| |
Main
Date: 17 May 2005 23:07:00
From: duffer
Subject: It's all academic
|
The two things causing bowling to lose it's integrity are the overall
attitude of it's participants and the Almighty dollar bill. Instant
gratification is the standard of today's bowlers. Why develop a game and
practice when you can buy rotation and entry angle at the proshop? Why learn
to adjust when you can have 10 boards area? If your area decreases, change
houses. The USBC has a dilemma. Bring back integrity or try to boost sagging
participation by sanctioning today's bumper bowling for adults. Houses HAVE
to provide walled shots or lose their league bowlers to another house who
will. Manufacturers have to keep discovering new coverstocks and weight
blocks to assure their products will sell. NOTHING will change because ALL
affected entities are more concerned with their bottom line, not the
integrity which bowling USED to enjoy. The game is in a death spiral and no
one will sacrifice their average or income to stop it.
|
|
| |
Date: 12 Jun 2005 13:51:30
From: Mark
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Doug - It's always fun to see numbers. Couple questions:
Any chance that you might have breakdown by age (say in increments of
10 years)?
Which regions / associations have the highest and lowest averages? I
want to know
if I live in a difficult or easy area :-)
Also, I think PBA events still have a blanket sanction - do their
numbers get added in?
Mark
|
| |
Date: 19 May 2005 02:38:17
From: Blue Hound Technologies
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
I have one even better for you.
Anyone who carries an average handicap that is negative can no longer be
part of the Amateur Ranks, be part of the tourneys or any other leagues.
I just finished my three this evening and found myself bowling against a
group of professional bowlers that are allowed to be on the league to
establish their handicap. It seems to me that that is the worst possible
ethics violation is a team of Pro's versus a team of people who are there to
have fun.
Takes the fun out of it if the team that bowls 200+ averages are taking all
of the prize money.
"duffer" <badgolfer2000@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:oOuie.780737$w62.696013@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The two things causing bowling to lose it's integrity are the overall
> attitude of it's participants and the Almighty dollar bill. Instant
> gratification is the standard of today's bowlers. Why develop a game and
> practice when you can buy rotation and entry angle at the proshop? Why
> learn to adjust when you can have 10 boards area? If your area decreases,
> change houses. The USBC has a dilemma. Bring back integrity or try to
> boost sagging participation by sanctioning today's bumper bowling for
> adults. Houses HAVE to provide walled shots or lose their league bowlers
> to another house who will. Manufacturers have to keep discovering new
> coverstocks and weight blocks to assure their products will sell. NOTHING
> will change because ALL affected entities are more concerned with their
> bottom line, not the integrity which bowling USED to enjoy. The game is in
> a death spiral and no one will sacrifice their average or income to stop
> it.
>
|
| | |
Date: 24 May 2005 21:02:39
From: Michael W. Lee
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
In most leagues I bowl in, most people join to have something to do that is
fun and allows them to make new friends. These leagues have maybe 5-10% of
the bowlers who are serious. There is not usually alot of money involved.
I was involved in one league that had teams that could average over 200.
This team wanted to make a rule that if the team average is greater than say
1000 then the opposing team gets the difference plus a percentage of the
difference added to their handicap. Example, team average is 1100 and
opposing team is 870, the opposing team got 110 added to their handicap. My
team also had 200+ bowlers and we agreed to the rule, but overall it was
voted down. At the end of the league, everyone complained because of how
good the teams were. Had they voted to allow the rule, many teams would
have done well.
In money leagues that I have participated in, we have many teams averaging
200+ on some pretty challenging conditions, heavy oil, 45ft gutter to
gutter. Two teams joined that had averages between 165 and 195, this being
a scratch league, everyone warned them that this type of league may not be
suited for them because of the higher averaged team. They stayed anyway
just to have something to do and made a lot of friends along the way.
People who want to join leagues for the purpose of fun and socializing will
not really care how well they do. They have a good time and at the end of
the night they go home or out to eat with other league members. There is no
real prize money at the end of these leagues. If a team takes first place,
is undefeated the entire league, each member takes top prize in a category,
and point money - the individual bowler on that team will not even break
even compared to what he paid to be in the league. People who join leagues
to make money usually bowl in money leagues that cost more each week, teams
have sponsors who pay a franchise fee, and a sponsor who puts a sum of money
in the prize fund for whatever reason. Even the person in last place will
get a good portion of his money back. So, if you are in a league and you
think that the competition is to heavy, join a easier league. If you are in
a league and want better competition, join the money leagues where not only
is the competition tougher, so are the lanes.
Leagues have the ability to get a house to agree to any type of condition
for the leagues. If they do not want to cator to the needs of the league,
then the league will find a house that will cator to them. Technology in
lanes conditioning machines is such that the house can lay any oil pattern,
any distance, and any no. of units of oil for a league and at the end of the
league or the next day, strip the lanes of the previous oil pattern and lay
a new one. May cost more for the leagues that want a tougher condition,
maybe varying each week, but true competitors will pay it.
Thanks for reading my rambling on here.
Michael
"Blue Hound Technologies" <sales@ebbids.com > wrote in message
news:t_Sie.7134$w21.4293@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>I have one even better for you.
>
> Anyone who carries an average handicap that is negative can no longer be
> part of the Amateur Ranks, be part of the tourneys or any other leagues.
>
> I just finished my three this evening and found myself bowling against a
> group of professional bowlers that are allowed to be on the league to
> establish their handicap. It seems to me that that is the worst possible
> ethics violation is a team of Pro's versus a team of people who are there
> to have fun.
>
> Takes the fun out of it if the team that bowls 200+ averages are taking
> all of the prize money.
>
> "duffer" <badgolfer2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:oOuie.780737$w62.696013@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> The two things causing bowling to lose it's integrity are the overall
>> attitude of it's participants and the Almighty dollar bill. Instant
>> gratification is the standard of today's bowlers. Why develop a game and
>> practice when you can buy rotation and entry angle at the proshop? Why
>> learn to adjust when you can have 10 boards area? If your area decreases,
>> change houses. The USBC has a dilemma. Bring back integrity or try to
>> boost sagging participation by sanctioning today's bumper bowling for
>> adults. Houses HAVE to provide walled shots or lose their league bowlers
>> to another house who will. Manufacturers have to keep discovering new
>> coverstocks and weight blocks to assure their products will sell. NOTHING
>> will change because ALL affected entities are more concerned with their
>> bottom line, not the integrity which bowling USED to enjoy. The game is
>> in a death spiral and no one will sacrifice their average or income to
>> stop it.
>>
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 28 May 2005 16:46:37
From: the valleys
Subject: my experience in a new area.
|
I'm moving (I've already moved wife and kids haven't) over to another state
and the place im going to has two alleys both 20 lanes. about a 1/4 mile
away from each other.
the older house has sport shot leagues all year. a nice mix of youth and
adult leagues. every time i've stopped by I've seen 10-15 people bowling
(open)
the newer house just down the road isn't open on Sundays and mondays. not
enough business.
No summer leagues. Couldn't get enough people to bowl in them.
Here's the kicker. I spoke with the bowling house manager of the newer house
and asked about summer league and sportshots.
Doesn't believe in sport shots. got to let them score. 200 ave is what he's
shooting for. He wants to have them have dueces all the time.. after all
I've got to massage the egos ( his words).
And yet.. he can't field summer leagues and on a friday night with rain he
had 3 couples bowling at 10:00 pm.
oh yeah he puts down the christmas tree
the better bowling will win out I think.
At least I know what I want to bowl on... something challenging not easy.
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Jun 2005 21:36:37
From: Michael W. Lee
Subject: Re: my experience in a new area.
|
To make a league challenging, get bowlers who will welcome a challenge and
not complain about how hard it is all the time.
Next, ask the house you are bowling in if they are willing to make a tougher
shot on your league night. If enough bowlers are participating, the house
will probably do it, if not, find another house. The shot should also vary
from week to week. Can you imagine having to learn something new, like
adjusting? Here is the neat part, you do not have to call it a Sport
League.
Thanks,
Michael
"the valleys" <kncvalley@metrocast.net > wrote in message
news:OMqdnSHVotoyRQXfRVn-hw@metrocastcablevision.com...
> I'm moving (I've already moved wife and kids haven't) over to another
> state and the place im going to has two alleys both 20 lanes. about a 1/4
> mile away from each other.
> the older house has sport shot leagues all year. a nice mix of youth and
> adult leagues. every time i've stopped by I've seen 10-15 people bowling
> (open)
> the newer house just down the road isn't open on Sundays and mondays.
> not enough business.
> No summer leagues. Couldn't get enough people to bowl in them.
> Here's the kicker. I spoke with the bowling house manager of the newer
> house and asked about summer league and sportshots.
> Doesn't believe in sport shots. got to let them score. 200 ave is what
> he's shooting for. He wants to have them have dueces all the time.. after
> all I've got to massage the egos ( his words).
> And yet.. he can't field summer leagues and on a friday night with rain he
> had 3 couples bowling at 10:00 pm.
>
> oh yeah he puts down the christmas tree
>
> the better bowling will win out I think.
> At least I know what I want to bowl on... something challenging not easy.
>
>
|
| |
Date: 17 May 2005 18:38:17
From: Paul Horvick
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
I agree. It is far too late to save bowling as a sport. That battle, if
there ever was one, was lost years ago.
"duffer" <badgolfer2000@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:oOuie.780737$w62.696013@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> The two things causing bowling to lose it's integrity are the overall
> attitude of it's participants and the Almighty dollar bill. Instant
> gratification is the standard of today's bowlers. Why develop a game and
> practice when you can buy rotation and entry angle at the proshop? Why
> learn to adjust when you can have 10 boards area? If your area decreases,
> change houses. The USBC has a dilemma. Bring back integrity or try to
> boost sagging participation by sanctioning today's bumper bowling for
> adults. Houses HAVE to provide walled shots or lose their league bowlers
> to another house who will. Manufacturers have to keep discovering new
> coverstocks and weight blocks to assure their products will sell. NOTHING
> will change because ALL affected entities are more concerned with their
> bottom line, not the integrity which bowling USED to enjoy. The game is in
> a death spiral and no one will sacrifice their average or income to stop
> it.
>
|
| | |
Date: 18 May 2005 00:49:36
From: Tony R Smith
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Yeah, but if USBC "mandates" tougher conditioning laws then the bowlers
will have no choice but to learn to bowl or quit. Many will quit... but
many will play again. Businesses said that when California instituted
the no smoking law that it would effect their business... and it did!
People that would refrain from going to smoky public places started
going again. Business is up, not down. I think that you will see a
decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
interest if it became challenging again.
Paul Horvick wrote:
>I agree. It is far too late to save bowling as a sport. That battle, if
>there ever was one, was lost years ago.
>"duffer" <badgolfer2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:oOuie.780737$w62.696013@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
>
>>The two things causing bowling to lose it's integrity are the overall
>>attitude of it's participants and the Almighty dollar bill. Instant
>>gratification is the standard of today's bowlers. Why develop a game and
>>practice when you can buy rotation and entry angle at the proshop? Why
>>learn to adjust when you can have 10 boards area? If your area decreases,
>>change houses. The USBC has a dilemma. Bring back integrity or try to
>>boost sagging participation by sanctioning today's bumper bowling for
>>adults. Houses HAVE to provide walled shots or lose their league bowlers
>>to another house who will. Manufacturers have to keep discovering new
>>coverstocks and weight blocks to assure their products will sell. NOTHING
>>will change because ALL affected entities are more concerned with their
>>bottom line, not the integrity which bowling USED to enjoy. The game is in
>>a death spiral and no one will sacrifice their average or income to stop
>>it.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 17 May 2005 21:47:48
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> I think that you will see a
> decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
> interest if it became challenging again.
In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care about
the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like 145,
which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100% accurate,
but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130 average
bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they even
notice any difference?
--
Jeff Rife
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2005 20:40:25
From: bowldoug
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
way off Jeff.
ABC average was 174.91 for the 2002-03 season
and WIBC was 139.06
--
Douglas Moye
Director Greater Detroit Bowling Association
member of consitution and by-laws committee,
and hearings and rerating committee
secretary Drakeshire Merchant Men,
developing fossil\general pest
"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> > I think that you will see a
> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
> > interest if it became challenging again.
>
> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care about
> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like 145,
> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100% accurate,
> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130 average
> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they even
> notice any difference?
>
> --
> Jeff Rife
|
| | | | | |
Date: 21 Jun 2005 11:54:10
From: Eldred Pickett
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 20:40:25 GMT, "bowldoug" <bowldoug@ameritech.net >
wrote:
>way off Jeff.
>ABC average was 174.91 for the 2002-03 season
>and WIBC was 139.06
Well, it's going up. Last time I read it(admittedly a few years ago),
it was about 160 for ABC and 132 for WIBC.
Eldred
|
| | | | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2005 18:23:52
From: Jeff Rife
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
bowldoug (bowldoug@ameritech.net) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> ABC average was 174.91 for the 2002-03 season
> and WIBC was 139.06
Yep, sorry. The 145 was the combined average from a few years back.
I guess I was thinking ahead to next year, where we will have a "USBC
average". :)
--
Jeff Rife
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 May 2005 17:00:22
From: Ryan Press \(NI\)
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
I Agree 100%!
Also, why cant the USBC jsut gradually toughen up lanes every year over a
lot of years? No-one would get a sudden shock, just a gradual change from
bumber bowling to REAL bowling...
year one, reduce max ratio to 8:1
year two, reduce max ratio to 6:1
year three, reduce max ratio to 4:1
year four, reduce max ratio to 2:1
and throughout keep the "gradual change over 5 boards" rule used in sport
bowling implemented...
Bowling balls arn't the problem - lanes are... It pisses me off when people
talk about going to the proshop and "buying hook" etc... just make the
minimum length of oil allowed 40ft and youl have less people hooking the
ball... make the minimum amount of oil allowed anywhere on the lane 10 units
instead of 3... THEN we'll be getting somewhere...
When NOBODY can question that the pros they see on TV are 10 imes better
than the average bowler, THEN we'll be getting somewhere!
Ryan
"Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net > wrote in message
news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> > I think that you will see a
> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
> > interest if it became challenging again.
>
> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care about
> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like 145,
> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100% accurate,
> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130 average
> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they even
> notice any difference?
>
> --
> Jeff Rife
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 May 2005 19:48:56
From: Al Whiteman
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Cheaters, Ryan; Cheaters.
In a small association with one or maybe 2 centers that would work fine,
but in larger ones, like mine with 22 centers in order to keep the customers
happy they would fudge the numbers just as some of them have been doing for
50 years. I could relate many stories, but one of my favorites happened a
little over 25 years ago, when the "inspector" had to verify the
lanes/pins/balls right after honor scores were shot. What happened was a
fellow shot a 300. The proprietor had the league stop bowling, furnished
all the bowlers with adult beverages or whatever they wanted from the
fountain. Had the mechanic and couple helpers strip and re-oil the lanes
(took the cut brush out of the b-90 and replaced it with new one). Then, 45
minutes later, everyone continued bowling. At that time the local ABC rep
was called and informed about the honor score. Asked why the league was
finishing so late, the response was a power failure. wink wink nudge nudge.
Score approved. Now, in defense of the center, the shot was not easy but
several other seemingly conditions had caused bowlers to lose awards, and
this particular owner was not going to let it happen to one of his
customers. As a follow up, this center was fairly busy anyway, but after
the news traveled around the customer base exploded and a waiting list
became the norm.
"Ryan Press (NI)" <juan-carlos.lupino@talk21.com > wrote in message
news:GwKie.9542$yY4.238@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>I Agree 100%!
>
> Also, why cant the USBC jsut gradually toughen up lanes every year over a
> lot of years? No-one would get a sudden shock, just a gradual change from
> bumber bowling to REAL bowling...
>
> year one, reduce max ratio to 8:1
> year two, reduce max ratio to 6:1
> year three, reduce max ratio to 4:1
> year four, reduce max ratio to 2:1
>
> and throughout keep the "gradual change over 5 boards" rule used in sport
> bowling implemented...
>
> Bowling balls arn't the problem - lanes are... It pisses me off when
> people
> talk about going to the proshop and "buying hook" etc... just make the
> minimum length of oil allowed 40ft and youl have less people hooking the
> ball... make the minimum amount of oil allowed anywhere on the lane 10
> units
> instead of 3... THEN we'll be getting somewhere...
>
> When NOBODY can question that the pros they see on TV are 10 imes better
> than the average bowler, THEN we'll be getting somewhere!
>
> Ryan
>
>
> "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
>> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>> > I think that you will see a
>> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
>> > interest if it became challenging again.
>>
>> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care about
>> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like 145,
>> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100%
>> accurate,
>> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130 average
>> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they even
>> notice any difference?
>>
>> --
>> Jeff Rife
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 02 Jun 2005 11:51:39
From: Dave Nestor
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Dave Nestor bowlingquestions@hotmail.com.
First of all, the lanes are supposed to be legal before you bowl now, not
after. And if your association would do their job right then all the lanes
would be legal all the time. The USBC is trying to bring the scores down
with some of the new rules. The newest rule is to make all the pro shops
drill the ball over the label with no weight holes to help. So the better
pro shop operators will be no better than some mechanic that just pops 3
holes in a ball. The reason they are going to go this way is that they can
not keep their local associations doing the job right. If they did do their
job right then the awards and high averages would be lower. Now a lot of the
local associations make a call to the centers to tell them they are coming
to check the lanes, This is wrong, the local associations are taking the
integrity out of the game not the pro shops.
"Al Whiteman" <alsproshop@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:MNKdnftqO7o1YxbfRVn-rA@comcast.com...
> Cheaters, Ryan; Cheaters.
> In a small association with one or maybe 2 centers that would work fine,
> but in larger ones, like mine with 22 centers in order to keep the
customers
> happy they would fudge the numbers just as some of them have been doing
for
> 50 years. I could relate many stories, but one of my favorites happened a
> little over 25 years ago, when the "inspector" had to verify the
> lanes/pins/balls right after honor scores were shot. What happened was a
> fellow shot a 300. The proprietor had the league stop bowling, furnished
> all the bowlers with adult beverages or whatever they wanted from the
> fountain. Had the mechanic and couple helpers strip and re-oil the lanes
> (took the cut brush out of the b-90 and replaced it with new one). Then,
45
> minutes later, everyone continued bowling. At that time the local ABC rep
> was called and informed about the honor score. Asked why the league was
> finishing so late, the response was a power failure. wink wink nudge
nudge.
> Score approved. Now, in defense of the center, the shot was not easy but
> several other seemingly conditions had caused bowlers to lose awards, and
> this particular owner was not going to let it happen to one of his
> customers. As a follow up, this center was fairly busy anyway, but after
> the news traveled around the customer base exploded and a waiting list
> became the norm.
>
> "Ryan Press (NI)" <juan-carlos.lupino@talk21.com> wrote in message
> news:GwKie.9542$yY4.238@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> >I Agree 100%!
> >
> > Also, why cant the USBC jsut gradually toughen up lanes every year over
a
> > lot of years? No-one would get a sudden shock, just a gradual change
from
> > bumber bowling to REAL bowling...
> >
> > year one, reduce max ratio to 8:1
> > year two, reduce max ratio to 6:1
> > year three, reduce max ratio to 4:1
> > year four, reduce max ratio to 2:1
> >
> > and throughout keep the "gradual change over 5 boards" rule used in
sport
> > bowling implemented...
> >
> > Bowling balls arn't the problem - lanes are... It pisses me off when
> > people
> > talk about going to the proshop and "buying hook" etc... just make the
> > minimum length of oil allowed 40ft and youl have less people hooking the
> > ball... make the minimum amount of oil allowed anywhere on the lane 10
> > units
> > instead of 3... THEN we'll be getting somewhere...
> >
> > When NOBODY can question that the pros they see on TV are 10 imes better
> > than the average bowler, THEN we'll be getting somewhere!
> >
> > Ryan
> >
> >
> > "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
> >> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> >> > I think that you will see a
> >> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
> >> > interest if it became challenging again.
> >>
> >> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care
about
> >> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like
145,
> >> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100%
> >> accurate,
> >> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130
average
> >> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they
even
> >> notice any difference?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jeff Rife
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Jun 2005 20:53:28
From: bowldoug
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
ok Dave, question.
yes the lanes are supposed to be legal BEFORE bowling. How do you propose
that this is maintained? every house would have to be inspected after oiling
and vefore league play EVERY TIME there is a fresh application of dressing
to ensure legality. Hpw do you propose this be accomplished.
In the very old days, the inspection was done after bowling and from all the
data obtained from the house about who what when where why and how, and
after the inspection was completed, then a conclusion was drawn as to what
was on the lane surface before bowling and the determination was made as to
whether that was comlp,iant or not. In those days just about every house
made a bend to some degree in the rules to egt higher scores and then did a
cover up after and to be honoest with you, just about all of them were not
very good at it. the bending yes but the cover up was very easy to detect.
this created subjective judgement and that was not always clear cut. some
scores were passed that should not have been and some were passed denied
that should have passed.
it stills boils down to the fact that if awards are to be given for top
accomplishmentsa and you want integrity in the sport you have to have ALL
parties on board the ship.
we need to have comforming rules, yes. we need the USBC to enforce them,
YES, we also need the proprietors to be in full agreement on these and there
needs to be some form of punishment for violators that has some meaning and
that has to also be agreed upon by all parties involved.
If a house were to violate the rules, the best way to "force" them to change
would be for the bowlers to get up and go somewhere else to play. hit them
in the pocket book. thin kthat will every happen??
--
Douglas Moye
Director Greater Detroit Bowling Association
member of consitution and by-laws committee,
and hearings and rerating committee
secretary Drakeshire Merchant Men,
developing fossil\general pest
"Dave Nestor" <scruffy8390@charter.net > wrote in message
news:8VFne.5147$K66.3250@fe02.lga...
> Dave Nestor bowlingquestions@hotmail.com.
>
> First of all, the lanes are supposed to be legal before you bowl now, not
> after. And if your association would do their job right then all the lanes
> would be legal all the time. The USBC is trying to bring the scores down
> with some of the new rules. The newest rule is to make all the pro shops
> drill the ball over the label with no weight holes to help. So the better
> pro shop operators will be no better than some mechanic that just pops 3
> holes in a ball. The reason they are going to go this way is that they can
> not keep their local associations doing the job right. If they did do
their
> job right then the awards and high averages would be lower. Now a lot of
the
> local associations make a call to the centers to tell them they are coming
> to check the lanes, This is wrong, the local associations are taking the
> integrity out of the game not the pro shops.
>
>
> "Al Whiteman" <alsproshop@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:MNKdnftqO7o1YxbfRVn-rA@comcast.com...
> > Cheaters, Ryan; Cheaters.
> > In a small association with one or maybe 2 centers that would work
fine,
> > but in larger ones, like mine with 22 centers in order to keep the
> customers
> > happy they would fudge the numbers just as some of them have been doing
> for
> > 50 years. I could relate many stories, but one of my favorites happened
a
> > little over 25 years ago, when the "inspector" had to verify the
> > lanes/pins/balls right after honor scores were shot. What happened was
a
> > fellow shot a 300. The proprietor had the league stop bowling, furnished
> > all the bowlers with adult beverages or whatever they wanted from the
> > fountain. Had the mechanic and couple helpers strip and re-oil the
lanes
> > (took the cut brush out of the b-90 and replaced it with new one). Then,
> 45
> > minutes later, everyone continued bowling. At that time the local ABC
rep
> > was called and informed about the honor score. Asked why the league was
> > finishing so late, the response was a power failure. wink wink nudge
> nudge.
> > Score approved. Now, in defense of the center, the shot was not easy
but
> > several other seemingly conditions had caused bowlers to lose awards,
and
> > this particular owner was not going to let it happen to one of his
> > customers. As a follow up, this center was fairly busy anyway, but
after
> > the news traveled around the customer base exploded and a waiting list
> > became the norm.
> >
> > "Ryan Press (NI)" <juan-carlos.lupino@talk21.com> wrote in message
> > news:GwKie.9542$yY4.238@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > >I Agree 100%!
> > >
> > > Also, why cant the USBC jsut gradually toughen up lanes every year
over
> a
> > > lot of years? No-one would get a sudden shock, just a gradual change
> from
> > > bumber bowling to REAL bowling...
> > >
> > > year one, reduce max ratio to 8:1
> > > year two, reduce max ratio to 6:1
> > > year three, reduce max ratio to 4:1
> > > year four, reduce max ratio to 2:1
> > >
> > > and throughout keep the "gradual change over 5 boards" rule used in
> sport
> > > bowling implemented...
> > >
> > > Bowling balls arn't the problem - lanes are... It pisses me off when
> > > people
> > > talk about going to the proshop and "buying hook" etc... just make the
> > > minimum length of oil allowed 40ft and youl have less people hooking
the
> > > ball... make the minimum amount of oil allowed anywhere on the lane 10
> > > units
> > > instead of 3... THEN we'll be getting somewhere...
> > >
> > > When NOBODY can question that the pros they see on TV are 10 imes
better
> > > than the average bowler, THEN we'll be getting somewhere!
> > >
> > > Ryan
> > >
> > >
> > > "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
> > > news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
> > >> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
> > >> > I think that you will see a
> > >> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
> > >> > interest if it became challenging again.
> > >>
> > >> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care
> about
> > >> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like
> 145,
> > >> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100%
> > >> accurate,
> > >> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130
> average
> > >> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they
> even
> > >> notice any difference?
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Jeff Rife
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 02 Jun 2005 19:16:40
From: Al Whiteman
Subject: Re: It's all academic
|
Dave,
It's a 2-edged sword.
1. Bowling centers are PRIVATE property, and can refuse to allow association
inspection "at will", as a result all associations make appointments.
2. Bowling centers have the option to certify (formerly known as sanction)
with USBC (formerly ABC/WIBC)
They could buy and furnish their own awards program, which would probably be
acceptable to a large number of current members. USBC has over the past 30
years made adjustments to conditioning rules and required inspections but
under great pressure from other organizations.
3. USBC has PROPOSED several elements regarding ball specifications. (when I
can't use my stacked Danger Zone, I am done.) I think clearer heads will
prevail. The manufacturer's reps have been writing some fantastic letters
which should clarify their position and the proshop industry position as a
whole, and I sincerely hope the Spec dept will take a long look.
That's one side.
Now the other side is simply that You and I (just examples) have no fun
bowling 170 games. If we did then we would bowl sport leagues only. Or find
a center in our town that does not maintain the equipment or "oils" once a
week. LOL
To blame our hard working local association officers and directors is wrong.
If a member of a board complains, the proprietor sometimes might call the
office and complain about that director/officer and even ask they be
replaced as representatives at that center..(Ok, I have heard horror stories
about some associations thinking they are the second coming of , well, you
know, but that is painting with a really broad brush)
I know both sides, having been a center manager, a pro shop operator for 30+
years, pba member and now, for the past 3 years, executive director of my
local ba.
al
"Dave Nestor" <scruffy8390@charter.net > wrote in message
news:8VFne.5147$K66.3250@fe02.lga...
> Dave Nestor bowlingquestions@hotmail.com.
>
> First of all, the lanes are supposed to be legal before you bowl now, not
> after. And if your association would do their job right then all the lanes
> would be legal all the time. The USBC is trying to bring the scores down
> with some of the new rules. The newest rule is to make all the pro shops
> drill the ball over the label with no weight holes to help. So the better
> pro shop operators will be no better than some mechanic that just pops 3
> holes in a ball. The reason they are going to go this way is that they can
> not keep their local associations doing the job right. If they did do
> their
> job right then the awards and high averages would be lower. Now a lot of
> the
> local associations make a call to the centers to tell them they are coming
> to check the lanes, This is wrong, the local associations are taking the
> integrity out of the game not the pro shops.
>
>
> "Al Whiteman" <alsproshop@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:MNKdnftqO7o1YxbfRVn-rA@comcast.com...
>> Cheaters, Ryan; Cheaters.
>> In a small association with one or maybe 2 centers that would work fine,
>> but in larger ones, like mine with 22 centers in order to keep the
> customers
>> happy they would fudge the numbers just as some of them have been doing
> for
>> 50 years. I could relate many stories, but one of my favorites happened a
>> little over 25 years ago, when the "inspector" had to verify the
>> lanes/pins/balls right after honor scores were shot. What happened was a
>> fellow shot a 300. The proprietor had the league stop bowling, furnished
>> all the bowlers with adult beverages or whatever they wanted from the
>> fountain. Had the mechanic and couple helpers strip and re-oil the lanes
>> (took the cut brush out of the b-90 and replaced it with new one). Then,
> 45
>> minutes later, everyone continued bowling. At that time the local ABC rep
>> was called and informed about the honor score. Asked why the league was
>> finishing so late, the response was a power failure. wink wink nudge
> nudge.
>> Score approved. Now, in defense of the center, the shot was not easy but
>> several other seemingly conditions had caused bowlers to lose awards, and
>> this particular owner was not going to let it happen to one of his
>> customers. As a follow up, this center was fairly busy anyway, but after
>> the news traveled around the customer base exploded and a waiting list
>> became the norm.
>>
>> "Ryan Press (NI)" <juan-carlos.lupino@talk21.com> wrote in message
>> news:GwKie.9542$yY4.238@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>> >I Agree 100%!
>> >
>> > Also, why cant the USBC jsut gradually toughen up lanes every year over
> a
>> > lot of years? No-one would get a sudden shock, just a gradual change
> from
>> > bumber bowling to REAL bowling...
>> >
>> > year one, reduce max ratio to 8:1
>> > year two, reduce max ratio to 6:1
>> > year three, reduce max ratio to 4:1
>> > year four, reduce max ratio to 2:1
>> >
>> > and throughout keep the "gradual change over 5 boards" rule used in
> sport
>> > bowling implemented...
>> >
>> > Bowling balls arn't the problem - lanes are... It pisses me off when
>> > people
>> > talk about going to the proshop and "buying hook" etc... just make the
>> > minimum length of oil allowed 40ft and youl have less people hooking
>> > the
>> > ball... make the minimum amount of oil allowed anywhere on the lane 10
>> > units
>> > instead of 3... THEN we'll be getting somewhere...
>> >
>> > When NOBODY can question that the pros they see on TV are 10 imes
>> > better
>> > than the average bowler, THEN we'll be getting somewhere!
>> >
>> > Ryan
>> >
>> >
>> > "Jeff Rife" <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote in message
>> > news:MPG.1cf468d2c3099800989d4c@news.nabs.net...
>> >> Tony R Smith (tonyrsmith@myrealbox.com) wrote in alt.sport.bowling:
>> >> > I think that you will see a
>> >> > decline at first but I believe that you would see a resurgence of
>> >> > interest if it became challenging again.
>> >>
>> >> In addition to this, you'd see a lot of people who just don't care
> about
>> >> the oil pattern at all. The ABC national average is something like
> 145,
>> >> which means that about half the bowlers are below that (not 100%
>> >> accurate,
>> >> but not a bad estimate). Does anybody here think that a 100-130
> average
>> >> bowler will stop bowling because "the shot is too hard"? Would they
> even
>> >> notice any difference?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Jeff Rife
|
|
