Author Topic: Is there really a fair handicap? (Read 3469 times)

The Hose · « **on:** March 30, 2004, 08:54:33 PM »

Our city tournament is going off of 85% of 220. There were only 3 bowlers who got zero handicap. In singles, one of the better bowlers in town bowled well and shot 729 scratch. But he was a little down last year and booked a 208 average. With his handicap, he had a 759. One of the young bowlers shot 744 scratch but had subbed in a league where he had over 21 games and the 10 pin rule got him so he had zero sticks. Another bowler who is hot and cold shot 750 scratch but he gets to shoot off of 188 so he ended up with 835.

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

Phillip Marlowe · « **Reply #16 on:** March 31, 2004, 07:24:32 PM »

I think I have a pretty good feel for this, having bowled in 80, 85, 90 and 100 percent handicap situations. Ignoring obvious sandbagging and assuming a correct basis (higher than the highest average bowler):

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."

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #17 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

MSC2471 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 01, 2004, 03:26:17 AM »

Most of the handicap tournaments that I've been bowling in lately base their handicap on 90% of 220. The usual payoff in terms of scratch places to handicap places is 35%/65%. Entries have been about the same from year to year, even when the lane conditions are tough.

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

ksucat · « **Reply #19 on:** April 01, 2004, 12:21:07 PM »

I don't like several divisions because then you end up with several champions. My friend and I won the State doubles title once, but his wife has won state doubles 3 times. She likes to brag about her 3 titles compared to his one. The problem I have with that is we won the higher of 2 divisions while she won the 3rd highest of 6 divisions. She considers her titles just as important as his. Too many divisions also spread the money and prestige out too far.

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.

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 01, 2004, 04:46:50 PM »

[Quiote].... 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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________________________

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

The Hose · « **Reply #21 on:** April 01, 2004, 08:24:00 PM »

Brickguy, if you are a 190 average bowler, you've mastered the basics. You may miss some spares from time to time and may not throw strings of strikes, or you may not invest in the right equipment or know what each ball is going to do.

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

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #22 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

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #23 on:** April 01, 2004, 10:11:21 PM »

Bones, I was having trouble paddling my boat by myself. Glad you climbed aboard to help me. Now I'm worried about Hose as to whether he is strong enough to paddle his boat up stream by himself or not or do we need to get him a CPL to help paddle.....

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

The Hose · « **Reply #24 on:** April 01, 2004, 10:32:28 PM »

Brickguy, I agree with 75 or 80% of 210. I know we've messaged each other and I know you've worked at your game. However, many don't because they want to keep getting that handicap.

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

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #25 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

ksucat · « **Reply #26 on:** April 02, 2004, 09:59:45 AM »

Brickguy, I empathize with your particular situation. However, I still stand by my statement that the better bowlers with the higher averages should have a distinct advantage. It should be easier for them to win tournaments because they have put in the effort to develop the total skills required to carry their high average. Your situation is unfortunate in that you are physically limited from doing the things your mind wants to. I agree that you should have a legitimate chance to cash on a good day, but your realistic chances of winning will be small because of your limited upside potential. However, for all the people like you, there seem to be many more that are just trying to take advantage of the handicap situation.

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.

Pinbuster · « **Reply #27 on:** April 02, 2004, 10:39:48 AM »

Most of the problem is with what I call the â€œfreak scoreâ€. Like Hose said a 180 average should not be shooting 750 scratch and with that setting a handicap score so high that no one can imagine shooting it.

That is the biggest difference from 30 years ago. No one would shoot more than 100+ over their average, 180 averages just didnâ€™t shoot over 650. Today 180â€™s tend to shoot at least one 700 a season in league.

Someone will say they shouldnâ€™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.

Brickguy221 · « **Reply #28 on:** April 02, 2004, 10:43:54 AM »

ksucat, I too am from KS. although I no longer live there, but the similiarities stop there as I am a KU Fan and not a K-State fan....lol.... Now on to the bowling thing, you stand "by your guns" on the distinct advantage thing being right and I "stand by my guns" that it is wrong. I am not just speaking for my self because of health problems because if you will note, I previously said I was never able to attain your, Hose, and others bowling status even when healthy and I still felt the same way then as now. I'm sure others in my bowling average class see it as I do. In fact I know some that do.

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

Jerry Weller · « **Reply #29 on:** April 02, 2004, 06:51:34 PM »

The way I see it scratch tournaments are for sharks and handicap tournaments are for minnows. Minnows need a chance to compete and grow for awhile before they get eaten up by the sharks and that's what the handicap is there for. If you don't like giving up handicap, then don't enter handicap tournaments.

Author Topic: Is there really a fair handicap? (Read 3469 times)

The Hose

Is there really a fair handicap?

Phillip Marlowe

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

MSC2471

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

ksucat

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

The Hose

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

The Hose

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

ksucat

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Pinbuster

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Brickguy221

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?

Jerry Weller

Re: Is there really a fair handicap?