Author Topic: Just for fun... (Read 1813 times)

IanMoone · « **on:** June 29, 2011, 12:28:11 AM »

I went back and checked the top 100 (top 75 for doubles since that's what I could easily find) scores from 2005 to present (since the tournament is almost over). Here they are for your "enjoyment":

Singles

2005 - 716

2006 - 729

2007 - 733

2008 - 727

2009 - 738

2010 - 732

Current - 745

Doubles

2005 - 1327

2006 - 1360

2007 - 1355

2008 - 1357

2009 - 1360

2010 - 1366

Current - 1384

Team

2005 - 2978

2006 - 3149

2007 - 3081

2008 - 3078

2009 - 3086

2010 - 3105

Current - 3198

All Events

2005 - 1973

2006 - 2041

2007 - 2033

2008 - 2023

2009 - 2039

2010 - 2041

Current - 2081

bass · « **Reply #1 on:** June 29, 2011, 12:29:40 PM »

Bowlers must have gotten better this year.

Almost all things are better when they come from Texas.Except maybe the USBC. LOL

Jorge300 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 29, 2011, 02:46:34 PM »

It's been widely noted that the lanes, when managed properly, are easier this year then in prior years. The scores you show here reflect that. I would ask that you add one more year to your post, go back to 2002 and add in Billings numbers, where a lot of the previous records were set prior to the last 2 years. Scores were higher that year then prior and then we saw a reduction of high scores for a little while. I would bet that next year the shot will be changed and the scores won't be as high as they are now. There will still be bowlers and teams, like Riggs team with Mike Shady, like Lind's Lakers with Matt McNeil, etc that will still score well, but the low to cash and the 100th place numbers will fall slightly, back in line with previous years. This really isn't news, the USBC tried something with the shot this year, they will do something different next year. The good teams will still bowl well, the average house hack will still struggle and we will have multiple threads about "when will I get my check".

Jorge300

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #3 on:** June 30, 2011, 06:09:28 AM »

I like how the shot was "easier" this year, and I hit the pocket more than the last two years accordingly, but I bowled slightly worse because my carry was so unbelievably horrible.

Jorge300 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 30, 2011, 07:17:32 AM »

Dan,

Don't feel bad. While in general I agree that the shot was "easier", I had my worst Nationals performance in my 12 years of participation this year. I think it had more to do with the not bowling for 6 months prior to going then how easy or hard the lanes were, in my case anyway. In your case, I am sure it was just bad luck, or bad racks, or bad pins.....lol

. Better luck next year!

Dan Belcher wrote on 6/30/2011 6:09 AM:
I like how the shot was "easier" this year, and I hit the pocket more than the last two years accordingly, but I bowled slightly worse because my carry was so unbelievably horrible.

Jorge300

Dan Belcher · « **Reply #5 on:** June 30, 2011, 07:48:58 AM »

We caught some nasty lane conditions in team event (the backends were SUPER tight for some reason, nobody could get anything to wrinkle downlane. It would pick up in the midlane, then wiggle and just labor to the pocket. I had a 538 with four opens, 9 strikes, and 13 nine counts, the highest score on my pair was a 540!). However, in singles and doubles, I just couldn't get the right angle and ball motion no matter what I tried. I had plenty of backend, I just couldn't get it lined up properly. Finally the last game of singles I had a 248 with two flat 10s and one ringing 10, but other than that I bowled between 185 and 215 every game basically.

Then I came home to make up for my Team USA singles league I missed, bowling on the 47 foot Paris pattern, and saw more motion than I got in the team event in Reno.

Threw the ball poorly for but still got a 193, then hammered the pocket for 6 ringing 10s in one game for a 196, then rolled a 280 and a 223. Whatever. Amazing how carry just seems to come and go without warning some days.

dR3w · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2011, 10:21:58 AM »

When participation is down from the previous year, I wonder if the lower end of the field are the ones that decide not to show. There was a lot of people disappointed with going to Reno in back to back years. So if the lower end of the scoring field doesn't show up, the average in general should rise. Does this seem plausible?

dR3w

"This space for rent"

On Further Review · « **Reply #7 on:** July 02, 2011, 07:00:06 PM »

I wonder if the overall average is better this year. It seems to be better at the top but a lot of bowlers always struggle a lot in the nationals. Doesn't the whole field have trouble averaging over 175 every year?

If Obamacare is so great why are so many waivers being asked for and given?

DrBob806 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 03, 2011, 03:56:08 PM »

I was really pumped about (finally) rolling a 700 series in Nationals (singles event). I felt (still do) that I executed real well, and I would also get a hefty check; it also helped my psyching, since I couldn't do a thing right the day before in team (501).

Well, the 707 is tied for 426th place. I would have never thought over 500 of us bowlers would break a 700 series at Nationals....incredible.

Andyman3333 · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2011, 09:19:43 AM »

More evidence scores are significantly higher.

Last year I shot 2003 for all events. Finished 192nd.

This year I shot 2003 for all events. Finished 401st.

www.brunswickbowling.com

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

PROFILE
340-370 revs
18 mph
230 book on THS
200 book on PBA

In the bag: Arsenal: (In the bag) C-System Alpha Max, Wicked Siege, Loaded Revolver, Evil Siege, Damage, Slingshot, Avalanche Slide, Swarm, C-System 3.5.