The 11th Frame: Update: BPAA exploring 1.5-1 pattern for 2013 US Open

http://www.11thframe.com/page/blog_id_5486

Excellent column Riggs.

I feel they need to leave it at 1:1. The U.S. Open is supposed to be brutal. If they want the convenience of one pattern for both men and ladies, let the ladies bowl on 1:1 as well. They are able to handle it just fine. If not, then the best of the ladies will still win.

+1.  The US Open is one of the toughest tournaments in the world for this reason.  It emphasizes shot making.  It should be left at 1:1, no exceptions.  The cream of the crop will rise to the occasion.

BPAA, which is running the U.S. Open in 2013 instead of PBA, said in an email responding to my query that "we are not going to be utilizing the US Open pattern" of recent years. "We are exploring a pattern that is 1.5:1 (not entirely flat, but close) for a few reasons.
 
"Due to the timing and the combining of the squads with both men and women, it would be a logistical nightmare to have two separate patterns ran at each center so we are trying to formulate a 'happy medium' for both the men and women to where scores won’t be through the roof, but won’t be disastrous either.
 
"We are still currently in contract with who the lane maintenance provider is going to be as well so there are definitely some unknowns."

Funny, I didn't hear any actual explanations in their response.  I didn't see it in the blog; did the women also bowl on a flat pattern in the past?  If so, everyone bowling on a flat pattern is as easy to set up as anything else.  What the heck does the maintenance provide have to do with the pattern ratio?  Even if the women didn't bowl on a dead flat pattern in the past, I'd be willing to bet a great majority would be up for the challenge.  Could it be any worse than last year's out door finals; ya know, the one where 8 games were bowled with an average score of under 163?

Way too much being read into this...when you have fields this large with such an array of talent and the inability to make shots and/or the 'condition' 1-1 or 1.5-1 the cream is going to rise to top. TQRs that have 2-1 eliminate so many...there will be no built in friction or hold and that eliminates prolly 80% of the field.

I received an email from BPAA's John Losito later Tuesday and added his comments, which some of you might not have seen:

######################

In a later email, BPAA's John Losito said the condition has not been finalized for multiple reasons, including that the Japan Cup was preventing a meeting with Mike Fagan, PBA Touring Players Committee representative.

"I do feel that the players should have input on the lane condition," Losito said.

The BPAA also has not finalized a deal for the lane sponsor and BPAA wants input from that company.

And, he said, "Our committee has only just recently received data regarding the lane surface of the centers in Columbus, as I just returned from my site inspection just over a week ago. This information will be considered in determing the ratio accordingly.

"For many decades the BPAA ran both US Open events, and we are appreciative of the support the PBA has given event for more than a decade. Although the US Open is a trademark of the BPAA, the BPAA Tournament Committee is working on the US Open as a collaborative event from all integers of the industry, including the PBA, USBC, BPAA and multiple commercial bowling industry sponsors. Although we will be making the final determination of what the lane pattern will be, we will not make that decision in a vacuum."

I do not understand why they would increase it .5% but I will say 2 things...I believe too much emphasis is placed on conditions & 'patterns' and this is a perfect example that scoring can be controlled showing all the negative emphasis placed on the bowling balls. This is proof the lane conditions can dictate the final outcome

The past US Opens for the women have been no where near 1.5:1.  They have been typically referred to as the US Women's "Wide" Open.  Last time I was at the Women's Open (2011), the pattern played close to 5:1 and 153 of the 286 participants were plus and there were (14) 300 games.  Last year there were 115 out of 202 participants that were plus. 

This is exactly what the better women have been wanting.  They don't want a league shot, which is what it has been in the past.  Whether or not 1.5:1 is ideal is another story.  The Women's Open has had issues with attendance in the past.  2011 was the most they ever had with many women go for the "experience". 

To me, this is a good thing on the women's side, though not sure how it affects the men's side.

I also have to imagine the TV element factors into this at least a little bit. Now, obviously, by the time they cut for the show, you're going to have the best bowlers there, and those guys and gals can score on just about anything you put out, especially after they've had the chance to carve it up during practice. Still, higher scores make for better TV. Sure, some of us love watching the elite grind it out, but the casual observer wants lots of strikes and big scores. I mean, when do bowling highlights make Sports Center? It's not when the title match is 205-204. It's when someone shoots 300 or the match goes 289-279. The USGA makes some of the same considerations when setting up golf courses for its U.S. Open, and they have far better sponsors and following than bowling currently has!