Depending on how you want to look at this, it could be a heavyweight fight or a middleweight fight to be more accurate. Or you could say, Tamer what the heck are you doing comparing the GOAT mid level Venom Shock to a urethan ball?!?

Spoiler Alert, I’m here to tell you that there is a good reason these 2 balls compare. Let’s start with the Motiv Venom Shock. As you know by now, for a long time I found no personal use for it but as my physical game changed, it became the no brainer in my bag that others’ had. When this ball is fresh, it is a beast. The 4000 OOB actually feels grittier than that. It’s a strong cover on a medium/weak even core. A fresh Venom Shock is a decent bit stronger than the Rubicon UC3. However, it’s really when the Venom Shock gets some games on it and it starts to go a little longer and a bit less backend, that the comparison starts to make sense. Most bowlers have the Venom Shock for a good amount of time and it settles. The ball is a good Mid Control ball in the bag, the benchmark. The core is a little weaker than I like in that spot and it does make it a bit later and a touch snappier but you can easily mess around with the surface to modify that. I don’t want to wax on about the Venom Shock since I did a full review of that.

It’s when you throw the Rubicon UC3 you start to wonder where the heck does this ball fit?? It is not weak enough to be at the bottom of your arsenal like many urethane balls. You could put it in the specialty part of the bag but to me, it fits in another category much more clearly. The UC3, despite being a so called urethane ball, for me clearly fits in the mid control part of the bag. It is a touch earlier and smoother than the Venom Shock so there is certainly a distinction. However, their respective formulas seem to bring them closer to each other than you would think. The Venom Shock uses a strong cover plus a medium weaker even core which means the cover controls the lane and the core doesn’t try to do anything crazy so you get predictability. WIth the Rubicon UC3, it’s technically a weaker cover with a strong core. But in this case, the surface on the weaker cover creates a balance with the stronger core where you get control in the midlane and control and evenness in the backend due to the urethane nature.

While they may look a different here, especially on the house shot, I’ve used both balls on medium and longer sport patterns and they both worked surprisingly well. I would’ve never thought for my game a supposed urethane anything would be useful on a 43ft Earl Anthony for example but it turned out to be the answer I needed on that particular night.

Bottom line, I choose between them on any given night in terms of which mid control ball I want in the bag. The choice is typically based on the general shape leaning I want in the bag overall. Strange to have to make this choice isn’t it?? I figure I’d leave you with that to think about for yourself.

Thanks for joining us for another video. If you like what we do, support us by joining us on Patreon.