The Classroom #1 - Cover TYPES vs Cover FORMULAS (Bowling Instruction)

[@hersheljones9467]

It hasn’t confused me more it kind of helps me more with arsenal building just wish they had a chart like that with all brands so that way if some people mix brands they can compare n contrast

[@Kmeadows09]

This was amazing. Now I wish the entire Storm/Roto/900 catalog was on a chart for strongest to weakest covers.

[@Mikeab07]

Really good stuff here, a topic that isn't talked about enough and many misunderstand! Thanks Luke!

[@zcornholio420]

That was awesome, I might be the only one but would love a deeper dive into this. Mind blown.

[@jeremiegrund]

Not the only one, would love to see a compliment video on RGs and Diffs!

[@darrencheng7805]

Very informative and I do think a lot of people should learn this before making a purchase decision. Thank you Luke for bringing this to us :)

[@shanehelm1570]

I go back and watch your older stuff all the time. Thank you for the educational videos rather than a video full of strikes on a house shot.

[@xlxthestalkerxlx6729]

That chart is great

[@ryansnyder7444]

Any chance we could get you to find a solid, hybrid and pearl with the same core base cover combo, that you could show the difference when they are at the same surface

[@LukeRosdahl]

Yup, going to work on an IQ version, solid vs hybrid vs pearl R2S

[@ryansnyder7444]

@@LukeRosdahl great to hear, love what you’re doing here, it’s great stuff keep up the great work

[@davidchamberlain5146]

Absolutely love this video. I tend to focus on cover and core types. Adds a new dimension to research when looking for new equipment.

[@joshh3105]

Great info. The chart can be especially helpful to understand responsiveness to friction.

[@aaronspringborn34]

Wow, this is a lesson of itself. I might need to rewatch this again and again to get this down Pat this is like ESPN, sports science I of itself. It’s totally fascinating.. bottom line is no matter why each bowler and Arsenal is completely different and of course it does change for more reasons than one

[@mickeysambor9070]

Thanks for the deeper dive. Good explanation to consider when watching your reviews.

[@kevinanderson9093]

I've been using the chart for a few years now. Thanks for your videos. Hope you keep rating the new balls

[@scottclouse5680]

I just asked a question realstes to this in Luis Napoles’ group and he guided me to this. Very interesting.

[@RyanBreaker]

Great content, thanks so much for making it and putting it into a playlist, though jsyk the first two videos are out of order in it.

[@LukeRosdahl]

Yeah, I uploaded a few all at the same time and so it tends to stack them in upload order

[@richgoetz1121]

Luke this is great. We play your content in our shop regularly and this is one I know our customers will learn a lot from! When selecting a ball to drill I like choosing ball (asym/sym, RG/Diff) first, selecting cover prep (if any is needed, like changing the box finish), then layout. Would you say choosing the correct cover formula (NEX,R2S, etc) is more important than the balls core design and numbers?

[@LukeRosdahl]

It works together with it, but generally speaking, if you have a cover that’s either too much or not enough for the lane surface/conditions, the core isn’t really going to factor in much. We’re bowling a tournament this weekend, and one of the houses is 30+ year old HPLs, crazy high friction, and you just have to use medium strength cleaner covers like R2S and eTrax. Beyond that, then you kind of dial it in with core and cover type, but if you’re trying to throw NeX for example, a Hyroad Max isn’t going to look any better than an Axiom or Proton at that point. I did just put up a video a few minutes ago talking about this very thing, AND I’m doing a video featuring the three I mentioned to show the difference that core creates within the same cover formula, type, and surface

[@tazfye01]

Love this type of information!!!

[@333STONE]

I appreciate your take on this coverage...🙂 You cover alot in the Bowling game. 🤔

[@QuantumRy]

Good video .. please make more of such video

[@nativolpert6235]

hi Luke can u post link to your discord? the one above not work for me =)

[@LukeRosdahl]

hey come check out Discord with me discord.gg/ztRwqCqy Try that one. The chart is pinned

[@thebigeasy8609]

Thank you

[@CDRFAR]

Very interesting as always. I know why you show Storm. I wonder if there is a way to see ranking of covers for companies like Brunswick and Radical. Radical lists the coverstock for there balls. They don't rank them, only the balls.

[@LukeRosdahl]

This chart came straight from Storm, so it'd be on the other manufacturers to create something like this for their brands.

[@GennyI3eerDrinkr]

What Storm balls came with the Oscillator core? I'm trying to do some research on cover/core combinations. Looks like the "strongest" cover/core combination is the Storm Bite SE...G2 core with the TractionX7 cover...but that Oscillator core, cannot seem to find much about it. Great video!

[@redcat5697]

Luke do have core and cover chart for the Roto grip balls?

[@LukeRosdahl]

They do but the cover chart isn’t accurate, It’s got the overall formulas ranked correctly but the versions of those formulas are just rated by recency, not actual strength

[@kennethkohlhorst8813]

Another 10/10 video! Tons of useful information. Especially with ranking each core and cover in strength! I haven’t heard of the g2 core before. Have they released a ball in the states with it?

[@LukeRosdahl]

I don’t think so, I think that’s an overseas only core right now

[@rb8999]

The G2 core was in the Sync in 2013. It's been used only overseas since

[@LukeRosdahl]

@@rb8999 Ah ok, thanks!

[@exesemas]

A topic that should be discussed more, so good idea to make a video about it. And it is a good video. However....(ok you knew it was coming LOL )....it is a tricky subject and i wouldn't be so "black and white" about it (like saying that if the 2 formulas compared are different, then cover type doesn't matter). There are only 3 coverstock situations (excluding urethane and polyester), but there are much more formulas within each brand. This means that formulas are much more "close"/"similar" to one another, that cover types are. Companies want to make different formulas frequently because it is also a marketing thing. Something must be "new". Same with cores. Even if the "difference" is minute. This will mean that frequently formulas will be similar and in those situations cover type would matter more than formula. (and surface prep matters more in all situations). I guess this subject gets a different meaning depending on what we know of the difference between a pearl and a solid cover type. On the same formula, what is the main difference in ingredients between a solid and a pearl coverstock. Just the mica additives of the pearl? Something else? It has never been completely cleared up for the consumer, and that creates confusion. A test with balls with the same/similar core and as many different cover formulas and cover types as possible (all at same surface prep), will help clear things out.

[@LukeRosdahl]

Yeah, I've got a few more videos I'm working on in that direction, because it's definitely not something that can be covered in a 5 minute video. The main idea that I was trying to get across in this one was to get the pearl/hybrid/solid idea out of someone's head as the primary sorting criteria. I see it all the time, "hey I need a pearl, what should I get?" Like I said, if I need a "pearl" reaction, I use an Idol Synergy, which is not a pearl, but of a cleaner and more responsive formula, and I'm definitely not thinking of a Parallax Effect in that situation. However . . if I need a cleaner responsive look, I'm not going to be throwing an IQ Tour Solid, which of course despite the cleaner formula isn't the look I'm going for, so it definitely can't be thrown completely out the window. At the same time, if the Synergy is a little too clean, I might end up in something like a Rubicon, which is a nice blend between strength and shape, and which is sharper than something like an IQ Emerald. I could have been clearer about that, but the video would have been 30 minutes long lol . . appreciate it as always, that helps with the focus of the next video at least.

[@exesemas]

@@LukeRosdahl haha, true ! I get your point. It is indeed a grey area, and we should pay more attention to what the ball reaction/shape is, than get stuck on a certain spec. What i see often is that most people will talk about cover type, or layout or even core, but forget about surface prep. Which is a grave mistake as surface prep is the top factor. 2nd is coverstock which includes both type and formulation and this is where your video comes in to shed light on how each matters and by how much. But indeed it needs several videos and tests to completely explore it. :)

[@ryanknippel828]

Hey Luke, I know you've said previously that you don't currently have an alpha crux but I just picked one up used and I'm not sure what I want to do with it in relation to my Omega. I really like how the catalyst core feels coming off my hand so I want these two balls to be kind of a 1-2 punch on heavier oil. I had initially assumed the Alpha would be a little stronger and earlier rolling than the Omega because I thought they were different types of the same formula. Now I see that the Omega is GI-20 while the Alpha is GI-16, which appears to be a bit weaker overall. Is it worth trying to drill the Alpha to be a stronger, earlier rolling version of the Omega? Or is it better to commit to the Omega as the 1 ball and go with a weaker layout and/or less surface on the Alpha as a complement? I mostly just want to avoid significant overlap in ball reactions.

[@LukeRosdahl]

I think I'd mentioned in the original review that those two were going to be fairly similar, or that the Omega would be the best replacement for an Alpha anyway, and it never quite took for most people. The Omega is going to be the earliest and smoothest of the two I think given same layout, same surface, etc., but what you can do is keep one sanded and the other one shiny/lane shined and that way you'll have one for the fresh and one for when the lanes start breaking down. Lots of people carry around two of the same ball with different layouts and/or surfaces for that kind of situation if they like that look enough.

[@ryanknippel828]

@@LukeRosdahl awesome, i really appreciate your input. love your content! best bowling videos on youtube and it's not even close.

[@hitnlazers]

Sorry to be late to the video. Awesome information. Discord says the chart has expired? Can you post again so I can print it please?

[@LukeRosdahl]

Ah yeah, I thought I pinned it, I'll get it fixed.

[@HollowFaith666]

WOW holy can of Worms Batman

[@greggas1]

Where's the C.A.M. core? Isn't it stronger than the C3 Control core?

[@LukeRosdahl]

It's out of production or they don't use it anymore, so might not be on there just for space reasons. The RG is quite a bit higher than the C3, but so is the differential. I tend to favor RG over differential, so I'd call the C3 core stronger personally. Or, it's somewhat like the core in the Hyroad line, I'd consider that weaker than the C3 even though it's got a lot higher differential.

[@jameslong9564]

Layout affects the ball by only 5-10% according to STORM. As a staffer, I’d think you’d know that.

[@LukeRosdahl]

I do, what's your point? The stronger a core gets, the more layout affects it, because with a weaker core, there's not much to work with in the first place, but they matter more with asyms because there's more to work with.

[@LukeRosdahl]

I said cores and layouts. Combined. They CAN have a large effect. Hyroad Pearl and Astro PhysiX can be made quite different due to the core difference AND a layout difference despite both having the same coverstock.

[@LukeRosdahl]

You might go watch their pin buffer layout system trilogy to get a better grasp on layouts and the details and specifics about how they affect ball reaction

[@dharvell]

I'm sure this is great information. But, for someone who is just getting into this depth of detail, none of this means much of anything. Especially if this is supposed to be video #1 of a series. It just sort of jumps in with the expectation that the viewer knows the topic being discussed. In terms of a primer, absolutely zero help.

[@LukeRosdahl]

I mean, not everything can be an absolute basics or entry level type of thing. If you're just getting into this depth of detail, you aren't at the point where you need to understand or worry about cover types and formulas. Yes, for this series, you do need to come into it with a certain level of knowledge and experience, this isn't meant to be an absolute beginner topic, this is a series for intermediate to advanced players.

[@clintharris8818]

👍

[@angrybadger4236]

This creates a new issue for me. I really can't afford more than a couple of balls. I try to get balls that are different enough to give me different looks but not so different that I can't play them. Now it seems it's not as simple as a pearl a solid and a spare ball.

[@LukeRosdahl]

Actually I'd say it solves an issue, so rather than just saying you need a pearl and a solid and possibly getting the wrong ones because you didn't know the difference in the strengths, you now should be able to have a better idea what you're getting when you go to buy another one. You can get onto the website (or just ask me) and find out what the makeup of the ball you have is and see what you either need to replace it with or compliment it with.

[@angrybadger4236]

If I gave you my story could you help me pick my next ball?

[@LukeRosdahl]

Yeah sure, I'll help out any way I can

[@angrybadger4236]

@@LukeRosdahl I have a Phaze II that has been my everything ball on house shot at leagues. I have a hyroad X that I thought was amazing before the Phaze II, but it's just not ever in play at leagues. Whatever the lane is giving me the Phaze II handles it better than the Hyroad X other than really burnt up lanes which I dont usually see at leagues. I do really well at leagues when I can play the phaze II with my release on 12 and 10 at the arrows up to release on 15 and my mark at the arrows on 12/13. when I move my feet in as the lanes transition I can't get the ball "back up the hill" every time. I end up trying to put too much on it and pull the shot or It just doesnt quite hook enough. I was looking at a ball with more torque like a pearl or hybrid Assym. I cant really get the ball back up hill from inside of 15. I used to have an astro physix but it cracked. I could play on 15 and it would make it back easily but it was so snappy off the friction for me that once I hit the dry it might strike or it might go Brooklyn so I am looking for something that digs just a little more so that I wouldn't get such dramatic movement off the dry. I have a medium rev rate. 15-16 mph is my best speed range. Any faster and I throw through my breakpoint.

[@LukeRosdahl]

I think a Rubicon would be perfect, it's not QUITE as strong as a Phaze 2, but it's stronger on the backend and a lot better from angle, BUT not as sharp or flippy as the Astro.

[@benh1356]

I like the chart it would probably be pretty tough to make one with rotogrip 900 global and storm covers and cores wouldn't it

[@LukeRosdahl]

Somewhat, but sometimes stuff on paper ends up kind of different on the lanes due to a large number of things, so bowling is still going to be mostly experience based BUT this helps get you going in the right direction at least