Author Topic: 80% or 220 handicap , why? (Read 16666 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

MI 2 AZ · « **Reply #16 on:** December 01, 2003, 01:22:36 PM »

ClutchClay,

Hey, that's okay. And I hope you dont mind but I copied down your example and will put a copy of it in my bowling bag for next year.

I just hope they are able to understand it (duh) or at least willing to make the effort.

Trash Heap,

Math class wont help. Our center is run by a clique and if you are one of them (the resident pro), then everything is believed and outsiders (like me) are only troublemakers.
--------------------

I just want 2C was'zzub.
____________________________________

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

Ishmael · « **Reply #17 on:** December 01, 2003, 01:38:41 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.

Using the negative pins is no different than raising the average that the handicap is figured off of. The point is that the cap average should be higher than the highest average in the league. If not, the people averaging above the cap have a huge advantage. Raising that cap average is obviously easier than dealing with the negative pins, so that's the best way to go.

ClutchClay · « **Reply #18 on:** December 01, 2003, 01:41:47 PM »

MI 2 AZ:
Go ahead and use it anyway you can. I am just glad it may help.

It's funny, I spent what seemed like forever trying to explain handicap to my teammates and nothing seemed to get through. Finally, I equated the percentage to the frames in the game. Basically, if the percentage is 90%, everyone bowls their average and nobody averages over the average basis, then the higher average team will catch the lower average team at the completion of the ninth frame and pass them in the tenth frame. 80% would be the eighth frame. 2/3 would be just over halfway through the seventh frame. That example was the one that seemed to cement the concept in their heads. Of course, averages over the handicap basis invalidate this example.
But, I am NOT going to ask my teammates about it again because it's been 14 weeks and I doubt if they still remember. And, yes, I am a pessimist.

--------------------
Regards, ClutchClay

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #19 on:** December 01, 2003, 01:55:30 PM »

Two things.

First it is much easier for an improving bowler or a low average bowler to shoot 20% over their average.

For example a bowler averaging 120 only has to shoot 144 to beat the high average bowler hitting his average who is under the cap. Say 218 average with cap being 220.

I've been in some real big money leagues where a bunch of good athlete drunks come in average 120 or 130 for the first half of the year, (all drunk as skunks),then the second half they buy shoes, a bag, a ball, go practice, stop drinking and average 170 the second half and come in first or 2nd every time!!!

Also for an above post why would a great bowler be concerned about negative handicap. It is a valid concept in golf(I think Greg Norman is a plus 6).
When he plays they add 6 to his score.

This makes for a nice game between the excellent and the not so good and maybe aspiring!

REgards,

Luckylefty

ClutchClay · « **Reply #20 on:** December 01, 2003, 02:00:15 PM »

Those of us who actually understand handicap (and have a reason for not wanting to give higher average players an advantage) should print this out for use during league meetings with discussion of handicap.

From the ABC League Officer Manual (page 9):

quote:
Competition, by nature, is exciting and intriguing. The more teams battle for a championship, the more interest is created throughout a league. To spark competition, leagues may try several formats:
- Higher handicaps - ABC/WIBC studies show that even with a 100% handicap, the higher average team has an advantage. The studies suggest handicap should be set at 100% or higher.

For those who are interested, the ABC League Officer Manual can be found at http://www.bowlingmembership.com/PDF/03-04LeagueOfficers_workingcopy.pdf.
--------------------
Regards, ClutchClay

DrillLord · « **Reply #21 on:** December 01, 2003, 02:27:01 PM »

This topic will never get old. By the way I have a Math Major to back up what I am saying.

Handicap is a great tool for making leagues fun and competitive for bowlers of all skill levels. I bowl on one league which has handicap set at 80% of 200. I feel that the bowlers averaging over 200 (including myself) have a definite advantage and if you look at the previous league champs it could be noted that every year it seems to be the team with the highest averages. If a team has three bowlers averaging over 200 then they have a distinct advantage since a lower average team will not see the full 80% handicap. For instance, a 195 average bowler will only receive 4 pins when bowling against a 215 average bowler that is clearly much better. My first opinion is that handicap should be set as a percentage of the current high average. This way the 80% or 90% handicap will be consistent throughout the league players.

On the other end of the spectrum I bowled on a league that was handicapped at 100% of 220 with no bowler averaging over 220. This was the MOST unfair league that I have ever bowled on. If a 130 bowler has a 170 game a 205 average bowler must bowl 245 to tie. Many have argued the point with me, but I feel that it is much easier for a mid-100's bowler to pick up pins than a 200 average bowler. For an individual to bowl 170 he/she must only pick up some spares throw a double and open once or twice. However for a 200 average bowler to bowl a 245 he/she must be clean and throw four or five in-a-row. This becomes a carry contest for the higher average bowler. It used to anger me losing to a 130 average bowler that picked up the 5-pins that he left from coming in light all night and then carrys a couple of brooklyn strikes. When I hit the pocket all night and leave a couple of corner pins.
This format is no longer in use since many of the high average bowlers stopped getting in to handicap jackpots since they had to bowl at least 260 to have a chance of winning.

There is no perfect handicap for every league. I prefer 80%-90% of the high average, but I know that there are people that think that this is ignorant. That is why we have league meetings ald leave it to the majority to decide what they prefer.

Jason

--------------------
I've found that the RESET button is the easiest way to knock down ten pins.

SrKegler · « **Reply #22 on:** December 02, 2003, 04:49:17 AM »

While it has it's disadvantages, my Tuesday league figures handicap at 80% of the difference between teams. This seems to keep it fair, we don't have to worry about what the high average is going to be that year, etc.

The disadvantage comes about for the handicap prizes at the end of the year. If you have the two lowest average teams bowling each other and one of them gets hot, they still won't have as high of a handicap series or game that they would have if they had been bowling the highest average team.

So far the league has been running over 30 years with the same procedures without any problems.
--------------------
~~~SrK - Have balls, will travel

johns811 · « **Reply #23 on:** December 02, 2003, 05:43:00 AM »

I've been reading this thread for a while and thought I would jump in. I'm definitely in favor of using the difference between the 2 teams. Being secretary for a few years, at 80% the highest average teams will almost always come in the top spots. The 20% difference over the course of a whole season will just about guarantee that. Recently our couples league went from 80% to 90%. That changed things significantly. Some of the lower or mid average teams can hang around in the top few spots thru the whole season rather then being stuck near the bottom.

One league I bowled in, I think used 80% or 90% of 220, then if you were over 220 it was 100% of the diff. Something like that.

Overall the easiest and probably most fair is 90% of difference. The reason I feel you can't use 100% is there are only so many pins available. Obviously the lower avg bowler can shoot over average much easier as there are more potential pins (over avg) available to them.

Lastly my wife bowled in a work league the handicap was 60%. Same team won every year. Imagine that.

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #24 on:** December 02, 2003, 08:34:58 AM »

Can I ask what is so bad about giving the higher avg. bowler a slight advantage? After all, they are the ones who have taken the time to learn and advance their skill level, shouldn't they, by nature, be more likely to win than a lower skilled one night a week league hack? Not trying to be mean, but if I want to beat someone who is better than me, shouldn't I work to improve my game rather than stand in the welfare line expecting free pins?

I suppose the only way to be somewhat fair is to forget about averages and do like drag racing does - closest to their avg without going over wins. However, that kinda ruins shooting for honor scores, so maybe go with no handicap and whoever is most over their average (or closest to it) wins.

--------------------
9~

LuvThatWhiteDot · « **Reply #25 on:** December 02, 2003, 08:57:57 AM »

quote:
I would quit too if they took pins away from me each game. Changing a league handicap % should be done for the benefit of the whole league, not just to the detriment of a single bowler.

My women's league on Monday is 75% of 775. Anyone going over 775 subtracts 100% of the difference *sigh*

Last year my team's average was 805, so we started out 25 pins in the hole each game (75 pins in totals) every week before throwing a single ball.

ONCE AGAIN, I tried to get the handicrap percentage raised, and even begged them to raise the 775 to 800 so I could fill the last spot on the league. When women were leaving the league meeting they were talking amongst themselves about how my team wanted the ceiling raised to benefit US. Without raising the ceiling to 800, I had to turn away six teams who could not fit under 775 to fill the league at 26 teams, so we're carrying a bye team now.

I bust my butt taking care of this stupid league on a weekly basis and have been doing so for the last six years. It will be my team's last year in it as well. We found a league that has handicap based on the difference in the team averages, so even if we're the higher team we'll be bowling with zero handicrap (scratch, if you will, sort of...). We would've left this season but with a new treasurer I didn't want to feed her to the lions

With the number of bowlers declining every year and the lousy economy and people being laid off left and right (just ask my poor anchor about being laid off), bowling will continue to decline and every single league will wind up being handicrapped just to keep them filled.

::rant mode off -- thanks for reading this::
--------------------
White Dot

Queen of the Stone 8 Pin

ClutchClay · « **Reply #26 on:** December 02, 2003, 11:42:57 AM »

9andaWiggle:
In the past I was, like you, interested in giving the higher average bowlers an advantage. But now that I bowl with my wife (120 average) and two other people (135 and 155), I have seen the things from the other side (being TOTALLY shut out last year by 2/3 of 200) and can now empathize with the lower average bowlers.

Besides, the whole point of handicap is to even the odds for bowlers of all skill levels - not to give an advantage to those who are more skilled. If you want an advantage for being more skilled, then bowl scratch.
--------------------
Regards, ClutchClay

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #27 on:** December 02, 2003, 11:52:36 AM »

ClutchClay - I might have been in a foul mood earlier when I posted, but I was also in the mindset of more competitive leagues. For "recreational" leagues, I would have to agree that some form of handicap is needed (and will agree it is no fun to be whipped every week even in a leisurely setting). However, there is a fine line in trying to make all fair and equal on the lanes. Maybe 100% of the difference in team avg. is the way to go - the team who bowls most over avg or closest to it would win.
--------------------
9~

janderson · « **Reply #28 on:** December 02, 2003, 12:07:21 PM »

The reason why higher average bowlers are given the slight (10% or 20% advantage) is due to the fact that the most you can throw in one game is 300.

Although it is an extreme example, it will demonstrate my point. Consider a 220 average bowler and a 60 average bowler bowling in a tournament where the handicap is 100% of the difference between your average and 220.

If the 60 average bowler bumps a few up against his leg, falls down, slips out of the ball and gets a triple and a couple of lucky spares to squeak out a 141, his score is 141 + 160handicap = 301. The 220 average bowler simply can not win, even if he throws a 300 (300 + 0 handicap = 300). Is that fair to the 220 average bowler who just threw a perfect game? Which is more difficult? A 60 average bowler throwing a 141 or a 220 average bowler throwing a 300? If the handicap system is 90% instead of 100%, now the 60 average bowler gets 141 + 144 = 285 and the 220 average bowler still gets 300. (As a side note, a 240 average bowler gets the same thing as the 220 average bowler in both scenarios). In essense, the 220 average bowler is given a true 16 pin handicap to make up for the all-too-common scenario of the 60 average bowler getting "lucky". Remember, lower averaged bowlers are less consistent, so their scores overall will be spread over a greater range of scores.

The 10% or 20% advantage given to the higher averaged bowler is a sort of recompense for the fact that they are limited in how many pins above average they can be.
--------------------
Questions? Drop me a line: haestas-(at)-yahoo.com

LuckyLefty · « **Reply #29 on:** December 02, 2003, 04:23:39 PM »

Handicap by definition is helping, socialist, or communist! It helps the less skilled.

Scratch is capitilist, the best man wins pure and simple.

Now that that is over, I thought the discussion above was purely about how to properly implement a "fair" handicap system.

I bowled in a bunch of tournaments where handicap was 90% of 230 with a cap of 65 for men and I think 70 for woman.

That worked pretty well except for sandbaggers.
If you won you lost pins!

Sort of on the concept of talked about above where one sets the standard to the highest average bowler in the house, this was close.

It seemed many weeks handicap finals had a good mix of scratch (guys who made BOTH finals) and pure handicap bowlers. Probably a good result when that happens. Capitalism, socialism and communism basically coexisting in the bowling world.

REgards,

Luckylefty

JOE FALCO · « **Reply #30 on:** December 02, 2003, 06:08:52 PM »

Someone mentioned it earlier (don't want to take the time to look up exactly who it was) the most fair way to handicap is on a TEAM TOTAL basis. Add the averages of both teams .. the team with the lowest total gets a handicap. This method eliminates a problem with HIGHER THEN CUT-OFF AVERAGES. The percentage used to calculate the handicap should be based on the ABC suggestion that was also mentioned earlier.

TEAM A total averages = 720
team B total averages = 780
difference is 60 pins .. at 100% this would be the Handicap for team A
54 pins .. at 90% this would be the handicap for team A

Under 90% it no longer is a Handicap in my mind .. I won't argue the point but refer to the comments suggested by ABC and direct your arguments to THEM!
--------------------
Hit them light and watch them fight
J O E - F A L C O

Author Topic: 80% or 220 handicap , why? (Read 16666 times)

trash heap

80% or 220 handicap , why?

MI 2 AZ

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

Ishmael

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

ClutchClay

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

LuckyLefty

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

ClutchClay

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

DrillLord

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

SrKegler

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

johns811

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

9andaWiggle

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

LuvThatWhiteDot

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

ClutchClay

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

9andaWiggle

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

janderson

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

LuckyLefty

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?

JOE FALCO

Re: 80% or 220 handicap , why?