Author Topic: My Experience (Read 8912 times)

Strapper_Squared · « **on:** March 17, 2012, 02:32:00 AM »

Quick report. Bowled the team event tonight. I found the conditions to be nearly impossible. Decided to start outside. Had absolutely zero area. Miss a board outside and missed the head pin right... Missed two plus boards and it was ditch. Going the other way, zero hold. Anything slightly projected off left absolutely took off.
After starting terrible, moved inside and found nothing there.
Several 230+ average bowlers on the pair, high set was 570, and drastically dropped off from there (into the 400's)..

I don't even know what to say right now. Frustrating and disappointing... Not really looking forward to s/d.

S^2

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Edited by Strapper_Squared on 3/17/2012 at 0:33 AM

Pinbasher209 · « **Reply #76 on:** March 20, 2012, 09:00:25 PM »

People say there's no crying in Baseball, but I see a lot of Crying in Bowling . If your not practicing to be the best why should you be rewarded. Take the time to learn the sport, practice as much as you can to perform at a top level then you can reap the benefits and appreciate your reward. I enjoy bowling on tough patterns as it makes me a better and more complete bowler. I have my arsenal built thru trial and error. Am I not one of those 230 Avg bowlers, Heck no not by a long shot, but I am still working at my game to refine it. I bet the same guys who complain want or probably have "WAHSAM" in the houses and don't even know it.. If you don't know what "WAHSAM" is pull it up on you tube and educate yourself, There are those who like a challenge, and there are those who complain. Which are you? Keep giving me the tough pattern's I Love the Challenge

And for heavens sakes stop the

TTforshort · « **Reply #77 on:** March 20, 2012, 11:41:44 PM »

Bill Thomas-"To continue to force the average bowlers to compete with former PBA champions, regional PBA title holders, Team USA members, and other means of loading teams IMO will eventually be the death of the USBC Open."

I must agree with this statement. The USBC Tournament should be playable by bowlers of all abilities. More divisions would see logical. Averaging 180+, I sure don't want to compete with the elite bowlers.

TT

â€œA word to the wise ainâ€™t necessary â€” itâ€™s the stupid ones that need the advice.â€.

Russell · « **Reply #78 on:** March 20, 2012, 11:52:37 PM »

No offense...but anyone who thinks a division that separates around 200 or 210 has never been to Vegas to see the "205 and under" Division at the Mini Eliminator. It was the sandbagger division, and watching them bowl you couldn't tell most of them weren't bowling the Open division. At 180 it's much tougher to sandbag that far down, and almost not worth the time. If you get a 215 bowler with nothing better to do and one league...they'll magically start missing a spare here and there and book 200 before you know it.

Little known fact: In Russian "Hope" and "Change" translate to "Tax" and "Spend"

JessN16 · « **Reply #79 on:** March 21, 2012, 12:13:42 AM »

From a guy who has no chance to ever win this thing (206 book average, and I try my hardest on every shot I make in my leagues), I do not want to see the pattern made easier.

I bowl in plenty of THS tournaments and you know what happens there? I get passed in the air by the 230 guys.

I've bowled sport shot leagues before. Guess what happens there? I get passed in the air by a bunch of 230 guys again, except now they're shooting 200s and I'm shooting 170s-180s.

But what those harder conditions do is remove some of those 230 guys from my field of vision. Some won't even shoe up to start with. Some of the ones that do have a one-dimensional game, with everything moving from left to right, no spare game at all. Now they're coming back to me faster than I'm moving backwards myself.

There's a reason I shoot better on USBC Blue than USBC White, and why my average on PBA Viper is the same as my THS average: I match up and can play places some of those guys never have to try to play.

So while I'm struggling along with 170s at Nats (if I'm lucky) in a few weeks, I'll be doing it with a hopeful look on my face, and trying to learn, rather than Mr. Cake who's also shooting 170 off his 230 book and getting pissed off to the point of distraction.

What this sport needs most is to educate the existing bowlers on how this system works. Then they might learn to actually seek out tougher shots.

Jess

Hoselrockets · « **Reply #80 on:** March 21, 2012, 01:29:56 AM »

+1 for this post!! Only if more bowlers had this mind set. Good luck at Nationals!!

JessN16 wrote on 3/20/2012 10:13 PM:From a guy who has no chance to ever win this thing (206 book average, and I try my hardest on every shot I make in my leagues), I do not want to see the pattern made easier.

I bowl in plenty of THS tournaments and you know what happens there? I get passed in the air by the 230 guys.

I've bowled sport shot leagues before. Guess what happens there? I get passed in the air by a bunch of 230 guys again, except now they're shooting 200s and I'm shooting 170s-180s.

But what those harder conditions do is remove some of those 230 guys from my field of vision. Some won't even shoe up to start with. Some of the ones that do have a one-dimensional game, with everything moving from left to right, no spare game at all. Now they're coming back to me faster than I'm moving backwards myself.

There's a reason I shoot better on USBC Blue than USBC White, and why my average on PBA Viper is the same as my THS average: I match up and can play places some of those guys never have to try to play.

So while I'm struggling along with 170s at Nats (if I'm lucky) in a few weeks, I'll be doing it with a hopeful look on my face, and trying to learn, rather than Mr. Cake who's also shooting 170 off his 230 book and getting pissed off to the point of distraction.

What this sport needs most is to educate the existing bowlers on how this system works. Then they might learn to actually seek out tougher shots.

Jess

THB

tburky · « **Reply #81 on:** March 21, 2012, 07:27:16 AM »

One of the biggest issues with the southwest tournament is bowling on "the great wall" and allowing the amount of handicap and sandbagging that goes with it. I've seen 165 to 180 average bowlers shoot 700+ every year. If the current amount of handicap is allowed to exist then the wall needs flatten. All a person has to do is look at the standings of the all events at this tournament will see what I'm talking about. One of the biggest problems with bowling today!

ksucat wrote on 3/20/2012 4:06 PM:I sat in on the directors meeting for the Southwest tournament recently and the discussion about how to improve the tournament came up there again. This tournament has been around for 20+ years and has always been played on a typical house shot. Scores now are outragiously high. However, my view on this is that you can't change the history of this tournament as an experiment to see if you can raise new bowlers. The folks that have been coming for years know what to expect.

Moving on to the USBC Nationals, which is likely the most prestigious with the most participants that us amateurs have. The long century-long history is that this is held on difficult conditions that put a premium on shot-making abilities and knowledge of adjustments including working as a team. I think the consensus is to keep the shot difficult, but this doesn't mean the same for everyone. Too many different styles to make it the same difficulty for everyone. I've personally ranged almost 500 pins from highest to lowest all-events over the years.

I choose to go to Nationals for the chance to compete on a challenging lane condition and beat most of my fellow bowlers. I go trying to finish in the top 100 with an eagle being only a dream. A top 100 finish in this tournament along with brackets will typically pay for a nice vacation out of this.

I'd also agree with the sentiment of changing sites more often as Reno is a bit tiring and not what the century-old tradition has been.

Edited by tburky on 3/21/2012 at 5:28 AM

Bill Thomas · « **Reply #82 on:** March 21, 2012, 10:27:35 AM »

Russell,

You are right to be concerned about sandbagging. That is going on now in the classified division as bowlers who compete in "uncertified" sport leagues and "brickyard" houses manage their average. That is why I have been advocating for several years now that entrants must use their USBC Open average for at least 27 games (3 years). Newbies would have to compete at the highest level until reaching 27 games. To me it is ridiculous to use house averages when they vary so much from center to center, locale to locale. BTW, I'm not stuck on how the divisions would be seperated by average. I think some statistics developed by USBC based on Open scores for a number of years would give some data upon which to establish the divisions.

Edited by Bill Thomas on 3/21/2012 at 8:31 AM

Jorge300 · « **Reply #83 on:** March 21, 2012, 10:30:28 AM »

Let me add to this. In PA, there was a tournament called the "Dutchman". When I lived there, for 2-3 years straight the winning score in Singles was over 900. You heard me correct, OVER 900. The shot was an easy house pattern and people came in with high handicaps and shot high 700's or low 800's and with handicap there total score was over 900. Coming in as a scratch bowler, I immediately had no chance to win Singles. Is this what we want for the USBC Open?? You say give the average bowler a chance to compete.....how can they feel they can compete when they show up to bowl and high for Singles is 890, or 878? And low to cash is 750??

tburky wrote on 3/21/2012 5:27 AM:
One of the biggest issues with the southwest tournament is bowling on "the great wall" and allowing the amount of handicap and sandbagging that goes with it. I've seen 165 to 180 average bowlers shoot 700+ every year. If the current amount of handicap is allowed to exist then the wall needs flatten. All a person has to do is look at the standings of the all events at this tournament will see what I'm talking about. One of the biggest problems with bowling today!

Edited by tburky on 3/21/2012 at 5:28 AM

Jorge300

Jorge300 · « **Reply #84 on:** March 21, 2012, 10:31:10 AM »

I agree, great post!! Good Luck!!

Hoselrockets wrote on 3/20/2012 11:29 PM:
+1 for this post!! Only if more bowlers had this mind set. Good luck at Nationals!!

JessN16 wrote on 3/20/2012 10:13 PM:
From a guy who has no chance to ever win this thing (206 book average, and I try my hardest on every shot I make in my leagues), I do not want to see the pattern made easier.

I bowl in plenty of THS tournaments and you know what happens there? I get passed in the air by the 230 guys.

I've bowled sport shot leagues before. Guess what happens there? I get passed in the air by a bunch of 230 guys again, except now they're shooting 200s and I'm shooting 170s-180s.

But what those harder conditions do is remove some of those 230 guys from my field of vision. Some won't even shoe up to start with. Some of the ones that do have a one-dimensional game, with everything moving from left to right, no spare game at all. Now they're coming back to me faster than I'm moving backwards myself.

There's a reason I shoot better on USBC Blue than USBC White, and why my average on PBA Viper is the same as my THS average: I match up and can play places some of those guys never have to try to play.

So while I'm struggling along with 170s at Nats (if I'm lucky) in a few weeks, I'll be doing it with a hopeful look on my face, and trying to learn, rather than Mr. Cake who's also shooting 170 off his 230 book and getting pissed off to the point of distraction.

What this sport needs most is to educate the existing bowlers on how this system works. Then they might learn to actually seek out tougher shots.

Jess

THB

Jorge300

Minnesota Don · « **Reply #85 on:** March 21, 2012, 12:31:27 PM »

I've been bowling since I was 7; this is my 55th year so do the math. I have 26 trips to the ABC/USBC Nationals and only for the first 10 or so did I ever think I had a chance or my teams had a chance of finishing in the top 100. We went and keep going for the personal quest of competing against the best on the toughest conditions. This year’s shot was not much different for the team event than in years past but the dbls/sgls were extreme. Depending on your time slot you could be the third shift on the same oil after a team event. New scheduling for the upcoming tournaments will help but I feel the tournament will diminish over time if something is not done to bring back the flavor or romance it once had when I started going on these bowling pilgrimages.

I'm one of these 220 house bowlers who have a lifetime USBC average around 185. The shot is tough, the time to prepare is short and for many the traveling takes its toll. There are several things I think they can do to make this tournament better and improve the average bowlers experience. First is to move the location each year, bring it to Reno, Vegas or anywhere else less often. It's a major expense to enter the tournament and increasing each year, flying is a pain and traveling by car requires additional vacation time to travel. The tournament needs to return to being a Championship Tournament and not a cash cow. If bowlers don't want to go because they can make more in other tournaments so be it. Attend and compete because it's the Nationals.

I believe there should be two classifications, an Open and a Classified. What I would change is that all bowlers and teams could enter the classified division based on their USBC tournament average not an inflated THS average. You could require a minimum 5 year average history to use it but it would be more representative of a bowler’s competitive skill than the system used now. Open the classified to all averages with no max and have three or four classified classes. 159 and below, 160-185, 186-200 and 200 and up.

The change to classifications and moving the tournament would bring back some interest. In my opinion the tournament should be a break even event. I don't know if the USBC makes anything off of the tournament but as a service organization it doesn't need to make a profit off of the tournament. Stop requiring a bid to host the event. Require a bond to secure the site and losses that might occur if the city pulls out but allow a state/city to host without going broke. Moving the site will also bring in new participants that would not travel across the country to bowl. Once they bowl they might be interested in returning? If I were the bowling Czar and had to make a decision I would require a rotating site to be in one region of the US each year. Divide the states into 6 or 8 regions and require they move through each region before returning to the first? It’s a thought, it would require additional work but these people are making salaries off of our yearly fees and we are getting less back each year in awards and recognitions. Sorry about the long rant but this is a complicated subject with no cut and dried answer. Need people who are willing to think outside the box for a change.

ksucat · « **Reply #86 on:** March 21, 2012, 02:50:23 PM »

Probably one of my favorite posts I've seen in a while. Many just want to see this be the best tournament it can be. Total teams are very high, we just want to see it as big as possible while still being great. I just don't know how big it can be.

I still contend that when you have a tournament with a long history, you should keep the intent of the tournament the same. Some changes to improve or just keep up with the times are needed, but the longer the history, the slower and less drastic the changes should be.

Improvements I like that I've seen are in no particular order: allowing women, adding a classified division, fresh oil for all team squads and the upcoming fresh for all, brackets and various side pots.

Changes I don't want: handicap added, THS, Reno every year.

Bill Thomas · « **Reply #87 on:** March 21, 2012, 02:57:37 PM »

Minnesota Don,

USBC does make a profit off of the Open. In fact, it is a "cash cow" that helps fund their operation. I suspect that at least one reason for the frequent returns to Reno is because their "profit" is better there. Even if USBC would somehow be able to move the Open to different places, it can't happen before 2016. By then it may be too late to salvage the trend of declining entries. Apparently the Tri-Properties casinos in Reno are providing USBC some sort of insurance against this decline. Your idea about multiple divisions for "Classified" bowlers would probably work better as a separate tournament.

Jorge300,

I am not advocating handicap nor do I envision using the THS walls that USBC instigated with the 3 unit rule. I simply want to see a separation between the highly skilled teams and the vast majority of teams who have no chance of winning an eagle and in the 75% who won't even cash. It is my, and others, contention that if you don't do something for the vast majority of participants the Open will suffer even more losses in entries to the detriment of USBC and their cash flow and the tournament itself.

Pinbuster · « **Reply #88 on:** March 21, 2012, 03:13:36 PM »

Don't put in a THS.

Don't put in more divisions. The womens tournament has done that and it has pretty much killed their national tourny.

Don't handicap it.

I believe most of the growth of the tournament has been from the classified division over the last 10 years, open division entries might be down over time. But I don't have any facts for that.

It is why bowling probably will not be back at the Olympics, as longs as the playing field can be manipulated you can control to a degree who can win and who can't.

I don't care that they make money off the tournament, but I do believe it needs to travel around the country more.

jaydee · « **Reply #89 on:** March 21, 2012, 04:11:31 PM »

I think it would be interesting and could work out to put in an easier shot for the classified division, (if you could make it work logistically). Maybe a 4-5:1 instead of 2-3:1

Keep open division the same tougher shot. Perhaps optionally if you're average is >180, you could still opt for the easier shot in a separate cash fund, essentially making it three classes with three cash funds: Classified on 5:1, Open on 5:1, Open on ~2-3:1 (where the "real" Eagles and awards reside). That would solve some issues but it would introduce more problems. For one, prize money for the 2:1 Open division would go down quite a bit, blue chippers wouldn't be happy about that. Lane assignments would be much more complex and a group bringing 2 teams, one classified, one open wouldn't be able to bowl together.

I'm not really advocating it, just saying it could be an option if enough people really complain about how hard the shot it. I'm personally fine the way it is, only real complaint is the location 4-5 years as been voiced by many others...

The opinion expressed here represents all major bowling ball and equipment manufacturers, not my own.

Andyman3333 · « **Reply #90 on:** March 21, 2012, 04:19:41 PM »

I'm not privy to the payout ratio and don't have time to check it, but why change anything about the tough conditions when the highest "Low-to-cash" score of any Open Championships was a 596 in singles? 596! It's not 650! 596! Bet you it's lower this year!

And that 596 was the highest ever. This thread, though focused on the majority of the bowling pool, has ignored the fact that the scores to cash are low. Most bowlers aren't looking to win. They are looking to cash or see a new town. Only one person can win in a tournament of 12000 teams, and 60000 individuals. For the majority of us, we're just looking to have a better than average set and break even. Maybe 500 people have a chance at an Eagle. This thread almost has taken the direction of finding a way to make lower average players more competitive with higher averages. Why? The better bowlers will just raise the bar to cash. Now instead of 596, you need 620 or 630. What purpose does that serve? The only person who truly can control your success is you. As Pete Weber most recently put it, Who do you think you are? I am! See the focus on the "I" statement.

Take the time to practice spares and playing different lines on the lane. Not just 3rd arrow. I CAN'T EXPRESS HOW FRUSTRATING IT IS TO WATCH GUYS HOOK IT AT SINGLE PIN SPARES on a Sport shot! Just throw it straight! Invest in a $60 spare ball. Golfers don't use their drivers on the putting green! Learn your equipment and why it reacts certain ways. Learn to read lane transition and how the oil reacts to bowling balls being thrown through it. And then, get better at executing shots. I bowl 1 league on a house shot. Thats the only league I bowl. Before the tournament, I work with a proprietor to have the shot laid out and arrange to have plenty of people on hand during slow business hours to rack up lineage. I get better before the tournament and that has drastically helped my ability to cash in this tournament in every event. I watch the live streams. I read the blogs. I read this forum and go wide eyes when people say the lanes are unplayable, yet the guy leading singles just averaged 261 for 3 games. I throw it straight at every spare but double wood. 8 for 8 cashing so far in two years in this tournament. Trying to make it 12 for 12.

I've hit bad pairs in singles and doubles and still fought through it to cash. Those bad pairs might affect my chances at an eagle, but not cashing. How important is spare shooting again?

You ultimately control your own destiny. We can't always blame someone else or something else for our own struggles. And if someone comes on here and tells me that they can't get 9 guys to break the lane down with them, I'm going to go insane. Again, are you trying to win an Eagle? Or cash? You can cash without the team breaking the lanes down. Done it twice now. Missed the Eagle by roughly 400 pins. We were close. If only we had broken the lane down as a team! <That's sarcasm>

Find the time to practice and study what is working and not working on this pattern. The information is available if you just ask for it!!! I enjoy bowling this tournament. The aura of the event, the walk, the announcements, and the environment is superb.

I'll probably get railed for suggesting these novel concepts. Someone is certainly going to tell me how they did all these things and still bowled like poo. The lanes were unplayable. So it's gotta be someone else's fault. We're just beating a dead horse here.

www.brunswickbowling.com
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.

PROFILE
340-370 revs
18 mph
Arsenal: (In the bag) Nexxus F(p+r), Nexus F(p+f), Nexus f(p), C-System Ulti-Max, C-System Versa Max, Massive Damage, Karma Pink/Purple. On the wall, Loaded Revolver, Lethal Revolver, Damage, Slingshot.