http://www.bowl.com/bowl/wibc/common/news/record.html?record=6938
--------------------
I start each day with yoga and meditation. I put my right foot under my left thigh. I put my left foot under my right thigh. I arch my back as much as I can, and then I begin my mantra: Ouch, oh, that hurts.

It seems to me if Dalkin is so all fired hot to dissolve ABC he should start the ball rolling by resigning.  Better yet, the BoD should fire him or reseign themselves.  Don't see how you can effectively lead an organization you think should no longer exist.  This whole SMO episode has done nothing but harm bowling and it appears to me that the powers to be at ABC and WIBC are going to stay after this thing till they get it through somehow.  You may be interested to know that bowl.com shut off the debate by closing down their discussion board on the subject.  They are showing a new thread on the board this am but you can't log in to post.  Every bowler who is sanctioned ought to get involved in this subject and let the powers that be in Greendale know what the members want rather than leaving the decisions to a small group of people.

We had a couple of topics opened up on this subject (SBO) earlier before and right after the votes by ABC and WIBC.  I havent checked in the last two days, but there was a thread going on this very subject on alt.sport.bowling if you read newsgroups.

I agree.  I think there should be one body.  There may be problems at first with conversions of juniors to adult status and other problems but that will get all worked out.   As for the gender problem, I just don't understand.  Most men and women bowl together in the same leagues!  Why can't they work together for the sport.  I have been an ABC member for 24 years and an AJBC member for 10 years before that.  What is there that is so magical keeping the sanctioning bodies apart?  I haven't seen it yet.

Smash49
--------------------
Smash49
robert@bowlersslidesock.com
www.bowlersslidesock.com

Having one sanctioning body will always make perfect sense and someday it will happen. If we don't vote it in, they will just do it without our approval or at least that is how it seems.

The main reason the current did not get approved is based on two main ideas and neither are gender related. 1) The delegates demand to retain the power do set dues. and 2) The delegates will not give up the power to approve constitutional issues. This is why the Dallas board voted NO and why all of the others I know voted NO. If the national board of 25 had the power to control the constitition, then they could at any time eliminate all delegate power and set all the rules and regulations without input from anyone outside Greendale. Now that is a frightening thought.

In not one single meeting did I ever here a board member say they would vote against this because of the Women. It will be a difficult transition in many areas, but since the men do %90 of the work in our area, we will actually end up with more help and volunteers. It seems that the womens local board has it in there constitition that they can not go to a league or meet with any league officials unless asked or invited to do so. They are strictly reactive to requests, do not offer help or become proactive in anyway. So, since we are proactive we would actually gain help and this would be another positive for our area.

As with anything you get those that follow the  pack and don't bother to even try to learn what is going on, then there are those that it is a personal issue and has nothing to do with reality, and then there are those that really care. Of coarse some of the ones that care at some point in time have moved to one of the other sides of the fence and never really meant to. I was a delegate in Billings and heard a lot of arguments. I attended, as did about half or more of our local board, the whistle stop and personally voiced my support of the single association concept. Now the question??? Do the delegates know enough to make a solid, intelligent decision for the best of bowling. In general....I would say yes. Not always and in the majority of cases they vote along the recommended guidelines. However, on several occasions in recent years the delegates have said no to critical issues and it was a general opinion that the last dues increase would have failed a ballot vote. What was my final vote in the local board meeting, well NO. Not because I do not believe in the USBC, but felt that 25 people that live in one small area of the country can not make an intelligent decision either and I sure don't want those guys deciding how much my annual dues would be. While I would have no problem paying for example $25 a year, I know many of my bowlers would just walk away or join a non-sanctioned league and there would probably be alot more of those around if dues got too high. If "they" want this to pass it is as easy as just leaving everything alone for now and changing the rule book to follow the more stringent rule and the rules apply equally for all members. One set of awards, one set of rules, one local, one state, one national and the would easily pass with one try. Once in operation and all bodies united, then propose rule and consitition changes to streamline the process's and try to get things on track. One step at a time or they will continue to do more damage than good.

The amazing thing Lefty is the powers in Greendale for some reason are not willing to do what you and others have described. All current organizations would have no problem getting a basic combine under one and move on proposal to pass. However, the current powers want more control or they are unwilling to move ahead. That alone smells fishy. They know how to get all of this approved, but are not willing to do it. They do not want to have to ask the delegates for approval for tiered memberships, increases, group memberships, staggered membership or all of the other items that have failed in recent years that "they" wanted. They want to come up with an idea and say as of September or tommorow this is how it will be done or how much it will cost. I think in some of the original tiered discussions that full top level membership was to cost somewhere aroung $50 per year. Try and get Joe from the local bowl, who only bowls one night a week and maybe the association tournament to donate that much. It is hard enough to get the $16 out of some of these guys.