Author Topic: 80% or 220 handicap , why? (Read 16667 times)

trash heap · « **on:** November 29, 2003, 12:19:03 AM »

I was talking to guy last nite who is in the Monday Night League I just joined this year. The handicap for that league is set up this way: 80% of 220. He told me last year they had a vote to raise to 90%. It was turned down. This year I am noticing there are several guys with averages above 220 and some above 230. Four teams left the league this year.

Now there were guys averaging over 220 last year. Why didn't they up to 230 for this year's season. The way this league is set up, there are definite advantages to teams with guys averaging over 220.

Is there anything that could be done about this?

--------------------
As I grow older, I pay less attention to what men say. I just watch what they do.
Andrew Carnegie

shotmaker · « **Reply #1 on:** November 29, 2003, 04:22:10 PM »

I'll give you a worse scenario. The league I used to bowl in for many years went from 90% of 200 to 90% of 220. When they still couldn't shut down one particular bowler they went 90% of 220, and everything over 220 is 90% negative handicap (Avg 230, minus 220=10, handicap -9). This effectively subtracted pins off your score if you average over 220. Needless to say the bowler averaging over 220 quit the league.

no1bucsfan · « **Reply #2 on:** November 29, 2003, 06:51:46 PM »

quote:
I'll give you a worse scenario. The league I used to bowl in for many years went from 90% of 200 to 90% of 220. When they still couldn't shut down one particular bowler they went 90% of 220, and everything over 220 is 90% negative handicap (Avg 230, minus 220=10, handicap -9). This effectively subtracted pins off your score if you average over 220. Needless to say the bowler averaging over 220 quit the league.

That's just pathetic. I have never heard of any league taking pins away form the better bowlers. I don't blame the guy for quitting. The league should have been disbanded for stupidity.
--------------------
You can always hit em hard when you've got the balls

Lefties are the only people in their right minds.

no1bucsfan

mumzie · « **Reply #3 on:** November 29, 2003, 10:09:52 PM »

The league I was in tried that a couple of years ago. I told 'em I worked too darn hard for the pins, and if they took any away from me, I'd quit, so as an alternative, and INARGUABLY fairer rule, I suggested 100% of the difference of your average and 300. No one could argue the fairness, but they did recognize the absurdity, and decided to drop the negative handicap.

trash heap · « **Reply #4 on:** November 30, 2003, 09:42:22 PM »

Why are bowling handicaps determined by each individual league? Golf there is a standard handicap. Why doesn't the organizations (ABC/WIBC) set the number to 250 or 300? Has anyone averaged above 250 in a League?
--------------------
As I grow older, I pay less attention to what men say. I just watch what they do.
Andrew Carnegie

stormerjip · « **Reply #5 on:** November 30, 2003, 09:45:24 PM »

my favorite handicapping system is the one we use on a friday afternoon mixed league it is 90% of the difference between the two teams averages.

stormerjip · « **Reply #6 on:** November 30, 2003, 09:47:52 PM »

i do believe that just a coupole years ago there was a 266 average recorded by a former or current pro that bowled in a full time league

JOE FALCO · « **Reply #7 on:** November 30, 2003, 09:55:07 PM »

Am I glad I didn't see this topic! TRASH HEAP .. YOU ARE DEFINITELY CORRECT .. this is one topic that people who don't know how to do simple MATH talk VERY FOOLISHLY! Handicaps are to make players equal ..the justification for GIVING THE HIGHER BOWLERS an advantage is UNJUSTIFIED .. but accepted by the lower bowlers .. I WILL NOT COMMENT FURTHER ON THE SUBJECT but wanted to note that I did see it!
--------------------
Hit them light and watch them fight
J O E - F A L C O

MI 2 AZ · « **Reply #8 on:** November 30, 2003, 10:20:24 PM »

The mixed league I bowl in had a handicap of 90% of 220 last season. A regional PBA member joined last year and at this year's meeting, he convinced the league that it was unfair to give that much handicap to 200 average bowlers like himself. So he made a motion and it passed, that the handicap should be 80% from 200. Now, it is much fairer for the lower average bowlers.

--------------------
I just want 2C was'zzub.
____________________________________

I am the SGT Schultz of bowling.
"I know nothing!"

trash heap · « **Reply #9 on:** November 30, 2003, 10:41:24 PM »

MI 2 AZ,

I hope your kidding. 80% of 200 is worse for a lower average person than 90% of 220.

ClutchClay · « **Reply #10 on:** November 30, 2003, 10:43:14 PM »

quote:
The mixed league I bowl in had a handicap of 90% of 220 last season. A regional PBA member joined last year and at this year's meeting, he convinced the league that it was unfair to give that much handicap to 200 average bowlers like himself. So he made a motion and it passed, that the handicap should be 80% from 200. Now, it is much fairer for the lower average bowlers.

Not really.

Take 90% of 220:
Bowler A averages 210, gets 9 pins handicap and shoots his average = 219
Bowler B averages 180, gets 36 pins handicap and shoots his average = 216
Net result, Bowler B loses by 3.
So to win Bowler B has to shoot 4 pins over his average.

Now take 80% for 200:
Bowler A averages 210, gets 0 pins handicap and shoots his average = 210
Bowler B averages 180, gets 16 pins handicap and shoots his average = 196
Net result, Bowler B loses by 14.
So to win Bowler B has to shoot 15 pins over his average (the additional 11 pins coming from the percentage difference - 1 pin - and the average basis - 10 pins).

Obviously, because of the percentage, the "pins lost by" increases as Bowler B's average decreases.

Therefore, when a bowlers average is higher than the handicap average basis, that bowler has an advantage over everybody else in addition to the percentage advantage he already had.

So, tell me again how a lower average basis helps the lower average bowler and shuts out the higher average bowler.
--------------------
Regards, ClutchClay

trash heap · « **Reply #11 on:** November 30, 2003, 11:01:28 PM »

ClutchClay, Good Example.

I think some people don't realize how handicap works. I had a young couple sub on my team and their average was considerably lower than my teammates. The league handicap was set at 80% of 200. Noticing that my team with the subs where getting 80 pins more per game, the other team complained about my team having so many pins (after we swept them).

They had a bowler with an average over 200. I told them that they had the advantage based on average and the difference was my wife's and my games. We bowled well that night.

The subs might of given us 10+ pins from each of them on one game. The other two games they bowled below average. All the other team could see was the 80 pins and we brought these subs in to have an easy nite.

I think this is the mentality of this Monday Night League I just joined. I think there is some high average players not wanting a challenge. You have to make a handicap league fair! I think 80% in any league is too low. It should not be less than 90%. Sometimes I wander if it should be at 100%.

MI 2 AZ · « **Reply #12 on:** November 30, 2003, 11:07:21 PM »

I am not kidding. That is what he suggested and because he is the 'pro', the leagues will follow his suggestions.

I realize how handicap works. That is why I had the smilie after my post (sarcasm). I am amazed at how many of the lower average league bowlers still think that 80% of 200 is more fair for them. They dont like to see higher average bowlers get any kind of handicap. Years ago I had an argument with a 150 average bowler in a league meeting when I brought up changing our league handicap from 90% of 200 to 90% of 210. He was against giving handicap to bowlers who averaged over 200 and I could not convince him that it was to his benefit.
--------------------

I just want 2C was'zzub.
____________________________________

I am the SGT Schultz of bowling.
"I know nothing!"

trash heap · « **Reply #13 on:** November 30, 2003, 11:11:12 PM »

You better give that league a Math Class.

ClutchClay · « **Reply #14 on:** December 01, 2003, 12:00:13 PM »

MI 2 AZ:
Sorry. I read right past the

in your post without seeing it.

trash heap:
Thanks. I think you are right. Most of the bowlers in my Friday night Vegas league have been bowling in the league for quite a while (except me, this is my second season in that league). Until this Fall, the handicap was 2/3 of 200. There were several guys over 210 and LOTS of people with averages in the 120-160 range. So when I made a motion to raise the handicap to 80% of 220 I was VERY surprised that most everybody was adamantly against it. Found out why later when I had to explain how handicap works to my other three team members. I guess that explains why everyone was surprised that the top five average teams took the top five places last year. I guess they thought that 33.3% was not too big of an advantage.

Oh well, at least they raised it to 90% of 200. I only moved for 80% because I did not think they would go for 90% (even though ABC recommends a minimum of 90% to make handicap leagues fair).
--------------------
Regards, ClutchClay

Author Topic: 80% or 220 handicap , why? (Read 16667 times)

trash heap

80% or 220 handicap , why?

shotmaker

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

no1bucsfan

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

mumzie

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

trash heap

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

stormerjip

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

stormerjip

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

JOE FALCO

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

MI 2 AZ

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

trash heap

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

ClutchClay

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

trash heap

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

MI 2 AZ

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

trash heap

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

ClutchClay

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?