BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Mighty Fish on July 20, 2013, 09:15:57 PM
-
Not surprisingly, a vast majority of bowlers from the Sarasota-Manatee-Charlotte County (Fla.) area joined most nationwide bowlers in performing far short of entering averages in the USBC Open in Reno ...
http://www.examiner.com/article/local-and-nationwide-bowlers-fall-far-short-of-averages-usbc-open
-
Of course they do. The only comment I would make is that it is more about comfort zones than it is about how easy house shots are. If everyone bowled on flatter 39-41 foot patterns all the time, their averages would, of course, be lower in league, but they would be a lot higher in the national tournament. Most guys averaging 220+ on house shots could easily average 210 on tournament patterns with practice and modifications to their game.
As an old guy I need every advantage I can get, and my biggest advantage has been the opportunity to practice and bowl league on mostly tournament patterns. As a result I usually average 210+ in sport leagues. I have made changes to my game that often don't let me exploit the house shot patterns as much as I could if I adjusted my game for the more top hat patterns.
The average bowler out there is still around 170 in league.
-
That's a good point, I'm the same way. I can put up good numbers on house shots, but not the really big ones with any regularity, but I can bowl better than most on sport patterns, just because that's how I've built my game. Judging somebody on how they perform over 9 games at the Open when they've bowled on nothing but house shots all year doesn't really give you an indication of someone's skill.
-
I think avabob hit the nail on the head when he said that it is about comfort zones. So many people have gotten caught up in the "you must play here to break the lanes down correctly to give the best chance of scoring" mentality. Most people in league are so used to playing 3rd arrow that when the world is telling you that you have to play up the gutter (not the twig), it gets a little uncomfortable and yet people still do because they feel like they have to. For the first time in 13 years, I got sucked into it and my scores suffered in a way I never thought they would. My lowest all events in 12 years was low 1700s and I have shot over 1900 in quite a few. I shot 1530 this year due to the "have to stay right" mentality. Big difference between my lifetime 210 average and averaging 150.
I have said it once and I am going to say it again. If you feel that you have a team that is a good team but not a team to contend for an eagle, then do what you do best without screwing over your teammates (using 500 grit coverstocks). When you are spending in the neighborhood of $1,000 to go participate in this tournament, its probably a good idea to do what you need to do to make some money back (unless of course you are made of money and its no object).
-
I think avabob hit the nail on the head when he said that it is about comfort zones. So many people have gotten caught up in the "you must play here to break the lanes down correctly to give the best chance of scoring" mentality. Most people in league are so used to playing 3rd arrow that when the world is telling you that you have to play up the gutter (not the twig), it gets a little uncomfortable and yet people still do because they feel like they have to. For the first time in 13 years, I got sucked into it and my scores suffered in a way I never thought they would. My lowest all events in 12 years was low 1700s and I have shot over 1900 in quite a few. I shot 1530 this year due to the "have to stay right" mentality. Big difference between my lifetime 210 average and averaging 150.
I have said it once and I am going to say it again. If you feel that you have a team that is a good team but not a team to contend for an eagle, then do what you do best without screwing over your teammates (using 500 grit coverstocks). When you are spending in the neighborhood of $1,000 to go participate in this tournament, its probably a good idea to do what you need to do to make some money back (unless of course you are made of money and its no object).
I've done that a couple years, and have ALWAYS found out that my first instinct was right. I always "stick with the plan" and by the end of the tournament find myself right where I thought I should be playing in the first place.
-
If any bowler had the opportunity to bowl on this weekly like THS shots or any sport condition they would improve their averages on it greatly. The way you improve and score well on tough conditions is to get out and bowl on them.
Many centers dont make them available because of cost and the low amount of bowlers willing to bowl on them. I cant blame a center when the demand isnt there.
-
On a slightly amended note, playing the shot as a so called team is over rated, and mis understood. The problem is with high rev guys who want to stand left and throw right to begin with. The first thing most guys need to learn to do on flatter patterns is to cut their axis rotation way down, and get a more end over end look. This doesn't mean cutting the rev rate, it just allows a guy to go more direct with a high rev rate. Once you do that you will find that most guys will find the optimal place to play on the lanes, and it will be in the same area. Do that, and the scores will be decent right out of the gate, and get better as the shot opens up for everyone.
-
How about some comments on the final paragraph, which implies that the key factor in the lower USBC Open scoring is LANE CONDITIONS, and not the steroid bowling balls?
Bowlers from all over the country bring their hefty 200+ averages and arsenals of steroid equipment, and yet they post sub-par scores BECAUSE THE LANES AREN'T ALL THAT EASY (even though they are playable, if a bowler makes good shots, as evidenced by the number of high scores shot).
-
Alot of bowlers only understand the THS, they get lazy with so much miss room to the right get lazy with hold to the left. It is nothing new. Most bowlers don't understand what to do when the shot is tight, don't understand how to break them down, differences in equipment, and why certain equipment works and other stuff doesn't, they don't grasp hand and finger positions to help alter reaction. As a result heads get kicked in when facing a mildly difficult pattern
The Pattern itself was playable if you were accurate, in rev rate, release and ball speed and new how to make ADJUSTMENTS!
Imo as stated above not the pattern or the ball it is the guy throwing the ball. No one bothers to learn or understand they just want the score handed to them. On the THS that works to get big numbers, on a Sport Pattern it makes for a good reality check and IMO it is a needed reality check
@mighty fish: Why have you posted this again? It was posted by you in USBC Tournament forum. What ars you driving at?
-
He just wanted more people to see the post I'm assuming. I've done that before.
-
I thought the pattern was the most playable in several years this year, although it might have partly been due to lane draw. I didn't get the abrupt over reaction coming of the end of the oil that is usually a factor on fresh oil at nationals. The patterns had the feel of being 3-4 feet longer than they actually were. Maybe the ice oil, I don't know.
-
Don't bowlers take their high-powered equipment to Reno? It seems that lane dressing is more of a factor than balls as far as THS scoring is concerned. Otherwise, why can't most of the league hotshots come close to their normal averages in Reno?
-
How about some comments on the final paragraph, which implies that the key factor in the lower USBC Open scoring is LANE CONDITIONS, and not the steroid bowling balls?
Bowlers from all over the country bring their hefty 200+ averages and arsenals of steroid equipment, and yet they post sub-par scores BECAUSE THE LANES AREN'T ALL THAT EASY (even though they are playable, if a bowler makes good shots, as evidenced by the number of high scores shot).
So, what are you saying, that a typical house shot is easier than the shot at a prestigious national tournament? Hmmmm. Who knew? Did you want to see easier shots at the U.S. Open? Perhaps you're just putting down most bowlers who don't bowl a lot of tournamemts? More than likely.
WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR POINT EXCEPT THE USUAL BITCHING ABOUT YOUR PERCEPTION ABOUT THE STATE OF BOWLING?
-
Here is the most misunderstood thing about high powered balls. They don't help you hit the pocket more, they only carry better IF you hit the pocket. It is the lane pattern that gives the comfort zone allowing multiple styles of players to easily get to the pocket on house shots. It is the steroid balls that get the strikes, when you hit the pocket.
Want proof. Look at the increase in award scores at nationals after resin balls were introduced. That increase was in no way associated with higher overall scoring averages in nationals
-
So, what are you saying, that a typical house shot is easier than the shot at a prestigious national tournament? Hmmmm. Who knew? Did you want to see easier shots at the U.S. Open? Perhaps you're just putting down most bowlers who don't bowl a lot of tournamemts? More than likely.
WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR POINT EXCEPT THE USUAL BITCHING ABOUT YOUR PERCEPTION ABOUT THE STATE OF BOWLING?
Dear Long Gone Daddy:
I simply reported the facts as pertaining to scoring levels in a popular bowling tournament. I'll leave the "usual bitching" to you, in part because you seem to be an expert at it.
-
Here is the most misunderstood thing about high powered balls. They don't help you hit the pocket more, they only carry better IF you hit the pocket. It is the lane pattern that gives the comfort zone allowing multiple styles of players to easily get to the pocket on house shots. It is the steroid balls that get the strikes, when you hit the pocket.
Want proof. Look at the increase in award scores at nationals after resin balls were introduced. That increase was in no way associated with higher overall scoring averages in nationals
Dear avabob:
You make valid points, in my opinion.
-
This was extracted from the other post by mighty fish. I am in agreement with this statment
We have what maybe 30 300 games in a year, that is like .01% of the games are honor scores. If there are 10 800 series in a year, that comes out to the same .01% of series that are honor scores. Doesn't seem to high to me, seems to be just about right. Anyone who says "scores are too high" is just trying to justify a reason to make the shot easier so they can score better.
-
Bottom line: Lane conditions have much more impact than balls do with regard to the fact that so many bowlers struggle significantly in the USBC Open Championships.
-
I'm glad you finally figured out lane conditions have a bigger impact on lower scores than the balls do. Unless you limit the bowlers to what type of ball they can throw. Make all bowlers use plastic balls with pancake weightblocks on the same shot and the scores will go down even more. And make the shot easier
-
Jimmy, are you saying that the shot should be made easier in the USBC tournament?
-
If they made every bowler use a plastic ball with a pancake weight block the oil pattern would have to be changed because today's lane oils are 100% solids compared to 30 years ago when lane oil was only 25% solids. The shot would have to be compensated for the equipment that is being used. Or they could leave the shot the same let everyone use their high performance equipment but go up on the pin weight to say 4lb pins and the average will drop a few more pins.
-
The lane man dictates scoring pace, always has, and probably always will.
-
The lane man dictates scoring pace, always has, and probably always will.
Dear Maine Man:
Agreed, but there are a number of posters on the PBA forum who insist that steroid balls are far more of a problem than lane conditions (with regard to today's ultra-high scoring levels).
However, year after year, the scores at the USBC Open continue to prove that lane conditions can keep the scoring levels down, regardless of how much high-powered equipment is brought to the tournament site.
-
The lane man dictates scoring pace, always has, and probably always will.
Dear Maine Man:
Agreed, but there are a number of posters on the PBA forum who insist that steroid balls are far more of a problem than lane conditions (with regard to today's ultra-high scoring levels).
However, year after year, the scores at the USBC Open continue to prove that lane conditions can keep the scoring levels down, regardless of how much high-powered equipment is brought to the tournament site.
Once again i will say this to you Mighty Fish the average male bowler averages between 150 and 160. Female bowlers are between 135 and 145. So your basis of comparing all USBC bowlers to PBA bowlers is pointless. Why don't you look up people who bowled the tournament who bowl on the PBA tour and see what they averaged for the tournament?
-
Once again i will say this to you Mighty Fish the average male bowler averages between 150 and 160. Female bowlers are between 135 and 145. So your basis of comparing all USBC bowlers to PBA bowlers is pointless. Why don't you look up people who bowled the tournament who bowl on the PBA tour and see what they averaged for the tournament?
Mighty Fish answer this question please. You have skirted around questions you don't like, enough of that ,answer this question sir.
I want to know why you are having such a big fit about the scoring pace being low, but fail to look at what actual National averages are. Also ignoring the fact that the pattern is completely fair because all Bowlers have to bowl on the same condition in the same Stadium.
-
For the balls vs lane it really depends what question you are asking. Lane conditions control scoring levels. Balls control carrying if you have the ability to hit the pocket. Thus good bowlers are going to score higher on tough conditions with high powered balls than they would without them. Poorer bowlers are not going to score significantly higher because the combination of a tougher pattern, plus quicker lane transitions will negate a lot of the carrying advantage they would get from the more powerful balls.
You could limit the balls to polyester ( don't care what you do with the weight blocks ), and cut the oil volume at least in half ( maybe more because of the all solids ). Scoring would still be high on house shots, but lower on tougher patterns, even for the best players.
I am an old codger, and I would love to play on a 42 foot buff with maybe a 4-1 ratio, and less than 12ml of oil using plastic. It would put some finesse back in the game when it comes to carry, rather than just reving it up and trying to open up the lane.
-
avabob, I sure agree that lane conditions control scoring levels and apparently the USBC tourney scoring affirms that.
-
The Open Championships to me represent everything that is right with bowling. No I don't like high powered balls that make it super easy to turn any shot into a house shot, I wish it was just plastic that would keep people honest, but sports progress. Only thing I don't like is that with a higher scoring pace, luck factors in much more. When the difference between a win and a loss is picking up a spare or making a good shot in a lower scoring match, I like that. When it's losing 21 pins simply because you stoned an 8 or drove by a 9, I don't like that. Yeah, that stuff occasionally happens in lower scoring games, but it doesn't cost you so much. In a lower scoring match its easier to overcome by picking up your spares and continuing to make shots. In a higher scoring environment, a couple screw jobs on carry and you're done. A lower scoring environment also makes the big scores mean more. It also more accurately represents how you threw the ball. On house shots, yeah, the better you throw the ball, the better you'll generally score, however, I feel it's MUCH closer on tougher shots. I don't know how many huge sets I've had on a house shot when I couldn't hit the same ARROW twice in a row. Then sometimes I can split boards and end up with 650.
Lane conditions are most important, balls are a distant second.
-
The Open Championships to me represent everything that is right with bowling. No I don't like high powered balls that make it super easy to turn any shot into a house shot, I wish it was just plastic that would keep people honest, but sports progress.
Dear Gizmo823:
It should be obvious, based on the scoring data, that high-powered balls DON'T turn ANY shot into a house shot.
And I agree with virtually everything you stated in your previous post.
-
The Open Championships to me represent everything that is right with bowling. No I don't like high powered balls that make it super easy to turn any shot into a house shot, I wish it was just plastic that would keep people honest, but sports progress.
Dear Gizmo823:
It should be obvious, based on the scoring data, that high-powered balls DON'T turn ANY shot into a house shot.
And I agree with virtually everything you stated in your previous post.
If you have 5-10 people working together that know how to break it down, yes they can. No your average player either won't know how to do it or they won't work together, but that statement was just in general, not specifically about the tournament. The PBA pros get a half hour of practice before each squad to "warm up" and by the time they actually start scoring, those shots are completely different from how they were put down. With plastic balls that's not possible, and that's the only point I was trying to make there in support of my opinion that lane conditions by far and away dominate scoring pace, but given the time and knowledge, the conditions can be altered by today's equipment. But as technology goes on and more and more money gets involved in innovative equipment, the more impossible it becomes to return the human element to the game.
Mark Roth had quite possibly the ugliest form and execution on the tour at the time he was destroying everyone. Why was he successful? Because the guy just knew how to bowl. Now it's all about numbers. Units of oil, paps, board moves, dual angle layout specs, core specs, etc. I like the idea of picking up a ball with some holes in it, putting your shoes on, not knowing anything about the house you're bowling in, nothing about the lane condition, and just figuring it out yourself. The knowledge is nice, but it all makes it too robotic for me. The challenge boils down to simply repeating shots which definitely is the most difficult part, but the instinct and intuition has kind of faded from it all.
-
The instinct and intuition are just used differently now than in the past. If that wasn't still part of the game, the game would be dominated by guys in their 20's and early 30's at their athletic prime, not guys in their late 30's and 40's.
The first step in controlling the scoring pace is oiling 5 to 8 feet further down the lane. Take away some friction and free hook and bring the flat 10 back into the game. This would lower the scoring pace without taking the pocket away. People hate Sport bowling because they suck and can't hit the pocket 3 times in a row.
-
Well you're talking more about experience than instinct and intuition. Agree with the second point. I've never been for throwing away the house shot and making everyone bowl on the US Open shot, but at least keep people honest. There's a lot of guys in our town that average 230 plus, but because of the way scoring is, one bad shot here, and a couple taps there are what kind of "cap" the averages. However, not all those guys are on the same skill level. The house shot makes it look like that, but if a shot gets just a tad harder, the one dimensional guys disappear, then the guys that need every single one of the 6 boards they have to aim at fall off, etc. I'd just like to see some kind of challenge other than keeping it on the right side of the headpin.
-
The problem is that we as league bowlers do not get the chance to bowl on these conditions very often if at all.
-
You get into trouble when blanket statements are made about the ease of house shots, or how egos keep bowlers from wanting to bowl on sport patterns.
I remember 40 years ago the biggest thing league bowlers wanted was consistency. They didn't want to have to adjust from slick to dry or vice versa. Nothing has really changed. The easiest thing about the modern THS isn't the margin of error it gives bowlers, but the comfort zone it puts them in. Guys spraying the ball all over a 5 board area aren't scoring consistently on house shots. The guys averaging 230 are repeating shots. The problem is that we see a guy who does spray the ball all over shoot an award score, and ignore the blind squirrel effect ( even sprayers occasionally make several good shots in a row ). With the old balls, 12 shots in the pocket had a lot less probability of shooting a 300 than with modern balls. I have bowled on house shots that were so wet dry edge to edge that it was more difficult to hit the pocket than on some 3-1 tapers. I have on two different occasions averaged higher in a sport shot league than on a THS in the same house. The reason is that I have built my game around playing straighter angles that carry much better on flatter longer patterns than on house shots where I am forced to hook the ball around the heavy oil in the middle. I carry much better when I can play more direct.
Also, just going longer with the oil won't put the flat 10 back in bowling unless you put out a flooded badger pattern. I bowled on a 52 foot Paris pattern in a senior tourney last winter where it took a 220 average to make the cut.
-
It's not egos that keep people from Sport bowling, it's the fact that league bowling has changed and most guys that bowl league just want to go have a couple of beers and throw strikes. The typical league bowler is not a bowling junkie that posts on internet forums and wants to bowl on anything remotely difficult. They don't practice. They have gotten a taste of averaging 200 and don't want to go back. The result of this is that good bowlers are now over 240, with some over 250. (And yes, there are sprayers that are over 230. The lanes must be tough in your area)
Regardless of the effects to the game, proprietors didn't start putting out easy conditions because their customers wanted the lanes more demanding.
-
House shots are easy in my area, but I do have lots of opportunity to play on sport patterns. I do agree totally with your analysis of the average league bowler. Nothing has really changed in that respect for the 40 years I was talking about except 200 today is about like 180 was then. Also, the modern equipment, and the harder lane surfaces make it easier to throw a high rev big hooking delivery. Spare shooting suffers, and guys become addicted to having swing area. I still disagree that sprayers are averaging 230. Just because a guy is hooking the lane and exploiting the dry does not necessarily mean he is spraying the ball. If you watch closely, most high average crankers are very near the same break point shot after shot. I know we all have missed 5 boards on a house wall and still hit the pocket, but if you are spraying it that much left and right on a regular basis, you aren't striking enough to average 230.
-
We'll just have to agree that I'm a more harsh judge of talent or lack there of.
I watch ball reaction very close, the amount someone curves it has nothing to do with how much they spray it. It's just easier to see the big hook guy that misses 4 right and gets it back vs. the straight guy that tugs it 4 and goes high flush.
-
This is just my opinion - The term sport shot is over rated....
If you consistently get the same shots over and over you will finally learn how to play the shot or purchase equipment that will help you over come those obstacles...
-
Sport patterns have been around long enough now and are catching on enough that I have seen a big improvement in scoring by guys on the sport patterns. We are all products of our environment. The more extreme the changes in the environment, the more versatile we become. Sport league averages are going up every season as more and more guys get comfortable in the environment. You can't do it by bowling league once a week and never practicing, but anyone who wants to learn to play sport patterns can do it if they are willing to make minor modifications to their game, and work on them.
On another note, there is a big difference between the sport conditions we see today, and the brickyard houses of 30-40 years ago. A lot of those houses had terrible wood surfaces, and the only way to play anything other than a wall pattern was to throw hard and straight and become a good spare shooter. I knew guys who practiced and bowled league on the tough shots of the day, using the rational that "think how good we will be on the easy shots". The problem was that none of them learned how to throw enough ball to carry when they did hit the easy conditions. Guys who honed their game on the wall shots of the day were much better equipped to compete on the tougher patterns. It became a lot different with the introduction of the resin ball. During the urethane and polyester era, carrydown was a brutal problem that really only could be addressed with a heavy crown or walled up pattern. The first thing we noticed with the early resin balls was how easily they handled carrydown that would totally stop our blue hammers. From that day forward the top hat wall really became unnecessary for giving a playable condition, but nobody wanted to flatten the patterns.
-
This is just my opinion - The term sport shot is over rated....
If you consistently get the same shots over and over you will finally learn how to play the shot or purchase equipment that will help you over come those obstacles...
Do you bowl on Sport or PBA Patterns Rountinly? Just curious.
Well said avabob
-
The problem with not bowling on sport patterns is that unless you already have a good deal of experience and a trained eye or the correct perspective, you may not know by bowling on a house shot what the definition of "repeating shots" is. If you're allowed to routinely miss with speed, revs, angle of rotation, and from 3-6 boards depending on the part of the lane, all you're going to do is improve enough to stay inside that tolerance. Plus your strategy may change. If I'm on a house shot my focus is more on how I'm throwing it than where I'm throwing it. You have plenty of area, so I want to make sure my carry percentage is higher on a house shot, but on a tougher shot I put the bigger emphasis on hitting what I'm aiming at rather than trying to juice the shot with revs or speed. I find it really hard to practice my sport shot game on a house shot, and vice versa.
We'll just have to agree that I'm a more harsh judge of talent or lack there of.
I watch ball reaction very close, the amount someone curves it has nothing to do with how much they spray it. It's just easier to see the big hook guy that misses 4 right and gets it back vs. the straight guy that tugs it 4 and goes high flush.
I've got to agree with this too, I'm pretty harsh most of the time, and for me ball reaction is all that matters. Doesn't matter if you crank it or barely hit it at all, if your ball roll has the ball doing what it's supposed to and transitioning right, you'll do well across the board.