Author Topic: What is a Reasonable Handicap.... (Read 21766 times)

TWOHAND834 · « **on:** April 05, 2011, 11:21:23 PM »

....for money leagues? We got into a debate recently at the fact that leagues that are $20-25 a night, have 30 teams, and the overwhelming majority of the bowlers are over 200, have handicaps based on 220 and even 230. So I thought it would be cool to debate that. If you are in a league where you have a hefty prize fund, what is a "reasonable handicap"? Should it be based off of 210, 220, 230....?

IMO.....handicaps should be based on a lower average, say 210, because I think it would help eliminate some bagging that goes on. Granted there are people in the leagues that average 220+ but the overall majority of the league is 200-210, with similarities in the number of 220 bowlers as there are 190 bowlers. I think that if you continue to have handicaps based on 220-230, you will continue to have teams with a "We won the first third/quarter so we can bag the rest of the year and build up handicap for the rolloffs" mentality. I know it goes on in just about every money league and realize this is a huge uphill battle. But, it has gotten to a point to where I dont care about those types of leagues anymore. I have had more fun in the $15.00/week leagues the past few years than the money leagues. There is a league at a center here that is $15.00/week and takes up almost all 40 lanes.

So what do you guys think? Curious to find out if it was completely up to you, what would you base the handicap on?

Peace doesnt always have to be silent.

txbowler · « **Reply #46 on:** May 15, 2011, 12:12:25 PM »

I posted this in another thread but it belongs here too...

What does every league need? Donators. What does everyone who bowls in a league not want to be? A Donator

There in lies the problem. How you do attract donators to get your Big Prize Fund? The answer is handicap.

How else does do you get teams of five 180-185 average bowlers to bowl in a mens league against a team stacked with five 210+ average bowlers. The 180 guys have to believe at the start of the year that they have some chance of competing. Why else would they spend $720 (36 weeks @ $20) if they knew up front they had no chance to win?

Make it scratch you say? Well then, you just lost the 4 teams of 180 averages, and the 6 teams of 190-195 as well because they know they cannot beat the five 210+ guys. So your big money league is now a small money league because it's only the 4 scratch teams left, and now they don't want to bowl because there is no money.

You always have to have donators. But you also have to make it seem like at the start of the year that there are no donators. Otherwise, the donators leave, and either you become the donator, or you don't have a league.

NO ONE WANTS TO BE A DONATOR, BUT SOMEONE HAS TO BE!!!!!

Edited by txbowler on 5/15/2011 at 12:14 PM

BrianCRX90 · « **Reply #47 on:** May 15, 2011, 12:25:20 PM »

Around 65-70% of 200 or 210 with a cap of 160. In other words, you can't get anymore handicap past 160 and down.

hhhbs1 · « **Reply #48 on:** May 15, 2011, 01:03:43 PM »

That is why you have to cap the team avg in a scratch league. Having a cap makes the 230+ people need a 180 or 190 bolwer on thier team to get under the cap. That is the only way you can have a scratch "big" money league. 4 team league with a cap of between 840 to 860 might not be that bad.

txbowler wrote on 5/15/2011 12:12 PM:
I posted this in another thread but it belongs here too...

What does every league need? Donators. What does everyone who bowls in a league not want to be? A Donator

There in lies the problem. How you do attract donators to get your Big Prize Fund? The answer is handicap.

How else does do you get teams of five 180-185 average bowlers to bowl in a mens league against a team stacked with five 210+ average bowlers. The 180 guys have to believe at the start of the year that they have some chance of competing. Why else would they spend $720 (36 weeks @ $20) if they knew up front they had no chance to win?

Make it scratch you say? Well then, you just lost the 4 teams of 180 averages, and the 6 teams of 190-195 as well because they know they cannot beat the five 210+ guys. So your big money league is now a small money league because it's only the 4 scratch teams left, and now they don't want to bowl because there is no money.

You always have to have donators. But you also have to make it seem like at the start of the year that there are no donators. Otherwise, the donators leave, and either you become the donator, or you don't have a league.

NO ONE WANTS TO BE A DONATOR, BUT SOMEONE HAS TO BE!!!!!

Edited by txbowler on 5/15/2011 at 12:14 PM

trash heap · « **Reply #49 on:** May 16, 2011, 08:12:12 AM »

You have to be joking??? Based on this handicap system, just make it a scratch league.

For all of those who want below 90%: The object of the league is to have competition. I see many statements on this site about achieving and making the shots when it counts. Yet you who chose this type of handicap want it easy. You don't want any team with a lower average to beat your team ever.

So you thinking is like this:

"I buy expensive equipment, practice every week, and this guy who just threw a 220 (160 average) wouldn't stand a chance against me in scratch. It must be a mistake. He has to be sandbagging. Anyone with a 160 average should NOT throw 60 pins over his average (Yet I carry a 210 average and have thrown numerous 270+ games in the year, but that is different). We need to have a league meeting and stop this"

You should be welcoming these bowlers into your league. Instead you call them cheats, when you lose to them. Your not helping getting new bowlers into this sport.

Why can't a guy with 160 average shoot a high 600 series? With the new equipment and on the THS, it makes pefect sense it can happen! We all have nights where throwing the ball was easy and we scored very high.

Nobody likes to lose. I always play to win, but when I lose I don't immediately think sandbagging. Its usually because of my lack of abilitiy (or my teams) that night. Yes there have been times that I have thrown 260+ and lose to someone who throws a low 200 game (140 average). Its part of the game.

We have all been in this sport long enough to tell the difference from a legit 160 average bowler and cheating 160 average bowler (who really has a 200+ average). You can tell.

When dealing with big money, there is no question the temptation to cheat is greater. Setting the percentage below 90% is not the answer. You need a committee to watch over this (Maybe its all team captains). It just can't be the officers. If you see someone (or a team) that seems to pour it on at the end every time or seem to miss spares at the end of a game when the lead is huge, then let them know they will be looked at.

You have to be upfront with this league policy. No team is exempt. It has to be a written complaint. The person writing the complaint must give detail information of the game or series bowled. Simply stating a team is cheating and leaving it to the committee figure it out is not good enough. If you get a enough complaints on a certain team, then that could be a red flag. Maybe just stating you league has a committee might be enough of a deterrent to keep the cheating teams out.

Of course that will probably never happen. Most that bowl leagues don't want to get involved.

Another idea is to make the oil pattern more difficult, but usually when that happens you lose bowlers. You got alot of league bowlers that will get upset about averaging 30 - 40 pins less.

The idea of setting a low average cap, isn't a bad idea. I would think anyone below 160 probably wouldn't want to join a big money league.

BrianCRX90 wrote on 5/15/2011 12:25 PM:
Around 65-70% of 200 or 210 with a cap of 160. In other words, you can't get anymore handicap past 160 and down.

txbowler · « **Reply #50 on:** May 16, 2011, 08:59:18 AM »

I don't understand it. In order for there to be big money leagues, you must have lots of bowlers who LOSE. And those bowlers must be willing to bowl and LOSE. The only way I know to make bowlers show up and bowl is to make it appear competitive for every team.

And around here, most bowlers want to bowl with their friends, so cap leagues do not work well.

HDCP does. At 90% of the difference between teams, the higher average teams tend to migrate towards the top of the standings, but the highest average team does not always win the league.

And I think that is where some of the egos get in the way. We averaged the highest, we SHOULD win!!!!

If your team starts out the 1st half of the year averaging 1050, and the 2nd half averaging 950, while team 2 averages 900 the 1st half of the year, and 1025 the 2nd half, team 2 may win the league even though team 1 had a higher average. It does matter when you bowl well.

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #51 on:** May 16, 2011, 09:34:26 AM »

That is my point exactly. It depends on where you live and how many 200+ average bowlers you have. I come from a place where 200+ bowlers (on THS) grow on trees. There are plenty of leagues in the area to where the 170 bowler needs to probably stay in leagues with others in their average range. If you are 170 and you know 90% of the bowlers in that league are going to hand you your rear end every week, dont sign up until you get better or stop complaining. There are probably 10 handicap leagues for every one money league.

We are damned if we do and damned if we dont. The reason we cant fill an entire center with a money league is because of the handicap being too high. There are decent leagues in a couple centers around my area, but think that the reason we dont fill a center wall to wall is because your handicap base.

In my opinion, if you marketed a league as a big money classic league with low handicap and a 850 cap, as the line says in Field of Dreams, "If you build it, they will come."

hhhbs1 wrote on 5/15/2011 1:03 PM:
That is why you have to cap the team avg in a scratch league. Having a cap makes the 230+ people need a 180 or 190 bolwer on thier team to get under the cap. That is the only way you can have a scratch "big" money league. 4 team league with a cap of between 840 to 860 might not be that bad.

txbowler wrote on 5/15/2011 12:12 PM:

I posted this in another thread but it belongs here too...

What does every league need? Donators. What does everyone who bowls in a league not want to be? A Donator

There in lies the problem. How you do attract donators to get your Big Prize Fund? The answer is handicap.

How else does do you get teams of five 180-185 average bowlers to bowl in a mens league against a team stacked with five 210+ average bowlers. The 180 guys have to believe at the start of the year that they have some chance of competing. Why else would they spend $720 (36 weeks @ $20) if they knew up front they had no chance to win?

Make it scratch you say? Well then, you just lost the 4 teams of 180 averages, and the 6 teams of 190-195 as well because they know they cannot beat the five 210+ guys. So your big money league is now a small money league because it's only the 4 scratch teams left, and now they don't want to bowl because there is no money.

You always have to have donators. But you also have to make it seem like at the start of the year that there are no donators. Otherwise, the donators leave, and either you become the donator, or you don't have a league.

NO ONE WANTS TO BE A DONATOR, BUT SOMEONE HAS TO BE!!!!!

Edited by txbowler on 5/15/2011 at 12:14 PM

Peace doesnt always have to be silent.

icefiction · « **Reply #52 on:** May 16, 2011, 09:52:22 AM »

I think it should be total pin fall for the year, not beating an opponent one week. A teammate of mine did a spreadsheet regarding the teams we bowled against this year, and the opposing teams we bowled against shot on average 12.3% over their average. So as one can see, it is quite possible to just get unlucky draws on a weekly basis and lose by a point system that is weekly, but with total pin fall even including handicap a team that loses by a weekly point system can still come out on top for total pin fall which would be fairest considering over the course of the year they knocked over the most pins, which is what bowling is about.

trash heap · « **Reply #53 on:** May 16, 2011, 10:35:02 AM »

I thought the whole issue of this topic was a reasonable handicap. And the main reason was to fill the league.

If you have a large amount of 200+ average bowlers and can fill a league, then great. Set a league that works for these bowlers.

If don't have that kind of bowlers in your area, what are you going to do. 90% is not a bad number. I am not sure why you all think this is terrible. 90% is still giving the higher average team the advantage.

How about this:

5 per team on a league.

Max Team Cap is 1100. 800 is low end. You get no more handicap if your team drops below 800.

The handicap is based on individual average set at 90% of 225.

Now let's look at it.

1. A high average team (218 average per bowler) at 1090 would get team handicap of 31. (Total = 1121)

2. A above average team (205 average per bowler) at 1025 would get team handicap of 90. (Total = 1115)

3. An average team (185 average per bowler) at 925 would get team handicap of 180. (Total = 1105)

4. A low average team (160 average per bowler) at 800 would get team handicap of 292. (Total = 1092)

*** So if your team is not good and drops below 800. 292 is all you can get as a team. ***

Right at the beginning. Team 4 would have to bowl almost 30 pins to get to Team 1's average. Yeah that is 3 marks for 5 players to make up, but a low average team is very inconsistent. I am going to say that Team 1 can rally alot better at the end of the game over Team 4.

Russell · « **Reply #54 on:** May 16, 2011, 10:05:53 PM »

Steven your thoughts are so horribly misguided....200 bowlers don't "grow on trees" here in Atlanta. Let's take a look at the league in question:

http://www.leaguesecretary.com/brunswick_zone_norcross/norcross_classic/bowling/league/53016/0/0/0/leaguefilesstandings.aspx

I count 58 regular roster bowlers that don't average 200...we should just send them packing back to their weaker leagues with the cretons right? Well your "money league" just lost almost 12 teams worth of people. How's that prize fund look now?

The pot game analogy doesn't hold water either...you're comparing apples to oranges. Go ahead and fight for handicap that sticks it in the *** of all of the "lesser" bowlers. Let's see how long they hang around after giving up $900 to get back $100 after 9 months....YAY!!!!!

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

TWOHAND834 · « **Reply #55 on:** May 17, 2011, 09:44:35 AM »

Okay but you look at one league. I am referring to the city as a whole. You are going to sit there and honestly say that if you promoted a league that was $25.00/night, $10.00 lineage, low handicap, 4 man team with a 850 cap, that given a couple years with the bowlers we have in this HUGE metro area that you could not make it happen? Because money talks my friend. If you got the word out to the Greg Blacks, Charles Jordans, John Qualtroughs, Dannial Cohens, and many others who are constantly looking for that very thing, that they would not show up?

Here is another thing about that league your posted. One reason more people did not average over 200 in that league, is because you should have seen the baggers that were in there. They averaged in the 200-210 range and then bagged the rest of the season to get as many sticks as they could before the end of the season.

I just know that back when league bowling thrived in this area, money leagues were based on low handicap and huge prize funds; and there were still plenty of people averaging 225+.

Russell wrote on 5/16/2011 10:05 PM:
Steven your thoughts are so horribly misguided....200 bowlers don't "grow on trees" here in Atlanta. Let's take a look at the league in question:

http://www.leaguesecretary.com/brunswick_zone_norcross/norcross_classic/bowling/league/53016/0/0/0/leaguefilesstandings.aspx

I count 58 regular roster bowlers that don't average 200...we should just send them packing back to their weaker leagues with the cretons right? Well your "money league" just lost almost 12 teams worth of people. How's that prize fund look now?

The pot game analogy doesn't hold water either...you're comparing apples to oranges. Go ahead and fight for handicap that sticks it in the *** of all of the "lesser" bowlers. Let's see how long they hang around after giving up $900 to get back $100 after 9 months....YAY!!!!!

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

Peace doesnt always have to be silent.

Russell · « **Reply #56 on:** May 17, 2011, 12:38:01 PM »

Steven where have you been?

There are leagues like that all over the city, and they are folding left and right....BOWLING IS DYING!!!

If you want a shining example....South Gwinnett Mens...we destroyed that league one year, then Q's team...2 years later it was gone. People got tired of donating money to scratch bowlers so they went elsewhere. Some of them have quit altogether. The playing field needs to be leveled, the more you tilt it towards the few players that actually give a crap about a money league, the more average Joe's you'll lose.

The examples of good leagues going under is all over the place. The big league at Cedar Creek that used to have a waiting list and be 40 teams x 5 players is down to like 24 teams of 4 players now....the high average bowlers aren't the ones quitting...look at who's not there anymore...it's the donators getting tired of being pillaged by primadonnas who just have more equipment and time than they do.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

Juggernaut · « **Reply #57 on:** May 17, 2011, 01:14:01 PM »

Reasonable handicap?

Don't make me laugh. There is NO SUCH THING.

First, EVERBODY would have to agree on what the term "reasonable" means. Does it mean that the lower average guys have the CHANCE to keep up, or does it guarantee they can? Does it mean that the high average guys COULD win the league, or does it guarantee they will?

"REASONABLE" depends on who you ask.

imjouster · « **Reply #58 on:** May 18, 2011, 07:10:07 PM »

Just give a quick post here... didn't read through all the posts so if this has been mentioned before... my bad

. What we do on our wednesday night league (highest average league in the state)... We use 5 man teams. and individual bowlers do not get handicap. We take the difference in the team averages and then assign handicap to the team with the lower averages. BUT the MAX handicap a team can have is 100 pins. So if you have 2 teams one with a team average of 1100 and the other with an average of 1040. The lower averaged team will be getting 60 pins of handicap. If you have 2 teams and team A have an average of 1150 and Team B has an average of 1025, Team B will get a flat 100 pins of handicap.

It encourages people not to sandbag, because at the end of the year they may end up being 170 pins below one of the teams they are having to bowl in the roll offs, and they end up hurting themselves by sandbagging. It also rewards those teams who have higher averages. Because if they happen to bowl a team that has an average of more than 100 pins less than them, they don't have to bowl as well as the other team (in respects to hitting average) in order to win their points. You get 1 point per game and 1 point for series, so 4 points possible per night.

This is probably the most fun league I've ever been a part of, and it REALLY works out well for everybody.

Author Topic: What is a Reasonable Handicap.... (Read 21766 times)

TWOHAND834

What is a Reasonable Handicap....

txbowler

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

BrianCRX90

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

hhhbs1

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

trash heap

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

txbowler

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

TWOHAND834

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

icefiction

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

trash heap

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

Russell

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

TWOHAND834

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

Russell

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

Juggernaut

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....

imjouster

Re: What is a Reasonable Handicap....