BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Mighty Fish on June 02, 2014, 08:21:42 PM
-
First of all, here's a link to a column published a few days ago, and pay particular attention to the sixth paragraph (regarding a 707 series by Dolores Meyers) before considering the subsequent posts ...
http://www.examiner.com/article/craycraft-fires-300-game-803-set-at-englewood-where-he-now-averages-245?cid=db_articles
-
The following is an unedited Facebook exchange between area bowler/pro shop operator Scott Long and myself ...
SCOTT: Why are we now giving press, in praising sandbags sir??
ME: I don't understand your question. When have I "praised" or lauded sandbagging?
SCOTT: On Wednesday night, we had a couple of teams decide to sandbag ridiculously. The worst being Delores Meyers team. The lead off bowler shoots 405 with a couple of 120 gms while having a 205 year book...he then proceeds to beat his yearbook average the next 2 weeks(both well over 200 pins total more than the 1st night). Also, besides him setting 67 pins below his yearbook, Delores set 47 pins below hers and her husband set 41 pins below his. Then I see in your article, that you are bragging about her set on Wednesday night where she beat me 707-702 but I was spotting her a whopping 48 pins per game and even adding salt to the wounds by congratulating her for sandbagging the first 2 weeks of the season after averaging 210 during the winter in the same building.
Off of her teams first week....their team set unbreakable records with 467 pins more the 2nd week and then bowled about another 150 pins more than the 2nd week last week or 617 pins total more than week 1's sandbagging.
just in case, the 67, 47, and 41 unders are per game not series.
ME: I see what you are saying, but how was I to determine that from the standings sheets? Of course, I noticed Dolores' low scores in the two previous weeks, but every bowler has off-weeks, and I hardly consider her a sandbagger. As for the other low scores that you mentioned, I rarely pay much attention to low scores (because I'm generally looking for high scores). At any rate, I certainly didn't attempt to promote sandbagging in any way, but thanks for your comments.
-
Now, some questions for forum members:
(1) Do you agree with Scott Long's original assumption that my column "praised" sandbagging?
(2) Do you believe that what Scott is claiming constitutes deliberate sandbagging?
(3) Do you believe that my column contained any inappropriate mention of Dolores Meyers' scores? And if so, how do you feel that her scores should have been reported?
-
Just some thoughts . did her team win in the weeks that she bowled the low scores? If the team did win it might be looked at as sandbagging .. however if the team lost I can't see how she would be sandbagging!Hurting your team is hard to be looked at as bagging! In my opinion!
-
How often when you're dumping does your team win? There's no way more than one good bowler bowls like crap, way below their averages, on the same night, and they're just having bad nights. A 205 average guy never bowls a 405 on a non sport bowling shot! I don't know how anyone can say hurting your team on one or two nights in order to gain an advantage later is not bagging!! It's really hard to believe a 210 average bowler would shoot a 486 in the same house he'd averaged 210. I average 198 and haven't shot below 500 the last 3 years. I find it hard to believe she would struggle badly two weeks in a row without an injury.
That being said, there was nothing wrong with reporting the great scores these people shot. As a bowler who witnessed bagging in my league this year, I also understand the frustration with the bagging bowlers being celebrated for doing what they should be doing or beating anyone after manipulating their game to gain an advantage!!!
-
(1) No you didn't praise sandbagging, just posted a good score.
(2) It's hard to know if it was sandbagging without being there to see what actually happened. The scores are somewhat believable, with a 162 avg the 1st week and 180 the second, but still a solid 35 pins under the previous 2 years averages. If I had to bowl a known 210 average bowler in week 3, and that person showed up with a 171, I would be very suspicious... especially if that person proceeding to post a 700. I would definitely keep an eye on any suspected baggers, but it is next to impossible to prove regardless. I've said this a thousand times, if there is a way to game the system to gain an advantage, some jack-wagon is going to do it.
(3) Your column was fine. It's not like you review tape on the previous weeks scores to verify everything is legit before writing them up. Just looking at the score sheets.
-
If a bowler is way under his average 2 weeks and his team loses then the third week he's way over his average (from last year) he's probable right back at his average the 4th week .. how did he gain a long time advantage?
I also think your column was fine!
-
Depends on how long the summer league runs. Do we know they lost? You don't have to lose if you're dumping. Have you ever seen dumping in person? I have. Their teams haven't always suffered huge losses. It depends on what the level of competition they were facing and if the others on the team could pick up the slack. Then during a short season they could gain an advantage.
-
It is an advantage as far as financial gain if the 700 series with the handicap gained based on the 171 average qualifies for a handicap series award at the end of the season. That is a lot of handicap gained compared to the normal 200 average.
-
Now, some questions for forum members:
(1) Do you agree with Scott Long's original assumption that my column "praised" sandbagging?
(2) Do you believe that what Scott is claiming constitutes deliberate sandbagging?
(3) Do you believe that my column contained any inappropriate mention of Dolores Meyers' scores? And if so, how do you feel that her scores should have been reported?
1. I can see how he might have thought it was praising a sandbagger but if you had no evidence other than the numbers you reported, then how could you know she was sandbagging. See possibly reasons in reply #2.
2. Unless you know the person and their abilities, it can be hard to say that they were sandbagging. The odds of a 200+ average bowler throwing 2 consecutive weeks of 450s on a house pattern is astronomically low, UNLESS they were bowling with a broken leg or a broken hand. Seeing as how she shot 480 and then 540, She could easily have just been adjusting to new oil patterns and/or new balls, or been testing a new release. I would say her scores, IN AND OF THEMSELVES, are not evidence of sandbagging.
3. I think you reported her scores totally properly.
If Scott Long had some evidence to the contrary, he should have reported it to you. I think he was just unhappy over being beaten, by someone who he thought should not have beaten him. It's a bitter pill we all have to swallow every once in a while.
-
IMPORTANTLY, I feel that there is a "fatal flaw" in the league rules, in that REGARDLESS OF ENTERING AVERAGE, BOWLERS ESTABLISH NEW AVERAGES (AND HANDICAP) ON THE FIRST NIGHT. And wouldn't such a situation tend to greatly increase the possibility (or probability) of sandbagging?
And in response to those who inquired as to how the team in question fared on opening night, they WON FOUR points and LOST FOUR points. Here's the league standings sheet (and the "accused" team is The Misfits) ...
http://www.leaguesecretary.com/LeagueFilesStandings.aspx?LID=27935&pg=1&YearNum=2014&WeekNum=1&Season=u
-
Can a 205 avg bowler have a bad week and avg 160. Yes. However, the couple of 120 games to get the 480 tells me that something is up. You reported based on the information available which is fine.
-
Lets break this down a bit more practical. USBC will not punish sandbagging short of them confessing to USBC that they did it......maybe
Had that this passed year in a mens league. The team that won the previous two years sandbagged. For a third year they did the same. Completely throw off the first half of the year, win the second half along with the roll off and take home first place.
One night one of the younger bowlers shoots 280 to start the series. Then starts picking off corner pins the second game. Finishes bowling 100 120 roughly or less the last two games.
One of the weeks we bowled the team one of their bowlers was on 279 pace for the 3rd game and the team was smoking us. 10th frame guy gets up and strikes, then double gutters to shoot 240 and laughs. Shoots a 650 set. He won most improved bowler this season on the league. 200 plus average bowler previous years finished at 180 something.
USBC was notified and sent out a rep one night. She obviously determine nothing. She chatted with the team and watched them bowl and that was it.
There is no class or respect with a lot of the people in bowling. The rules and the governing body are also lacking in quality. So weather you promote sandbagging or not really doesn't matter because it is no existent issue in bowling. The real problem is no thumb bowlers and weight holes allegedly.
I love bowling. I am also realistic, and bitter. There are too many examples of why it is often consider a low class dirty game played in old smoked filled establishments and not a sport.
-
Can a league adopt a rule like this?
How about a bowler's previous year's average is their base handicap for the current year. A bowler ends with a 204 average for the previous year. So in a handicap league set at 100% of 220, that bowler receives a handicap of 16. No matter how far this bowler goes under their average in the current year they cannot receive more than that handicap base. Of course if their average goes up, their handicap descreases, but it never increases beyond the established base.
An exception to the rule. If someone sustains an injury, then you might put it to a captain's vote to have a handicap increased.
You could be a little forgiving maybe give the bowler and additional 10. So in my example the bowler's average to drop to 194, but anything less is only going to get 26 handicap.
Now teams and bowlers who sandbag would have to tank whole seasons to get a clear advantage. Obviously that could easily be shown in standing sheets from year to year.
To add: You would still keep scores for the current year. Average would be determined by the current years score.
Another idea: Could a league adopt another rule base on how much you current year's average compared to last year. The rule would be a person could only drop 10. So if a person drops 20 pins in the current year, their average used to establish a base handicap for the next year would be 10 pins higher.
Now you curving them down. Reach a level. It's going to take several years to get that average down 50 pins lower.
-
Can a league adopt a rule like this?
How about a bowler's previous year's average is their base handicap for the current year. A bowler ends with a 204 average for the previous year. So in a handicap league set at 100% of 220, that bowler receives a handicap of 16. No matter how far this bowler goes under their average in the current year they cannot receive more than that handicap base. Of course if their average goes up, their handicap descreases, but it never increases beyond the established base.
Dear trash heap:
Most leagues have some sort of entering average requirement, and if the bowler has established an average in that league, or in the yearbook, they are handicapped on that figure for a certain number of weeks.
However, it's certainly not an ideal situation when -- regardless of previous averages -- everyone establishes a new average on the first night. That would certainly tend to be an "inviting" situation for sandbaggers.
-
Fish,
I understand. I am asking can a league adopt a rule that I am suggesting. A bowler cannot receive anymore handicap than their "handicap base" across the entire league season.
It's a new term.
Handicap Base = Handicap calculated using Bowler's previous year average.
since we are on another page here was my proposal:
Can a league adopt a rule like this?
How about a bowler's previous year's average is their base handicap for the current year. A bowler ends with a 204 average for the previous year. So in a handicap league set at 100% of 220, that bowler receives a handicap of 16. No matter how far this bowler goes under their average in the current year they cannot receive more than that handicap base. Of course if their average goes up, their handicap descreases, but it never increases beyond the established base.
An exception to the rule. If someone sustains an injury, then you might put it to a captain's vote to have a handicap increased.
You could be a little forgiving maybe give the bowler and additional 10. So in my example the bowler's average to drop to 194, but anything less is only going to get 26 handicap.
Now teams and bowlers who sandbag would have to tank whole seasons to get a clear advantage. Obviously that could easily be shown in standing sheets from year to year.
To add: You would still keep scores for the current year. Average would be determined by the current years score for next year.
Another idea: Could the league then adopt another rule base on how much you current year's average compared to last year. The rule would be a person could only drop 10. So if a person drops 20 pins in the current year, their average used to establish a base handicap for the next year would be 10 pins higher.
Now you curving them down. Reach a level. It's going to take several years to get that average down 50 pins lower.
-
Fish,
I understand. I am asking can a league adopt a rule that I am suggesting. A bowler cannot receive anymore handicap than their "handicap base" across the entire league season.
Dear trash heap:
Indeed, a league can do so, and in fact, a few leagues have adopted such a rule.
-
Darn. :D I thought I was first to think of this.
I understand you don't get rid of the guys that pour it on and lay back through out the season. But to me this would cut the clear blantant dropping of average at the beginning of the year.
As far as things go Fish. Keep up the reporting. I am thinking of trying to get local bowling scene back into our local news. With our high school team being so successful this past year, bowling is becoming a little more popular.
-
Here's a subsequent (later) communication from Scott Long, who obviously feels that there is major sandbagging going on in his league ...
I know you didn't do it on purpose Bill. Sorry if I was grumpy.....just getting old in this league. We had a guy establish 117 last year and then finish at 188 and shoot a whopping 935 handicap series in week 2 off a 220 hdcp base. This year he isn't even the worst in the league and he is at it again.
-
I haven't read every comment here but I wonder if the true motivation would be handicap pots/brackets?
-
Urethane Game brings up a good point. What is the motivation for this? Most summer leagues, that I have bowled in or seen, aren't big money leagues as far as prize money. Is this league an exception to that? Is it for handicap pots/brackets as UG mentioned? Is there a local big payout handicap tournament in the near future that uses current (summer league) average? Again, I have never seen one like this where they wouldn't use at least last winter league averages. Unless these individuals only bowl this summer league, they would have established higher winter league averages. Is it just to say they won this league every year? Those would be my questions to Scott Long.
-
Urethane Game brings up a good point. What is the motivation for this? Most summer leagues, that I have bowled in or seen, aren't big money leagues as far as prize money. Is this league an exception to that? Is it for handicap pots/brackets as UG mentioned? Is there a local big payout handicap tournament in the near future that uses current (summer league) average? Again, I have never seen one like this where they wouldn't use at least last winter league averages. Unless these individuals only bowl this summer league, they would have established higher winter league averages. Is it just to say they won this league every year? Those would be my questions to Scott Long.
Dear jorge300:
I get the impression from Scott Long that he strongly feels it's not just one team that is sandbagging; rather, he apparently claims that a number of teams and individuals are allegedly guilty. And as you imply, it's a virtual certainty that most (if not all) of the "suspected" individuals have established averages that COULD be used for entering-average purposes when joining (or re-joining) a league.
-
This week's league standings aren't posted yet, but I just noticed that Dolores Meyers had an 866 handicap series (when she rolled that 707 scratch last week). Think that might hold up for high women's handicap set for the season?
-
This week's league standings aren't posted yet, but I just noticed that Dolores Meyers had an 866 handicap series (when she rolled that 707 scratch last week). Think that might hold up for high women's handicap set for the season?
That is what I was referring to in my earlier post.
-
That is what I was referring to in my earlier post.
Dear MI 2 AZ:
In line with what you've stated (in your earlier post), here are some additional facts to ponder:
* Leadoff man John McMahon rolled an 884 handicap series [he established a 135 opening-night average]
* THREE TEAM MEMBERS now have HANDICAP GAMES of better than 300, with Dolores' 305 being second to her husband's 309.
* THREE TEAM MEMBERS now have HANDICAP SERIES of 884, 866 and 827.
Therefore, whether or not they sandbagged on the first night, there can be no question that everything has worked out great for them in the league so far.
-
This is why you never establish an average with at least 6 games and then by the 3rd week people can use what they established. Until you establish an average you use the highest from last year from the USBC records, if no bowling last year, go back the previous year, etc.... Until then if no record then and only then will averages be established after 3 games
Could also put a limitation on awards for instance only handicap scores after the 9 games established (10th forward) will be eligible for handicap based awards.
I would make it very clear on what those rules will prevent and people will agree to them if most of the league is honest. Even if leagues don't have this problem they should be proactive. The minute it happens everyone knows about it and then that league gets a bad rep. Around here a bad rep will kill a league the next year, but only about 12 teams in a league so doesn't take much to cripple things.
-
An update after this week's competition ...
* Dolores Meyers rolled games of 182, 245 and 227 for a 654 series
* Her team now has a 28-4 record (and still has a four-player handicap of 185)
* The team has amassed nearly 700 handicap pinfall more than any other team over the first four weeks, and leads in virtually every statistical scratch and handicap team and individual category.
-
So after all that you have now reported Mighty Fish, do you now believe they are sandbagging? I don't know how you could say "whether or not they sandbagged the first night." You have to be smarter than just giving them the benefit of the doubt. It seems in my mind these are all low class sandbagging scum and doing it more for their own egos and to beat down their opponents, than anything that could be won in prize money in a summer league. These are the type of baggers I see in my winter league as ours is not a big money league. They are actually more frustrating because egotistical clowns like these are worse than the ones who are trying to just win cash.
-
I wish Charlest and Joe Falco would come back and comment again since 'the sour grapes" and "how did he gain a long time advantage" comments look hollow now!
-
Idk about all of you "pros" on this forum but it takes me 3 or 4 weeks to get my game up to par every year....I flat out suck at first...but so does everyone else..usually. I'm glad I don't have conspirators losing sleep at night over my "possible" sandbagging. "Dun-dun-dunnnnnnn"
-
Idk about all of you "pros" on this forum but it takes me 3 or 4 weeks to get my game up to par every year....I flat out suck at first...but so does everyone else..usually. I'm glad I don't have conspirators losing sleep at night over my "possible" sandbagging. "Dun-dun-dunnnnnnn"
I agree that sometimes it takes a while to get adjusted. Especially if it's on conditions that you've never bowled on. Or after coming off of a long layoff.
-
So after all that you have now reported Mighty Fish, do you now believe they are sandbagging? I don't know how you could say "whether or not they sandbagged the first night." You have to be smarter than just giving them the benefit of the doubt. It seems in my mind these are all low class sandbagging scum and doing it more for their own egos and to beat down their opponents, than anything that could be won in prize money in a summer league. These are the type of baggers I see in my winter league as ours is not a big money league. They are actually more frustrating because egotistical clowns like these are worse than the ones who are trying to just win cash.
Dear TDC57:
I always opt to be fair-minded, and I'm certainly not going to claim that someone is sandbagging without being virtually certain about my allegations.
Frankly, although the bowler(s) in question are from my general area, I have never met any of them, and on the basis of longtime coverage of Dolores Meyers' on-the-lanes career, I've never had any reason to suspect her of being a sandbagger, and until this recent situation, I've never heard any hint of anyone calling her a sandbagger.
However, I can certainly see how some could make a case for sandbagging, based on the early-season summer league scores shot by the bowlers in question, but I prefer to report the scores (in my bowling column) and let others decide if sandbagging is a likely (or obvious) conclusion.
And again, when I reported on Dolores Meyers' 707 series, I did note that she had started with a pair of sub-par (for her) series, but I didn't even notice the scores of her teammates at the time. When I scan a league standings sheet, I'm looking only for scores good enough to publish in a bowling column, and that's what I did in this case.
-
Mighty Fish,
in one of my first comments I said that you had done nothing wrong by reporting the scores, but it is apparent that these people are baggers and Scott was clearly correct. It doesn't make any difference if he was being sour grapes over losing or not. He spotted the sandbagging and called it out. Again, you were correct in pointing out good scores, but you also held Scott up for others to judge and judge they did. All sorts of excuses were made for the low scores and now in later posts you have clearly proved the doubters of Scott wrong by pointing out scores and wins and losses by these bowlers. I laud you for continuing to update what the bowlers in question have done since!!
-
billdozer and EL3MCNEIL,
You guys make good points about it taking time to adjust after a layoff but that loses it's steam when you realize the people in question bowled a winter league this year and started a spring league soon after AT THE SAME BOWLING CENTER! Benefit of the doubt goes out the window knowing that and no other excuses are needed!! 200 average bowlers don't shoot 120 games and 400 series very often if ever unless injuries are involved.
-
Again, allow me to interject the opinion that leagues should never allow EVERYONE -- even including those with previous league, house and association averages -- to establish a NEW average (and handicap) on the first session of a league schedule. Such lack of an entering-average rule could clearly be an "invitation" to sandbagging.
-
I see your point. Then that's up to the league to create better rules to regulate it, if not, you end up with sandbaggers!
-
I see your point. Then that's up to the league to create better rules to regulate it, if not, you end up with sandbaggers!
Dear billdozer:
Unfortunately, that's the way it is, when a bowler with an established league or house average of 200 is allowed to establish a new handicap on the first night. There's always a chance that -- because of that "poor night" OR "throwing off" -- such bowler will wind up with a far-below-average series (and hence, emerge with a vastly inflated handicap).
-
They did in our Thursday night summer league. I had to bowl for my wife and I made a joke that great I get to start over and was going to set a 170 average. I said that as a joke cause I hate when they don't use last years average as the entering average. Needless to say when I went to turn our recap sheet in, there was several people waiting to check my scores. I didn't get any handicap and didn't expect to, but I could have had a bad night! People can have a bad night, but we know at the center if somebody is missing on purpose. We had a league in another house and if the team had the game won they didn't pick up spares. It was obvious, but it't hard to prove.
-
I too struggle early on because I don't bowl in the summer (usually) and it takes me 6 weeks or so to get to where I want to be.
That said, the problem I see is what do you do in these situations? It's virtually impossible to prove sandbagging unless someone admits to it. So your options are get killed or join the crowd. Neither option is ideal. I like the idea of capping the max handicap by some number based on last years or the last couple years. Not sure how feasible that is, but it might be the best solution I've seen.
It might be fun to bowl in an unsanctioned league where everybody is sandbagging just to see what happens. Wouldn't affect any other leagues or tournaments. If everyone is doing it, does the advantage go away? Will someone bowl a 0?
-
Sandbaggers know they hold the advantage because it is hard to prove without a doubt. Those that do it to gain an advantage in big money leagues are the worst. Those that do it to stroke their own egos by using it to win their (non-big money) league championships are just phonies. Anyone that has bowled for any length of time with these bowlers know when bagging is going on, but if they call it out they know there will be heated discussions over it and they usually just let it go. I think as in our league where it happened, the team was reveling in the fact they were beating the crap out of everybody, just made it frustrating. Leagues do need to try and protect itself from this but it doesn't always work. Our league has the rule that you use last years average for the first two weeks, but if only two guys on the team are doing the bagging, the team can still look somewhat legitimate as the team this thread was about, did.
But, guys please quit going on about how after the summer layoff it takes a while to get back in form. That is true, this case is totally different as it's a summer league with very little if any down time between the winter league and it.
-
But, guys please quit going on about how after the summer layoff it takes a while to get back in form. That is true, this case is totally different as it's a summer league with very little if any down time between the winter league and it.
Whether of not the bowlers in question sandbagged, I can assure you that each of them were doing quite well at the end of the regular season.