BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: avabob on May 05, 2014, 03:28:16 PM
-
Does anyone but me find it humorous that so many message board posters complain about technology ruining bowling, and insist on comparing scoring from 1975 to today, yet we never hear anyone arguing that golfer should go back and have a persimmon driver only golf tournament.
If you are my age and have done both for any length of time you know that there is as much difference between a persimmon driver circa 1975, and the 460 cc monsters of today as their is between my old yellow dot, and my Mastermind.
-
I still haven't gone all the way to a 460cc driver. Mine's a "puny" Titleist (400cc) with a speeder shaft and I'm not craving anything different.
Golf balls seem to be changing the fastest, but that's just my opinion. There are so many good balls for less than $30 per dozen it amazes me...
I think people need to complain.
-
Respectfully I don't feel there's any comparison between the effect technology has had on golf compared to the impact it's had on bowling. How often have we heard members of this forum complain bowling, with all the new tech, and particularly on THS has gotten too easy? Quite a few times correct? I doubt you'll find one person seriously say the same thing on any golf forum. Sure I hear the pros (Jack Nicklaus among others) say they need to dial back the distance the current ball travel, but to us mortals the game is still very hard to be good at.
-
Respectfully I don't feel there's any comparison between the effect technology has had on golf compared to the impact it's had on bowling. How often have we heard members of this forum complain bowling, with all the new tech, and particularly on THS has gotten too easy? Quite a few times correct? I doubt you'll find one person seriously say the same thing on any golf forum. Sure I hear the pros (Jack Nicklaus among others) say they need to dial back the distance the current ball travel, but to us mortals the game is still very hard to be good at.
Really? So your saying a bowling ball has seen more technology the last 40 years than golf clubs, balls, training aids ect....? I agree golf is overall a more difficult sport and like bowling, if you dont put in the time your likely not going to be good at it. But to me the super game improvement equiptement of todays golf world has far more of an impact on the average golfer than bowling balls do for the same skill level bowler.
-
Respectfully I don't feel there's any comparison between the effect technology has had on golf compared to the impact it's had on bowling. How often have we heard members of this forum complain bowling, with all the new tech, and particularly on THS has gotten too easy? Quite a few times correct? I doubt you'll find one person seriously say the same thing on any golf forum. Sure I hear the pros (Jack Nicklaus among others) say they need to dial back the distance the current ball travel, but to us mortals the game is still very hard to be good at.
Really? So your saying a bowling ball has seen more technology the last 40 years than golf clubs, balls, training aids ect....? I agree golf is overall a more difficult sport and like bowling, if you dont put in the time your likely not going to be good at it. But to me the super game improvement equiptement of todays golf world has far more of an impact on the average golfer than bowling balls do for the same skill level bowler.
No, not saying that at all. The technology in golf equipment has advanced even more so that that of bowling. I am saying is that for 99.9 percent of us golfers, its still not enough. You will not find any golfer who feels the game is too easy.
A lot of bowlers right here in these forums complain that the ball, in conjunction with the THS pattern, have made scoring well too easy. That the 300 game/800 series has been watered down. Despite all the tech advances, you're never going to find a golfer saying "there are far too many single digit handicaps at my club, way too many rounds in the 70's this year".
And btw, I have no horse in this race. I love both games.
-
Also something to consider, with golf equipment getting better/faster/longer, courses go the same direction. Narrower, longer, faster. Lane has always been 60 feet, and as tech in bowling balls gets better/easier, the shot gets easier as well...It's very different.
Good question though. Interesting thought.
-
Bowling technology has allowed for a large number of players to hook it a lot more. Golf technology has allowed far more people to hit it further then before.
Neither guarantee better scores.
-
Golf is perceived as tougher due to the playing field...it's more visible...bowling is on a limited invisible environment and very few perceive or understand the differences between the PGA PBA average bowler or golfer...at the highest levels they are extremely similar...the equipment is much viable at the highest levels as they are able to maximize the uses...the average bowler/golfer only sees minimal differences that they believe are larger
There are prolly IMHO more delusional bowlers than golfers...
-
Respectfully I don't feel there's any comparison between the effect technology has had on golf compared to the impact it's had on bowling. How often have we heard members of this forum complain bowling, with all the new tech, and particularly on THS has gotten too easy? Quite a few times correct? I doubt you'll find one person seriously say the same thing on any golf forum. Sure I hear the pros (Jack Nicklaus among others) say they need to dial back the distance the current ball travel, but to us mortals the game is still very hard to be good at.
Really? So your saying a bowling ball has seen more technology the last 40 years than golf clubs, balls, training aids ect....? I agree golf is overall a more difficult sport and like bowling, if you dont put in the time your likely not going to be good at it. But to me the super game improvement equiptement of todays golf world has far more of an impact on the average golfer than bowling balls do for the same skill level bowler.
No, not saying that at all. The technology in golf equipment has advanced even more so that that of bowling. I am saying is that for 99.9 percent of us golfers, its still not enough. You will not find any golfer who feels the game is too easy.
A lot of bowlers right here in these forums complain that the ball, in conjunction with the THS pattern, have made scoring well too easy. That the 300 game/800 series has been watered down. Despite all the tech advances, you're never going to find a golfer saying "there are far too many single digit handicaps at my club, way too many rounds in the 70's this year".
And btw, I have no horse in this race. I love both games.
OK I get what your saying and agree. I also love both and am a better golfer than bowler but I'm a total equipment whore with both! Luckily bowling balls are cheep in comparison.
-
Regardless of it's technology golf will always be tougher to excel at than bowling.
Let's assume that your driver clubface is not perfectly square at impact, and only off by 1/8 inch. For an average golfer with only average swing speed the ball can be off target by 60 yards (in any direction)!! Bowling will never be so precise.
Having said that, I LOVE both sports! The average golf season where I live is about 7 months long. Bowling is whenever I want; cold, hot, windy, rain, snow, you name it. If I walk 18 holes I get some good exercise. I'd get much less if I only hit the middle of the fairway, but that's another topic. By comparison, if I bowled for 4 hours I'd also get plenty of exercise.
I don't get skin cancer from bowling... I don't eat pizza while golfing... The two are extremely fun and addicting, but to me they're way different.
-
Does anyone but me find it humorous that so many message board posters complain about technology ruining bowling, and insist on comparing scoring from 1975 to today, yet we never hear anyone arguing that golfer should go back and have a persimmon driver only golf tournament.
If you are my age and have done both for any length of time you know that there is as much difference between a persimmon driver circa 1975, and the 460 cc monsters of today as their is between my old yellow dot, and my Mastermind.
I know personally that this is 100# true
-
Golfers are usually too crappy to be effective whiners, but there's a few out there.
I find that almost without exception, people who complain about things changing to give advantage aren't upset that they game has gotten easier for them, but resentful that it's gotten easier to everyone else.
-
It also would help to compare apples to apples. We talk about high tech balls helping bowlers, but we are still only talking about the top 5% of bowlers who really have benefited from these balls. Sure, lots more poorer bowlers throw more strikes, but they haven't seen any increase in overall scoring because they cant repeat shots. In golf we say the clubs haven't helped because we are only looking at the Saturday morning hackers like myself who still cant put or repeat shots. I am 66 years old. I drive the ball as far today as I did when I was 30. Think I am a freak of nature, or just a guy who can buy the right Big Bertha. I think Bubba Watson would say that the clubs have a bit to do with his ability to drive the ball 350 on a fairly regular basis
-
No, not saying that at all. The technology in golf equipment has advanced even more so that that of bowling. I am saying is that for 99.9 percent of us golfers, its still not enough. You will not find any golfer who feels the game is too easy.
A lot of bowlers right here in these forums complain that the ball, in conjunction with the THS pattern, have made scoring well too easy. That the 300 game/800 series has been watered down. Despite all the tech advances, you're never going to find a golfer saying "there are far too many single digit handicaps at my club, way too many rounds in the 70's this year".
And btw, I have no horse in this race. I love both games.
[/quote]
Well said! Both are difficult sports in their own rights. However, more people acheive "honor" scores in bowling (300/800) as compared to the people who have experienced or shot a round under par. Both are fun, the technology in both sports is mostly about money. Keep creating to keep selling, Keep advancing to keep creating.
-
The difference in Golf is the courses are more than 10% longer and almost 20% narrower. In the last 30 years and yet the golfers are still breaking records.
A golfer at the top level and the best of the best control a golf ball to 1 degree. This makes the game capricious as a player very often cannot guarantee hitting into a fairway within his abilities as a player. ie a top player will often say today on a tough long course that he played better today but he might have shot 10 strokes higher.
That first day he was 300 yards off the tee but 2 feet inside the fairway lines, the next day he was 12 feet off the fairway same distance and could not make a backswing under a tree!
The difference is now players at the top level, Tiger and Phil are playing between 8 and 9 under par through the short game and the plethora of lob wedges, sand wedges and heel toe weighted putters and putting technology and better agromony.
But I will say, take them to a pro tour course of the 70s set up like the 70s and there is a high probability one of them will shoot a 58 or Rory will!
So it is with bowling. The best bowlers are playing on shots that give them very little area that is almost capricious on the US open. Even the very top can throw to the limit of human control and cannot accurately predict whether good throwing will put them in the top 10 or 50th or lower.
However put them on an almost league shot, say in the villages or at the recent Charlotte senior tour and they will show you what is possible with their advanced human talent. ie averages in qualifying up over 250! Wow!
Bottom line, on the golf tour the courses are 30% tougher than in the 70s. I would guess the bowling tournaments have a much tougher oil pattern say the US open than in the 70s but as Rico says, it can't be seen!
Both sports are hard on difficult conditions. Both test the bounds of the peak of human performance at their highest and most difficult levels.
Bowling and golf on easy conditions for the skilled can be quite easy. There are more skilled bowlers than golfers. I can only guess that the use of two arms together in golf creates the difficulty.
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS I believe a score of about 65 or so is very analgous to an 800 on an easy bowling condition. Probably less than 2 or 1% get them no matter how easy the condition in both sports!
-
If I had to use a persimmon driver, my golf scores would begin to approach my bowling scores.
-
Most of my accomplishments in Golf were performed with a Ben Hogan Laminate driver. 2 degree open face. The number of players that used those things and played incredible golf with them is huge. If you could hit the dime sized spot on them it really was very cooperative! I use my natural right hand at golf.
I can till hit that thing right were I want to.
Regards,
Luckylefty
PS extra yardage comes from todays 46 inch drivers but who needs it!
-
The point is the technology in golf has allowed the players to take advantage of being bigger and stronger with more aggressive swings because there is more margin of error on the clubface. Swing an old persimmon driver at 110 mph club head speed, and you would get plenty of distance with it too, but the tiniest mis hit puts the ball in the next county.
I hate to get into scoring comparisons between the two sports, because while there are so many things that are comparable there are many things that are not. Technology is one thing that is comparable between the two. While a larger proportion of bowlers than golfers may be able to take advantage of those advances it does not make the advances any less significant.
-
How about the long putters?
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/golf/pga-to-abide-by-ban-on-long-putters-1.1315559
-
Does anyone but me find it humorous that so many message board posters complain about technology ruining bowling, and insist on comparing scoring from 1975 to today, yet we never hear anyone arguing that golfer should go back and have a persimmon driver only golf tournament.
If you are my age and have done both for any length of time you know that there is as much difference between a persimmon driver circa 1975, and the 460 cc monsters of today as their is between my old yellow dot, and my Mastermind.
What do you think a PGA golfer would score on a course with a slope rating of 55? Think he might complain that it was too easy?
-
There are too many differences to compare the sports, but I do know one issue golfers don't have to deal with. Bad shots equaling good results. I am a below average golfer, if I went out with four guys that took golf as seriously as I take bowling and I duck hook my driver off the tee into the trees only to have it ricochet onto the cart path running up the fairway kicking off a rock and landing beside the same guy who split the middle with a gorgeous fade avoiding the bunker, and I did this seven times every round we played together, no matter if they still won by 15 strokes, I bet the entire group would be on a golf message board complaining about how easy golf is becoming.
-
The big difference between bowling and golf is that good shots can give you bad breaks and bad shots can give you good breaks more frequently in bowling. This has always been true regardless of lane conditions. That is the reason that historically top bowling tournaments featured much longer formats, where the breaks had a chance to even out. I remember getting beat once in a game on a very tough condition where a guy threw 7 brooklyns and beakers at me for 230+. It happens.
I lost a big match in Vegas a couple of weeks ago where I stoned 3 super solid 10's on the same lane. I have had my share of breaks go my way too.
-
There of course have been technological advances in both sports but the impact on the actual scoring ability is drastically different.
Longer, lighter clubs haven't changed the fact that you still need the core of the game to be able to score and that's chipping and putting. I play with a lot of golfers who can't break 100 and there is no club out there that will change that. I've also been playing in plenty of local scratch amateur tournaments for years and most of the guys winning and scoring are using clubs several years old. Why? Because the new stuff doesn't help them score better. It still comes down to accuracy, iron play, chipping and putting.
The bowling advances drastically change the scoring ability of all.
-
There of course have been technological advances in both sports but the impact on the actual scoring ability is drastically different.
Longer, lighter clubs haven't changed the fact that you still need the core of the game to be able to score and that's chipping and putting. I play with a lot of golfers who can't break 100 and there is no club out there that will change that. I've also been playing in plenty of local scratch amateur tournaments for years and most of the guys winning and scoring are using clubs several years old. Why? Because the new stuff doesn't help them score better. It still comes down to accuracy, iron play, chipping and putting.
The bowling advances drastically change the scoring ability of all.
In general I agree with most of your points ... but ... technological advances in golf have had a big impact on the sport. How many times have they lengthened Augusta, or other courses. PGA guys were and still are hitting wedges into par 5's on their second shots. Greens are cut short to make putting more difficult. Roughs are grown longer to offer another challenge. Clubs have cavity backs, and offsets and allow the average Joe golfer to score several shots better by lessening the effect of bad ball strikes. There are bad swings in golf that score, just like there are bad swings in bowling that score.
I do agree though, that bowling in general is easier ... and technology has caused that. But if you have ever bowled on flat conditions, you know how tough bowling can be. Just like in golf, playing from the furthest tees with the trickiest pin placements, can make it tough for golfers, regardless of what state of the art clubs they have in the bag.
Bowling has allowed the ease, because high scoring appeases a lot of bowlers. I know lots of golf courses that have removed traps, moved up tees and taken down trees amongst other things to make scoring easier ... under the guise of "speeding up play", and making the local golf pros feel better about their scores.
Personally, I don't think there is such a huge divide between the two sports.
Bad putts go in, and slices sometimes find the best part of the fairway ... just like bad shots in bowling sometimes strike. But lots of bad shots in bowling don't strike, just like not every drive is striped down the middle of the fairway. Of course we all remember the times when someone threw a bad shot (or a series of bad shots) to beat us. Hell our team just lost in the roll-offs when our opponents anchor man, who needed to strike, went Brooklyn in the 10th frame. But I have also lost golf matches to guys who have chunked the ball all over the course, but did just enough to score decent.
I personally don't believe that the divide that has come through advances in technology are that different. It is the lane conditions in bowling that are the issue. You can have the best fitting, most expensive, best matched up drill pattern on your ball, but that isn't gonna make most people shoot 200 on a really tough oil condition.
-
The mistake people make is comparing golfers who cant crack 100 with bowlers who are averaging 220, even if the latter average is inflated. The balls and the lane conditions don't help 170 average bowlers anymore than the big drivers help 25 handicap golfers.
As for scoring, I never could figure out why some truly top average bowlers get so upset when a house shot specialist averages a big number or puts up a lot of award scores. Most higher average league bowlers have a lot better idea of what they are playing on than we give them credit for. I don't see PGA pros lashing out when a kid on a high school golf team shoots 59 on a 6000 yard muni.
-
I don't see PGA pros lashing out when a kid on a high school golf team shoots 59 on a 6000 yard muni.
... but how often does that happen? By comparison, it wasn't that long ago when five different bowlers in an area junior league rolled perfect games (some of them more than once) in a single season.
-
At least as often as it happens on the PGA tour. 59 is extreme, but I see high school tournaments where there are bunches of 67's or better.
The point is that just because lanes all look the same doesn't mean that almost all scratch league bowlers don't understand the difference between a house shot and a tournament condition.
Scores are a lot higher today than the were years ago. Balls have a lot to do with it. More consistent synthetic lanes have something to do with it, and bowlers are a lot better than they were 30 years ago, just as golfers, baseball players and every other athlete is better.
If you don't think bowlers are better, look at what is happening to scores on sports patterns. They are going up a bunch too. Second year in a row a team record is set at Nationals. I bowl almost nothing but sport pattern leagues and tourneys anymore. I average almost as much on those patterns as house shots. The last couple of 300's I have shot were on the 2013 nationals pattern, and a Kegel sport pattern. I just bowled a super senior tournament where it took a 215 average to make the cut on a kegel challenge pattern.
I think bowling would be better at the competitive level if cut back on the friction of ball surfaces ( go back to plastic or polished urethane ), allowing the use of less oil, and the patterns to hold up better. That is the biggest problem with high level scratch bowling today, not the relative level of scores.
-
A big part of the reason the scores are higher on Sport patterns is the fact it's too easy to blow a hole in the pattern and open them up. Sure, you have to be smart and know how but there is still a fundamental problem that the original shot can be changed so drastically. This isn't all from bowlers getting better.
You start on a course with high rough, fast greens and tough pin placements, the course will play just as tough for everyone.
-
A study was just released...bowling balls equated to approx 7 pin in average where lane conditions effected scoring between 15-30 pins....
-
That is why I said they need to cut back on the friction of balls for competitive bowling. The modern balls do blow a hole in the pattern too quickly, but, trust me on this, it only helps if you have a bunch of good bowlers who know what they are doing. Tour was terrible for quite awhile because the power guys would blow them up from 4th arrow in right away, leaving nobody with anywhere to move. Now you see the guys starting around 10, playing straight and giving themselves more room to move as the shot breaks down. Top seniors have always played them this way, because most don't have enough revs to move in right away and blow them up.
-
If you don't think bowlers are better, look at what is happening to scores on sports patterns. They are going up a bunch too. Second year in a row a team record is set at Nationals.
Dear avabob:
True, but with regard to the Nationals, it's only a small fraction of bowlers -- the elite and talented true shotmakers -- who exploit the conditions, but when the entire field in the Regular Division can average only about 173 year after year, most of the modern-day high rollers (with their 200+ and 220+ averages) fall far short of their league "norms."
-
Okay, so the second tier of scratch bowlers don't score as good at nationals as they do on house shots. So what is different between now and 1985 in that respect. I bowled the US open in 1980. In the practice session I was talking to guys from Detroit who were averaging 225 in league. Think any of those guys averaged 200 on that pattern.
The upper 10% if bowlers average higher on house patterns than they did 35 years ago. The top 5% are more versatile and talented than any bowlers in history.
-
Dear avabob:
I'm sure things (scoring-wise) were varied in different parts of the country. When I moved to Florida in 1966, there had never been an 800 series in the history of the state, and the very highest statewide average on the first season I bowled in Florida was 214 by Jacksonville's Glenn Pierce. And I'd have to check for the exact number of 200+ averagers in the entire state, but that number was certainly no higher than 20.
-
While technology in golf has helped one hit the ball longer and straighter it still doesn't help with getting the ball in the hole. Putting is such a large part of the game and pitching and chipping when you miss the green hasn't been helped much. You still have to have certain skills to get the ball in the hole.
The average golfing handicap has stayed around 16 I believe.
And while the average bowling score hasn't increased a lot as well some of that maybe do to the graying of the average bowler. I have to believe the average age of league bowler here has to be in the mid 50's.
Between the technology of the balls, synthetic lane surfaces, and lane machines that strip and prepare the lanes the lack of certain bowling skills can be masked.
My biggest complaint of modern bowling equipment is how it alters the playing field.
If you could come up with a playing surface that didn't require conditioner or make the balls where they didn't remove conditioner rapidly I believe the game would be better served. But I don't believe either is going to happen shortly.
It has become a headache at many tournaments that bowlers are starting to refuse to bowl second shifts and insist that lanes be run between squads.
-
And while the average bowling score hasn't increased a lot as well some of that maybe do to the graying of the average bowler. I have to believe the average age of league bowler here has to be in the mid 50's.
... and certainly, in my area of Florida, where there are a lot of senior bowlers, a similar age dynamic likely holds true.
-
Average age of league bowlers has increased significantly. However there are several implications to that. Fish noted that in 1966 there had never been an 800 in the history of his association. Similar in my area. One guy had the first 800 along about 1967. Then he had another a couple of years later. None shot then until 1975 when we had 8, many with Shore Ds.
I don't think many people understand the degree to which the game was in its infancy in the 1960's. Just because the game had been around for 60 years isn't the same thing. The bowling boom of the late 50's was really the beginning of the modern game in many respects. Technology was minimal. Coaching non existent. Many bowlers were first learning the game. When I started in 1961, everyone in my town was a beginner no matter what the age.
-
One of the biggest differences is the amount of control one has over a shot. In golf for instances, (not accounting for wind obviously), if I make a great swing and send the ball down the middle of the fairway, it should end up relatively close to the center of fairway. Even with wind, you can judge how far left(right) you need to aim to have the ball end up in the middle. However, in bowling, the less advanced players do not see transition and do not know how to move. They will make a perfect shot off their hand, (same as last shot that might have struck) and have this one hit a dry patch, hook through the face and left the greek church. That would be the equivalent of hitting a perfect 8 iron right at the pin, and all of a sudden a bunker pops up in the middle of the green and your ball plugs in it.
In my opinion, there needs to be more restrictions on lane conditioner, lane machines, oil patterns, bowling balls, ect. There was not as much guessing back in the day. Scores were not as high, but I venture to say that more people enjoyed bowling more because a 150 guy had a shot at competing with a 180. I would say that back with urathane balls and less dense oil patterns, there was a much greater difference between a 150 avg bowler and a 190 avg bowler whereas today, on today's house shots, there is not that great of a difference between a 190 avg and a 220 avg. Granted, the 220 is much more consistent, but half the time, the diff is the 190 cant make a spare to save his(her) life.
I believe bowling needs to dial things back a bit, focus more on the youth and the actual "sport" of bowling, rather than teaching everyone that in order to be great, you need 600 rpms and high speed.
-
In my opinion, there needs to be more restrictions on lane conditioner, lane machines, oil patterns, bowling balls, ect. There was not as much guessing back in the day. Scores were not as high, but I venture to say that more people enjoyed bowling more because a 150 guy had a shot at competing with a 180. I would say that back with urathane balls and less dense oil patterns, there was a much greater difference between a 150 avg bowler and a 190 avg bowler whereas today, on today's house shots, there is not that great of a difference between a 190 avg and a 220 avg. Granted, the 220 is much more consistent, but half the time, the diff is the 190 cant make a spare to save his(her) life.
Dear MTbowler:
Your above-quoted paragraph contains some valid observations, and the entire post is thought-provoking, in my opinion.
-
As many have said relating to this issue, the horse is already out of the barn and jumped the fence!
You make valid points but going back is not going to grow the sport. It would cause more people to leave in my opinion as they are used to the easier conditions and hook it like Tommy Jones balls they have now. Force everyone back to urethane and a lot of bowlers I feel would quit because now instead of averaging 200 with no practice, they would average 180-190 again and that would be no fun.
I do not think bowling will ever return to the heights it achieved decades before.
Kids have too many other things to be interested in that didn't exist in the 80s & 90s. Atari & Intellivision were just getting started. Now X-box and playstation rule the world.
The blue collar leagues that the big cities and lanes always had have gone away.
Also cost is a factor. Back in the 80's and 90's my parents could unload me at the local lanes with a $20, and between bowling, arcade games and food, I'd be busy for 4-6 hours easy.
Today that same thing would take $50-100.
And we know that the weekend lane conditions are just great for a junior bowler to work and improve their game. (Just ignore the black lights and loud music in the background)
For my point of view, bowling was also the sport that didn't require you to be a perfect athlete. The super thin kids and the over-weight kids seemed to be the ones who bowled. Athletic kids played baseball and football on the weekends.
It gave them the chance to compete against anyone. You didn't have to be blessed with god given size to be a bowler.
Those same kids today find other ways to be competitive with others. Through video games, and other online activities, they can stay home and have fun.
It is a long hard battle ahead in my opinion.
One of the biggest differences is the amount of control one has over a shot. In golf for instances, (not accounting for wind obviously), if I make a great swing and send the ball down the middle of the fairway, it should end up relatively close to the center of fairway. Even with wind, you can judge how far left(right) you need to aim to have the ball end up in the middle. However, in bowling, the less advanced players do not see transition and do not know how to move. They will make a perfect shot off their hand, (same as last shot that might have struck) and have this one hit a dry patch, hook through the face and left the greek church. That would be the equivalent of hitting a perfect 8 iron right at the pin, and all of a sudden a bunker pops up in the middle of the green and your ball plugs in it.
In my opinion, there needs to be more restrictions on lane conditioner, lane machines, oil patterns, bowling balls, ect. There was not as much guessing back in the day. Scores were not as high, but I venture to say that more people enjoyed bowling more because a 150 guy had a shot at competing with a 180. I would say that back with urathane balls and less dense oil patterns, there was a much greater difference between a 150 avg bowler and a 190 avg bowler whereas today, on today's house shots, there is not that great of a difference between a 190 avg and a 220 avg. Granted, the 220 is much more consistent, but half the time, the diff is the 190 cant make a spare to save his(her) life.
I believe bowling needs to dial things back a bit, focus more on the youth and the actual "sport" of bowling, rather than teaching everyone that in order to be great, you need 600 rpms and high speed.