I'm sure that the fans who are actually at the venue during the week find the new format more exciting. They can focus on head to head matches that are actually life and death for the bowlers involved, rather than the old system where the matches are really only for racking up total pinfall (including the bonus for winning a match).
I think that for following the tournament from afar--as most of us have to do--it's more interesting the old way, when we can see guys go up and down the standings as they either find or lose a groove.
I think it works the same way as lane conditions. When the lane conditions favor certain bowlers' "A" games, they dominate, and when the lane conditions favor another type of players' "A" games, those players dominate. Certain kinds of bowlers seem to work better under the sudden death format in use now, and other bowlers are better when hanging on for the long haul is the format. It doesn't make one type of bowler better than the other, the two formats just showcase different strengths. Sprinters don't win marathons, and marathoners don't win sprints. Of course, it's match play on TV either way. I just prefer the old tournament format and the old step ladder type finals as well.
Of course, then there's Norm Duke, who (in spite of losing this week) has shown the ability to handle different lane conditions, different release styles, and different tournament formats better than anyone else, IMHO.
Shiv
--------------------
Listening to the monotonous staccato of rain on my desk top
