Post by: The Hose on March 30, 2004, 08:54:33 PM
Team winners were almost at 3500 and doubles was 1490.
When I asked the board why they go off of 85% of 220 they say that they are afraid that the numbers would decline. I asked them if entries were up and they said "No, but they didn't go down". I don't think that the entries would go down if it was 75 or 80% of 210.
Shouldn't working on you game mean something? Shouldn't the one who bowls the best get the reward? Where is the incentive to get better if you can average 175 and get "hot" and win the tournament?
I played Tennis and don't remember getting any points or games from the guys who were better players then me. If I wanted to beat them I had to practice harder on my game to get to their level. This isn't the case in bowling. Who started this crap?
I drive 4 hours to Dallas to compete against some of the best in the country. CJ, DJ Archer, Wes Mallot, Chris Barnes, Rick Lawerence, Mike Scroggins, Paul Fleming, Dino Castilo, and I could go on and on. I bowl scratch against those guys and it doesn't bother me to lose to them nor do I feel like they should give me sticks. If I want to win, I need to work harder and get better.
It's not easy walking in every handicap tourament and seeing 830's.
I know you'll say, " well, don't bowl them". Shouldn't I reply "Well, get better!". I only bowl about 3 handicap tournaments a year. We don't have much in the way of scratch stuff unless you go to Dallas.
I don't mind giving "some" handicap. I understand you need it to get the numbers. But what is really fair?
--------------------
I can't help it, Hot Chicks Dig the Hose
Post by: Pinbuster on March 31, 2004, 12:16:51 PM
In truth is any amount of handicap is unfair to someone who shot higher scratch. But as you said it becomes a number game to get entries.
Perhaps there needs to be a sliding handicap. The more scratch you shoot over your base average the less handicap you would get. This might not of kept your 188 average from winning but it might turn his 835 into a 775 and let the scratch bowlers feel like they had a chance.
I guess we are lucky here in that I don’t worry too much about the handicap scores and look more at the scratch portion of our city tournament.
As far as tennis goes, the few tournaments I ever played in were always flighted by ability which is a form of handicapping.
Post by: Rantings on March 31, 2004, 12:22:15 PM
--------------------
Bowling is for sissies..ask Bones...
Post by: charlest on March 31, 2004, 12:25:59 PM
1. There are always going to be sandbaggers, until society gets some lie-detector device attached to the human being or we all become telepathic.
2. There are always going to be the people who this year (or whatever year the average is taken) are bowling much better than their normal average and who will complain that they should get more than their allotted handicap.
3. There are always going to be a percentage of bowlers who are bowling well under their normal average this year and will score much higher than their current average. Others will say they sandbagged for this tournament.
What the valid local handicap percentage (100, 95, 90, 85%, etc) and the whatever the base (200, 240, etc) someone will not be happy with it, yet it is the best can be done IF you want 170 bowlers to be able to compete in the same tournament as 220 average bowlers.
You can't make all the people happy all the time. You'll go crazy trying.
--------------------
"We get old too fast, and too late, smart."
Post by: Kevin on March 31, 2004, 12:37:00 PM
say bowler a) has a 175 average. His handicap will be 38. He bowls a 175 + his handicap of 38 = 213
bowler b) has a 220 avg and zero handicap. He bowls his average of 220. He wins.
So if both bowlers hit their average, the better scratch bowler always wins.
If bowler a) scores 15 pins over his average his score would be 228.
Bowler B) scores only 9 over his average. Bowler B still wins with a 229.
--------------------
Winning and Losing are both very temporary things. Having done one or the other, we move on. Gloating over Victory or Sulking in Defeat is a good way to Stand Still.
Post by: The Hose on March 31, 2004, 12:44:55 PM
I'm asking where the incentive is for handicap bowlers to get better. Wouldn't the owners want people out working on their games?
What does it take to shot 750's? You can miss twice or three time a game and make every spare. Even on a wall that isn't easy. Yet that is what it takes just to cash in some of the handicap touraments.
I bowled last weekend out of town and shot 2000, not great but still over a 220 average. What did that get me? I think you know the answer to that.
--------------------
I can't help it, Hot Chicks Dig the Hose
Post by: mumzie on March 31, 2004, 01:43:38 PM
And that average was legit - the average the year before was 187, I'd had two bad injuries... And the next year, started getting serious.
I do, however, favor divisions. WIBC does this - I think they are up to 5 divisions now. 200+, 180-199, or whatever they are. This makes more sense - like is competing against like. Yes, you will still have the bowler who shoots lights out - who booked in the brickyard, etc, etc. But it is far more equitable than handicap.
But my real pet peeve regarding handicap is NEGATIVE HANDICAP!! I worked hard for every one of those pins - don't you DARE take them away.
Post by: Steven on March 31, 2004, 01:51:05 PM
And I completely agree with the premise of your topic -- most handicap schemes are unfair and biased against the more skilled bowlers. The basic point that should never be lost when discussing handicap is that in general, it's easier for a lower average bowler to bowl significantly over average than it is for a higher average bowler to bowl significantly over average.
That's why 100% handicap is really silly -- too silly to take seriously. The fact is that it's much easier for a 175 bowler (who's working on his/her game at all) to meet or exceed their average than is is for a 220 bowler to do the same.
So given this, in most cases, handicap needs to set to some number significantly less than 100%. Of course, there are exceptions. First, there are senior leagues, where everyone basically "is what they is" and therefore 100% might be the best solution. And then there are the obnoxious beer/social mixed handicap leagues, which probably shouldn't be sanctioned at all, because scoring and results are so skewed that they have almost no meaning that should be referenced for future handicap calculations.
As far as tournaments, what I've seen work best is a '199 and less' division based on 90% handicap, and a '200 and over' scratch division for everyone else. To try and come up with any handicap scheme that would account for a mix of bowlers averaging anywhere between 150-230, and the fact that those averages were established in different houses on different conditions, borders on insanity and invariably generates crazy results.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "
Post by: pin-chaser on March 31, 2004, 01:51:53 PM
I am with you brother. But I look at the handicap not that I am spotting them pins but that they are spotting me pins. I mean to be fair, If an am averaging 230... and the handicap is 90% of 220... I am getting 10 pins plus 10% of the difference in our averages. The real problem is that, it far easier with todays equipement for a 170 average bowler to shoot 150 pins over his average (660) than it is for me to shot 150 pins over mine (840). In by gone days, when equpiment required more accuracy and consistantcy in entry angle and relase, 170 bowlers had a much harder time shooting 660... today every 170 bowler does this several times a quarter, back then, it was once per year at best. It is not that handicap that is hurting us, it is the equipment and cheaters who intentionally average 20 pins less so that they can intentionally have more pins is what is hurting us.
--------------------
Getting all the pins I can.
Post by: hotwire13 on March 31, 2004, 01:56:36 PM
quote:
The higher average still has the advantage with 85% handicap of 220.
say bowler a) has a 175 average. His handicap will be 38. He bowls a 175 + his handicap of 38 = 213
bowler b) has a 220 avg and zero handicap. He bowls his average of 220. He wins.
So if both bowlers hit their average, the better scratch bowler always wins.
If bowler a) scores 15 pins over his average his score would be 228.
Bowler B) scores only 9 over his average. Bowler B still wins with a 229.
--------------------
Winning and Losing are both very temporary things. Having done one or the other, we move on. Gloating over Victory or Sulking in Defeat is a good way to Stand Still.
on paper, this point makes sense. that is, until u get into the realm of much higher scores than just basic averages. when bowler A shoots 240, the 38 pins handicap brings that to 278. now, instead of having to shoot only 9 pins to win, he needs to shoot a 279+, which only allows one 9 count spare throughout the game. i am not siding with scratch or handicap here...i dont think there will ever be a situation where everyone is happy. but the higher u get in scoring, the harder it is for the higher average bowler to keep up, even though there scores may be superior. my thinking is this - the harder the condition(THS, OOB, sport shot), the more handicap should be given...a THS in my mind should be handicap enough for everyone...it brings peoples averages up anyway, so the playing field is leveled out without having to add any pins(and the higher average bowlers do not benefit as much). the more difficult conditions start to show differences in average, typically, and should require more handicap given. better bowlers make better shots on tougher conditions, so anything less than 100% handicap should allow the better bowlers to end up on top. this may be a bad way of looking at it, but i am not a huge fan of handicap anyway. noone will ever agree on a set percentage or base, but there may be little adjustments that can be made according to format and conditions.
--------------------
Erik Olsen - e13ez85@hotmail.com
Post by: Kevin on March 31, 2004, 04:54:41 PM
--------------------
Winning and Losing are both very temporary things. Having done one or the other, we move on. Gloating over Victory or Sulking in Defeat is a good way to Stand Still.
Post by: Steven on March 31, 2004, 05:10:34 PM
quote:
So the guy with the 38 handicap fires a 240. So he wins that one game. Is he going to throw another 200+ game? Most likely not that day.
Kevin: You hit on the problem (at least kinda). In most cases, there is at least one guy (or gal) with the 38 handicap who not only fire a 240+ the first game, but also the second, third, fourth, etc. On paper this shouldn't happen, but it does. And it doesn't have to be everyone -- just a few. This is why more often than not a 170-190 average bowler wins these handicap events.
And this is what drives the more skilled bowlers nuts.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "
Post by: hotwire13 on March 31, 2004, 05:20:22 PM
--------------------
Erik Olsen - e13ez85@hotmail.com
Post by: Steven on March 31, 2004, 05:32:06 PM
This is an important topic because there is much confusion and misperception on how handicap really works and how it affects competition. Hopefully, threads like this clear the issue up.
--------------------
"You want the truth? -- You can't handle the truth! "
Post by: Kevin on March 31, 2004, 07:05:14 PM
a) 210+ avg
b) 180-210
c) 150-180
d) 0 - 150
You can have it set up that a Bowler who bowls most his games in a tourney above the high avg for his division, auomaticaly gets moved up for future events.
exmple - Say you have a 189 avg. You would be in Div B....During the tourney you avg or bowl the majority of your game above 210. Next tourney you will be moved in to group A.
No handicap, all games a straight up. You just bowl in the dividion that meets your skill level.
--------------------
Winning and Losing are both very temporary things. Having done one or the other, we move on. Gloating over Victory or Sulking in Defeat is a good way to Stand Still.
Post by: Phillip Marlowe on March 31, 2004, 07:24:32 PM
80%. Favors the higher average bowlers. Period.
85%. Seems to even it out some, but it eliminates teams that don't have a composite average within say 15-18 per person of the highest average teams.
90%. In a quarter system, evens it out, in so far as it allows average and even below average teams to win a quarter. Over the course of a year, higher average teams still do slightly better, in terms of total wins and losses.
100%. Flat favors the middle and below average teams in a league. Period.
--------------------
"I don't mind if you don't like my manners. I don't like them myself. They're pretty bad. I grieve over them on long winter evenings."
Post by: Brickguy221 on March 31, 2004, 11:56:22 PM
Quote
.......Hose, your topic is the very reason so many of the better bowlers across the country are not entering handicap events and the reason tourney entries keep going down.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bones, if you do away with the handicap, you are going to see entries really go down big-time. Take myself, I have a 185 average this year. Without a handicap, what chance do I have to even place, let alone win, competing against bowlers with averages of 215-220-225 and up. The answer is no chance. So am I going to enter the tournament? No I am not. Why? Because my chances of placing, winning, etc. are Nil. All the other bowlers like myself are not going to enter either, so you are going to see entries drop like you've never seen before.
To me, one solution to this handicap thing in tournaments is to have two divisions. A scratch division and a handicap division. I just know that myself and others in my class will not bowl in tournaments where we have no chance at all.
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: MSC2471 on April 01, 2004, 03:26:17 AM
However I am perplexed at the state tournament and their handicap this year- 90% of 240. Unless the condition that they set up is more of a PBA/ sport shot, this will definitely favor the 180/190 average bowler who can get hot and put up a couple of high 600/ low 700 series....
Matt
Post by: ksucat on April 01, 2004, 12:21:07 PM
I like a 60-85% handicap of 200-210. This gives the higher average bowlers a distinct advantage, but still gives the lower average bowler a chance. I don't mind the occasional top 10 finish by a lower average bowler if he had a career day. I just don't like this to become habit for him. I want him to get a taste of success and realize that with hard work, he can become better and compete on a scratch basis.
Until we have a master database of all sanctioned tournaments, sandbaggers will still be a plague to the sport and ruin the concept of handicapping. Once this database is maintained, then those that consistently make money in tournaments by averaging way higher than their entering average will be rerated or banned. ABC needs to step up to the plate here.
Post by: Brickguy221 on April 01, 2004, 04:46:50 PM
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________________________
ksucat, on a 60% handicap, the lower average bowler like myself is not going to enter these tournaments. A lower average bowler like myself is not going to enter any tournament if he doesn't have an equal chance to place/win as the high average bowler. You can't give the higher average bowler as you call it a "distinct advantage" and expect the lower average bowler like my self to enter/compete as it isn't going to happen.
Everyone should have an equal chance and not give one group, lower average or higher average either one, a distinct advantage. From my personal experience of the tournaments I have entered, 85% of 210 is a good number. Although it still gives the higher average bowler a tiny bit advantage, the lower average bowler has a chance here. I've both won and placed in these 85% of 210 tournaments and I've lost and came in close to the bottom in them......And the higher average bowlers still won their share also.
Again, to me thru my personal experience, 85% of 210 is as close to fair as you will get if you want both low and high average bowlers in the tournament.
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: The Hose on April 01, 2004, 08:24:00 PM
Now, if that same guy would spend some time with a coach, or work on spares, learn to read lanes and make the proper ball changes, I'd say that same bowler could be at 210 in a short amount of time.
Just a few years ago, I started back up and averaged 197. The next year I didn't work on my game much but averaged 205. The year I shot off of 197, I didn't do much in tournaments nor did I bowl many.
Two years later, I'm at 228. How? Hard work. I've been paying my dues and am now seeing the fruits of my labor. Sure I could have stayed at 200 to 205 but I wanted to get better.
The problem I see is that the 190 average bowler doesn't work to get better but wants the handicap to give him an equal or close too chance. Why should he have the same chance?
I like Steven's idea about two divisions. A 199 and below is in a division with 90% of 200. 200 and above is scratch. If a 199 or eblow wants to compete scrach, he can pay the prize fun only (no extra lineage) and be eligible for the scratch.
It's hard to know that you've worked at your game and invested a lot of time and money in this sport and walk into a tournament and see 830 to 860 leading Singles. I go to win, not to cash. While, as in our tournament, a 188 average bowlers gets a few breaks and shot 750 scratch. He would have won it if he shot 690 scratch.
All I am saying is that the best should win. The top score scratch that is.
--------------------
I can't help it, Hot Chicks Dig the Hose
Post by: Brickguy221 on April 01, 2004, 09:25:18 PM
Quote
...."All I am saying is that the best should win. The top score scratch that is."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hose-Bones, (a father-son thing, oh golly gee...lol) I understand from where you are coming from and if I was in your shoes, I'm positive I would feel the same way you do. However, I'm not in your shoes, I am in mine so naturally I have to look at it different than you do.
As for practice, hard work, and even coaching, I've had/done it all this year and this 185 avg. is as good as I seem to be able to do. Prior to my major surgery last summer, I averaged 194-196 with the same practicing, working hard, coaching, and etc. After I came back in the fall, I've fallen to where I am now and I've tried everything imagineable to get back where I was before the surgery, but it has been to no avail. At my age plus still some health problems, plus I can't get down at the line anymore, I can't see me averaging 200-210-220, etc. I've never been able to do it before when I was in good health, so how in the world could I do it now. As already mentioned, I've done every thing possible to do better and have failed to do so. Everyone "has their peak" as to how far they can go and it looks like I may be at mine due to my health and age.
I don't mean to offend you with what I've said here, but I felt that maybe you two were telling me I need to practice and work at my game harder whereas I have already done this.
We all have a point of view from where we all stand and if we traded shoes, we'd see the other person's point of view and then feel the opposite. So, if I don't have a chance and can't compete, then why throw my money away and bowl in tournaments. On a 85% of 210 setup, I can compete and do have a chance, although the higher average bowler still has a slight edge, but not a huge or as ksucat calls it a "distinct advantage". Maybe it is different where the two of you bowl, but around where I live, the higher average bowler still usually wins.
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: Brickguy221 on April 01, 2004, 10:11:21 PM
In reality, I'm glad you under stand where I am coming from and I likewise understand you too. Thanks for expressing how you see it plus the bowlers averages of today vs the bowlers of the past.
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: The Hose on April 01, 2004, 10:32:28 PM
If money was paid out heavier for scratch scores, or if handicap was done away with, what do you think would happen? Sure you'd lose bowlers, but I bet a lot of averageds would go up and you'd see people work on their game.
There were two really good Tennis players in Oklahoma when I was growing up. All through the ages of 12 to 18, I could never beat those guys. I worked hard and got lucky and beat one of them. The thrill was unbelievable. If he had to give me 3 games a set and I won, I wouldn't have felt the same way.
Would it be fair to set a max score for handicap? Say no matter what you shot, the max you could get was 750 unless you beat it scratch. That way a scratch bolwer feels like they have a chance to win. 750 isn't easy for anyone. If a guy can shoot 720 should he be good enough to bowl scratch anyway?
I bowled a handicap matchplay doubles deal in OKC last summer. A 188 average bowler shot over 700 4 out of the first 5 matches. Come on, the guys shot 744 against us and was crying about his carry.
It's just rare to walk into a tournament and see Singles below 800 and thats tough on me when I can know that I'm shut out after 4 balls.
I bowled in Pittsburg KS last week and 2300 was leading AE shot by a college kid named Rhino Page. He did it scratch! Great for him, I'd be the first to tell him how great he bowled. I wouldn't feel that same way if a guy shot 1870 but with his handicap he reached 2300.
In most sports, the best win and get the most money. I don't see it being true in bowling.
--------------------
I can't help it, Hot Chicks Dig the Hose
Post by: Brickguy221 on April 01, 2004, 10:43:39 PM
I think we see each other, but not entirely agreeing....Only partially agreeing.
....Oh well, as Jeffrevs would say, "Whatever"
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: ksucat on April 02, 2004, 09:59:45 AM
Senior tournaments represent a whole different game. I would go up to 80-100% of 210 for them and have no problems with that. Much less chance of a 188 bowler shooting 700's on a regular basis.
I would like to see scores as a whole come down so these zip code scores are a rarity that are special, not an every tournament occurrence. I'm going to Pittsburg, KS this Saturday and while I am happy for Rhino for his scores, I don't think a 2300 All-Events should happen very often.
One of my favorite tournaments in this area is the Greater Ozarks because the scores are normally kept reasonable low. I hear tons of hacks that complain that those lanes are terrible, but I have only had a couple years where I caught a bad pair and felt shut out. Most of the time, I felt that as long as I executed well and got a few good breaks, I had a legitimate chance for a top 10 finish. I also like that All-Events (the most important individual title) is scratch. Currently the 1st place team looks a little out of place in that they are one of the higher scratch scores and still get a bunch of handicap. Looks like an exception to the norm. Rhino was pretty good there also as he is leading Singles.
Post by: Pinbuster on April 02, 2004, 10:39:48 AM
That is the biggest difference from 30 years ago. No one would shoot more than 100+ over their average, 180 averages just didn’t shoot over 650. Today 180’s tend to shoot at least one 700 a season in league.
Someone will say they shouldn’t be penalized for shooting in a brickyard that no one can average over 190 in. Well those places are few and far between and if they go somewhere and start shooting 50+ pins a game over their average they should be out of their comfort zones and start choking on it.
As Hoses stated maybe a cap on handicap scores or as I stated earlier a sliding handicap scale based on pins shot over average that would in effect put a cap on handicap scores.
Post by: Brickguy221 on April 02, 2004, 10:43:54 AM
I can't imagine someone sandbagging all year long in leagues to gain an advantage in tournaments, but maybe it happens, I don't know. All I know is that where I bowl, it doesn't happen.
To sum it up, you wear your shoes and I wear mine. If we were to trade shoes, I'm sure I would see it as you do and you would see it as I do. So, whos right and whos wrong? You and I can't determine this as we are on different sides of the fence and will disagree forever. In fact, I don't think there is a right or wrong answer because there are two different sides to this. The way it is now, the high average bowlers whine. If they were to change it to 60-65-70-75% of 210-220, or whatever, all the lower average bowlers would whine. So either way, someone is going to whine. Unless you would go to two divisions as some have suggested here, someone is always going to be unhappy. Right????
--------------------
Lane 1 - The Bowlers Company
Nothing hits as hard as an Uranium
Post by: Jerry Weller on April 02, 2004, 06:51:34 PM