Bowling's digital daily newspaper delivering news, analysis and opinion.
With PURPLE HAMMER 6s, 7s ruling, USBC cuts off just part of the tumor, doesn’t address the cancer
USBC’s ruling announced Monday on the PURPLE HAMMER 6s and 7s can be likened to cutting off only part of a tumor while not addressing the underlying cancer.
The tumor is the 6s and 7s PURPLEs that were unknowingly produced illegally soft at the old EBI plant in Kentucky in 2016 and 2017, according to former EBI staffer and PBA Tour champion Mitch Beasley, backed up by other former EBI employees, according to USBC.
Beasley first made a Facebook post last Monday on the topic and then did an interview with me that resulted in this lengthy story.
After first dismissing Beasley in this statement on its Facebook page that didn't name him last week, USBC changed its tune in this news release Monday by stating that it interviewed more than a dozen people in an attempt to validate the claim and “multiple former Ebonite employees, including ones with first-hand knowledge, told USBC they believe the production process in 2016 and 2017, prior to the production change, led to some Purple Hammers being unintentionally produced below 72D,” which was the minimum hardness at the time (it becomes 73D at production on Aug. 1, 2022).
It’s important to emphasize that no one has said that EBI intentionally made illegal balls: Beasley said it was the failure of a quality control employee that allowed it happen without the company knowing it and the employee was fired. (USBC didn’t reference that assertion in its news release.)
It’s also important to note as I have repeatedly that this was the old EBI before Brunswick bought the brands of EBI and the Kentucky plant was shuttered in November 2019, and Brunswick had nothing to do with what happened. In fact, Brunswick was a competitor of EBI theoretically harmed by any unintentionally illegal balls.
USBC said in Monday's release that no one had evidence PURPLE HAMMERs were produced under 72D, though Beasley told me that ““About halfway through 2017, we got a new person that was doing (quality control) and they were finding a bunch of them that were soft, in the mid-60s. And then we found out from people checking them in the field that they were soft.”
I'm not sure why someone with first-hand knowledge stating that wouldn't count as evidence; perhaps it needed to be recorded in some manner?
USBC said while the findings of its investigation are “inconclusive,” the “credible first-hand accounts describing the potential for an unknown number of Purple Hammer balls to be produced out of specification in 2016 and 2017 is concerning.”
As a result, USBC said it was immediately instituting a tournament rule at all USBC national tournaments prohibiting PURPLE HAMMERS manufactured in 2016 and 2017 from being used in these competitions. The tournament rule reads:
Purple Hammer bowling balls manufactured during 2016 or 2017 (identified by serial numbers that start with either a “6” or “7”) are prohibited for use.
The Open Championships, which start Saturday, and Women’s Championships were mentioned in the release, but USBC national tournaments should include the Masters, Senior Masters, Queens, Senior Queens, Team USA Trials, Intercollegiate Championships, Junior Gold Championships, PWBA Tour, and possibly more that escape me as I write this.
None of those other tournaments were named in the release, but two college coaches confirmed that the PURPLE HAMMER 6s and 7s were banned for this weekend’s sectionals for the Intercollegiate Singles Championships and Intercollegiate Championships.
UW-Whitewater coach Shawn Wochner said Monday night that “We just had a meeting and were told they were out” for sectionals.
Another coach who asked not to be quoted by name noted that “Not all teams are resourced to simply replace that type of ball (or any for that matter) on such short notice.”
While the coach is right about the inequity of that issue, I think many will feel that is the lesser of two evils compared to letting the 6s and 7s be used.
USBC said that Brunswick will offer owners of 2016 or 2017 PURPLE HAMMERs the option to exchange their balls for a new PURPLE HAMMER or another product of their choice that can be used in all tournaments. This can be done at the 2022 USBC Open Championships or USBC Women’s Championships, or by contacting Brunswick at: consumerproducts@brunswickbowling.com or 800-937-2695.
Kudos to Brunswick for stepping up to help fix a problem it did not cause.
Unfortunately, USBC did not go far enough with its ruling (did not get all of the tumor), as it said the 2016 and 2017 PURPLE HAMMERs would remain USBC approved. It said the USBC equipment specification manual allows for revocation of ball approval when balls at the time of manufacture demonstrate non-compliance to specification, but that it doesn’t have evidence and is unable to locate enough blank balls from 2016 and 2017 to conduct conclusive testing.
USBC said each competition, whether tournament or league, has the option to adopt USBC’s national tournament rule on the PURPLE HAMMER or other rules related to equipment restrictions.
I'm sorry but it is absurd to argue that a ball's legality is questionable enough to ban for some USBC certified tournaments and not for all certified competition. This double standard has the potential to cause a lot of heartache and conflict for tournament competitors and operators, and I have to think there’s a decent chance USBC eventually will make it a blanket rule for certified competition, perhaps for the 2022-23 season.
I think the USBC’s new rule also will provide an impetus for PBA to extend its new rule banning urethane balls more than 2 calendar years old from the PBA Tour to all PBA competition (adding the PBA50 Tour, PBA Regionals, and PBA Jr. levels).
The rule also does not address the underlying cancer, which is USBC’s failure to put the integrity of the sport as its top priority, as any National Governing Body should.
USBC Executive Director Chad Murphy worked for Ebonite for years before moving to work in IBC Youth in Arlington and eventually becoming the head of USBC.
You would have to be naïve beyond belief to believe that Murphy didn’t know about the unintentionally soft PURPLE HAMMERs soon after EBI figured out what was happening. Beyond his close ties to the old EBI, he also consistently is described as a control freak and micromanager who has his hands in everything.
If the integrity of the sport was Murphy’s primary concern, he would have immediately announced an investigation, ordered checks of the balls, and upon discovering they were well below 72D (assuming what the "multiple former Ebonite employees" said is correct), ordered them banned and recalled.
Putting the integrity of the sport you govern means doing the right thing and letting the chips fall where they may.
Why the PURPLE 6s and 7s weren’t recalled as the illegal MOTIV JACKALs were — detailed in my story here — is the question Murphy needs to answer, either publicly or at least to the USBC Board of Directors. That question involves both differing treatment of different companies, and failure to uphold the integrity of the sport for ... what? To protect a company he formerly worked for?
Simply put, this has the odor of a noxious scandal.
But I won’t be holding my breath that he will answer, or that the Board will do an investigation and/or take any action.
I would imagine there will be some discussion by the Board, though, as there are several high-level bowlers on the Board who I can’t imagine aren’t filled with disgust at the failure to uphold the integrity of the sport, and the competitive tragedy of the situation.
But the Board has shown no independence or accountability when it comes to Murphy and his many questionable actions.
The PURPLE HAMMER 6s and 7s are gone from PBA competition thanks to its new rule, but undoubtedly there were titles won and money earned with 6s and 7s.
However, I am not convinced that any player knowingly knew they were using an illegal ball, just based on my own thinking that EBI had come up with some chemical combination that made the PURPLE special — I never considered hardness being the issue. And even if they did, I don't know you could prove that, unless there is some sort of smoking gun of evidence.
Who before the USBC testing in 2020 considered hardness to be a significant factor in bowling, since it had disappeared from all concern for 20-plus years of reactive resin dominance.
If I was a free agent or EBI staffer at the time, I can guarantee you I would have been trying to get one of the "special" PURPLEs to try, not that I could hook it with my 250-300 rev rate. But I would have wanted to try one because of the all the chatter over how special it was — which I assumed was some chemical advancement, not how soft it was.
And throwing a ball that you think is special is different than throwing a ball you know is illegally soft.
I kick myself now because if I had been smarter then I might have asked the right questions and exposed the 6s and 7s years before Beasley did, saving bowling from the heartache it has been going through for years.
I sent a query email seeking comment on the situation to USBC last week after it began developing and no one at USBC has responded to me, as has been the situation for more than four years.
# # # # # # # # # #
For those wanting to know the history and issues that make urethanes a hot button issue, here are the lengthy and detailed stories I have written since the situation blew up in early 2020 (in chronological order):
It's a 'baseless claim' to say illegal PURPLE HAMMERs are being used on the PBA Tour, PBA Commissioner Tom Clark says (2/10/20) (NOTE: Clark's characterization was what was known at the time, before USBC study and testing. And this story contains the old PBA rule on ball checks.)
After urethane testing, USBC proposes logical change with ball hardness rules — and creates a hole cheaters could exploit (4/22/20 and update 6/8/20)
PBA Tour re-instituting ball hardness checks, but only for TV finalists (1/19/22)
3 balls used during 2022 KIA PBA Tournament of Champions fail pre-TV hardness checks, sources say (2/27/22 with updates)
PBA bans urethane balls more than 2 calendar years old for PBA Tour competition (3/2/22 with updates)
With PURPLE HAMMER 6s, 7s ruling, USBC cuts off just part of the tumor, doesn’t address the cancer (3/7/22)
Note: As has always been clearly disclosed on 11thFrame.com here, I have been a Storm bowling staffer since 1996.