It dawned on me the other day, that I bowled my first scratch tournament 46 years ago this month.  I was throwing a Brunswick hard rubber ball, the only ball I owned at the time.  I shot about 30 under for 6, and missed the cut, but I don't remember by how much.  I know it took plus.  I felt like I was in over my head a bit, but I immediately signed up for the next tournament before I had time to dwell on it.  This one I remember well.  I qualified 3rd with -7 and ended up winning the tournament on the back of a 4 game stretch in the finals where I shot 967. 

The old technology probably jumps out at people reading this post, but the real difference was lack of knowledge and skills.  There were only a handful of guys in any tournament who were versatile enough to play multiple angles from the gutter to 4th arrow.  I didn't even have a ball that was balanced for static weight until 1974.  Scoring was lower in those days,, not because the shots were more difficult, but because carry ebbed and flowed as you moved with the oil breakdown.  You could shoot a 260+ game, and pound the pocket the rest of the day and not crack 220. 

When polyester became appreciated in the 70's ( it worked much better on the new hard urethane lane finishes than it did on the lacquer of the 60's ) scoring took a big jump ( bigger than from urethane to resin in the 80's ).  By the 70's the game really was no different that it is today.  Half the guys were complaining about lane conditions being too easy, and the other half thought the cream came to the top on the higher scoring conditions.  Older, straighter players like myself looked down our noses at the young crankers who struck all day but couldn't pick up a spare.  Leftys either had a big edge, or they were shut out. 

Urethane didn't really change the game much in the 80's, it just allowed even more power players to become dominant, because the oil patterns had gotten so short.  I averaged nearly as much in league with urethane as I did a decade later with resin.  Tournaments were a diffferent story.  Only way to win over a 10-12 game tourney was to hook it a ton, or be able to play dead straight and stay outside.  Us tweeners just couldn't carry with the crankers when the shot moved in. 

Today I only see two things different than when I started the game all those years ago.  One is bad the other is good.  On the good side, the resin balls have allowed different styles to compete on a level playing field across a broad range of conditions.  On the bad side the balls blow up patterns so quickly that nobody is really forced to play the shot as it is layed out for very long. 

The many more award scores and super high averages have had no impact on the game from my perspective.  The guy who executes the best in the long run wins whether it takes a 240 average or 210 average.   In the short run you can get beat when a guy sprays the ball and gets lucky today just as I lost games when guys threw 3 or 4 brooklyns 40 years ago.  People get frustrated with the game for the same reason they did 40 years ago.  Usually it is not because the game is too easy for them, but because it seems to easy for the other guy.             

People get frustrated with the game for the same reason they did 40 years ago.  Usually it is not because the game is too easy for them, but because it seems to easy for the other guy.             

Quoted for truth....

Great post.

I don't mean to crash this post, but intelligent post like this reminds me of the late SAWBONES.

The cream does still rise to the top, but when it doesn't it is more about the short formats that have become necessary because of the degradation of oil patterns.   I remember well the last ABC Masters where they only oiled the lanes once a day in the match play finals.  It was 1996 at Salt Lake.  By the 4th round the right side had become totally trashed.  I bowled Ernie Schlegel in the round of 8.  He eked out a close victory against me and drew the other remaining right hander the next round to make the show.  He told me later that he would never have won the tournament had he drawn a lefty instead of me or the right hander in the next round.  The next year they started oiling after every 3 rounds.   The PBA format changed for much reason.  The old qualifying formats where lanes were oiled once in the morning would make lanes uplayable by the 3rd round with todays balls. 

Bottom line, I have lost lots of games and matches to guys who sprayed the ball, but I have never been out averaged over the course of a season by one.  Their are still lots of league bowlers with high averages and bundles of award scores who can't pick up spares, but go play top local scratch tournaments or regionals, and you won't find guys missing many spares and making money. 

I reiterate my position that problems with todays game have nothing to do with high scoring, but rapid degradation of the playing environment by high friction balls is a major problem at the elite level of the game.

Thanks to the poster who compared me to Bones.  I use to post often when Bones was alive and active. I respected him greatly and always regretted that I never got to meet him.   

Bottom line, I have lost lots of games and matches to guys who sprayed the ball, but I have never been out averaged over the course of a season by one.  Their are still lots of league bowlers with high averages and bundles of award scores who can't pick up spares, but go play top local scratch tournaments or regionals, and you won't find guys missing many spares and making money. 

A big plus 1 ....
 
Bob is absolutely right. For anyone who bowls in higher end scratch leagues and tournaments, the cream almost always rises to the top over the longer haul. I'll lose on occasional nights to the higher rev guys who spray the ball around, but they're never near the top at the end of the season. 
 
That's why I don't give the higher scoring pace much thought. It's still all relative.

Now that makes more sense to me Pinbuster.  There have been a few references to high rev guys that spray the ball but resin allows a weak handed player who also isn't very consistent to target score as high as a better player, cranker, tweener or stroker alike. 

I just don't recall seeing guys with poor releases and poor fundamentals spraying Yellow Dots and LT-48s all over the place and scoring like they do today.  That phenomenon is strictly a byproduct of resin balls and precision oil machines.

Overall I would agree. But there certainly is nights where I know without a doubt that the pattern/breakdown/ball gave an inferior bowler an advantage over me.

In nearly 20 years of adult leagues my brother has never outaveraged me once. I have a more diverse game and repeat shots better. But in our Wednesday league where there is lots of friction on the outside he had a look that allowed it. 233 or so was his final average. First time he has booked over 225.

The game has changed. Certain styles match up in some places. Tweeners are quite often up against bad odds as crankers carry better on oil and open up the house wall, and the weak handed or high speed guys can sit out in the track. I can tell you honestly that I was only able to play my "A" game maybe a dozen times all year.

That said, I did ok. But I know there are many more nights where I look around and see scores through the roof based on match-up. So much so that that is the number one thing I tell people walking into my shop. I don't care if you are 160 or 230....if I can peg the right match-up for the conditions you're on you are going to start striking a lot.

I hate Rico and pin down layouts. Grabbed my brothers ball towards the end of the season (Rico 916AT) and started destroying pins. Probably averaged 250+ with it including an 837 set. (289, 258, 290) All about match-up. I threw it okay....but the ball did all the work.

I hate Rico and pin down layouts. Grabbed my brothers ball towards the end of the season (Rico 916AT) and started destroying pins. Probably averaged 250+ with it including an 837 set. (289, 258, 290) All about match-up. I threw it okay....but the ball did all the work.

I do think the game has changed a bit, but I don't necessarily believe its in a bad way.  This quote is the key to the entire thing, in my opinion.  Current conditions allow inferior bowlers to bowl as well as a better bowler for a day or even for the course of a season... IF the better bowler is stubborn.  Bowling is a much more mental game now.  On a THS, knowing how to play what the lane gives you is more important than making minor hand adjustments.  A bowler with a better game plan can overcome a bowler with more skill, and I see nothing wrong with that.  It happens in every single sport.  The inferior bowler only really has a chance to win when he matches up better to the lanes than the superior bowler.  If the bowler is truly superior, he SHOULD be able to find a way to match up better than the inferior bowler, especially over the course of a season on a THS that doesn't change week to week.  If he can't, I question how superior he really is, as adjusting is an integral part of the game. 

Will there be occasions where the superior bowler is bowling well and still gets beat by someone inferior?  Of course, that what makes sports great.  The Stanley Cup is currently being contested by the 6th and 8th seeds of their respective conferences.  They obviously weren't the best teams all year, but they got hot at the right time and have had good game plans to take down more talented teams.  That is what happens in sports, and that will happen bowling. 

In the case of completebowler's story, his brother didn't out average him because the lanes were set up better for him.  His brother outaveraged him because CB didn't make the correct adjustment until the end of the season (pin down ball).    His brother simply figured out how to play the lanes faster than CB did (probably by accident, but he still did).  If CB figured that out earlier, he would've outaveraged his brother easily.  I'm sure his brother would still admit that CB is the better bowler, though he will probably use the offseason to rub in his victory lol.  (Sorry to use you as an example, CB).