The physics of bowling strike after strike | Hacker News Reader

The physics of bowling strike after strike

arstechnica.com

47 pointsnoleary23 comments

The calculations involved in such research are very complicated because there are so many variables that can affect a ball's trajectory after being thrown. Case in point: the thin layer of oil that is applied to bowling lanes, which Hooper found can vary widely in volume and shape among different venues, plus the lack of uniformity in applying the layer, which creates an uneven friction surface.

FWIW, pro bowling events will use one of several predetermined oil patterns. The bowlers will know the pattern in advance & practice for a few frames to get a feel for it. Part of the game is knowing how the oil shifts from the balls rolling over it throughout the course of the round and making adjustments. My buddy was recruited to play on our high school team precisely because he was a lefty in a league where there were relatively few others and thus his ball would be less affected by these variables. https://www.pba.com/player-resources/oil-patterns

Even for fun leagues will probably have someone prepare the lanes ahead of time with a certain pattern and let the bowlers know.

Solid article, but one very important detail that they left out is that this only really applies to at least league level and above players. Most of this is moot for the recreational, a few times a year type bowlers.

80% of the folks that walk in the door of a bowling alley are going to grab plastic house balls and bowl straight (or try to put hook on it, which isn't overly effective for a number of reasons). Most of this information only applies to bowlers using a ball with a coverstock and core that cause the ball to naturally hook a certain way.

Nothing wrong with being a recreational bowler or bowling straight. It's just trying to apply these statistics to a straight ball doesn't quite work.

I love this topic, but this article is literally just "there exists a paper" without any useful information about the paper aside from the inputs they consider in their model.

At this time, the balls rate of revolution is a strong factor in how often the ball hits the pocket and how often it strikes.

This has not always been the case. As the materials used for balls, lanes and oil have changed there have been premiums for different attributes like accuracy, speed, axis tilt, etc.

Todays best bowlers don’t look much like the best from 30 years ago, and probably won’t look much like the best ones 30 years from now.

Especially since the pins are on strings now, which changes the game.

https://usbowling.com/articles/string-pinsetter-q-a/

Isn't a strike effectively a solved problem? Like the pin you're supposed to aim for, and the angle you're supposed to approach the pins at, where you're supposed to stand, and all that?

Like I get that it's super hard to replicate time and time again, and that's why pros are as good as they are.

Sort of. Sure, the angle and position of the ball as it hits the first pin is solved to a fair degree. The problem is the number of variables between when the bowler even picks up the ball vs contact.

This is very much like saying we know what angle and speed we need for a rocket to achieve orbit, but you need to account for many, many other factors, some of which you don't have true control over. Weight, dimensions, and geometry of the rocket, wind, drag based on variable air density, weight of that individual rocket, are all engines burning at the right rate, etc, etc.

A veritable mission control is going on in a professional bowlers head at any given time. Varying speed of approach, how far back the ball should swing, axial tilt in the hand, which board to stand on, which board to hit, where the breakpoint should be, how the oil is changing as the game wears on (oil moves over the course of a game), is the pinsetter actually placing the pins correctly. Ball weight, core type, coverstock (surface of the ball) type, oil absorbtion into that coverstock, etc, etc. It's not so much replication, it's constant adjustment, and no two frames, much less games, are really the same. Not to mention you can't SEE how oil is changing directly. You have to infer it from the reaction of your ball as well as other bowlers.

Bowling is a deceptively deep and vexing sport

Sorta. This is a pretty entertaining video about how hard it is, even when you sorta cheat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1fUliFuz2U

The oil on the lane can be set in different patterns, so the throw can change depending on the pattern. You can't see the pattern (I've never been able to see it anyway), but the alley will show you a picture of what it should look like. It also will change as balls are thrown over it.

It's solved in the same way that baseball is solved: an omniscient superhuman player can get the perfect hit every time, but the fun is that we're imperfect and have to minimize our mistakes and maximize our recovery from mistakes.

I think there are diff oil patterns on the lanes that change where you want to aim.

Is the number of perfect games being bowled in competition going up in any meaningful way?

Just curious.

Fascinating work! I’m not a physicist, but I wonder from what distance down the lane this model’s predictions become reliably accurate. It might be interesting to pair it with a second model—one that helps bowlers achieve the needed initial conditions (release speed, angle, spin) with the required precision. A kind of two-stage approach to managing the chaos in the system.

It's big ball bowling. The ball is nearly as wide as the lane, so it knocks over all the pins. QED.

Candlepin and mini golf are the more advanced versions of their respective sports. Fight me.

I've never heard of candlepin bowling before this, but now that I'm reading about it, I'm surprised it's not more popular. It looks like a lot of fun. The fact that fallen pins are not cleared seems like it would lead to some interesting strategies.

What about mini golf is more advanced than regular golf?

I have not considered it enough to form a view yet but I expect he would be referring to the precision required for mini golf.

Seems like there is more precision required for regular golf since it includes all of the precision of miniature golf (putting) with the added difficulty of multiple player surfaces, longer distances, and the difficulty of hitting a small object with another small object at speeds around 100 mph.

the commentary

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULP0cbGXU8k

The plumbing, for starters.

What?

Ehh, 10 pin and candlepin are challenging for differing reasons. I wouldn't say one is more difficult than the other. It's kind of like comparing NASCAR to rally racing.

Sure, ten pin can be fun occasionally. But the world record in candlepin is a score, the world record in 10 pin is a quantity of perfect strings bowled in a row. I don't really get NASCAR either, fwiw.

> the world record in 10 pin is a quantity of perfect strings bowled in a row

While I see what you are going for, judging an entire game off of an extreme is an intrinsically narrow set of criteria. I'd argue that the consecutive strike aspect is not what gets folks excited in 10 pin, its the ability to clean up one's spares and string together solid scores consistently. Regular Joe league bowlers get far more excited about someone picking up a greek church or some other wacky spare than hitting 7-8 strikes in a row.

> I don't really get NASCAR either, fwiw.

Understandable. NASCAR is an example of min maxing sort of in the same way D&D can be run different ways. Some groups like role play and story driven elements, some like to squeeze every bit of efficiency out of a character. NASCAR's draw is not in the fact that they go around an oval 200 times, its the small details and tweaks that differentiate HOW those cars go around those 200 times. It definitely does not appeal to everyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com