I saw that the classic AE leader averaged 210 two years ago, and around 190-205 the previous 4-5 years.  then he drops to 177?  kind of odd to drop from 190s to 170s...maybe an injury, maybe a bagger?  


http://members.bowl.com/SearchUSBC/ViewMember.aspx?prefix=267&suffix=5625

Given what's been going on in the classified division for several years, this should come as no surprise to anyone.  There will be more.

Why would anyone bowl handicap tournaments for money and not expect to get taken?
Even if everyone was "honest" the playing field is not level. Leagues, league formats, lanebed conditions, oil patterns all vary, making a house league average close to worthless.
Just my .02....

Anybody can shoot big scores or small scores at any time.  In our city women's tournament this month, we had a woman go 1750 scratch all events, a 194 average for 9 games.  Her book average?  140.  It was just her tournament to win.  She totally skunked me and everyone else in brackets, too.  I say good for her!

Now, what bothers me is that I AM a classified bowler, and there are all these regular bowlers with strong opinions about a division where they don't even bowl.  Do I think I have a chance to win the classified division at Nationals?  No.  But -- It might just be my day.  If it is my day, with my 159 book average, will the regular division bowlers who are so incensed by the "corruption" in the classified division then call me a bagger?

I suppose it's my option to read or not read these threads.  I'd just very much like to see us all give people the benefit of the doubt.  We don't know why a bowler's average dropped.  There could be all sorts of horrible circumstances.  It's a bowler's choice to enter any tournament.  I enter for the love of the sport and the excitement of the event, and I'd imagine a good portion of the other classified bowlers have similar feelings.

Deb
--------------------
Do you want to play.net?

Edited on 2/26/2009 2:18 PM

Bill,

I think using the tournament average is a great idea, and I'd totally support it.  What do we do with a person like me, who will be bowling their third Nationals this year?  Do I go in at 220 until I've had three years under my belt?  Would we use my 1190 AE (132 avg.) for year one, the 1481 AE (164 avg.) for year two, and then the default 220 avg. for year three?  Just wondering what would be most equitable.

I'm thinking the second option would be too complicated for the powers that be to handle, considering that I still have to tell them what my book average is and have it confirmed by my local association, even though they have all the data at their fingertips.  (OK, that was a minor rant on my part.)

Not that any of us have any chance of changing the way things are now, but it's fun to play the "King (or Queen) for a day" scenerio.

Deb
--------------------
Do you want to play.net?

Personally I think you should have to bowl in the Regular Division until you establish a 3 year USBC Tournament average.  This would reduce, but not eliminate the sandbagging.  Of course USBC will never go for it because it might hurt entries.  Afterall, its really about the tournament being a cash cow for USBC.

I've seen another type of sandbagging..............
 A bowler who refuses to bowl 21 games in a house where they score 10-20 pins higher and would have to claim that higher average in tournaments. For many years there's someone that I know that flat refused to bowl with us even when he was our last resort to have that fifth bowler.
 This same person has won the Senior State crown in this state by doing this same thing.
--------------------
Chris
 JTTDB---Just Throw The Damn Ball
 Don't "think"---that ball isn't in your bag yet..........