Post by: T-GOD on August 10, 2003, 09:12:16 PM
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
Post by: T-GOD on August 11, 2003, 12:54:14 PM
Post by: michelle 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...
Post by: Pinbuster on August 11, 2003, 01:13:31 PM
I think that far to often today bowlers who have not fully developed their “A†game are trying to produce a “B†game or “C†etc. etc. and not fully developing their “A†game.
My feeling is that a if you develop a fundamentally sound “A†game you should be able to bowl at least “good†on all conditions and “great†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.
Post by: T-GOD on August 11, 2003, 02:12:08 PM
Now, would you rather be Robert Smith or be versatile, cashing every week, but not winning..? =:^D
Post by: mumzie on August 11, 2003, 02:21:58 PM
I just want to be good enough to beat the other bowlers.
--------------------
Bowling? Of course it's a sport.
Post by: DON DRAPER on August 11, 2003, 11:08:47 PM
Post by: T-GOD on August 12, 2003, 01:05:37 AM
Post by: louie on August 12, 2003, 12:59:34 PM
--------------------
Why does everyone laugh when I bowl?
louie
Post by: Pinbuster on August 12, 2003, 01:05:31 PM
Post by: 9andaWiggle on August 12, 2003, 01:15:40 PM
--------------------
9-
Why, WHY won't the last one just fall?? It's WIGGLING for cryin' out loud!!
Post by: T-GOD on August 12, 2003, 01:56:12 PM
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
Post by: Phillip Marlowe on August 12, 2003, 01:58:42 PM
--------------------
"I'm God's gift to the lanes, sort of comic relief."
Post by: Pinbuster on August 12, 2003, 02:09:59 PM
What are describing is more of a cultural icon who actually transcends the sport. I’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 …..
Post by: T-GOD on August 12, 2003, 02:34:02 PM
Post by: Pinbuster on August 12, 2003, 02:55:39 PM
Post by: T-GOD on August 12, 2003, 03:39:52 PM
Back in the 70's, Mark Roth was this player. He is the only bowler where "all/most of the kids" tried to, and did copy his style. He changed the way the game was played. =:^D
Post by: charlest on August 12, 2003, 05:32:15 PM
--------------------
"Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it."
Post by: Psychoballtester on August 14, 2003, 03:46:52 AM
Ok,I can be great at being bad or horrible for being good!
This makes no sense!
Lets try this again,I'm just a great good ok bowler with horrible bad off days,I'm satisfied with that!!!
Oh Goshzilla!That was typed a bad as the first example!
As long as I have Life in me,NOT Newsweek,I can still throw a ball,I'm good ta go!!!
If I put a lil' concentration,I can bowl extra OK,I think?
Later Ballreviewyittes!!!
Moral to my goofy post;No one expects you to be great,getting there is half the fun!!Be ok,you'll be fine!!
Psycho.B.T
Post by: Zman on August 15, 2003, 11:32:49 AM
Lennox Lewis is con sided great and his winning percentage of fights is in the high 90's percentage wise.
The great hitters is baseball had averages in the mid to high 300's.
Thats over a 60 percent failure rate.
Until Tiger went nuts winning what 4 or 5 majors in a row in 200 I believe the golfers THAT won 1 major and 3-4 other tournaments out of 25-30 entries were considered great that year.
To me greatness is defined by your success against your competition.
Walter ray is great this year due to number of wins and high finishes.
he is dominant compared to his competition this year. To me he is a great bowler.
I agree 1000% with you about bowl needing a more dominant player.
I don't believe we have had anyone really really dominating since earl Anthony. If you say great bowler Earl is the 1st name that pops in my head.
We need 1 great dominant player or even better, two guys great having memorable matches.
I used to love it when Roth and Holman made a lot of shows and went head to head.
Now I'll answer your original question.
I want to be great and kill people certain tournaments rather than just cash and not win. I've also never understood the PBA stopping certain players from dominating with changing shots.
In golf you can see the changes in the courses and for major tourneys.
In bowling the subtilely's of "different" lane conditions is lost on the general public because you cannot see it and you have a hard time making just casual fans understand why it's tougher.
--------------------
Zman
Cleveland State Vikings.
Post by: stanski on August 18, 2003, 12:20:56 AM
--------------------
stanski