Due to a recent hip injury (I don't know how permanent it is), I find myself unable to bowl in the normal way. I cannot walk to the foul line, slide to a stop on my left foot and release the ball. Stopping on my left side can, unpredictably, result in intense sharp pain. But I have commitments to bowl in three leagues (one quite casual), so I decided to experiment with a few things to see if I could bowl without pain.
I found that I can just stand a few feet behind the foul line, swing the ball back and roll it, accurately, down the lane. I noted that, without straining, I could throw the ball just about as fast (13-15 mph) as I "normally" do; I can get as many strikes as I usually do, but I'm having trouble locating spare shots, mainly because the geometry is a bit different when releasing from the foul line. So right now, my average would go from about 185 down to about 170. (Interestingly, bowling has a rule that allows a new average when a bowler has a PERMANENT problem that affects the ability to bowl...you don't want to make the team suffer because you still want to bowl, despite some disability).
But now to my point: Is it any wonder that I can still throw the ball the same speed as when I could walk up the approach normally?
Consider the difference between a baseball pitcher and a cricket bowler. One is standing still, the other is running toward the target. Check out the following expertanalysis...
"Despite the differences in delivery action, the delivery speeds are similar for both sports with the fastest bowlers and pitchers propelling the ball in the region of 95–100 mph (150–160 km/h): the fastest recorded cricket delivery is 100.2 mph (161.26 km/h) with baseball's record quicker at 105 mph (169.0 km/h)."
And compare golf with hockey. Can a hockey player propel the puck any faster than the stationary golfer can hit his ball (consider mainly clubhead speed)? I don't think so. Is a tennis player not able to serve the ball at 130mph+ while standing still?
While it is counter-intuitive, there is no reason to think that I can't bring my stationary bowling to the same level as before, once I get a better handle on the modified strategy for making some spares.
Even if I do look like a gimp in the process.
I found that I can just stand a few feet behind the foul line, swing the ball back and roll it, accurately, down the lane. I noted that, without straining, I could throw the ball just about as fast (13-15 mph) as I "normally" do; I can get as many strikes as I usually do, but I'm having trouble locating spare shots, mainly because the geometry is a bit different when releasing from the foul line. So right now, my average would go from about 185 down to about 170. (Interestingly, bowling has a rule that allows a new average when a bowler has a PERMANENT problem that affects the ability to bowl...you don't want to make the team suffer because you still want to bowl, despite some disability).
But now to my point: Is it any wonder that I can still throw the ball the same speed as when I could walk up the approach normally?
Consider the difference between a baseball pitcher and a cricket bowler. One is standing still, the other is running toward the target. Check out the following expertanalysis...
"Despite the differences in delivery action, the delivery speeds are similar for both sports with the fastest bowlers and pitchers propelling the ball in the region of 95–100 mph (150–160 km/h): the fastest recorded cricket delivery is 100.2 mph (161.26 km/h) with baseball's record quicker at 105 mph (169.0 km/h)."
And compare golf with hockey. Can a hockey player propel the puck any faster than the stationary golfer can hit his ball (consider mainly clubhead speed)? I don't think so. Is a tennis player not able to serve the ball at 130mph+ while standing still?
While it is counter-intuitive, there is no reason to think that I can't bring my stationary bowling to the same level as before, once I get a better handle on the modified strategy for making some spares.
Even if I do look like a gimp in the process.
