I fully support any ideas that will grow bowling.  I am not sure this one will.

I would love it if the money at this tournament would rise.  No one would complain if it did.

But a lot of "elite" bowlers bowled this tournament, looking at it as a really good chance at doubling, tripling or more their bracket investment every year.

Well, more than likely, that is gone.  So your idea is that lower average bowlers should boost the higher division prize fund to make up for some of that lost income?

How about instead, you enter 4 or 5 additional scratch tournaments across the country that are available almost every weekend and make it up yourself?

It's just like your business.  If you suddenly lost 10% of your revenue.  Are you going to ask the government to bail you out to make up for it, or are you going to work your tail off to find additional business revenue?

Well the easy money from beating the 181-209 bowlers is now gone.  You need to work your tail off (beat better bowlers, bowl extra tournaments) and make up the difference yourself.  Not expect USBC to bail you out.

That's my take on it.

Did anybody check to see where the entries are dropping from?  The whole point of the changes was to boost entries.  As a 190 bowler who has no realistic chance of even getting my entry fee back, I have to applaud the changes.  My group goes every year, spends the same amount of money traveling and if we get hot, we might get meal money back.  Brackets are a non issue, since it would be stupid to have a 190 bowler throw money away bowling against all the 220+ bowlers.

But we go to have a good time and support the tournament.  But how many bowlers that ave 205-190 want to spent that kind of money, year after year to bowl and get nothing back?  That's why they left.  And as some poster already pointed out, I will never get any better, that's why we ave 190.  I wish I was good enough to ave 210, and applaud all of you at that skill level.  But I'm not gonna be upset at the least that my entry fees are not going to your prize fund. 

I just noticed this in the FAQ PDF about the new changes to the USBC Open and found it interesting AND needed. Preventing the "Regular" division guys from joining the ones who can manage to sandbag into the Classified/Standard groups is overdue in my opinion. And restricting the Classified teams to only one Standard division bowler will help cut down on the BS as well.


http://usbcongress.http.internapcdn.net/usbcongress/bowl/tournaments/pdfs/usbcopenchamp/2017/2017OCFAQ.pdf

Additional parameters for divisional placement:


1.Regular Division bowlers(entering averages of 210 and above)may not compete in Classified Team or Classified Doubles, regardless of team composite average.

2.Teams in the Standard Division may have no more than one bowler with an average of 210 or higher.

3.Teams in the Classified Division may have no more one bowler with an average between181-209.

I find the rules changes contradictory...

The pattern will not be announced and there will be no live streams to "level the playing field" as it was put by the USBC. Well lets see, the staff/tour guys can still bowl on the showcase lanes and the bowlers journal tournament, then drill balls based on recommendations from guys working the booth. Joe Bowler on the other hand makes his best guess at building an arsenal and hops on a plane...maybe I'm missing something here. It appears as though the USBC is making changes to put more money in their pocket so don't tell me you're leveling the playing field until the showcase lanes are shut down and players are only allowed to enter the BJ when they've finished competing in the open. In fact, Matt McNeil says he never practices on the pattern and shapes his strategy/arsenal by bowling at the tournament site and who's been more successful than him the last five years! Personally I think most of the decisions coming out of the USBC lately have far less to do with increasing membership/participation and much more about generating additional revenue from a shrinking membership base which quite frankly isn't what the governing body of bowling should be focused on.

Just my two cents...

Quote from: Bowl_Freak on November 09, 2015, 12:50:32 PM

I think the one thing they need to do is take the tournament avg. If you have bowled the USBC Open before, you have a tourney avg and that is the one they should use since all USBC Tourneys are on sport patterns and house shots aren't sport compliant. Or use the adjustment scale to get your tourney avg instead of using your house avg for a sport tourney since we all know avgs are inflated.

I agree but make it so that you have to have in X # of years, say 4 or 5.

USBC rules say 21 games establishes an average. Three trips with Team/Doubles/Singles should do it.