Galaxy, you come in and criticize and when someone (me) asks you some questions on how the USGA and USBC proposal compare, you say you are out of here.  Have a nice day.
--------------------
Who says bowling isn't a blood sport?

Just my opinion here.  It is like contract negotiations.  Not everyone will win.  Both sides must give a little.  Seems that at the meetings proposals should have been taken as to what the local reps think the SMO should be.  Then once all that is in.  Try to hammer things out with the knowledge that not everyone gets to have their cake and eat it too.  I think everybody truly wants a SMO.  The problem as I see it is that everyone still wants to be just as important as the see themselves now.
--------------------
I don't really play cards and I am not 79, but it fits together somehow.

I've seen the ABC reject balls for competition - probably more "novelty balls" like the Quasar, the "Michael Jordan Basketball", etc. but I believe I just read here on this board about a company's equipment having to be recalled because it had too high a "coefficient of restitution".

Golf has it's own equipment issues with Big Bertha drivers, etc. and wasn't titanium used in golf long before it made it's way into bowling?

The area where I think golf does a better job than bowling is in labeling the courses and tees to reflect how difficult they really are. Unfortunately, given that there are a lot more lanes than there are golf courses and that those lanes can be modified at the proprietor's whim at any time by changing the oil pattern - labelling the difficulty of the lanes strikes me as a much more challenging proposition.

I do have an idea myself, but I'm sure people will find fault with it. For what it's worth - here goes...

I think the bowling powers that be should track the "house" average for every bowling center in America and using a bell curve, come up with a system to rate the difficulty of the houses by virtue of the house average. In order to have  sanctioned leagues in their house, proprietor's should be required to prominently post a decal on their front door with the rating of their house difficulty on it. In order to prevent easier and easier conditions from degrading the standards, a gold standard should be established based upon conditions from "the golden age of bowling" the 1950s.

In turn, the ABC should modify it's awards according to the house difficulty. The ABC gold 300 ring should not be available by upgrade anymore. If you shoot your 300 in a cake house, you get a cheap ring with the level of difficulty of the house marked on the ring.

e.g.

300 - C means you shot your perfect game in a house of average difficulty, etc.

In order to get a gold 300 ring, your perfect game would have to be shot in a house that met the gold standard - the house average would be in line with the averages established in the 1950s - bowling's "golden era".

The same rules would apply to high series awards, etc.




Edited on 5/1/2003 1:33 PM

Interesting concept. As they say "There is no such thing as a bad idea" it might inspire one that would really work well, if it doesn't itself.

On the ball or product rejection question. There are probably hundreds of balls that are rejected annually we never know about. We here about the ones that are made anyway, like the Quasar and Micheal Jordan. I think the first to be banned after the ball was out and approved was the old Orange DOt. There was another one a couple years ago, but can't remmember which one. I think the La Nina would be denied approval under the new standards or so I understand. The plastic pins were denied for something like 10 years or more. The new DBA Laneshield was denied approval for around 7 years. So, yes ABC does reject products on a regular basis. We just never hear about them unless the manufacturer makes it an issue or have friends in Wisconsin.

HOw exactly did we go from SMO to GOlf vs. Bowling. Bit of a tangent. Oh well, that is how it goes. I don't Golf, understand why some people do. It just is not my cup of tea. Love to bowl and have no idea why. Just do. I have friends that are 200++ bowlers and just as good at Golf. I know that many of the PBA tour guys enjoy both sports, hear them talking about it often.

Geez, where were all of you folks the past 3 years when the debate, pro and con, was going on about USBC?  Maybe the reason some are unhappy with the ABC/WIBC governance of bowling is they set on their duffs and do nothing but second guess what those who are involved do.  With the exception of Sawbones and Tex, I don't remember hardly any of you becoming involved when we tried to discuss USBC on this forum prior to the votes.  Yes, I am a local ABC volunteer, director and I opposed USBC vigorously for over 3 years not because I oppose an SMO but because the USBC proposal was an ill-conceived avomination.

Sorry Bill, just found this site this year.  I did start one thread on the SBO after our local rep came to our league and addressed us on the proposal but only gave one side of it.  Learned a lot more about it from that and from looking at the www.bowl.com site.  There is a lot of knowledge to learn from the people who visit this site and my thanks to all of you for sharing.
--------------------
Who says bowling isn't a blood sport?