Author Topic: The Joys of Handicap..... (Read 7888 times)

Steven · « **on:** October 20, 2003, 09:50:36 PM »

I bowled in a mixed doubles handicap tournament this last weekend. Handicap was 100% of the difference between book average and 220. That means a 170 average bowler was given 50 pins per game out of the gate. With my 220 entering book, I of course got a big fat zero.

The winning team had a female 170 bowler who averaged 220 over 8 games. Maybe it was a legitimate streak, but the odds say not. However, assuming the scores were legit, I would have had to average 270 to keep pace, which was unrealistic. Again, assuming her average was real, it's much easier for a 170 average bowler to go 220 than it is for a 220 bowler to maintain 270.

The point is to illustrate the basic unfairness of 100% handicap (or even 90% handicap) formats. Because it's harder to score more as you move up the chain, handicap needs to be in the 80% range to ensure some semblance of fairness.

Anyway, I did the tournament purely for fun and for the opportunity to bowl with a senior friend, so I wasn't overly disappointed. However, the outcome was predictable.

Some food for thought the next time you enter a similar format.

--------------------

"Advertisers -- you too can have access to this prime demographic"

allengrace62 · « **Reply #31 on:** October 25, 2003, 10:49:16 AM »

I agree that a person with a higher handicap may be more
likely to win a tournament, especially if the shot happens
to agree with his game. But to say a 160 bowler is more
likely to shoot 200 than a 200 bowler is to shoot 240 is
ridiculous. If it happened consistently he would soon not
be a 160 bowler. My observation shows that regardless of
the average, a bowler will shoot about half of his games
above average and half below. If he does anything much
different his average will either go up or down because
nobody whether they average 160 or 220 will bowl those
exact scores very often. I bowl in a league that has two
teams that are all nearly scratch bowlers. The handicap is
80% of 210. The only way most teams take many games from
these two teams is when a couple of their bowlers have
a bad night and the opposing team bowls over their average.
These two teams have finished 1 & 2 in the league for the
past three or four years.
Handicap level the playing field somewhat but unless it
is 100% the teams with the best bowlers will generally win.

LadyW · « **Reply #32 on:** October 25, 2003, 11:00:41 AM »

What I resent most is someone putting words in my mouth.

Tell me where in my post I said "Tough. etc, etc. etc."

I will try to explain one more time so that everyone else on this forum doesn't get the wrong impression of me.

The tournament rules and handicap % are set by those running it. It is not a matter of fair or unfair. When one chooses to enter any competition, they are well aware of the rules and the odds of them winning based upon the handicap percentage.

If you accept the challenge and lose, you can't then blame it on the rules because you knew them going in. Noone forced you to enter the competition especially when you knew the odds were against you.

I am an erratic 170 bowler who is very capable of shooting 220-240 games on occasion.

There's a group of gentlemen with averages between 180 to 210 that are at the alleys almost daily.

Sometimes I join them and they play for $.50 a game scratch. Now I know going in that every single one of them is a better bowler than I am but I still choose to accept the challenge even though the odds are against me.

I've come in first on several occasions, second and third on others and somtimes I'm totally destroyed.

I don't walk away saying I lost because the rules weren't fair. I knew the rules, chose to participate and lost because I just wasn't good enough that day.

A tournament or any form of competition is a contest. You know the rules, you step up to the challenge and accept the outcome. It is not a matter of fair or unfair.
--------------------

LadyWannabe

kendog · « **Reply #33 on:** October 25, 2003, 11:47:39 AM »

I see both sides of this, but we all know that ther ARE sandbaggers and it's these people who tip the scales against scratch bowlers. I know a couple off the top of my head who bowl in a leaugue simply to gain pins for tourneys. I don't understand why these guys don't get rerated, it seems to me that's the cure for this ill. When I won a sweeper a couple of weeks age, I got rerated. But I know these couple of guys I'm talking about cash and win frequently. And they consistantly bowl 20-30 pins over their league aves. I don't want to put my money up against theirs, because I know my league ave is legit.
--------------------
Ken Stoner

JOE FALCO · « **Reply #34 on:** October 25, 2003, 12:56:41 PM »

If I REMEMBER the topic .. it related to what % (80/90/100)would be FAIR? Anyone who enters a tournament not knowing what he signs up for is a FOOL!

VERIFICATION of averages falls on the TOURNAMENT DIRECTOR .. tournaments that I was involved in .. we ALWAYS verified the TOP 10 winners. Tournaments we ran were all LOCAL BOWLERS and it was not THAT difficult. BIG CASH prizes attract OUT OF TOWN BOWLERS .. AGREE that is GOOD but VERIFICATION is TOUGH! My feeling is a bowler showing an average based on LESS THEN 2/3 of a FULL WINTER league should be advised that they will bowl SCRATCH or that their average will be CALCULATED at the end of the tournament.

There is NO REASON for a 210/220 average bowler to be IN a (SINGLES) HANDICAP TOURNAMENT!
--------------------
Hit them light and watch them fight
J O E - F A L C O

seadrive · « **Reply #35 on:** October 25, 2003, 01:16:56 PM »

In the modern game, with so much of our scores resulting from the lane conditioning practices and the power of modern bowling balls, it's almost impossible to design a handicap tournament that will be fair to all, especially if you have bowlers from other houses entered. Their averages may not indicate their potential on the THS in the house that's hosting the tournament.

Tournaments held near the end of the season often have the problem of rapidly-improving bowlers, whose averages don't reflect their current bowling ability.

And then, of course, you have the baggers.

As a matter of principle, I would refuse to bowl a 100% handicap league or tournament. I worked too hard to get to my current level of ineptitude

to lose to someone who bowls 150 with a 130 average. That's just silly.
--------------------
seadrive
Cogito ergo bowl

kendog · « **Reply #36 on:** October 25, 2003, 01:23:54 PM »

Joe, why would you say there is NO REASON for a 210/220 bowler to be in a handicap singles? Maybe it's handy, as in close by. A person wants to bowl for some dough, big deal, I don't follow your excited statements.
--------------------
Ken Stoner

kendog · « **Reply #37 on:** October 26, 2003, 02:52:06 PM »

As far as my idea, I'm talking about rerating people based on prior tournament scoring. You may sandbag once but not twice. That's it
--------------------
Ken Stoner

kendog · « **Reply #38 on:** October 27, 2003, 10:45:13 AM »

Once is too late but that's how justice works. You can't correct an infraction that hasn't occurred yet. I don't think there is an absolute answer to this issue.
--------------------
Ken Stoner

Steven · « **Reply #39 on:** October 27, 2003, 10:49:46 AM »

LadyWannabe: You asked the following:

quote:
What I resent most is someone putting words in my mouth. Tell me where in my post I said "Tough. etc, etc. etc."

OK, fair question. Please examine two of your statements in previous posts in this thread:

1) "You knew going into the tournament that the handicap was 100%. Since that puts the advantage on the lower average bowlers side, you had the choice of not participating. "

2) "Of course the advantage is on the side of the lower average bowler at 100% handicap. My point was that everyone entering knew that and still chose to participate. "

Your message was very clear. First, you acknowledge that one group (i.e. lower average bowlers) has an inherent advantage going in. Second, your analysis of the situation concludes that the solution is for the higher average bowler not to enter. In other words, you are saying "Tough" to the bowlers who get the short end of the stick.

Remember, the ideal intent of handicap is to ensure that all participants, regardless of ability, have an equal chance of winning. However, since this particular format favors you, your answer is to leave it alone.

So if you recognize that the format is unfair, why don't you take the approach that as a lower average bowler, you'll refuse the participate because the competition rules are tainted? That seems to be the higher road to take.

--------------------

"Advertisers -- you too can have access to this prime demographic"

LadyW · « **Reply #40 on:** October 27, 2003, 11:59:49 AM »

Steven-

Unless you haven't noticed, we don't live in an "ideal" world.

You can't expect every tournament to be designed to satisfy the needs of the higher average bowler who is the minority, not the majority.

What about scratch competitions? Should they be abolished because they cater to the higher average bowlers? What chance does a 170 average bowler have there? Is that fair?

Why don't you run your own tournament so that you can set up the parameters?

We could go around in circles on this forever.

Let's just agree to disagree.
-----------

LadyWannabe

card79 · « **Reply #41 on:** October 27, 2003, 12:17:53 PM »

A scratch tourney is atleast open and honest that it is unfair. It says what you get is your score if somebody is really bowling better than you they will beat you. The problem he is trying to show you is that these handicap tournametns try to spoon feed that they are making competition fair for everyone. When infact they are maybe not as unfair as they scratch tourney's but unfair in a worse way they create a false sense of accomplishment and really create no real winner. They simply create a paper champion that the tournament directors create based on the handicapp percentage. Shoot they might as well get Don King and switch it over to boxing instead of a handicap bowling tournament.
--------------------
I don't really play cards and I am not 79, but it fits together somehow.

Steven · « **Reply #42 on:** October 27, 2003, 12:38:13 PM »

LadyWannabe: We might actually be making progress so I'm not going to let you off the hook -- just yet.

Your example of scratch tournaments is interesting and there is actually some truth to what you said. Scratch tournaments do in fact cater to higher average bowlers, but that reality is right up front in flashing neon lights, so if you choose to enter, you know the rules (Card79, thanks for pointing this out first).

Conversely, Handicap format tournaments are supposed to be designed to eliminate the concept of favoring one group over another. And if the intelligent application of handicap percentages across different groups of bowlers was implemented, it could probably be achieved.

The problem is that the ABC does in fact want to cater to lower average bowlers, because that majority group is the only force that stands between them and organizational extinction. They pander this silly notion the 100% - 115% handicap is "fair" in a losing battle to maintain membership.

You can close your eyes and pretend this is good, or do the right thing and speak up against blatant competitive unfairness. You're right that we don't live in an ideal world where there are simple answers to all problems. However, when the answers are clear and easy to implement, we're remiss when we don't choose to speak up.

--------------------

"Advertisers -- you too can have access to this prime demographic"

Edited on 10/27/2003 1:48 PM

LadyW · « **Reply #43 on:** October 27, 2003, 01:09:00 PM »

Steven -

You're exhausting me. I'm running out of steam as I'm not as young as I used to be and need to conserve some energy for bowling later.

I'll reply tomorrow after I take my iron pills.
-----------
LadyWannabe

P.S. I'm amazed at how many people have viewed this post. Last count 1,345.

JOE FALCO · « **Reply #44 on:** October 27, 2003, 10:33:15 PM »

STE .. just for kicks .. go to your league secretary and find out what percentage of games bowled by a 170 average were in the 220 and what percentage of 215 averages had games in the 240 area! I'll check with one of my leagues (Wed night)I'll let you know what I FIND!

Less see if your SPECULATION is reality!
--------------------
Hit them light and watch them fight
J O E - F A L C O

Author Topic: The Joys of Handicap..... (Read 7888 times)

Steven

The Joys of Handicap.....

allengrace62

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

LadyW

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

kendog

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

JOE FALCO

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

seadrive

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

kendog

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

kendog

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

kendog

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

Steven

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

LadyW

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

card79

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

Steven

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

LadyW

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....

JOE FALCO

Re: The Joys of Handicap.....