Catching up on bowling podcasts, 'Sweep the Rack' with Brooklyn Rob and Big Mike (both experienced / talented bowlers), worth a listen most weeks. Recent conversations included Chad Murphy - USBC executive was to improve bowling membership by eliminating prize funds thus downsizing cost of league night.  Prize funds are what we were brought up on years ago but as podcast stated no one says "let us eliminate prize funds".  Most leagues are social in nature, anyway.


 Currently in the NE, we are up to $35 p/nite league fees and lineage of $17.25.  Prize funds are struggling to earn return on year's investment. I don't believe bowlers are into league for the little prize money.  The more serious bowlers have weekend tournaments for action and most bowlers enjoy various forms of gambling.

What are people's thoughts about eliminating prize funds and maybe hype some brackets - handicap based, high averages/low average brackets increasing competition based on skill levels.  Leagues already promotes strike jackpots,50/50, mystery scores, mystery doubles. Any other promotions people use ?

All thoughts and comments are welcome.

First of....$35.00/night is insanity.  I am in a league that is semi-competitive (mix of handicap and a handful of guys capable of averaging 220s).  We pay $21.00/night and still have a smallish prize fund.  It is a trio league and I believe first place to win is like $500 split 3 ways.  This league also is 20 weeks long, has a 2 week break, then reconvenes for another 18 weeks with points starting all over.  We also have a strike jackpot, brackets, and a 50/50.

I believe eliminating prize funds are stupid.  It then becomes something called open bowling.  All states are run differently and the costs to live there are considerably different as well.  The cost of bowling is not a USBC problem.  It should be up to individual leagues on whether or not they want prize funds.  There is a competitive league in the same center I bowl in that is $25.00/night, 4 man teams, and filled the entire center (44 teams).  I was told that the prize fund in that league alone is around $75,000-80,000 and that doesnt include brackets and other side action. 

If Chad is smart; he would maybe offer it more as a suggestion rather than just mandating it across all leagues nationwide.  Leave it up to the leagues to decide what they want to do.

Chad's basic position in the interview was that leagues have the power to do these things.  If they want to eliminate the prize fund, the members can vote to do so.  Unfortunately most league members don't know/understand/care enough to want to make changes and just keep things the same.  The USBC establishes the framework and the bowlers basically "choose their own adventure".

Eliminating prize fund from handicap leagues isn't a bad idea.  No one gets rich off of handicap league bowling.  Reserve the prize find bowling for the competitive scratch and sport bowling leagues.  Most handicap league bowlers I know just bowl for the social aspect and never win or even care if they win or lose.  The scratch bowlers I bowl with are all about the prize money.

Tom Shannon, the CEO of Bowlero, had an interesting interview recently where he talked about league bowling.  He views league bowling as "gambling" where the bowlers put in a certain amount in the hopes of winning something.  Bowlero would like to add a sport gambling element to league bowling where (based on Lanetalk stats) a bowler is presented with the probability of getting a strike on the next ball, or picking up a certain spare.  The bowler could then bet on themselves that they will get the strike or pick up the spare.  If you bet, and you get it, then you get a payout based on the probability from Lanetalk.  If you miss, you lose.  Bowlers would probably have the chance to make way more doing this than winning prize fund in the league. 

The only fault in the plan is that the lower average bowlers are going to have way more opportunity to cash in on such a scheme than higher average bowlers.  Would this mean that the higher average bowlers sandbag to keep their Lanetalk probabilities low enough to cash in?  Oh, probably.

I have bowled a league in the past with no prize fund; this league was $10 per night when I bowled it.  at the time it could have been a little cheaper because they did buy trophies for the first place team, high average, high game and high series.  but this was a work related league and some liked to have their trophies on their desks.

in comparison my leagues with a prize fund and somewhat more serious bowlers cost $15 to $17 and my sport league was $20. 

today of that list, all I bowl is the sport league and it is $25/night.

prize funds are not the only barrier for entry; the length of the season is very often a turn off when I have tried to recruit friends or co-works into a league.

at one center I bowl at, they struggled to keep their Friday night league full.  this league bowled a season divided by thirds as many others do; so the center converted the league such that each third was an 11 season.  now the bowlers were only making a 3 month commitment.  of the 12 teams, 9 of them bowl all 3 "seasons" and they have had no trouble filling out the other spots.  they have had 12 teams for all 33 weeks since instead of a 8 or 9 team league for one 33 week season.

there are creative ways to try to attract new bowlers.

Most leagues in my area are mixed and not competitive.  The prize fund always voted on has the difference in first place and last place be minimal.  No prize fund would actually pay out bowlers more by keeping their money. Most of the non competitive leagues don't recognize they are paying in $10+ a week to win back $5max.

That's a league by league basis. No doubt there are plenty of competitive leagues out there.

I've bowled handicap leagues for most of the 31 years I've been involved in league bowling, and only twice I can remember could you "make" money off the prize fund -- and in both those cases, you would only make back a little bit above your weekly cost, so it was basically that you got to bowl 36 weeks for free.

In both cases, it was because the league got sponsored (the local Budweiser plant, both times). And in both cases, it "elevated" the league from a bunch of people having a good time, to some having a good time and some letting their a-hole shine through.

I kind of agree with the concept, especially in mixed leagues with a lot of beginners. Hand out some cheap trophies at the end and kill the prize fund, especially since bowling isn't getting any cheaper. I'm up to $17 for one of my leagues and $18 for the other, and neither has a prize fund worth worrying about.

Having said that, it should still be bowler choice, and if a bunch of handicap bowlers want to fancy themselves as psuedo-pros, have at it.

Jess