Banned Vs Excluded USBC / PBA / Storm Bowling Balls | What is Going On? | What That Means To You

All of the products showcased can be purchased at

For more information consider joining our Staff for Free.
Click here.

You can also join our National Program and receive monthly items for a fee

You can also sign up to come visit us at the the Education Center

38 Comments on “Banned Vs Excluded USBC / PBA / Storm Bowling Balls | What is Going On? | What That Means To You”

    1. To a degree. Ebonite got pinged as well. The RG rule that caused the original Gamebreaker to be grandfathered in and then not able to be used anymore, hence the Gamebreaker 2. The same rule that sin binned the Motiv Jackal is the same rule that got the Gamebreaker. In fact, it hit the Gamebreaker BEFORE the Jackal.

    2. @Jake Snussbuster Only new ball I bought this year is the Polaris. Love it! I still use older Ebonite balls. Challenge (2013), Turbo/R (2017) that I change surface on and play with and they still work great. hundreds of games on them over the years!!!

  1. Disappointed in USBC. This seems super suspicious on USBC, I’ll go as far as saying it is borderline corruptive.

    1. @Dattebayo Everyone involved is in a bad spot. Imagine this being discovered when it was and the USBC not disclosing until after nationals is over. Imagine the outcry from non-Storm fans about how they knew there was a problem and kept it secret. Bottom line is that this is going to happen no matter how any of us feel about it.

  2. Absolutely outstanding dialog, explanation of the ruling, and unbiased theory sharing on an unfortunate and costly situation. Not good for Storm, perhaps a boom for pro shop operators who are incented to redrill replacement balls.

  3. Is there not an internal process (at Storm and the other manufacturers) where they are continuously monitoring things like hardness during the course of manufacturing? How was this not caught internally?

  4. Just a thought, the cover stocks are made of Chemicals, Chemicals have a habit of breaking down over time and mixing Chemicals can break down at different times do the Bowling companies check SHELF life of their balls.

    1. Reactive balls continue to cure over time, so they get harder over time. Thus, that isn’t the reason.

    1. @M. Wilson he might be in a league that decides to not allow it. My league is deciding it this coming week.

  5. Today’s YouTube post by Storm is really weird. They don’t mention the banned equipment but reference their long history, personal sacrifice, innovation and values. There is definitely a lot more to this situation than meets the eye.

  6. Ridiculous! A santioning body says this equipment isn’t within spec for only certain types of competition. Oh, but it’ll be ok for other types of competition… unless your league or tournament decides they aren’t.

    Can’t do it this way. They are good or bad. Not kinda good or kinda bad.

  7. What about Tom Clark’s comments on the 11th Frame interview where they have their own sets of data amd none of these balls tested out of compliance in the PBAs tests from January to March?

    1. One of the problems with the testing could be that these Durometers are calibrated at best with a +/- 1 point difference. So a test of 72.5 on one durometer could be up to a 74.5 on another. How many durometers did they use? How many test points did they use? Why behind curtains? This just seems suspicious to me. I feel they aren’t using proper testing techniques.

    2. @Paul F agreed.. And if there is that much variance in the Standard Deviation of the test accuracy, then shouldn’t that variance be built into the number.

    3. @Duane Enterline I do believe in a previous YouTube post by creating the difference. That the standard deviation set in the rules for field testing is +/-2.

    4. @Duane Enterline I don’t make the rules I’m only commenting on the usbc ball approval process from the YouTube that Ron did less than a week ago.

  8. Im just trying to figure out why the USBC was Testing them behind a Curtain in Vegas without the Bowler being Allowed to Watch and told Anything. Why?

  9. Thank you for shedding light on the situation! From my standpoint I was mad at the USBC, but it obviously seems like Storm has a quality control problem.

  10. If the hardness is a function of the cover stock formula alone and not the core, wouldn’t we expect balls with the same coverstock during the timeframe of this “manufacturing issue” to also be out of spec?

    My guess is that USBC and Storm agreed to not impact balls released prior to July 2021 in order to simplify the “ban” to specific balls. I bet that all balls with effected coverstocks manufactured in ‘21-‘22 would be found to be out of spec.

    USBC probably doesn’t want to show the data because it may show that balls like Hy-Road Pearl with R2S Pearl manufactured during this time are technically out of spec.

    USBC would only ban certain years of balls (like they did with the ‘16-‘17 purple Hammers) if it presented a significant competitive advantage because it is completely confusing to most of the general bowling public and damaging to the sport.

    USBC is doing its best to limit the damage in an unfortunate scenario. I don’t think there is enough of a competitive advantage introduced with these balls that people would have suspected an issue. If there wasn’t the recent controversy of the purple hammer where there was a competitive advantage, I bet this gets sorted out between USBC and Storm behind closed doors with no ban or public notice.

  11. Great show CTD! A lot of people needed to see your perspectives and expertise on this subject. I feel for all the league bowlers that have these balls that are legal to keep using, that is “if” they league doesn’t ban them. Also how will their fellow bowlers feel about someone using a “cheater ball?” I can see people doing that. You know how competitive people can be and if you have an advantage over somebody they may not be too happy about it.

  12. How does USBC know this won’t be an issue in the future? Why make a definitive statement like that in this context?

  13. I completely agree with Ron on this. We need USBC we need Storm to provide to grow the sport of bowling. However we can’t forget bout other bowling products like Retro Grip, Columbia 300, and the one product I use now the Ebonite. I bowl their remastered of the Puma. This this very hard day for everyone in bowling. We can all heal from this and grow from it.

  14. I think that in fact USBC gave Storm a break. If they did a total ban themselves Storm would have to completely replace a total of 7 balls counting the Spectre. That’s not to say it won’t happen depending on the leagues.
    Can’t say it’s a witch hunt when the numbers just shown were at limit already. Not much wiggle room there.

  15. still sad i wont be able to buy phaze 4 or trend 2. will this effect belmo and storms sponsership will belmo drop storm since his ball trend 2 has been Excluded ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *