Something in another post got the hamPsters in my head running pretty fast about the significance or lack thereof of big scores. I fall in the category of thinking the scores should mean something. Back a few years ago, getting breaks meant you were doing something right. Right area of the lane, paying attention, thinking, etc. Now more often than not somebody just happens across a good matchup with the ball. The good bowlers were consistently up there in score, and while it still took a few breaks, you didnt just walk out and shoot numbers if you were clueless or inconsistent or the percentage was waaaay down. Now its more like a rite of passage. I can shoot a big game or set using experience, thinking, laneplay, paying attention, keeping ahead of transition, but jr thats fresh out of youth leagues can pull the latest and greatest out of his bag and walk up there, hit 3 different arrows, and outscore me. The youth kids in town always talk about "getting their 300," like its owed to them or something. Then the ones that get one go around talking about their "first" 300 like its also a given that they will get more. So do i just need to get over it and realize that its more of a fun thing to get a big score than an actual honor?
Im a perfectionist, and my m.o. so to speak is working hard at something until im significantly better than the average. I dont have to be the best, just in the conversation. And its not being "better" than someone else, its just a nameless faceless number to me. If the average for whats considered a good bowler is 220, i want to average 230. I could care less about recognition and having my name above someone elses on a list, its just a personal goal, i could be the only person on the planet, and if i at least had something to beat, thats good enough for me.
So if the scores by themselves arent enough to say anything, is accumulation of them really anything to talk about either? What is the measure of a good bowler anymore?
That's just like, your opinion, man.
