Just another thought here. I had read or heard many times that what the sport needed for it to grow was a "superstar". Someone who was on the TV show more often than not.
Well, they have it. It's Jason Belmonte, and his unique style is growing the sport from what I hear. Youth bowlers are experimenting with the 2 handed approach/release.
But what I also am hearing is that tour players are dropping off because of Jason.
I heard Randy Peterson state on TV that he didn't bother entering a tournament because Jason entered. He said he knew he couldn't beat Jason so he saved his entry fee.
Before Jason began dominating the tour; on any given weekend the top 20 bowlers on tour could make the show. No matter the pattern, you would see 2 to 3 of the top 20 each week along with usually someone new who got hot that week and matched up to the pattern.
There were lots of stars, but no superstar. In my opinion, for a while, they hoped that Chris Barnes would develop into one but it never quite happened where he would dominate like Jason is now.
It is ironic that you have pros skipping tournaments when Belmonte bowls. Same logic the 200-210 average bowler uses to skip scratch tournaments against the 230-240 scratch guys. They just aren't good enough vs. Jason.
So which is better for growing the sport? Having 1 "superstar" Belmonte dominate with his unique style, inspiring bowlers to learn and mimic his style so that they can hopefully dominate like he does. Or having 20 "stars" that are all fairly evenly matched talent wise, and whoever has the best matchup that week makes the show?
