OK, first I am in favor of handicaps, but not in favor of 100% handicaps. A 100% handicap is not fair to the better teams. 85% yes, 90% probably, but 100% no. Here is an example of why 100% isn't fair to everyone:......For an example of where it wouldn't be fair is to suppose a bowler has a 300 average and another has a 150 average. The 300 average bowler bowls his average, but he can't go over his average because 300 is the highest score a person can bowl plus he gets no handicap, whereas if the 150 average bowler bowls 151 ( 1 Pin iver his average ), he wins the match, 301 to 300.
Now, I know that no one has a 300 average, but that is still an example as to why you can't have 100% handicaps. It is way-way easier for the 150 or less bowler to go over their average than it is for a high average bowler to go over theirs, so the high average bowler is at a disadvantage from the start. It needs to be fair to everyone with everyone having an equal chance to win, but a 100% handicap doesn't give everyone an equal chance.
--------------------
Ex Member of Lane 1 Clique