Author Topic: Would you rather be good, or great.? (Read 3607 times)

T-GOD · « **on:** August 10, 2003, 09:12:16 PM »

We hear arguments all the time about bowlers that are good, or which bowlers are only good on certain conditions, being 1 dimensional.

It seems to me that to be great, you have to put in more time practicing and/or practicing a certain thing. If a bowler wants to be great, they must practice a certain technique, so they can dominate when they hit a certain condition.

Because there are so many different conditions in bowling, there are many different techniques needed to be learned to be good on all of them. Many of the "good" bowlers like for the condition to be different, and usually tough.

Why is that..? Is it because they would rather be good, instead of great..? Or, is it because they are not good enough to beat the great bowlers, so they want different conditions, in order to beat them..?

Which would you rather be, good or great..? =:^D

T-GOD · « **Reply #1 on:** August 11, 2003, 12:54:14 PM »

Maybe I didn't get my point across that well, but it seems like today, the good bowlers think they're the great bowlers. Because, they always put down the "Great" bowlers, saying that they're only 1 dimensional. =:^D

michelle · « **Reply #2 on:** August 11, 2003, 01:05:23 PM »

If one is doing this for money, the greater likelihood of making $$$ is to be consistently good across a range of conditions as opposed to waiting for the one condition that can be crushed.

Beyond that, this seems to be a thread that will cause people to get hung up on labels that vary in definition across the country...in other words, different labels being applied to a bowler when in fact people may intend the same thing...

Pinbuster · « **Reply #3 on:** August 11, 2003, 01:13:31 PM »

If I get your drift right, you are saying that a player should develop a game that when their favorite condition is present it allows them to win (at least a good percentage of the time) on that condition. Thus by winning they become great and that good bowlers can bowl well on several conditions but they seldom win.

I think that far to often today bowlers who have not fully developed their â€œAâ€ game are trying to produce a â€œBâ€ game or â€œCâ€ etc. etc. and not fully developing their â€œAâ€ game.

My feeling is that a if you develop a fundamentally sound â€œAâ€ game you should be able to bowl at least â€œgoodâ€ on all conditions and â€œgreatâ€ win your favorite condition(s) come up.

I'm well past ever being considered a great. But what I would call a truly great matchs what I described as a solid "A" game player.

T-GOD · « **Reply #4 on:** August 11, 2003, 02:12:08 PM »

Is Robert Smith great or not..? Does the PBA intentially change the shot, so others can win..? Or, if they didn't change the shot, could Robert Smith dominate and win every other week..?

Now, would you rather be Robert Smith or be versatile, cashing every week, but not winning..? =:^D

mumzie · « **Reply #5 on:** August 11, 2003, 02:21:58 PM »

I don't really care about the labels.
I just want to be good enough to beat the other bowlers.

--------------------
Bowling? Of course it's a sport.

DON DRAPER · « **Reply #6 on:** August 11, 2003, 11:08:47 PM »

the GREAT players on the pba tour( walter ray williams, jr., chris barnes, norm duke, parker bohn III, brian voss, etc. )are what every serious bowler should aspire to be. in reality though, most of us will never reach that lofty level. i try to get better each and every time i bowl whether it's practice, a league, or a tournament.

T-GOD · « **Reply #7 on:** August 12, 2003, 01:05:37 AM »

That's basically what I'm saying. The game of bowling doesn't know itself. It doesn't know what to settle on, so it keeps on changing, conditions and such. The so called great bowlers of today, are Jack's of all Trades, masters of none..!! =:^D

louie · « **Reply #8 on:** August 12, 2003, 12:59:34 PM »

I'd love to be great, but these days I'd settle for being good!!

--------------------

Why does everyone laugh when I bowl?

louie

Pinbuster · « **Reply #9 on:** August 12, 2003, 01:05:31 PM »

T-God - Am I to imply that you don't think that any of the top bowlers on tour today are great bowlers ?

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #10 on:** August 12, 2003, 01:15:40 PM »

I'd rather be lucky. That way I could spray the lane and slop my way to victory and leave all the great bowlers shaking their head wondering how they lost to a hack who never hit the pocket!!

--------------------
9-

Why, WHY won't the last one just fall?? It's WIGGLING for cryin' out loud!!

T-GOD · « **Reply #11 on:** August 12, 2003, 01:56:12 PM »

Pin,

To be GREAT, one must "Dominate" AND do it with power and grace, while also impacting all the kids to want to be like them..!! Ala Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Mark Roth. I don't see any of the top 5-10 PBA players fitting into this catagory. =:^D

Phillip Marlowe · « **Reply #12 on:** August 12, 2003, 01:58:42 PM »

I'd rather be...great. I'd accept acceptable.
--------------------
"I'm God's gift to the lanes, sort of comic relief."

Pinbuster · « **Reply #13 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:09:59 PM »

To me great is a person who dominates on the field of play at the top level. I feel there are several current PBA players who fit that description. Walter Ray, Pete, Duke and Parker.

What are describing is more of a cultural icon who actually transcends the sport. Iâ€™m not sure any bowler has ever done that. Outside of bowling circles I doubt anyone knew of Mark Roth or Don Carter or Dick Weber or â€¦..

T-GOD · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2003, 02:34:02 PM »

Pete Weber, Duke, and Parker are definitely NOT dominating the PBA Tour at this time. And yes, GREAT athletes will trancend their sport. =:^D