We've been having internal debates on our local board about hall of fame inductees.  We are getting some younger bowlers on the board now, but there are a lot of 60+ guys and a lot of under 40 guys, not many in the middle.  What really is a sticking point here is several of the recent inductees over the last couple years.  There have been a lot of "buddy system" picks, or guys that have been put in just because they're good friends with somebody on the board or bowled with them a long time.  I don't think that simply bowling for a certain number of years merits being put in a hall of fame.  However, I also don't think that a young phenom that pops in a bunch of honor scores over a decade or so deserves to be put in yet either. 

We do have several guys in their mid to late 30s that are very deserving though.  Guys with city championships, state championships, bowler of the year awards, though most of them haven't been involved behind the scenes, either in a center/pro shop, on the board, etc.  The older guys hedge because they don't think those guys have "paid their dues," but then the guys they've put in recently haven't done much more than bowl for a few decades.  Guys with an honor score or two, high finishes in city or state tournaments, and just being on the list a few times for bowler of the year.  There was one guy a couple years ago that's really done absolutely nothing.  One 300, never in the running for bowler of the year, city top ten, city or state tournament, but he's shown up and drank coffee on Saturday mornings for the last 10 years in between telling kids here and there to keep their arms straight and discouraging the ones graduating into adult leagues from jumping into the competitive scratch leagues. 

I also don't think you can have a certain set of requirements, or at least you shouldn't hold everyone to them.  We did have a sports writer that hasn't bowled in 30 years but has followed city bowling and has written about it in the city paper for the last 35 on his own time (paper has given him space but hasn't paid him for it).  He absolutely deserved it, but had absolutely no actual bowling credentials.  Going back to a lot of these "younger" bowlers, they are also MY peers, and I don't want to do the same thing as these older guys are doing and just try to put in MY buddies.  I don't think I would do that, but I'd wager to guess the older guys don't think they're doing that either.  I also DO think you need a certain amount of time invested.  If somebody goes completely HAM between the ages of 20 and 30 then has a couple kids and quits, I don't think that is enough, but at the same time, if that person bowled for another decade, even if they didn't win a thing or put up another single honor score, I feel they would be deserving or at least more deserving then. 

I weigh service heavier than accomplishment.  If you're just going in for accomplishments on the lanes, I think you need a lot more for a lot longer time than if you are active in the community, on the board, in the business, etc.  Those people sacrifice a lot of time that could have been spent improving their own game and advancing their own skills and success.  Let me give you a few examples of people I would like to put in our hall, because I want to make sure I'm being objective here. 

Bowler 1:
Age: 38
300 games: 10
800 series: 8 (high of 856)
Career average: 225 (appx)

Pro shop operator for nearly a decade, worked at a local center in his younger years.  Has a doubles title at the Greater Ozarks Open, is a member of a state championship team that set and still holds a scoring record, shot 300 at this year's state tournament, has multiple top ten finishes in team at state, has a city team championship (maybe more), too many cashes in all other events in city and state tournaments to count, and has been in several city top ten tournaments and is always in the running for bowler of the year.

Bowler 2:
Age: 35
300 games: 40
800 series: 38 (high of 853)
Career average: 230-235

Head mechanic at local center for about 6 or 7 years, worked at the center for over a decade.  6 time bowler of the year.  Multiple top ten championships, city tournament wins in ever event, state tournament wins, lots of local sweeper/tournament wins.  Honor scores in SEVERAL different houses, including a sport 300 and 800. 

Bowler 3 shares a similar stat line to the previous bowler, though not quite as impressive.  Would it be fair for these guys to be put in the hall of fame?  I would say obviously yes, but again, want to make sure I'm not biased. 

Dear Gizmo823:

It would certainly seem that Bowler No. 1 and Bowler No. 2 would have sufficient local Hall of Fame credentials, but such qualifications wouldn't likely be enough in my area ... UNLESS they also fit into the "good-old-boy" clique that comprises the Hall membership.

Dear Gizmo823:

Have you ever heard of such bowlers as Gil Sliker, Steve Neff, (former PBA Tour director) Ted Thompson or (1981 Masters finalist) Skip Tucker?

Apparently, none of them are good enough to make our Hall of Fame, either, despite longtime ties (and service) to this area.

You're not alone.  Same issues here in that some seemingly deserving folks are left out while a few long-time league bowlers got in recently.  I've been in the city less than 20 years, but some of these guys were just middle of the pack in scratch leagues that I saw. 

I think it would be nice to see the HoF credentials for all to see and aspire to.  I want people to say "WOW" when the see what a HoF has done.

Our committee had the brilliant idea to only show credentials to those voting one year without any names attached.  These credentials basically being how many honor scores shot.  Didn't even reference when the honor scores were shot, so recent numbers were just as important and those pre-1990 scores.  Duh, the whole place would stop to watch someone go for 300 back in 1972.  Not that I'd personally know, but I've heard many stories from the old farts.

CPA, I'm going to take your requirements to a board member as a starting point for discussion.