I think you think that I'm against your point... I actually prefer harder lane conditions. I don't think it's necessarily causing the demise of bowling, but it certainly isn't helping.
1. I understand golf is commonly compared to bowling. That's what annoys me. The comparisons often make no sense. I'm not disagreeing with you that easier golf courses would be easier, which is the very obvious point you seem to be trying to make. (Though I do doubt your ability to beat Tiger, regardless of the size of the cup).
2. Ok, if you'd prefer a sport that requires a several game series, theTampa Bay lightning won the Stanley Cup last year as an 8 seed. It took them several best of 7 series to get there. Honestly, did you really GUARANTEE that making the NCAA tournament a Multi game set would change the outcome? Isn't that completely obvious? You're missing the point: the tournament is exciting because anyone can win on any given day, even if the best of the best tend to end up winning it all most of the time. That's what makes sports fun to watch, and thats what makes sports fun to play. Any given day, any given series. What makes bowling different? Why aren't good bowlers allowed to lose a game occasionally? Do you honestly believe that if the PBA bowlers you had around bowled league, they wouldn't dominate over the course of the year? I'm feeling very confident in saying that they were shooting consistent 250s and 260s, while the guys who were "beating" them only threw one good game and lost to the pros in series.
On the flip side, last year I bowled against a fairly recent PBA rookie of the year on our PBA summer league. I don't average 200 on sport shots, but he got some bad breaks and I beat him 2 out of 3. Does that make me a better bowler than him, or is it possible that even the best players lose occasionally?
Again, I'm not debating you that harder shots would be better in the long run for bowling. I'm just pointing out general flaws in the arguments.