OK, here's a question for Avabob (and the other old timers)  since he's been winning since a little before I was born.  Which era was the best bowling wise?  Rubber, Polyester, Urethan or Reactive?  Not your best results, because I've read your opinion on short oil, or the most participation, because that declines every year, but the just the most overall enjoyable time to bowl.

I know this will be very dependent on your life circumstances at various times, but try to think just about the bowling at the time.

Just had a conversation today at the Senior World Championships with a former PBA bowler. We revisited the days of old, when we bowled against each other in the JAT days. He told me "The game was so much simpler then, and the difference between the top and the great, then the good, then the decent and so on, was not that far apart." He also said 99% of the bowlers out there are not good enough to throw the modern equipment, so the houses had to become easier to keep people bowling.

Guess what: I agree with him. I am no saying our time, the 80's urethane days, were that much better, and yes, it had it drawbacks, too. But almost any time you can name will be better than what we experience now and any time other than now will be better on many different levels.

The 1900's, of course.



lol

I enjoyed the early 90's too, right before reactives...but the ball/lanes were only part of why I preferred it. The other is the economy was doing fairly well, the houses were still busy, leagues were full, etc. In truth, that was more important than the technology, which really doesn't mean that much.

But, every generation will have a different answer. In truth, I love the game now and enjoy it more than ever, but the sport as a whole is not competing with the pace of modern life and it's losing it's relevance...and that's a shame but I don't lament how the game has progressed. It's easier? News to me, I still have to compete with everyone else and they're all better than ever too.

Interesting points about the wood lanes.  In our area Brunswick synthetics took over earlier than many places.  By 85 we were bowling on synthetics in 75% of our houses.

 I will freely admit that my opinion favoring the mid 90's is heavily influenced by the fact I had my most success during that period.  I think probably from a broad perspective the 60's were the best era of bowling.  Automatic pinsetters had brought the game to the suburbs.  The PBA tour was getting off the ground and drawing good tv ratings on ABC.  Junior leagues were full on Saturday mornings ( most important of all ). 

Still lots of issues.  Bowling still had the "smoky poolroom" stigma for a the blue collar crowd, and most importantly with educators. 

I think it was this elitism among many that prevented the game from capitalizing at the pro level to a greater degree on its  popularity during the 60's and early 70's.  Despite out drawing golf and even the NBA on tv advertisers were loathe to commit major money to the game, viewing the bowling population as a low priority market.   They totally ignored the level to which the game had proliferated in the general population.

The funny thing is that the 70's actually saw the biggest single increase in scoring during my lifetime. My average increased from 200 to 214 in 1975 when I first began throwing Columbia white dots and yellow dots.  We had 6 800 series shot that season in our association, several with the super soft Shore D.  Doesn't sound like many until I say that we had 2 in the entire history of our association prior to that season.  A friend of mine set a world record for 6 games at the time of 1608 with a Shore D.  Averages jumped dramatically from as the soft polyester balls took over.  They increased again with urethane, but not as dramatically.  Increase in averages with resin balls was noticeable, but the award scores increased disproportionately to average increases       

This is a good question, as while I was really young bowling on them, I can still remember them.

A lot of points were already made here. To be good on those older patterns, you had to be as versatile as a Gary Dickinson and Dick Weber, but also as much of a technician as Earl Anthony could have ever taught you. That pretty much summarized the 70s as much as I could remember (I didn't first start bowling until '78-'79).

The 80s changed the entire game around. Synthetics, urethane, the entire lot. Kids were able to watch bowling on TV on a saturday afternoon, as well as any local show that featured bowling (Omaha had two such shows; one of which constantly advertised that if you left a 9 count, and the headpin was the only one standing, you'd win a car). And we flocked to it like moths to a flame.

Wanting to be like the people on TV, junior leagues were completely filled at every house in Omaha. Rose bowl in Omaha (second largest house at the time) had so many kids they had to split juniors into 3 shifts. Ames Bowl had 50 lanes but still had to split theirs into 2 shifts, and every lane was used. We only had 3 choices for balls: Rubber, Plastic, or House ball. That is why it was much more of a game of skill then than now.

While I would also say that the early 90s would be my best time (I just turned 18 when the Rhino Pro, Turbo X, and X-Calibur made it big), I would have to go back and say that the late 70s through 1990 was probably the best. That is when it took the most skill, accuracy, versatility, and professionalism to excel at the game. We still had to deal with rubber vs. plastic vs. urethane, but we still had to deal with short vs. long oil and that condition on wood vs. synthetic. Of those 21 houses I mentioned in the Kelley's Hilltop thread, by 1989, 3 were synthetic (IIRC, AFBs have always had synthetic. By 1991, 4 were synthetic (would be 5; Rose Bowl closed at the end of the 1990 season) By that time, it was a challenge to figure out how to keep a urethane ball, let alone reactive resin when it came out, consistent and not erratic due to the hook factor it had on wood lanes, and due to how quickly synthetic lanes dried out at that time.

But the technology made the game easier back then just as it has now. I would love to see a couple of classic leagues our tournaments come up to where ball manufacturers had to put out something back from that level of technology to see people return back to requiring skill for the ball rather than it always hooking out of the box. Won't happen, but I can dream.

Anywho, I would definitely say from 1973 to 1993 would be the best time for bowling.

BL.

I'm a young pup compared to some of you, but I think I was allowed to bowl for the first time back in 1985 ( would of been 8 or 9 years old), went prior to that but my parents wouldn't let me actually bowl.

Anyways here in Middle Tennesse pretty much everything was synthetic by then, granted alot of the centers around here started popping up or remodeling around then. Sad to say but I've never seen a wooden lane other than on old videos.

About the only thing I could say would be, " I can remember when you had to do the scoring yourself!". Yeah just yeah 

Anyways, I think I remember watching a PBA Plastic Championship back in 2009 if I remember correctly, it was interesting to watch. I personally would like to see more of it, with Urethane only, or maybe nothing prior to X year. Might be a way to get the to re-release some of the old balls. ( Yes I know its wishful thinking )

Without a doubt, my answer would be the '70s. By the start of the '80s, there was already too much easing of the scoring conditions, and the game has never really been the same since.

 I bowled some back in the 1970's, but didn't really take it up seriously until 1982. I can honestly say that I wish I had been able to experience earlier times, but I was not.

 I honestly think that the late 1940's and all of the 1950's had to be the "golden age" of bowling. The war was over, and the economy was booming. Many people, with jobs and money, were looking to be entertained, and bowling seemed to be the ticket.

 Technology was simple back then, and so was the game. Learn the basics, then practice them until you were good enough to suit yourself. The ONLY thing separating the really good from the crowd was their ability to develop certain techniques to a higher level than most.

 There weren't any worries about what "condition" you were playing, nor was there the worry of trying to pick the "right" ball, because you only had a small handful to pick from, not the literal HUNDREDS available today.

 Me, personally, I liked the 1980's best. The game was still reasonably basic and simple, and technology was still just a minor player. Much more emphasis was put on the bowlers themselves, and their physical abilities, rather than on whether someone had the right "matchup" or not.