StormHotRod300 said:
If you really want to know all the variables that come into play in a controlled bowling environment, i will list them: Humidity, Heat, Cold, type of oil used on the lanes, even the ball that is being used, how many people is bowling on your pair of lanes, the # of games bowled on the lanes, And yes the speed of the ball is a factor, angle of entry into the pocket. Even coverstock of the ball IE: Particle, PArticle Pearl, Reactive Resin, Urethane, Plastic, Pro-Active, Reactive Urethane. Even if the ball is polished or sanded.
Other things that are a factor, sometimes you have a back rack, pins are offset by maybe 1/2inch. Maybe the lanes are wood or synthetic, or wood and synthetic.
And who ever said i didnt know what a centerhit is? or stun or draw, or sidespin? I have known what all those things are for years.
Also if you go back to my opening post, this whole thing was based upon Pro pool players and Pro Bowlers and the conditions they face. Not comparing a Pro pool player and some league bowler.
And last, so why would we hafta play 8ahead sets in 9ball for twice the amount? is that so you can win your money back and claim some kinda victory over little ole me? And i will take that bet, if i am allowed a designated breaker/coach
I just did a little bit of research. The odds of a professional bowling a single strike is about 65%. For this to happen in pool would be extremely optimal conditions. In fact, if the odds were this high for pool, we would see 2-packs 42% of the time, 3-packs 27% of the time and a 7-pack 5% of the time. In fact, the odds are much closer to 1/3 for the pool player.
Now, that isn't to say that bowling 300 isn't tough. There are a lot of things that appear to be in a pool player's control that simply aren't the case in bowling. The moment the bowler let's go of the ball, he's assuming a number of things are going to take place that will allow him to knock down all ten pins and close simply doesn't count. Pool, on the otherhand, appears to be a far more controlling situation with a shooter having the luxury to make-up for any errors in position through recovery shots. In otherwords, an error in pool does not necessarily translate into a missed shot.
However, with all of that said, the variables that need to go in the shooter's favor far surpass the bowlers. That isn't to say that bowling doesn't have its variables. It does but the recipe for a successful strike remains constant throughout the match. Humidity, lane conditions, rotation duration and ball materials will have minimal change over the course of the game. Everything else remains the same. The pool player must pocket a ball on the break and gain position on the 1 with only a hopeful strategy of attaining this goal. After that, they are faced with a unique pattern every single time. In fact, it is fair to say that the pattern is unique to any the shooter has faced in his entire life since when possibilities are infinite, redundancy is nearly impossible. What's more, there is little the shooter can do to increase his chances of running out beyond making multiple balls on the break and even then, little is guaranteed. Running 11 racks in a row is a statistical anomaly, even for the greatest of players. For a professional bowler, bowling a 300, is a statistical probability that is mired by the emotional stigma given to it by the participant.
Examining statistics on the matter is difficult since certain conditions have not been mathematically factored in. In order to bowl a 300, not only must one bowl 12 strikes in a row, the beginning of his run must coincide with the beginning of a game. Multiplying the probability of a strike 12 times (see SJM's chart) would not be sufficient since if he began his 12 strike run in the second frame of a game and ended it on the 1st frame of his next game, this would not be a 300. After that, you would need to divide the probability by 12 (number of necessary strikes). However, the discrepancy when examining a 1/3 probability with breaking and running out vs. a 2/3 probability of performing a strike creates a huge chasm once drawn out to 10 or more results that even a 1/12 calculation does little to affect.
What you end up with is the professional bowler will inevitably bowl 12 strikes in a row many times during his career. Among those times, 8.5% will begin in the first frame assuming he will not deviate from his approach throughout the run. The pool player will be faced with identical (if not greater) mental challenges since the mere frequency of running 11 racks will not only be impressive to himself but also his peers who have likely not accomplished the feat either.
But speaking of pure mathematics, I calculate that the probability is 93 times more likely that one will complete a 300 game over running 11 racks and that, sir is with all the material that is available at this point in time. If you can come up with anything that would tilt it in favor of bowling, I'd be happy to factor that in.
