my hand positioned in the opposite direction from normal. My latest ball is a bit lighter than the average one... 13 pounds... and there are only two holes which are drilled slightly deeper than normal. I don't know how many RPMs I'm putting on it, but it's definitely spinning faster than most people I've bowled with. After having watched a video, this guy looks to be doing much the same thing except he's stabilizing the ball with his other hand.
I learned to bowl this way from a friend of mine over 25 years ago and it's been a favorite ever since. My mom was a member of a bowling league at one point and I absolutely wore out her 11 pound ball when she stopped playing competitively.
That is so interesting for amateur play, it will be a revolution for casual players with low grip strength. The way he performs the whole swing while holding the ball with the palm of both hands, instead of just gripping with your dominant hand's fingers, means he is using arm strength during the heaviest part of the swing. I mean, it is the full strength of both arms vs the grip strength of only one hand, it should be an order of magnitude difference, so weaker players will be able to focus more on technique instead of being 100% dedicated to just not dropping the ball mid swing.
bowling is fucken weird..I was a junior almost pro bowler and I know Belmo, being around the same age, coming up at the same time and in the same area as him…he’s a freak in the best sense of the word. I remember some other kids who would bowl with a bigger hook (and their thumbs) but Belmo was just super consistent…knew he would do great and very glad he has, despite all the haters
Did anyone else click this link hoping it was an article about Pete Weber’s incoherent yelling?
Belmo is a beast. Ten Pin Life did a great interview with him last year: https://youtu.be/p3RWN86W8Cw
Bowling technique is used as an example of something you can abuse in order to get quick wins and easy improvement on bowling ability, yet quickly hit a skill ceiling and you must relearn correct technique from the beginning (actively get worse at bowling) if you wish to reach an advanced level.
From TFA there also seems to be a third path of "this isn't wrong, it's actually a better technique", and the article does outline the whole journey of self-coaching, being called a cheater and ultimately being validated via a string of victories and imitators.