BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: ccrider on August 15, 2012, 12:47:59 PM
-
I bowled on a "modified" U.S. Open Pattern last week. The ratio outside was actually 2 to 1. It did not matter because the volume of oil was so high until it was impossible to play outside of 10. The shot was punishing. I bowled 11 games. High game 209, low game 129. The shot was much tougher than the USBC Open shot in Louisiana.
Everything mattered. Ball speed, release, target--- miss any one and you had no chance of striking.
The 209 game (5th game) I did have the front five. Five perfect shots. But that's about all I can say I did good for 11 games. The rest was a lesson.
All that said, it is clear to me that are bowling scores in league bear little to no relationship to are ability to repeat shots. By manipulating the lane conditions, one can score at will, while in the house next door with a more difficult shot, the scores are lower but odds are the bowlers will be better in the long run.
There should be some way of addressing this inequity. I wish I had the opportunity to practice regularly on a tough shot where you get true feedback about how you throw the ball. I talked the the manager of the center and he told me that he had put the shot out on two lanes for several weeks. Several of the 220+ bowlers struggled to break a 200 game, and some bowled double digit games. That was some consolation, but not much. You really do not know how inconsistent you throw it until you get on a shot with flat, or almost flat oil.
CC
-
CC,
I totally agree. You should look up my post "Sport" bowling should die. I addressed that all in that, and there was like 13 pages of back and forth.
I think it's awesome for bowling. Make it all tough. I bowled an ABT tournament this weekend, and they put out winding road, which isn't too tough, but I bowled the 3rd squad where there was no reoiling. I could tell that people were BURNING a hole between 10 and 15. There was either up 5, or swinging 23 to 12 at the breakpoint. Not much forgiveness, and it was awesome.
Lesson I learned? Next ABT tournament, bowl before the people shimwreck you lol.
-
Yeah I think if a tournament is going to use your ths league average then it should be a ths pattern. For modified patterns or sport shots they should use a sport shot league average.
-
Well maybe they could use something like Slowinski's International Bowling Skill Score Number.
a method to evaluate a bowler's overall skill level (versatility, accuracy, power, repeatability & knowledge).
http://bowlingknowledge.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=176&Itemid=51 (http://bowlingknowledge.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=176&Itemid=51)
-
League Average is only the average that you have for that particular house on that particular night for that particular league. Its just a comparison on how you measue up to the other bowlers in YOUR league. To compare averages from house to house or even league to league means nothing. Even in the same house, your average can vary from league to league.
Not sure what else tournaments can use for entry average, if its a handicap tournament. A potential truer average might be a composite average of all leagues and not just your highest average.
Sport leagues are a bit different. I bowled in 2 PBA leagues in different houses. Each pattern played different in both houses. Different lane suface, different oil machine and different oil. Some sport leagues play easy and others very hard.
So, I totally agree, that averages are meaningless
-
It's your recreational average and nothing more than that. Those who want to bowl recreation can have their recreational average and that is fine.
The more people like yourself who want the challenge and take the challenge the better.
Most people would quit and go back to being high on the recreational pecking order.
Keep working hard on your game and accept the challenge.
-
I wouldn't go so far as saying averages are "meaningless". In almost all cases, a 230 THS bowler is going to out perform a 200 THS bowler, regardless of house or condition. That goes for PBA/Sport patterns as well.
There's no question the flatter patterns will expose weaknesses, regardless of THS ability. Anyone who has an opportunity to bowl a sport shot league during the summers is a fool not to take advantage.
-
I wouldn't go so far as saying averages are "meaningless". In almost all cases, a 230 THS bowler is going to out perform a 200 THS bowler, regardless of house or condition. That goes for PBA/Sport patterns as well.
There's no question the flatter patterns will expose weaknesses, regardless of THS ability. Anyone who has an opportunity to bowl a sport shot league during the summers is a fool not to take advantage.
Very good point. The THS average may be well inflated but it does show how well a bowler can repeat shots to an "area" and more than that carry.
-
Playing Devil's advocate here... What if I averaged 200 in a brickhouse, known for a rough THS, and went to a cake house and averaged 230? Am I the better bowler because I killed the easy house shot, or because I have to be much better with my execution and moves on the brickhouse shot?
-
With the replies from Steven and Cornerpin, I just had a thought on how USBC could come up with rating that did have meaning.
Why not use the information reported to USBC by the leagues AND tournaments to create a rating number for a bowler instead of using the average?
There would need some fine tuning of course, but a quick basis could work like this;
Rank the bowler as 1-100 based on the overall house average/overall league average. So if the bowler had the top average in a given house/league, then they would get a 100. The ratings could be then be averaged across all houses/leagues to get the bowlers overall rating. There could be some checks and balances put in place to remove the anomalies that tend to pop up and to help prevent the inevitable sandbagger who knows how to work the system.
Of course this system would not be perfect, but it would level out some of the differences between bowlers from high scoring houses and low scoring houses.
-
Playing Devil's advocate here... What if I averaged 200 in a brickhouse, known for a rough THS, and went to a cake house and averaged 230? Am I the better bowler because I killed the easy house shot, or because I have to be much better with my execution and moves on the brickhouse shot?
Doom, there are exceptions to what's generally true for almost everything.
The strawman you just outlined has been put out many times in the past. I've been bowling on and off for most of my life, and I can't say I've ever seen the rags to riches (brickhouse to cake) scenario you just presented. Not saying the scenario doesn't exist, but I think it's rare at best.
Here is concrete example. I was in a 6-game Kegel sport shot tournament this last weekend. There were about 40 bowlers who ran the whole spectrum of background -- PBA Regional guys, cake 230 THS guys, 200 brickhouse guys, etc. I could have predicted the relative results ahead of time, and at the end there were no surprises. The 200 average guys, regardless of where they came from, were in the bottom tier.
I've seen this over and over. That's why I responded to this thread.
-
With the replies from Steven and Cornerpin, I just had a thought on how USBC could come up with rating that did have meaning.
Why not use the information reported to USBC by the leagues AND tournaments to create a rating number for a bowler instead of using the average?
There would need some fine tuning of course, but a quick basis could work like this;
Rank the bowler as 1-100 based on the overall house average/overall league average. So if the bowler had the top average in a given house/league, then they would get a 100. The ratings could be then be averaged across all houses/leagues to get the bowlers overall rating. There could be some checks and balances put in place to remove the anomalies that tend to pop up and to help prevent the inevitable sandbagger who knows how to work the system.
Of course this system would not be perfect, but it would level out some of the differences between bowlers from high scoring houses and low scoring houses.
A start maybe, but it would not account for houses that have more than one lane pattern for leagues. A house that uses two different patterns for different leagues (mens vs mixed) or houses that put out a sport shot for only one league that is not sanctioned as a sport league but just as a regular USBC league.
-
A start maybe, but it would not account for houses that have more than one lane pattern for leagues. A house that uses two different patterns for different leagues (mens vs mixed) or houses that put out a sport shot for only one league that is not sanctioned as a sport league but just as a regular USBC league.
True, that's why it could be calculated based on their league instead of the entire house when a house has multiple patterns used. The house would have to let USBC know if that is the case of course.
My point being that the bowler would be rated against other bowlers on the same conditions over the course of a season or tournament series. The better bowlers will show up at the top of the rankings.
-
I think it would be pretty impossible to come up with a rating system.
Without a lot of knowledge of the pattern and general strength of the bowlers.
I bowled in a classic 5 person traveling scratch league for several years before the league folded. This league consisted of a several PBA National and Regional players as well as a good number of current/former Wichita State and Kansas Newman collegiate players.
We bowled second shift at all the houses we rotated thru. I can't tell you the number of times we would come in and some of the better league bowlers in front of us would tell us how tough they were that night.
The net result was most nights this league would produce several honor scores and the league average would be 210+ for the night.
In the past I have bowled in several houses that simply didn't allow good scoring. But virtually all of those houses have closed over the years and with synthetic lanes and modern lane machines most houses have a playable area somewhere.
Some of the houses in the Wichita area have a little better carry than others but all give you a pretty easy opportunity to get to the pocket.
And yes averages are pretty meaningless unless there was a pattern rating with them.
-
Are honor scores meaningless?
-
Again, you would not compare averages against other bowling alleys. Or in the case of a second shift league or a travel league would you compare against the entire house, just the people on that league.
You would be ranking bowlers facing the same conditions. So if the entire house had the same patterns, then their rank would be based on how they did against the other bowlers in that house. A travel league would be based on how the bowler did against the members of the travel league. Same for sport leagues and second shift leagues.
The fact is, given the same conditions, the better bowler will rise to the top over time. The lesser skilled bowler would not average as high down to the least skilled.
I think it would be pretty impossible to come up with a rating system.
Without a lot of knowledge of the pattern and general strength of the bowlers.
I bowled in a classic 5 person traveling scratch league for several years before the league folded. This league consisted of a several PBA National and Regional players as well as a good number of current/former Wichita State and Kansas Newman collegiate players.
We bowled second shift at all the houses we rotated thru. I can't tell you the number of times we would come in and some of the better league bowlers in front of us would tell us how tough they were that night.
The net result was most nights this league would produce several honor scores and the league average would be 210+ for the night.
In the past I have bowled in several houses that simply didn't allow good scoring. But virtually all of those houses have closed over the years and with synthetic lanes and modern lane machines most houses have a playable area somewhere.
Some of the houses in the Wichita area have a little better carry than others but all give you a pretty easy opportunity to get to the pocket.
And yes averages are pretty meaningless unless there was a pattern rating with them.
-
The hitch to ranking bowlers in this way is, Joe Schmoe who only bowls one league, avg 210+ while rest of the league is in 170's or below. His ranking or rating would be tops but with no other leagues he would be subjected to the highest tier of bowlers.
-
That is very true, but Joe Schmoe with a 210+ average will be ranked with the higher level bowlers anyway.
But why would Joe have an average so much higher than the rest of that league? Is Joe that much better on a difficult pattern? (which would make the this rating system correct)
Or does Joe like being a big fish in a little pond of less skilled bowlers? If it's the latter, maybe this ranking system would encourage Joe to find a pond that makes him more equal if he wants to bowl tournaments. However, having seen guys like this, they don't usually bowl tournaments anyway as they know the real story about their skills.
The hitch to ranking bowlers in this way is, Joe Schmoe who only bowls one league, avg 210+ while rest of the league is in 170's or below. His ranking or rating would be tops but with no other leagues he would be subjected to the highest tier of bowlers.
-
Milo,
Agreed. Unless you are just bowling in a league with the wife and still having fun, I could see how that would mess someone up, maybe. But it may be time to strap on your big girl panties and see how you really measure up. Telling someone "Yeah, I average 270" would stop. (Oh yeah, I've heard that more times than I can count.)
-
Are honor scores meaningless?
Yes, if you are comparing from one house or shot to the next.
I have a different perspective about approaching a sport than many. I know I will never be the best. But I certainly would like to know how I compare to the best, and if I am making progress towards getting better. I want to master the game, and maximize my skill level. I do not think that the various THS allows the opportunity to fine tune your skills to the point of being your best.
And you can not replicate the intensity needed to strike on a 2 to 1 ratio shot, on a consistent basis while bowling on a THS with free hook to the outside, and hold in the center of the lane.
So what, you shot an honor score or a three hundred on the wall of China. That tells me nothing about how good a bowler you are, compared to the guys that can split boards, alter their hand position to obtain desired reactions, and read the lanes properly and make proper adjustments.
-
Excellent post CC!
-
CC,
That's how I feel. I was bowling a Kegel league this summer with 2 fellow BR members (You know who you are), and we led the thing wire to wire. As the anchor, I felt the pressure to perform. All we had to do was win 1 game out of 4. Lost the first 2. Pulled my head out of my bum, changed balls, moved, and rattled off a 220 something to win. Boy, I haven't felt that much good pressure since I used to bowl pot games all the time. I started running them out, and getting really vocal. It felt good to perform!
The house shot... it feels like it's a given already. Meh, I say.
-
I do not think that the various THS allows the opportunity to fine tune your skills to the point of being your best.
And you can not replicate the intensity needed to strike on a 2 to 1 ratio shot, on a consistent basis while bowling on a THS with free hook to the outside, and hold in the center of the lane.
I don't disagree with you. Usually you state anything about honor scores on an easy shot, some people tend to get a little upset on this site.
-
Ahem.
See my "Sport" bowling must die post. Oh wait... you did. :)
I do not think that the various THS allows the opportunity to fine tune your skills to the point of being your best.
And you can not replicate the intensity needed to strike on a 2 to 1 ratio shot, on a consistent basis while bowling on a THS with free hook to the outside, and hold in the center of the lane.
I don't disagree with you. Usually you state anything about honor scores on an easy shot, some people tend to get a little upset on this site.
-
No, don't go there again... LMAO!!
Ahem.
See my "Sport" bowling must die post. Oh wait... you did. :)
I do not think that the various THS allows the opportunity to fine tune your skills to the point of being your best.
And you can not replicate the intensity needed to strike on a 2 to 1 ratio shot, on a consistent basis while bowling on a THS with free hook to the outside, and hold in the center of the lane.
I don't disagree with you. Usually you state anything about honor scores on an easy shot, some people tend to get a little upset on this site.
-
I have honor scores in both type of leagues. I refuse to denigrate somebody's honor score no matter what they shot it on. To some bowlers, THS is a tough shot. To others, not so tough. I know which one I value more and that's all that matters. The funny thing is, I had way more fun bowling the honor score on the THS shot and how everybody reacted vs. the almost business-like atmosphere of the tougher shot league where everybody has an honor score or two. The fun is rapidly leaving the sport with people concerned over stuff like this thread is about.
-
If you want to see how in consistent you really are in any house on any condition, get a plastic ball and start using it as your only ball. Do it in league, practice, or when ever you choose. It will give you a very fast and accurate read on how consistently you are able to do something.
Averages are averages. If you average over 215 it is all the same no matter what that you will not be getting any handicap. So even a house hack at 235 bowling in a jewelry box house will probably not fair as well when he goes to bowl tournaments else where. His disadvantage, not yours.
-
So what, you shot an honor score or a three hundred on the wall of China. That tells me nothing about how good a bowler you are, compared to the guys that can split boards, alter their hand position to obtain desired reactions, and read the lanes properly and make proper adjustments.
CC, I get concerned when read comments like this. The vast majority of bowlers will never experience the joy of shooting a 300, even given the benefits of the great wall of China. There have been threads started here on BR for those who have never shot a 300, and the posts went on for pages. You have to give kudos to the honesty.
I have many bowling warts (which Milo can attest to ;) ), but I do have sanctioned 300s on all sides of the fence -- THS cake, PBA Experience, and Kegel Challenge. I respect any 300 thrown regardless of condition, and will stay and cheer on anyone approaching the feat.
The only way you'll truly know "how good" you are is to bowl events like Nationals and your State Tournaments where large numbers of people bowl at the same location and see the same sport conditions. It's the only true test I know where you can compare your scores against thousands of others. There are too many variables at the THS level to get a good apples-to-apples comparison.
Focus on your own game, bowl as many events as you can outside you home house, and you'll get a feel for where you stand in the bowling world.
-
Averages and honor scores are not meaningless to me. They are relative. You have to compare your scores and average to what everyone else is bowling on with that same condition. And even then there are some considerations.
The THS is a good example. Because the margin of error is greater, average bowlers have better odds to do better. Great bowlers have opportunities, too, but the higher you average, the harder it is to get your average. (Or the better you are the less room you have to improve. You know what I mean.)
On the nationals shot the cream tends to rise to the top. Because the margin of error is much much less, average bowlers tend to struggle. Great bowlers can and will struggle, too. But their shot making and abilities to adjust will help them score better than the average bowler.
It's no different in golf. A pro golfer can shoot really low scores on your public coarse, shoot below par on the average tour stop and if they are great, average par on a major stop. It's all relative!!
-
Any statement can be taken out of context. If any of my analysis is faulty, please point it out. I think my assessments are accurate.
My concern is not about what any particular person's scores are. It is more about the distortion that exist due to intentional manipulation of the game to make it easier.
Add to that, the fact that we are not playing the same game that the pros are playing.
For those of you that have read and follow what I am saying, I appreciate the fact that you understand or share in my frustration. For those of you who are somehow offended, all I can say is --- read what I have said, slower, and give it a chance to sink in, rather than taking it as some personal onslaught.
-
I get the epiphany that comes from bowling PBA/Sport conditions. Most bowlers who give it a try walk away with a healthy respect for everything that matters.
The major beef I have is your assertion that bowling scores in league bear little to no relationship to the ability to repeat shots.
Spare making is spare making regardless of condition. Use plastic for most all of your conversions, and you'll know how accurate you really are.
On strike shots, it depends. If your style depends on bouncing off the right side wet/dry bumper, you have a point. On the other hand, if you're focusing on getting to a consistent breakpoint and repeating shots, you'll know when you screw up. It's not rocket science.
You'll never completely bridge the inequity between the two conditions, but it doesn't mean you can't find value on the THS. Like most things, it depends on what you put into it.
-
Stephen,
First, I agree with your assessment regarding making spares with plastic.
When I use the term meaningless, I am referring to the fact that THS scores or averages are not accurate indicators of one's ability to repeat shots in terms of ball speed, rev rate and accuracy. The free hook and hold allow you to miss your mark, throw it faster, and grab it at the bottom while still making it to the pocket.
On the 2 to 1 ratio shot, any one of the above errors and you were not going to strike. Combine two of them and you were assured a bad result.
I agree that you get some feedback from a THS. However, the focus necessary to bowl on the flat shot is much more intense and difficult to continuously replicate on a THS, if for no other reason, but for the negative result you get when you throw it ok, but not great. The "ok" shot is a strike on a THS. On a flat shot, its a 9 count, or worse, with only the occasional lucky strike.
Are regular bowlers so bad until it is necessary to skew the lanes to keep us in the sport? Or is bowling really not a sport and I am trying to make it something that it is not.
-
Are regular bowlers so bad until it is necessary to skew the lanes to keep us in the sport? Or is bowling really not a sport and I am trying to make it something that it is not.
Lane conditions are controlled by owners/proprietors. They put out walled conditions to cater to lower level recreational bowlers who pay top lane $$ rates. The more they strike, the more likely they'll come back for more. It's simple economics.
There are only a small percentage of us that look at bowling as a sport. For us, we have to make the most of THS's we see most of the time, and jump at opportunities to bowl sport/PBA when it's available. Don't look at this as some sinister plot. Accept the THS for what it is, and support sport tournaments when available. It's the only way to advance the situation we have.
-
Most golfers would not want to play a US open course from the tips.
Bowlers are the same, most do not want beat their heads against a wall.
Technically a 1:1 ratio would be the truest test but because of the way lane conditioner moves it would make it near impossible for everyone.
I feel we have gone too far to the stupid easy side of the scale, particularly with the carry percentage of modern balls, I don't think we want to swing to major championship conditions for all leagues.
But again averages are simply a measuring stick of bowlers on a particular condition.
Certain conditions will favor certain styles and abilities.
Until you bowl on a numerous conditions for multiple games it is hard to pick out the most versatile players.
-
Bravo! Very good response.
Most golfers would not want to play a US open course from the tips.
Bowlers are the same, most do not want beat their heads against a wall.
Technically a 1:1 ratio would be the truest test but because of the way lane conditioner moves it would make it near impossible for everyone.
I feel we have gone too far to the stupid easy side of the scale, particularly with the carry percentage of modern balls, I don't think we want to swing to major championship conditions for all leagues.
But again averages are simply a measuring stick of bowlers on a particular condition.
Certain conditions will favor certain styles and abilities.
Until you bowl on a numerous conditions for multiple games it is hard to pick out the most versatile players.
-
honestly when I golf..... I like playing from the Tips... especially on tough courses.. why?? because you get a good understanding of how good or bad you really are vs the Pro's....
it's just like the red-white-blue patterns... if the Blue Pattern is considered the Tips.. and you are still bowling well, then kudo's to yourself...
Same with golf.. if you are still playing well from the Tip's, then bravo.... Imagine how much easier it would be golfing from the " red / league " tee area vs the " blue / pro "
As with bowling... I like bowling on tougher patterns.. why?? because I know if i am still bowling well, i am doing something right.....If i am sucking the big donkey that day, then i know i need to work on stuff...
-
But yes..... jmo Averages do not mean a damn thing anymore..... I see more guys who average 210+ all day in their local league.... But they go else where and they are lost...
And as one other guy asked about honor scores... If they are meaning less.... yes I do believe unless you are bowling on a Challenge pattern or harder, they do not mean anything..
I see / hear about too many bowling alley's that just pump out 300's like it's their job.....
-
I didn't really read the rest of the thread, but a couple of points are worth making. First, it is not about repeating shots. Guys who score well on house patterns generally repeat shots quite well. What kills them on flat patterns is their style. Either too much side roll and revs, or they do nothing to the ball and dump it into the dry.
As for praticing on sport patterns, what that will do is make you a much better bowler on sport patterns. The best style in terms of versatility for sport patterns is often not optimal for carry on a high scoring house pattern.
As a 64 year old stroker I can still average 220-230 on a house shot, but that puts me about 10 pins behind the high average. However, I can usually average around 210 on a variety of tournament patterns. Sometimes I get out averaged there too, but it isn't by the guy who got me by 10 on the house shot. House shots aren't any easier than sport shots in terms of execution. They just reward different skill sets in terms of release.
In one respect the game hasn't changed in 50 years that I have bowled. There have always been trade offs between versatility and power ( except for the short oil period of the 80's )
-
Bob,
I can see where you're coming from. Good fundamentals are good fundamentals. Problem is, on a easy THS, it's easy to get away from those. Tougher shots make you look at your fundamentals. The minute stuff, not the larger stuff. Hand position changes, index and pinky finger placements, moving your eyes up and down the lane vs side to side. Things like that make a better bowler, IMO.
Score does not a bowler make.
-
Avabob,
No doubt, you are a solid bowler. How many bowlers have you seen that avg 210+ on various sport shots, that can't break 170 on a house shot?
On the flip side, how many THS bowlers average over 210 on the wall, but can't break 170 on a sport shot?
The first scenario, I have yet to see. The second scenario I see every tournament that puts out a true sport shot.
There are two different skillsets involved. The sport bowler having more refined skills, the THS bowler knowing how to score in his house on that particular shot so that he wins the carry contest.
-
There are two different skillsets involved. The sport bowler having more refined skills, the THS bowler knowing how to score in his house on that particular shot so that he wins the carry contest.
I think it introduces confusion to suggest it's one or the other. You can be both, even though most of your time is spent on cake THS.
Averages have meaning in that in most cases, you don't have a chance of scoring respectfully on sport shots if you can't average 220-230 on cake. The 220-230 THS bowler has some applicable skills, even if this fact is rejected by some.
In my case, I've been a 225-230 house hack for years. In fact, my main house is the butt joke of the local area for being 'easier' than most. So according to your logic, I should be wallowing in the 170 range on sport shots.
Well, I'm about to finish third overall with a 213 average in a summer Kegel Challenge league. The skills I used were developed on regular THS conditions. Once you understand the skills required to be somewhat successful on flatter patterns, you can practice on the THS playing inside the oil line and thinking your breakpoint vertically instead of horizontally. It's not rocket science to know when you've executed successfully and when you haven't.
If the point of this thread is to point out that most THS bowlers have difficulty making the transition, mission accomplished. But it's not absolute and doesn't have to be.
-
Stephen,
You state "So according to your logic, I should be wallowing in the 170 range on sport shots." Please read my statement much slower. I posed two different hypothetical situations and then asked which the reader had seen in the past.
Sure, there are good THS bowlers, like Bob, that are good sport shot bowlers. You miss the whole point.
Simply stated, the fact that you have a 230 average or that you threw an honor score on a wallllllleeeed up shot does not mean you are a good bowler, nor is it an accurate indicator about how you bowl, compared to the person in the next house over, or professional bowlers.
-
Simply stated, the fact that you have a 230 average or that you threw an honor score on a wallllllleeeed up shot does not mean you are a good bowler, nor is it an accurate indicator about how you bowl, compared to the person in the next house over, or professional bowlers.
And you missed my point. If you're a 230 average bowler, there is the chance you are also a good (or decent) sport shot bowler. If you are a 200 average house hack, I can almost guarantee you don't have the fundamentals for sport level success. So averages do give us some insights, even if it isn't perfect.
The bottom line is that there is no way to tell absolute skill level based on all the variances we see in different houses. But there are hints if you're willing to look at them.
-
Modern-day averages are indeed meaningless. You can have ...
* A talented bowler rolling on an easy condition
* A talented bowler rolling on a tough(er) condition
* A not-so-talented bowler rolling big scores on an easy condition
* A not-so-talented bowler struggling on a tough(er) condition
And when you throw sandbagging into the mix -- not to mention "renegade" leagues that put out the equivalent of a Sport shot but certify as a regular USBC league -- how can there be any legitimacy (or value) to a modern-day average?
-
There are too many variables to say that avgs dont mean anything. I think that we are looking at one end of the spectrum; the house hack who avgs 230, who sprays the ball all over the place, inconsistent spare shooter, and has mud feet. However, there are bowlers out there who equal their sport avg to their THS or surpass it. With that said. The major key is spare shooting and shot repetition; i believe that is where you see the difference in skill. That is the design of a sport pattern. THS masks inconsistency and missed spares by giving bowlers the ability to miss spares and recover with a string. Or, spray the ball across the lane and get the ball to recover or hold to the pocket.
With today's game becoming more complex and the balls technology at an all time high, it's easier, i believe, to be inconsistent and score at will on THS. So i do agree there to some degree that in this case, the only way averages matter is with handicap. (I'm not going to get into my belief on handicap, We'd be here all night) Unless you bowl in mulitple leagues and in multiple houses.
As stated above, avgs will matter with correlating THS to Sport Patterns. It shows inconsistency in spare shooting, accuracy, making transitions, and ability to repeat shots. Some guys are good enough to make sport patterns look like THS. Is that a far cry with the strength of balls and the rev rates being higher than ever. We know that some houses are not equipped to layout sport patterns the way they are designed to look to the bowlers, but I think its a bit unfair to criticize a house for putting out a "THS" when you throw a strong asym with a strong layout and 500 rpms. The Scorpion Pattern in one house is going to be different than the same pattern in another house even though they can be the same pattern with the same units. There are many variables that play into that. As far as the bowler, we see it with bowlers on tour. They know what the shot is and make adjustments from the breakdown of the house. They know what to look for so its easier to be consistent and they have ability to repeat shots. Avgs give bowlers who do a multititde of bowling on a variety of patterns, the ability to see strengths and weaknesses in their game and make adjustments.
-
Pretty good points rightycomplex. Not all 230 house averages are created the same. Biggest issue isn't so much poor execution by house hacks as it is that the THS does not force them to make tradeoffs between power and the ability to square up when necessary.