There is what's written by the USBC, and what we know intuitively. Remember, the USBC also believes 116% is the ideal handicap.
The usbc does not say that, they just say An exact 50-50 distribution of league championships would result only if a 116% handicap was used.
They dont advocate using it either.
The fact that they specifically point out that 116% provides for the most equitable chance of a league championship across all teams is an implied endorsement. Since the stated intent of handicap (from the USBC perspective) is to provide for equity, I don't know how you can interpret their study any different.
This is from the USBC facts about handicap sheet:
Question:
If a handicap percent of 116% would result in absolutely equalizing competition in
handicap leagues,
then why doesn’t the USBC advocate the use of that percent of handicap to the exclusion of all others?
FACT: Nobody wants to deprive the more skillful of the benefits of their superior skill. If the
more proficient bowlers have an edge, it is one they’ve earned. It is a premium, which comes
from more diligent efforts to improve their capabilities. That incentive should not be taken
away, regardless of the level at which a bowler competes.
So that say's they don't advocate using it.
If you look in the rule book they advocate using 100%
Commonly Asked Questions – Rule 100g.
100g/1 What is a good handicap percentage for a league with members who have a wide
range of averages?
One hundred percent of the difference between a bowler’s average and a base higher than
any average within the league is a good percentage to balance the disparity in averages.
One hundred percent handicap basically makes the competition a “pins over averageâ€
competition, because if the two teams bowl average they will be tied.