| |
Main
Date: 07 Feb 2005 14:13:09
From: Darby
Subject: sub fees
|
The sub doesn't pay for the bowling fees, the missing, regular bowler pays
for that. The sub pays a fee for subbing, usually a couple bucks, and that
goes into the league's prize fund.
Dar
I never heard of charging a sub to sub. In this area - the sub bowls for
free - the regular bowler pays. Why wound I pay to sub in league and get
nothing back - and open play is cheaper.
eastwood wrote:
How is it fair that a sub pays into the prize fund but does not collect.
From my point of view if someone is hanging around hoping to sub then maybe
that person should pay something. But if you get asked ahead of time why
should that person pay.
I very rarely sub, mainly because I bowl three nights but if I am asked, I'm
sorry, but I don't why I should pay to help someone out.
I will go one further. If I have sent in my fee for all events for a
tournament and for some reason I cannot make it, I find a sub and he bowls
for free. That is just an unwritten policy for my team. If the team cash's
then I get my share of that but the sub keeps anything from doubles and
singles.
"NimBill" <nimbill@aol.comtisme > wrote in message
news:20050206210153.17983.00000483@mb-m22.aol.com...
From: "clark" ccorey@starnetdial.net
anybody out there bowl in leagues where subs have to pay,filled in for
someone wed night and had to pay a $3 sub fee was told sub fees go towards
there prize fund
Almost every league I have ever been in does that.
The missing person pays the lineage and does not bowl. The sub pays into
the
prize fund and does not collect.
If there is no sub available the absent bowler pays everything so it is
extremely fair to everyone except in leagues where the amount going to
lineage
is smaller than the amount going into prize fund which are few and far
between.
|
|
| |
Date: 08 Feb 2005 13:55:25
From: moncho
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
"Darby" <darlene@caves.net > wrote in message
news:110fiunc5hpifd9@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> The sub doesn't pay for the bowling fees, the missing, regular bowler pays
> for that. The sub pays a fee for subbing, usually a couple bucks, and that
> goes into the league's prize fund.
> Dar
>
>
> I never heard of charging a sub to sub. In this area - the sub bowls for
> free - the regular bowler pays. Why wound I pay to sub in league and get
> nothing back - and open play is cheaper.
>
> eastwood wrote:
>
<snip >
I bowl in one league and sub for two others.
The first league I sub in does not want the sub to pay anything other than
individual
jackpots on their own. This is because the "TEAM" wants to keep all of the
prize
money at the end of the year. This is fair to me because I am just a sub
with free bowling.
The nice thing about the this league, is they will pay for my entry to the
banquet at the end of
the year ($25). This is sort of a "thanks for filling in" kind of thing.
The other two leagues, the sub pays full price, but also shares in the any
of the prize money for
the team at the end of the year and receives entry to the banquet. This is
fair because the team
separates the prize money based on the number of games bowled.
(((prize money-Xtra banqet) / (33 weeks * 3 games * 5 bowlers))) *
(#games bowled-fees) = $
The calculations is something like the above (sorta in a rush).
This is fair to all involved and you are paid based on how many games you
bowled. If there are any
non-paid fees by an indivdual bowler, it is deducted from their individual
prize money.
Either of the scenarios above is fair to me. You pay if your receive, if
you don't, you don't.
moncho
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2005 21:46:42
From: 1966olds
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
I usually sub in a couple leagues each year in addition to a couple
others that I am a regular in. MOST of the time, the absent bowler pays
and the sub bowls for free (of course paying for their own pots and
such). However, in one of the leagues I am subbing in this year I am
considered the 6th man on a 5 man team.
No, we don't rotate players, but I am entitled to a full share of prize
money regardless of how many games I bowl for the team. Of course, I
also have to pay whenever I bowl, although I pay a slighly lower fee
($3 less) than the regulars. In my other [subbing] league, I bowl for
free, but am not officially entitled to any prize money. At the end of
the season, my teammates always chip in at least $10 or $20 a piece, so
I actually get about as much as I would bowling in a summer league.
Preference? I don't have one. I have my regular leagues that I look
forward to, and I don't see subbing as just me helping out someone
else. I get free practice and competition and still have a chance to
win money in the pots.
I do think, though, that it should be the same rules thruout the
league. A couple of years ago in the league I subbed in for free, my
team knew they wouldn't need me the last several weeks of the season,
and another team (same league) asked if I would bowl with them. This
team expected its subs to pay.
I never complained to them, but always felt a little miffed in this
instance. It wasn't the money itself. It was just that in the one case
where I really did see myself as helping them out vs an equal
partnership, it seemed ironic that I should have to pay a full share.
Especially since it was the same league and my regular teammates were
more fun. I would rather have paid to bowl with my regular team.
Well... that's my 2 cents. Just saw this post and thought I'd share.
clark wrote:
> in the league i was talking about the missing bowler pays full league
fee
> upon return subs get stuck beefing up the prize fund
> "Darby" <darlene@caves.net> wrote in message
> news:110fiunc5hpifd9@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> >
> > The sub doesn't pay for the bowling fees, the missing, regular
bowler pays
> > for that. The sub pays a fee for subbing, usually a couple bucks,
and that
> > goes into the league's prize fund.
> > Dar
> >
> >
> > I never heard of charging a sub to sub. In this area - the sub
bowls for
> > free - the regular bowler pays. Why wound I pay to sub in league
and get
> > nothing back - and open play is cheaper.
> >
> > eastwood wrote:
> >
> > How is it fair that a sub pays into the prize fund but does not
collect.
> > From my point of view if someone is hanging around hoping to sub
then
> maybe
> > that person should pay something. But if you get asked ahead of
time why
> > should that person pay.
> >
> > I very rarely sub, mainly because I bowl three nights but if I am
asked,
> I'm
> > sorry, but I don't why I should pay to help someone out.
> >
> > I will go one further. If I have sent in my fee for all events for
a
> > tournament and for some reason I cannot make it, I find a sub and
he bowls
> > for free. That is just an unwritten policy for my team. If the team
cash's
> > then I get my share of that but the sub keeps anything from doubles
and
> > singles.
> >
> >
> > "NimBill" <nimbill@aol.comtisme> wrote in message
> > news:20050206210153.17983.00000483@mb-m22.aol.com...
> > From: "clark" ccorey@starnetdial.net
> > anybody out there bowl in leagues where subs have to
pay,filled in
> for
> > someone wed night and had to pay a $3 sub fee was told sub fees go
towards
> > there prize fund
> > Almost every league I have ever been in does that.
> >
> > The missing person pays the lineage and does not bowl. The sub pays
into
> > the
> > prize fund and does not collect.
> >
> > If there is no sub available the absent bowler pays everything so
it is
> > extremely fair to everyone except in leagues where the amount going
to
> > lineage
> > is smaller than the amount going into prize fund which are few and
far
> > between.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2005 23:33:07
From: Joe Zachar
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
My mixed league doesn't allow subs on any of the teams.. If a team has
an absent bowler a pacer can bowl if the 2 team capatains agree to it.
The pacer has to pay for the games. There is also a league/house rule
that no free game coupons can be used during league play. The pacers
have to be sanctioned too. The pacers can enter the pots.
I agree with you that it is crazy to bowl in the league as a pacer when
you have to pay full price. After the league I think they charge $10 an
hour per lane for open bowling. In the afternoon they charge $1 a game
from 1 PM to 4 PM.
Joe Z
Darby wrote:
>The sub doesn't pay for the bowling fees, the missing, regular bowler pays
>for that. The sub pays a fee for subbing, usually a couple bucks, and that
>goes into the league's prize fund.
>Dar
>
>
>I never heard of charging a sub to sub. In this area - the sub bowls for
>free - the regular bowler pays. Why wound I pay to sub in league and get
>nothing back - and open play is cheaper.
>
>eastwood wrote:
>
>How is it fair that a sub pays into the prize fund but does not collect.
>From my point of view if someone is hanging around hoping to sub then maybe
>that person should pay something. But if you get asked ahead of time why
>should that person pay.
>
>I very rarely sub, mainly because I bowl three nights but if I am asked, I'm
>sorry, but I don't why I should pay to help someone out.
>
>I will go one further. If I have sent in my fee for all events for a
>tournament and for some reason I cannot make it, I find a sub and he bowls
>for free. That is just an unwritten policy for my team. If the team cash's
>then I get my share of that but the sub keeps anything from doubles and
>singles.
>
>
>"NimBill" <nimbill@aol.comtisme> wrote in message
>news:20050206210153.17983.00000483@mb-m22.aol.com...
> From: "clark" ccorey@starnetdial.net
> anybody out there bowl in leagues where subs have to pay,filled in for
>someone wed night and had to pay a $3 sub fee was told sub fees go towards
>there prize fund
> Almost every league I have ever been in does that.
>
>The missing person pays the lineage and does not bowl. The sub pays into
>the
>prize fund and does not collect.
>
>If there is no sub available the absent bowler pays everything so it is
>extremely fair to everyone except in leagues where the amount going to
>lineage
>is smaller than the amount going into prize fund which are few and far
>between.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 08 Feb 2005 21:34:21
From: 1966olds
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
As far as I know, there are no provisions allowing for pacers in any of
the 3 sanctioned mens leagues I participate in (2 as a sub, 1 as a
regular). I also bowl in a mixed league that does allow them, much to
my dismay.
I enjoy a fast paced game and when a bowler is missing...even if its on
my own team and puts us at a potential disadvantage...at least that's
one less person to wait for and usually picks up the tempo of the
bowling. Ok... so maybe I'm in the minority and most league bowlers
like the idea of keeping the same pace being the same as it would have
been with 8 regular bowlers on the two lanes, thus the name "Pacer"?
But that's just it.... the so-called pacers are normally inexperienced
bowlers at best and inattentive ones at worst.
In my mixed league (which is non-sanctioned), one couple normally
brings their son or daughter as a pacer if they both can't make it on
"game day". One of the two children (I won't say which so as to protect
the identity and feelings of the couple, no matter how unlikely it is
that they would see this post) is in mid to late teens, and brings a
cellphone and spends more time on the damn phone than on the lanes.
This "pacer" is usually ready physically to bowl when its their turn,
but many times not, and they aren't REALLY there at all mentally.
That pacer is only squeezing the bowling around their phone
conversation and I find it extremely rude and annoying. The idea
behind it in this case is for the couple to get their money's worth.
Now if the pacer actually enjoyed being there filling in for their
parent, AND it helped them feel they were getting their money's worth
despite the regular's absence, then fine. But to drag a teenager there
and put up with the subtle boredom and rudeness really bugs me.
I have a teenager also and asked a couple times if they wanted to be a
pacer when my wife couldn't make it. And when they wanted to, it was
fine, and when they didn't want to, I didn't take them.
Sorry for the rant, but the word "pacer" is a four letter word to me
these days.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Feb 2005 02:52:45
From: NimBill
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
>From: Joe Zachar jzacharzard@optonline.net
>My mixed league doesn't allow subs on any of the teams.. If a team has
>an absent bowler a pacer can bowl if the 2 team capatains agree to it.
> The pacer has to pay for the games. There is also a league/house rule
>that no free game coupons can be used during league play. The pacers
>have to be sanctioned too. The pacers can enter the pots.
>
>I agree with you that it is crazy to bowl in the league as a pacer when
>you have to pay full price. After the league I think they charge $10 an
>hour per lane for open bowling. In the afternoon they charge $1 a game
>from 1 PM to 4 PM.
>
>Joe Z
I've also bowled in leagues that did not allow subs or pacers because the house
wanted the leagues vacated ASAP.
Some leagues I am in allow expanded rosters but no floating subs or pacers.
Some allow expanded rosters and floating subs but no pacers.
In fact none of the leagues I now bowl in has provisions for pacers for the
reasons you state.
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Feb 2005 12:45:59
From: Joe Zachar
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
--------------010109040301000201050005
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Our mixed league has 30 teams and I can see now why subs are out. If
you get 4 people that want to be subs that could be 4 less permanent
bowlers in the league. You do that a number of years and soon you have
less full teams (each team is 4 people at least 1 female bowler required
per team). Looking at the league teams only one is missing a bowler
(using a vacant score). I would say that the rule seems to be a good
one as far as the league is concerned. If you want to bowl you have to
be a member.
NimBill wrote:
>>From: Joe Zachar jzacharzard@optonline.net
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>My mixed league doesn't allow subs on any of the teams.. If a team has
>>an absent bowler a pacer can bowl if the 2 team capatains agree to it.
>>The pacer has to pay for the games. There is also a league/house rule
>>that no free game coupons can be used during league play. The pacers
>>have to be sanctioned too. The pacers can enter the pots.
>>
>>I agree with you that it is crazy to bowl in the league as a pacer when
>>you have to pay full price. After the league I think they charge $10 an
>>hour per lane for open bowling. In the afternoon they charge $1 a game
>>
>>
>>from 1 PM to 4 PM.
>
>
>>Joe Z
>>
>>
>
>I've also bowled in leagues that did not allow subs or pacers because the house
>wanted the leagues vacated ASAP.
>
>Some leagues I am in allow expanded rosters but no floating subs or pacers.
>Some allow expanded rosters and floating subs but no pacers.
>
>In fact none of the leagues I now bowl in has provisions for pacers for the
>reasons you state.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--------------010109040301000201050005
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" >
<html >
<head >
<title ></title>
</head >
<body >
Our mixed league has 30 teams and I can see now why subs are out. If you
get 4 people that want to be subs that could be 4 less permanent bowlers
in the league. You do that a number of years and soon you have less full
teams (each team is 4 people at least 1 female bowler required per team).
Looking at the league teams only one is missing a bowler (using a vacant
score). I would say that the rule seems to be a good one as far as the league
is concerned. If you want to bowl you have to be a member.<br >
<br >
NimBill wrote:<br >
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20050208215245.24466.00000016@mb-m17.aol.com" >
<blockquote type="cite" >
<pre wrap="" >From: Joe Zachar <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jzacharzard@optonline.net">jzacharzard@optonline.net</a>
</pre >
</blockquote >
<pre wrap="" ><!---->
</pre >
<blockquote type="cite" >
<pre wrap="" >My mixed league doesn't allow subs on any of the teams.. If a team has
an absent bowler a pacer can bowl if the 2 team capatains agree to it.
The pacer has to pay for the games. There is also a league/house rule
that no free game coupons can be used during league play. The pacers
have to be sanctioned too. The pacers can enter the pots.
I agree with you that it is crazy to bowl in the league as a pacer when
you have to pay full price. After the league I think they charge $10 an
hour per lane for open bowling. In the afternoon they charge $1 a game
</pre >
</blockquote >
<pre wrap="" ><!---->>from 1 PM to 4 PM.
</pre >
<blockquote type="cite" >
<pre wrap="" >Joe Z
</pre >
</blockquote >
<pre wrap="" ><!---->
I've also bowled in leagues that did not allow subs or pacers because the house
wanted the leagues vacated ASAP.
Some leagues I am in allow expanded rosters but no floating subs or pacers.
Some allow expanded rosters and floating subs but no pacers.
In fact none of the leagues I now bowl in has provisions for pacers for the
reasons you state.
</pre >
</blockquote >
<br >
</body >
</html >
--------------010109040301000201050005--
|
| |
Date: 07 Feb 2005 16:19:12
From: clark
Subject: Re: sub fees
|
in the league i was talking about the missing bowler pays full league fee
upon return subs get stuck beefing up the prize fund
"Darby" <darlene@caves.net > wrote in message
news:110fiunc5hpifd9@corp.supernews.com...
>
>
> The sub doesn't pay for the bowling fees, the missing, regular bowler pays
> for that. The sub pays a fee for subbing, usually a couple bucks, and that
> goes into the league's prize fund.
> Dar
>
>
> I never heard of charging a sub to sub. In this area - the sub bowls for
> free - the regular bowler pays. Why wound I pay to sub in league and get
> nothing back - and open play is cheaper.
>
> eastwood wrote:
>
> How is it fair that a sub pays into the prize fund but does not collect.
> From my point of view if someone is hanging around hoping to sub then
maybe
> that person should pay something. But if you get asked ahead of time why
> should that person pay.
>
> I very rarely sub, mainly because I bowl three nights but if I am asked,
I'm
> sorry, but I don't why I should pay to help someone out.
>
> I will go one further. If I have sent in my fee for all events for a
> tournament and for some reason I cannot make it, I find a sub and he bowls
> for free. That is just an unwritten policy for my team. If the team cash's
> then I get my share of that but the sub keeps anything from doubles and
> singles.
>
>
> "NimBill" <nimbill@aol.comtisme> wrote in message
> news:20050206210153.17983.00000483@mb-m22.aol.com...
> From: "clark" ccorey@starnetdial.net
> anybody out there bowl in leagues where subs have to pay,filled in
for
> someone wed night and had to pay a $3 sub fee was told sub fees go towards
> there prize fund
> Almost every league I have ever been in does that.
>
> The missing person pays the lineage and does not bowl. The sub pays into
> the
> prize fund and does not collect.
>
> If there is no sub available the absent bowler pays everything so it is
> extremely fair to everyone except in leagues where the amount going to
> lineage
> is smaller than the amount going into prize fund which are few and far
> between.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
