BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: ignitebowling on January 19, 2018, 09:55:55 AM
-
My bowling first started around 1995-96 and many of you have been around bowling for much longer. We are often fed the stories of how great bowling was....wall to wall leagues any day of the week, morning leagues, late leagues, people bowling leagues for as far as the eye could see. That has rapidly declined. Many centers over the years have closed and many with the loudest voices blame it on bowling being too easy. Too many refuse to believe it has anything to do with the changes in society and the larger options in entertainment. Heard a book, Bowling Alone, mentioned on a talk show the other day in reference to the decline in several different social sports and sports in general along with other social groups and organizations in society. After reading a little over the premise of the book it seems pretty on par with what we have seen and many have tried to discuss with the decline in bowling. Not from a being too easy factor, but from a social change.
Why some choose to believe that in the golden era everyone loved bowling because it was hard and consisted of half board adjustments playing on the 3rd or 4th board I do not know, maybe it helps ones ego.Many videos available as far back as the 1940s and 1950s show professional bowlers playing 3rd or 4th arrow regularly...not 3rd or 4th board. Bowling is every bit as fun today as it ever has been. It can be as easy or as hard as one chooses. So despite USBC trying to define bowling as more of a sport to seem legitimate in the world, or all of the older PBA players saying the equipment made the game too easy...that it needs to go back to when...insert ball era here, instead continue enjoying bowling for what you think it is, not what others try to shame you into believing.
Most bowling centers like other businesses have fallen behind on the times. Most centers and leagues operate off of the same business model as they did in the 1950s. Open doors, offer 36 week leagues, and wait for people to sign up to bowl. Try offering anyone you know the chance to come bowl for 36 consecutive weeks and see the look of crazy you get. Bowling is still great. Once you get passed the hype of equipment sales the rest is pretty straight forward. Try and knock down as many pins as possible. interesting to look at if you get a chance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowling_Alone
-
Fact is the internet fundamentally changed human civilization just like writing and printing press did before it. I know it sounds like hyperbole but it will probably be the one thing humans remember most about this era hundreds of years from now (assuming we make it that long). It really was that much of a game changer. It becomes harder to remember what life was like without it even though that was about the first half of my life.
(edit: without it maybe we bowl in our still strong leagues but then I wouldn't be talking to you either and this would be a conversation only among local friends).
-
Think about other entertainment option in the 50s-80s.
What was your tv options? Number of channels? Channels after midnight?
Game systems and options available? Atari, nintendo, computer etc.
Now the internet as you mentioned.
More things for people to do. Interesting with the article is the other social norms people use to take part in that are also suffering.
"Putnam notes the aggregate loss in membership and number of volunteers in many existing civic organizations such as religious groups (Knights of Columbus, B'nai Brith, etc.), labor unions, Parent-Teacher Association, Federation of Women's Clubs, League of Women Voters, military veterans' organizations, volunteers with Boy Scouts and the Red Cross, and fraternal organizations (Lions Clubs, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, United States Junior Chamber, Freemasonry, Rotary, Kiwanis, etc.).[1] To illustrate why the decline in Americans' membership in social organizations is problematic to democracy, Putnam uses bowling as an example. Although the number of people who bowl has increased in the last 20 years, the number of people who bowl in leagues has decreased. If people bowl alone, they do not participate in social interaction and civic discussions that might occur in a league environment.[1]"
"
-
>civic discussions that might occur in a league environment
There are few places I would rather less want to talk about anything civics than a bowling alley. Don't know, I remember a lot from 1980s and even some from 1970s and lived most of that time in small ass towns and it was positively claustrophobic how much people were into your business. There are plenty of down sides to tight knit almost incestuous cliques as well. I swear half the reason I have so much contempt for groups of people and group think (none of us are as dumb as all of us) in general is growing up in those kind of environments.
-
Think about other entertainment option in the 50s-80s.
What was your tv options? Number of channels? Channels after midnight?
Game systems and options available? Atari, nintendo, computer etc.
Now the internet as you mentioned.
More things for people to do. Interesting with the article is the other social norms people use to take part in that are also suffering.
"Putnam notes the aggregate loss in membership and number of volunteers in many existing civic organizations such as religious groups (Knights of Columbus, B'nai Brith, etc.), labor unions, Parent-Teacher Association, Federation of Women's Clubs, League of Women Voters, military veterans' organizations, volunteers with Boy Scouts and the Red Cross, and fraternal organizations (Lions Clubs, Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks, United States Junior Chamber, Freemasonry, Rotary, Kiwanis, etc.).[1] To illustrate why the decline in Americans' membership in social organizations is problematic to democracy, Putnam uses bowling as an example. Although the number of people who bowl has increased in the last 20 years, the number of people who bowl in leagues has decreased. If people bowl alone, they do not participate in social interaction and civic discussions that might occur in a league environment.[1]"
"
A lot of those organizations or groups that you mentioned had leagues in the 60s/70s. I remember at the centers I worked at the K of C and B'nai Brith leagues. Plus, being from Detroit, there were a lot of labor union or factory leagues running at different times of the day or night at other centers that were close to those work locations.
In the mornings we had senior, women's, and school leagues between 9am and 4pm, but never a full house and not every day but enough to justify opening. At night we had double shifts Sun through Fri. Saturday night was just open bowling but we had two shifts of junior leagues during the day.
As you mentioned, there are many more different options of entertainment available now than there was then. Bowling may have been that time period's 'Facebook'. :)
-
Too many refuse to believe it has anything to do with the changes in society and the larger options in entertainment.
I've never understood why this is difficult to grasp/confront. I've also never understood why exactly a pre-conceived bias with regard to this particular topic is incredibly difficult to break through.....very strange. It is the answer that is accurate in reality, but for some reason this answer is not appealing to some old school peeps therefore it is disregarded and then it's back on the parroting of.....
the golden era everyone loved bowling because it was hard and consisted of half board adjustments playing on the 3rd or 4th board
Again, bizarre psychology.
-
I wanted to mention one thing that was going on back then that I do not see happening now, at least at my center - it may be different at yours. Back then, the center I worked at had two people who worked on bowling league promotions in the summer (their regular job in the league season was not needed in the summer, nursery and snack bar). They would call people in the area and promote the leagues, offering free bowling coupons to use in the summer for sign-ups. At the counter we would regularly ask new bowlers or bowlers we were unfamiliar with if they were interested in a fall league and take their info down to present to the league secretaries. I don't see this happening here now.
-
I wanted to mention one thing that was going on back then that I do not see happening now, at least at my center - it may be different at yours. Back then, the center I worked at had two people who worked on bowling league promotions in the summer (their regular job in the league season was not needed in the summer, nursery and snack bar). They would call people in the area and promote the leagues, offering free bowling coupons to use in the summer for sign-ups. At the counter we would regularly ask new bowlers or bowlers we were unfamiliar with if they were interested in a fall league and take their info down to present to the league secretaries. I don't see this happening here now.
I think now centers turned to creating Facebook posts to promote the upcoming leagues and gathering interested parties.
-
Sounds like people are saying this really isn't about bowling after all........but isn't it? Ok society has changed, technology has changed, but bowling still has that "pull" on a person and that "thing" that makes it become addicting and something you not just want to do but need to do. That is why we frequently see the posts on this site about persons that are going through this or that physical limitation or malady and want to still find a way to satisfy their bowling craving---with some actually switching hands just to continue bowling.
Did most people not really enjoy bowling back then and only engage in the activity because there was nothing better to do on a Tuesday night?? Apparently most people who bowled in leagues back then didn't catch the bowling "bug", and when other things came along such as multiplexes/playstation/xbox/aol/comcast etc.... they just moved on...I have trouble believing that THAT is the main catalyst for the drop in league participation.
Brad
-
Sounds like people are saying this really isn't about bowling after all........but isn't it? Ok society has changed, technology has changed, but bowling still has that "pull" on a person and that "thing" that makes it become addicting and something you not just want to do but need to do. That is why we frequently see the posts on this site about persons that are going through this or that physical limitation or malady and want to still find a way to satisfy their bowling craving---with some actually switching hands just to continue bowling.
Did most people not really enjoy bowling back then and only engage in the activity because there was nothing better to do on a Tuesday night?? Apparently most people who bowled in leagues back then didn't catch the bowling "bug", and when other things came along such as multiplexes/playstation/xbox/aol/comcast etc.... they just moved on...I have trouble believing that THAT is the main catalyst for the drop in league participation.
Brad
I agree it's not only whats been stated, but generational changes are a part of it. Bowling is/was a blue collar "thing" that people did. Husbands leaving their factory jobs and go to bowling night for some beers, bullshit with the guys, and break away from work and family life. Now a days we have more work from home/office jobs. Woman are much more involved in the workforce versus 30-40 years ago so maybe scheduling doesn't condone bowling nights.
With that said, times change and bowling needs to adapt. One thing I think should be tested is leagues broken into two 16 week leagues. Commitment to 32-38 week leagues is quite a long time, and some people shy away from it. They might still bowl tournaments, but they don't participate in leagues. I don't know about everyone else's leagues but the two I bowl in, in two different houses have shit payout. Money creates interest. One of our most looked down upon centers by bowlers in my area, as it's very Chuck e Cheese(ish), has a huge Thursday league because of a big prize fund.
-
The book mentions open bowling is larger then ever, but league bowling has declined.
So bowling is still great, fun, and people regularly enjoy going out to bowl….. But 36 week commitments no longer an interest for many. Look at peoples commitment to almost anything these days. Shorter, much shorter.
With so much else to do why bowl league and commit when I can do other things and mix bowling is as I wish.
-
The book mentions open bowling is larger then ever, but league bowling has declined.
So bowling is still great, fun, and people regularly enjoy going out to bowl….. But 36 week commitments no longer an interest for many. Look at peoples commitment to almost anything these days. Shorter, much shorter.
With so much else to do why bowl league and commit when I can do other things and mix bowling is as I wish.
Plus with open bowling don't have to commit to buying equipment either. At least I will give Bowlmor or Brunswick or whoever the hell it is in my area that runs all the lanes having a Sunday just for fun doubles league (two 17 week seasons as well) that gets me league priced open bowling on virtually every lane in the area (AMF, Brunswick, Bowlero) was an easy way to get me back into leagues. Not having to give money to USBC was the cherry on the sundae. Some of us don't want league to get ruined by money and drunk idiots kicking the ball return or unable to move around people with 12 balls (plus don't get a prize fund with $11 a week league with no up front fee lol, but is nice to pay the entire season for both of us at once and not have to fart around with envelope). That is what tournaments are for. Still yeah I can see how money draws people like flies but that is why have multiple leagues I suppose.
-
The bowling boom arose because of two factors. First was the invention of the automatic pinsetter, combined with the emergence of the baby boom generation. Second was a young generation of post war adults looking for recreation options that were in short supply. The bowling industry was able to channel this population into organized league bowling. Great for short term, but not a sustainable model over the long term when put up against s host of other emerging recreational activities that did not require commitment to such s structured format.
-
I still think that we aren't taking into account locale.
What I mean by that is that we are not taking into account what is occurring outside this country. When you have national teams and players bowling eachother, like for example, at PABCON, QubicaAMF World Cup, Men's and Women's World Bowling tournaments, etc., we can easily see that the reach for the sport is much further than just our local leagues in this country.
Bowling in Japan, S. Korea, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc., is HUGE. When you have a tournament like the Japan Cup, in which PBA bowlers are flying over there just because of how prestigious it is, let alone that the prize fund is bigger than just about every PBA tournament in the US, that tells you alone how big it is just for even that country.
So I still wonder if we aren't taking the bigger picture into account..
BL.
-
>the prize fund is bigger than just about every PBA tournament in the US
I have seen 4H kids win bigger prize funds than PBA checks. You know something is FUBAR when bowlers 30 years ago had much larger checks period even before inflation. SAD!
-
That is the point....these other countries where bowling or at least competitive bowling is flourishing have the same recreational and entertainment options as we do, in fact most of them created/invented many of the technologies we as americans recreate with..so the lack/drop in league/competitive bowling in the US cannot simply be attributed to more entertainment and leisure options, or else we'd see the same decline in other nations---so they decline must be factors other than simply THAT.
Brad
-
I would be interested in what proportion of the total population bowls leagues in those countries.
-
Makes total sense, I’ve been arguing for years the volunteer model employed in bowling is broken. Add to that a complete lack of competence from the USBC who continues to say membership is a local problem and continues to do the same thing and expect a different result. Tournament bowling, especially the PWBA, is not going to save our great game or make membership great again yet that’s all the USBC cares about.
-
Societal changes have played the major role in bowling’s decline. No matter what has caused those changes, they have occurred.
Jobs and working hours have changed a lot. Entertainment options have exploded exponentially, and finances are tighter than ever.
The psychology of the American consumer is fundamentally different than anywhere else on the planet. Here, if we don’t get instant gratification, we move on to the next thing, whereas other cultures tend to apply themselves to things to a much greater degree.
Think of it like two separate choices:
1. You’re looked up to, respected, and admired for applying yourself to a difficult task, and developing you skills to a very high degree
OR
2. You’re looked at as stupid for wasting your time on something as frivolous as bowling.
If the same thing will get you admired and respected for in one place, will get you ridiculed and derided in another, there’s not much wondering why it’s bigger there than here.
They respect bowling as a skilled activity, one that must be practiced to gain the necessary skills.
Here, were taught it something done on the weekends by drunks. Something anybody can do, if they have the time and money.
-
Sad, but true....
-
I was going yo bring up some similar points. Us old guys have a little different recollection of the game than some of you younger guys. Bowling was born in the smoke filled pool room atmosphere. While the introduction of the automatic pinsetter brought the game to the suburbs and the middle class, it was not able to find a niche with college educated professionals like golf did. This explains to a large degree why golf was able to garner insurance companies, high end car makers, and investment banks as sponsors.
-
And even among us college professionals the game may have been passed generation to generation from our more blue collar roots. Honestly that would be my guess of the single biggest factor for most bowlers is whether their parents introduced it to them if even indirectly. Maybe we went long stretches of not bowling in our life but most of us probably at least learned quite a bit of the game during teen years or before.
-
I was going yo bring up some similar points. Us old guys have a little different recollection of the game than some of you younger guys. Bowling was born in the smoke filled pool room atmosphere. While the introduction of the automatic pinsetter brought the game to the suburbs and the middle class, it was not able to find a niche with college educated professionals like golf did. This explains to a large degree why golf was able to garner insurance companies, high end car makers, and investment banks as sponsors.
Great point. Smoke filled dungeons and shady people along with gambling was a very big part of bowling. Reading some of Johnny Petraglias stories on it were nothing short of crazy.
Technology also a huge part with oil machines making the conditions more consistent lane to lane, day to day. Anyone can go into a bowling ally and throw a house ball and get lucky and shoot 180 plus and think hey I saw a pro only shoot 180 on tv once, this is easy. That will never change. Just like some league bowlers thinking them averaging 200+ means they can compete against pros on tv because of scores they see on tv. Blue oil, making house shots harder, lessening bowling equipment changes none of that.
Someone mentioned bowling popularity growing overseas. Also would need perspective on where they were in popularity in the 50s thru 80s compared to the U.S. and if that popularity includes league memberships. What formats they might be using as well. 36 week leagues, 5 person teams, etc. All would be great to know.
-
And even among us college professionals the game may have been passed generation to generation from our more blue collar roots. Honestly that would be my guess of the single biggest factor for most bowlers is whether their parents introduced it to them if even indirectly. Maybe we went long stretches of not bowling in our life but most of us probably at least learned quite a bit of the game during teen years or before.
Speaking of indirectly, the night I was born, my mother was earlier at the bowling center watching my father's team bowl. Maybe that's why I find the sound of falling pins so soothing? :)
-
In regards to overseas, didn't Japan go through a bowling boom and then bust around the 80s? At one time they had some of the biggest centers in the world, including multiple story centers. They must have figured out how to recover from that bust (unlike the USA) if it is gaining popularity again.
-
A friend currently stationed in Japan has posted pics from two tournaments he has bowled in. Both have open bars, both gave out prizes in alcohol not money. So apparently drinking and winning alcohol is popular.
-
Too many refuse to believe it has anything to do with the changes in society and the larger options in entertainment.
I've never understood why this is difficult to grasp/confront. I've also never understood why exactly a pre-conceived bias with regard to this particular topic is incredibly difficult to break through.....very strange. It is the answer that is accurate in reality, but for some reason this answer is not appealing to some old school peeps therefore it is disregarded and then it's back on the parroting of.....
the golden era everyone loved bowling because it was hard and consisted of half board adjustments playing on the 3rd or 4th board
Again, bizarre psychology.
There was a writer that used to post a lot here -- Mighty Fish or something like that. I used to get into arguments with that guy all the time about the role of societal change in America vs. ball tech and scoring environment. That guy never believed he ever lost a point, or felt the need to concede a point on the matter. But you'd hear plenty about how he had been in the industry for x-number of decades and the answer was scoring pace.
At the same time, I used to be a member on the PBA.com boards. I've never walked off a message board in my life over disagreements and such until it happened to me over there. You had a handful of regional guys and a couple of touring pros who would engage fans directly, in a negative and condescending way, about scoring pace and ball tech. Brian Voss was the worst. And heaven forbid you disagree with him, because if he did, you had a half-dozen guys come in right behind biting at your ankles: "Don't you know who you're talking to? That's Brian Voss. Genuflect, dammit!".
For a couple of years there, if you came to this site, or went to the PBA's site, and you were an amateur who just wanted to be a fan, or who wanted to be a good league bowler and decent teammate to his friends -- but you didn't immediately start singing from the hymnal of how everything wrong with bowling is the fault of scoring pace and therefore YOU, Mr. League Bowler, since you want to score high -- then you really didn't feel welcome. I had to quit PBA.com to get away from it. Over here, it seems some of the louder ones finally left. But I feel quite a bit of damage was done anyway. Granted these sites are just a fraction of the bowling universe, but what kind of message does it send when you basically had to come in the door kissing *** right from the get-go, or you would be ostracized? Because you da*n sure weren't going to have any of thsoe guys tolerate your viewpoint.
It got to a point on PBA.com where some of the other pros were trying to tell the worst offenders to chill a bit toward the fans. One of my last posts over there raised the point, "How many other major sports have an interactive forum where the players ridicule the fans for not being as good as they are?". It's no accident that I went from either watching live or taping everything PBA-related I could find on TV to basically nothing these days.
Jess
-
Remember the PBA board well. Couldn't agree with you more. Technology and knowledge have been the biggest factors in the scoring increase. Decline in league boekers has never been about people quitting because the game is too easy. People quit because of health and age factors.
More people quit golf than bowling each year.
-
Brian Voss had a video and later a long post about equipment killing the game and how it needs to be dialed back and the only reason he cannot compete to still is the equipment takes away from great shot making…… yet the bulk of Voss titles came in the resin era.
Short memory I guess. Interesting how many pba plastic ball events Voss has won the last few years or any of the pba shorter patterns where the majority of the field is using urethane and still no Voss.
Time passes everyone by…… doesn't take away from how great bowlers are today.
-
I think you would find that at least 50% of Voss's titles were in the urethane era. Whether you agree with his opinion on equipment and the game.
After the wrist injury in 1999 it is hard to say how much that effected his game and father time takes it toll on all of us.
I agree that few quit because the game is too easy or scoring is too high. In fact if a house in town scores higher bowlers will quit the harder houses and move. That is why proprietors all try to put out as easy a shot as possible.
But the sad truth for the game is that people continue to quit (for what ever reason) much faster than new bowlers are entering the game.
The number of lane beds in town has dropped 50% in the last 15 years and I wouldn't be surprised if another house would close in the next couple years.
And if you like to bowl in competitive leagues options are getting pretty slim and before soon you will be bowling alone.
I hope it last long enough till I'm ready to hang them up.
-
No disrespect to Voss, but the game at the highest level has always been revolutionized by technological change. Whe urethane lsne finish replaced lacquer the great strokers of the 60s felt betrayed as the young power layers exploited the shorter oil patterns and ha harder finishes. Some adapted, many did not. Same when resin first came in power players hated it at first, then many adapted but some did not.
Great players of one era have always felt betrayed when the environment changes. I can't really blame them, but it has been a fact of the game since lacquer replaced shellac.
-
I realize I'm the guy that brought his name up, but I don't want to turn this into a bash-Voss fest over any struggles, real or perceived, as he got older.
My point was about the attitude on the forums. The other thing I didn't post in my first message was that a lot of times, when amateurs (or tech-friendly pros) would disagree with Voss, et al, there would be someone to bring up, "Well, you're coming to PBA.com, this forum should be run by the pros." Well, seems to me that if you guys want a pros-only forum, you should have a pros-only private forum. As soon as you open it up to public comment, you don't get to control what those comments are going to be anymore.
What's funny about this stuff is that I'm doing some of my best bowling in years right now with tame, older equipment. Most modern houses are so dry and abrupt off the spot that it does me no good to drill the latest-and-greatest. The most aggressive ball I've drilled in the last 5 years may be a Track MX-05. And I put less than 10 games on it last year outside of tournaments. It would probably help me be more competitive if we were back to plastic or regular urethane.
But going backwards, technology-wise, universally drives down interest no matter the sport. When softball leagues started legislating bat strength, interest dropped. When golf started getting overly concerned about driver head size and/or groove shape, people got upset. Once the barn doors have opened, you can forget closing them again. You have to adapt the rest of the sport to the new reality.
That's what Voss and a lot of his cohorts never understood. And yeah, I realize it's uncomfortable to go into a league environment and see amateurs cranking the ball on par with you, but all it takes is to put down a real tournament shot on the lanes and the pros take over again. Just like you can go play your local muni from the front reds, shoot 75 and brag about it, but you're not going to win at Augusta.
Unfortunately -- and I don't know how PBA.com is today, because I left it 10 years ago and have never looked back -- there was enough damage done to relationships and potential relationships that a lot of amateurs went from looking up to these guys to starting to question their fanship. I don't know whether PBA leadership could have impacted the situation, but had I been sitting in the CEO role at the time, we would have gathered everyone with a tour card in a room and had a seminar on how we were all going to use social media going forward, and recommendations would not have been optional. If you couldn't march with the rest of the band, you either got off the site or gave up your card. Bowling's cachet with its fans is the accessibility. You lose that and you lose the biggest trump card in your deck.
Jess
-
Unfortunately -- and I don't know how PBA.com is today, because I left it 10 years ago and have never looked back -- there was enough damage done to relationships and potential relationships that a lot of amateurs went from looking up to these guys to starting to question their fanship. I don't know whether PBA leadership could have impacted the situation, but had I been sitting in the CEO role at the time, we would have gathered everyone with a tour card in a room and had a seminar on how we were all going to use social media going forward, and recommendations would not have been optional. If you couldn't march with the rest of the band, you either got off the site or gave up your card. Bowling's cachet with its fans is the accessibility. You lose that and you lose the biggest trump card in your deck.
Jess
This is the approach NASCAR took to generate unprecedented growth. Drivers were instructed on how they interact with fans and media and the outcome was meteoric rise in popularity. I realize it wasn't the only factor, but NASCAR drivers were known for their approach to their interactions with those outside the sport.
-
Pros and many others are quick to write off bowlers today because of equipment vs ability. They also refuse to believe bowlers have evolved and knowledge of bowling equipment, surface, drilling etc has evolved.
Here's a link to bowling in 1963. Nothing against any of these guys but look at their form and style and how much it has evolved since then. Also look at what part of the lane they are playing and the scores they are putting up. Guys are shooting 670-740 for 3 games. Pros today would be able to score just as well and likely better because of rev rate, drilling options, and surface adjustments….. Which would be a nasty mess on rubber lol. What you dont see is the guys playing out on the 2nd or 3rd board and making half board adjustments we are regularly fed some times when talking about the good old days.
-
In fairness to Voss and other pros who sometimes frequented the PBA board, a lot of the most outlandish stuff came from trolls who couldn't play with a PBA player on their best day.
Having said that, I can't understand why any pro would have to lash out at a league bowler who has fun averaging 230 on a house shot. Can you imagine Dustin Johnson getting upset because some local guy shoots 59 on a 6200 yard muni.
-
Great players of one era have always felt betrayed when the environment changes. I can't really blame them, but it has been a fact of the game since lacquer replaced shellac.
It took me a LOOONG time to come to this same conclusion, but I finally got it.
I didn’t like it when technology took away my “edgeâ€, and I formed the opinion that I was right, the people who changed bowling were wrong, and it never should’ve happened.
Then, after enough time had passed, I realized that’s the way life is. It wasn’t just bowling that had changed, but everything had changed. This let me reflect on all the ways bowling had changed before, and who had been left behind by those changes.
When I realized it happens even to the greats of former years, I realized nobody was immune to it, and I stopped feeling victimized by the changes.
That victim mentality is a killer. Once you get it, it’s you against the world, and everybody that tries to tell you different gets written off because they “just don’t get itâ€.
Mr. Voss is/was a great. I respect his talent and ability, but he needs to get over it, just like everybody else has. He was an all time great in his day, but the sun has set on that day, and a new one has dawned.
Move on.
-
I started bowling in 1960. By the mid 70s I was a pretty good local amateur. When I look back at how little I really knew about the game in those days compared to today it is shocking. If you brought back lacquer and hard rubber balls tomorrow, I could easily average as much or more at age 70 than I did back then using the same equipment.
Several years ago I watched a video of a 1955 Championship Bowling match between hall of famer Ned Day and a very young Glenn Allison. Day threw a full roller and his follow through seldom went the same direction twice in a row, yet he fired a 670 at Allison. Allison clearly had a much better game, yet struggled to shoot 580 on what appeared to be shellac, demonstrating that matching up was a problem back then just as today. Days semi roller appeared to over under on the shellac track
-
Everyone who bowls should read your post juggernaut. I went threw a similar phase during the late 80s when shirt oil was the rule. I very nearly quit the game because I was too stubborn to adapt to the urethane short oil game.
-
Voss is a legend and by no means is this to take away from his career but some of what he said and posted was very polarizing.
Same for some other pros recently dogging equipment etc. At no point in their careers of pimping all the new equipment did they ever say theses things… ...nope not till all of that is gone do we have these epiphanies.
Saw something recently with Burton pimping jr gold I believe and then tapers off about how he had high pba average for so many years etc etc and now he's no where close. Seemed pretty bitter. You were one of the greatest of all time. Time moves on. More greats come along. You still remain a legend.
All of these seem to have one thing in common. Wanting to make changes that preserve their idea of integrity to the game. How does this change anything for 98% of the league bowlers out there?
-
Voss is a legend and by no means is this to take away from his career but some of what he said and posted was very polarizing.
Same for some other pros recently dogging equipment etc. At no point in their careers of pimping all the new equipment did they ever say theses things… ...nope not till all of that is gone do we have these epiphanies.
Saw something recently with Burton pimping jr gold I believe and then tapers off about how he had high pba average for so many years etc etc and now he's no where close. Seemed pretty bitter. You were one of the greatest of all time. Time moves on. More greats come along. You still remain a legend.
All of these seem to have one thing in common. Wanting to make changes that preserve their idea of integrity to the game. How does this change anything for 98% of the league bowlers out there?
Pros may well resent being ball salesmen first and pro bowlers second. Salesmen who want to keep their job generally won't talk down their product while they are getting paid.
-
Voss is a legend and by no means is this to take away from his career but some of what he said and posted was very polarizing.
Same for some other pros recently dogging equipment etc. At no point in their careers of pimping all the new equipment did they ever say theses things… ...nope not till all of that is gone do we have these epiphanies.
Saw something recently with Burton pimping jr gold I believe and then tapers off about how he had high pba average for so many years etc etc and now he's no where close. Seemed pretty bitter. You were one of the greatest of all time. Time moves on. More greats come along. You still remain a legend.
All of these seem to have one thing in common. Wanting to make changes that preserve their idea of integrity to the game. How does this change anything for 98% of the league bowlers out there?
Pros may well resent being ball salesmen first and pro bowlers second. Salesmen who want to keep their job generally won't talk down their product while they are getting paid.
Of course, and credit said ball for their success. #ballgreatest #ever
Then once time has past by it's the equipment that keeps them from still being great. If we go back to technology "X" then said pro would still be relevant. Or records would still stand.
Its insulting to say shot making isn't a factor today. Or that its only because of equipment etc.
-
Voss is a legend and by no means is this to take away from his career but some of what he said and posted was very polarizing.
Same for some other pros recently dogging equipment etc. At no point in their careers of pimping all the new equipment did they ever say theses things… ...nope not till all of that is gone do we have these epiphanies.
Saw something recently with Burton pimping jr gold I believe and then tapers off about how he had high pba average for so many years etc etc and now he's no where close. Seemed pretty bitter. You were one of the greatest of all time. Time moves on. More greats come along. You still remain a legend.
All of these seem to have one thing in common. Wanting to make changes that preserve their idea of integrity to the game. How does this change anything for 98% of the league bowlers out there?
Pros may well resent being ball salesmen first and pro bowlers second. Salesmen who want to keep their job generally won't talk down their product while they are getting paid.
Of course, and credit said ball for their success. #ballgreatest #ever
Then once time has past by it's the equipment that keeps them from still being great. If we go back to technology "X" then said pro would still be relevant. Or records would still stand.
Its insulting to say shot making isn't a factor today. Or that its only because of equipment etc.
Belmo would be a top 5 champion in any era since at least WW2 with any equipment. Guy is more effortless with two hands than all but a few even one handers ever. Anybody that thinks the old school guys had flawless technique needs to watch Marshall Holman sliding well after he released the ball. Granted he could smoke me any day of the week but not sure he would be top 5 these days with that technique.
-
He is clutch. I wanted to not like him but watching him on tv, especially in majors, he has "it". All greats do.
-
Holman had excellent technique for that era. Releasing the ball during the slide facilitated accuracy--- a must in that era. Today's game places much more emphasis on creating power and area through late timing and dynamic wrist action. On sport shots today, there is still a premium on accuracy but there is a bigger premium on hand action. That was a no-no in the old days due to the conditions and equipment of the earlier era. I do believe that some of the best players of today would have done well back in the "day", and some, perhaps even better. But I would venture an educated guess that they would not be lofting gutter caps or banking the gutter, with wide open shoulders to boot. Some posters have pointed to a few old videos of players in the 1950s shooting big numbers playing up the 10 board. That did happen, but not very often. In those days we had to contend with burned out heads, high boards, low boards, lanes dressed with hand held oil guns. More often than not, if you wanted to score, you had to keep your angles strictly in front of you--- no leaking to the right of target, no matter how many revs you might have had. And you had to throw the ball SLOW on those conditions or your rubber ball would deflect off those solid pins like silly putty (pins were not top heavy like the double voided pins of today). Anybody who claims that they averaged 200+ in those days fell into one of 2 categories: 1. They were either the BEST bowlers in their region or, 2. They were bowling on blocked conditions (illegal at that time, not like the standard THS today).
Let's try to give credit to the best bowlers of each of these eras. The very best developed physical games that BEST fit the conditions and equipment of their time.
That includes the likes of Marshall Holman and Belmo.
I seldom get my "heckels up" but on this subject, I must, because I bowled in both of these eras. Those who claim that bowling back in the old days was easier simply do not know what they are talking about and those who demean the incredible talent
needed to prevail on today's challenge conditions have obviously never put on their shoes and tried to compete with the talented kids of today.
-
I don't think anyone is claiming it was easier back then. I think the issue we've been discussing the last few pages is how a fair number of pro bowlers decided, during the resin era, to get confrontational with league bowlers because of equipment changes, and how that may have affected popularity of the sport. It wasn't just Brian Voss; he just happened to be one of the most consistent on the subject.
As a fan, it made me think twice about whether I was appreciated by the guys I was spending money to see and support. I don't want them to bend over backwards for me; I just want to know whether they appreciate the support, or whether they secretly resented us because of disagreement over equipment rules.
We even had another thread on this board -- you can actually Google it and find it -- over whether fans who bought PBA-logo clothing through the PBA.com online store were "posers." Same topic came up on PBA.com, and we actually had bowlers ridiculing other bowlers for wearing that stuff to league if they didn't have a PBA card. How many NFL fans wear jerseys to games? Do you think those players ridicule their fans over it?
For some reason, bowling seems to have a self-image problem that it perpetrates upon itself over and over again. It's like we can't get past the "we are TOO a legitimate sport" stage. In the 90s and 2000s, when we should have all been working together to push the sport to new heights, instead we decided to get mired in an equipment dispute. I don't know of another sport that is so often its own worst enemy.
Jess
-
Holman had excellent technique for that era. Releasing the ball during the slide facilitated accuracy--- a must in that era. Today's game places much more emphasis on creating power and area through late timing and dynamic wrist action. On sport shots today, there is still a premium on accuracy but there is a bigger premium on hand action. That was a no-no in the old days due to the conditions and equipment of the earlier era. I do believe that some of the best players of today would have done well back in the "day", and some, perhaps even better. But I would venture an educated guess that they would not be lofting gutter caps or banking the gutter, with wide open shoulders to boot. Some posters have pointed to a few old videos of players in the 1950s shooting big numbers playing up the 10 board. That did happen, but not very often. In those days we had to contend with burned out heads, high boards, low boards, lanes dressed with hand held oil guns. More often than not, if you wanted to score, you had to keep your angles strictly in front of you--- no leaking to the right of target, no matter how many revs you might have had. And you had to throw the ball SLOW on those conditions or your rubber ball would deflect off those solid pins like silly putty (pins were not top heavy like the double voided pins of today). Anybody who claims that they averaged 200+ in those days fell into one of 2 categories: 1. They were either the BEST bowlers in their region or, 2. They were bowling on blocked conditions (illegal at that time, not like the standard THS today).
Let's try to give credit to the best bowlers of each of these eras. The very best developed physical games that BEST fit the conditions and equipment of their time.
That includes the likes of Marshall Holman and Belmo.
I seldom get my "heckels up" but on this subject, I must, because I bowled in both of these eras. Those who claim that bowling back in the old days was easier simply do not know what they are talking about and those who demean the incredible talent
needed to prevail on today's challenge conditions have obviously never put on their shoes and tried to compete with the talented kids of today.
For record did bowl in the eighties in a four wood lane ancient house in rural Iowa (lanes often broke down too) so trust me I know it wasn't easier back then. And honestly as talented was Holman was in his prime with modern training and equipment he could compete today for sure but probably not with that style. I don't buy sliding increased accuracy because he was one of the only early top pros ever from any era. Roth sure wasn't sliding well after release (he was hitting up big time as you had to do back then and will say that is because of equipment, and again both of them would have been able to kick my ass probably when they were 12 years old). I think he succeed in spite of the deficiencies in his style not because of it, though his athleticism which probably wouldn't fly today with the equipment and training and such but I am sure he would find a way to succeed for sure. A champion is a champion because at the top level its mostly mental.
-
The game changed s bunch in the early 70 s when non red label urethane lane finish replaced lacquer. It was this change that brought Roth and Holman to the fore front, and a bunch of lessor power players who followed. Holman was smooth to the line, unlike Roth, but he was a high rev player who took carry to another level with the soft polyester balls that pretty much made hard rubber obsolete during this time.
One thing I think people don't realize is that the top centers in hot bed bowling cities like St Louis, Detroit, Seattle and LA, were very high scoring even back to the 60's. Not like today because of the carry, but easy to the pocket. The modern scoring explosion started with the introduction of the soft polyester balls. In our city association there had been 2 800 series in the history of the assoc prior to 1975. In the 1975 season their were 6. My own average went from 199 to 214 when I switched to polyester that season. Around the city the number of 200 averages went way up. Our city was not near as high scoring as Seattle or Portland. I remember bowling a team tourney in Portland about that time where we averaged 220 per man over 12 games. We finished 3rd.
By the 80s when urethane balls came in and walled up shots were legal as long as the oil didn't go past 24 feet, averages continued to climb. I was usually close to 220, and hit 225 a couple of times during the 80s. It was also during the 80' that power began to get even more rewarded that accuracy. Roth and Holman had paved the way, but by the mid 80's a bunch of guys with more wrist cup and less accuracy were winning on tour.
-
The game changed s bunch in the early 70 s when non red label urethane lane finish replaced lacquer. It was this change that brought Roth and Holman to the fore front, and a bunch of lessor power players who followed. Holman was smooth to the line, unlike Roth, but he was a high rev player who took carry to another level with the soft polyester balls that pretty much made hard rubber obsolete during this time.
One thing I think people don't realize is that the top centers in hot bed bowling cities like St Louis, Detroit, Seattle and LA, were very high scoring even back to the 60's. Not like today because of the carry, but easy to the pocket. The modern scoring explosion started with the introduction of the soft polyester balls. In our city association there had been 2 800 series in the history of the assoc prior to 1975. In the 1975 season their were 6. My own average went from 199 to 214 when I switched to polyester that season. Around the city the number of 200 averages went way up. Our city was not near as high scoring as Seattle or Portland. I remember bowling a team tourney in Portland about that time where we averaged 220 per man over 12 games. We finished 3rd.
By the 80s when urethane balls came in and walled up shots were legal as long as the oil didn't go past 24 feet, averages continued to climb. I was usually close to 220, and hit 225 a couple of times during the 80s. It was also during the 80' that power began to get even more rewarded that accuracy. Roth and Holman had paved the way, but by the mid 80's a bunch of guys with more wrist cup and less accuracy were winning on tour.
Bowling is bowling. The technology constantly changes and perhaps scores go up but bowling the sport is still graded on a curve. Every eras champions had to earn it.
-
The game changed s bunch in the early 70 s when non red label urethane lane finish replaced lacquer. It was this change that brought Roth and Holman to the fore front, and a bunch of lessor power players who followed. Holman was smooth to the line, unlike Roth, but he was a high rev player who took carry to another level with the soft polyester balls that pretty much made hard rubber obsolete during this time.
One thing I think people don't realize is that the top centers in hot bed bowling cities like St Louis, Detroit, Seattle and LA, were very high scoring even back to the 60's. Not like today because of the carry, but easy to the pocket. The modern scoring explosion started with the introduction of the soft polyester balls. In our city association there had been 2 800 series in the history of the assoc prior to 1975. In the 1975 season their were 6. My own average went from 199 to 214 when I switched to polyester that season. Around the city the number of 200 averages went way up. Our city was not near as high scoring as Seattle or Portland. I remember bowling a team tourney in Portland about that time where we averaged 220 per man over 12 games. We finished 3rd.
By the 80s when urethane balls came in and walled up shots were legal as long as the oil didn't go past 24 feet, averages continued to climb. I was usually close to 220, and hit 225 a couple of times during the 80s. It was also during the 80' that power began to get even more rewarded that accuracy. Roth and Holman had paved the way, but by the mid 80's a bunch of guys with more wrist cup and less accuracy were winning on tour.
Are you sure it was less than 24 feet? I remember clearly ensuring lanes were oiled at least 24 feet.
And there are still several USBC records (top 5) from the pre-resin period.
-
If the oil was shorter than 24' and the house had declared as a "short oil house" then all they did was measure the distance, the pattern didn't matter. If it was longer the oil pattern had to be in compliance. Houses that didn't declare as short had to be in compliance no matter what distance was on the lane.
-
Maximum was 24 feet, unless oil was applied evenly gutter to gutter. That rule was changed in 1989 to system of bowling that required 3 units of oil out to the gutter. 24 foot rule was ridiculous because there was no requirement to strip, thus lanemen walled them 10 to 10 then let the carry down build up for a week or more.
-
Maximum was 24 feet, unless oil was applied evenly gutter to gutter. That rule was changed in 1989 to system of bowling that required 3 units of oil out to the gutter. 24 foot rule was ridiculous because there was no requirement to strip, thus lanemen walled them 10 to 10 then let the carry down build up for a week or more.
Boy, I remember those days. I picked up the game seriously in '88, started bowling in a league in '89 when all that change was just flying at us. My home house, which was 50-plus-year-old wood (top score in that house's history was a 286 shot by a 130-average straight-ball rolling female using a 12-pound Galaxy 300; less than 10 700s ever shot there all-time) was on the short oil system and they stripped the lanes Monday morning. By the time you got there on the weekends to practice, you had 5-6 days of carrydown buildup. No two lanes were even remotely alike. And when they did oil, it was a bug sprayer and then a guy walking a mop with a towel tied around it down the lane. We used to have a set of footprints on every lane straight up the middle arrow. People used to wonder how the teams from our little house used to dominate tournaments in south Alabama and northwest Florida; when you bowled on what we did during the week, it was no mystery at all. "Involuntary handicap management" is what it was.
Jess