Author Topic: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article (Read 9475 times)

xrayjay · « **on:** April 25, 2017, 01:19:08 PM »

interesting....

http://www.bowl.com/News/NewsDetails.aspx?id=23622329086

Impending Doom · « **Reply #1 on:** April 25, 2017, 02:00:36 PM »

And the baggers wept.

Olderdude · « **Reply #2 on:** April 25, 2017, 02:12:24 PM »

This will be dependent on bowling centers to enforce?

SVstar34 · « **Reply #3 on:** April 25, 2017, 02:13:20 PM »

Ok great. Doesn't change much unless more centers actually offer leagues with those designations

Strapper_Squared · « **Reply #4 on:** April 25, 2017, 02:21:56 PM »

Now they need a designation for houses with shitty carry, poor maintenance procedures (e.g. cleaning the pin decks so pins don't slide), and dead pins.

All of these factors impact the scoring environment.

Gene J Kanak · « **Reply #5 on:** April 25, 2017, 03:14:32 PM »

I agree that this step certainly won't eliminate the problem, but at least it shows that USBC recognizes the problem and is willing to try some things to curb it.

milorafferty · « **Reply #6 on:** April 25, 2017, 03:21:32 PM »

The USBC has all the information they need to make handicap accurate right in their databases.

The fact is, good bowlers will have higher averages than not so good bowlers. Get rid of using averages and rank bowlers among their peers. This will take house/lane/pattern variances out of the equation.

Olderdude · « **Reply #7 on:** April 25, 2017, 03:24:05 PM »

Quote from: Gene J Kanak on April 25, 2017, 03:14:32 PM

I agree that this step certainly won't eliminate the problem, but at least it shows that USBC recognizes the problem and is willing to try some things to curb it.

I agree, at least try something.

Funny thing is, I'm not sure why we convert averages up from sport to THS and the we go bowl sport at nationals and have to use a THS averages. Oh well

tburky · « **Reply #8 on:** April 25, 2017, 04:12:30 PM »

Just my honest opinion. I see the USBC putting together a database of averages in all centers and rerating bowlers in their particular center based on the data. The reason I say this is a lot of big dollar handicap tournaments have people averaging 185-190 that bowl in centers that have piss poor topography and low volume of oil and go to a tournament that has an easy shot and shoot 660+ with a lot of handicap. Also you have the typical baggers too.

Olderdude · « **Reply #9 on:** April 25, 2017, 04:43:55 PM »

Quote from: tburky on April 25, 2017, 04:12:30 PM

Just my honest opinion. I see the USBC putting together a database of averages in all centers and rerating bowlers in their particular center based on the data. The reason I say this is a lot of big dollar handicap tournaments have people averaging 185-190 that bowl in centers that have piss poor topography and low volume of oil and go to a tournament that has an easy shot and shoot 660+ with a lot of handicap. Also you have the typical baggers too.

I've had people 180 and under score higher than me at nationals. lol

ITZPS · « **Reply #10 on:** April 25, 2017, 04:48:35 PM »

Impossible to accurately implement and completely subjective. Too much gray area.

Quote from: tburky on April 25, 2017, 04:12:30 PM

Just my honest opinion. I see the USBC putting together a database of averages in all centers and rerating bowlers in their particular center based on the data. The reason I say this is a lot of big dollar handicap tournaments have people averaging 185-190 that bowl in centers that have piss poor topography and low volume of oil and go to a tournament that has an easy shot and shoot 660+ with a lot of handicap. Also you have the typical baggers too.

Olderdude · « **Reply #11 on:** April 25, 2017, 05:09:36 PM »

Quote from: ITZPS on April 25, 2017, 04:48:35 PM

Impossible to accurately implement and completely subjective. Too much gray area.

Quote from: tburky on April 25, 2017, 04:12:30 PM
Just my honest opinion. I see the USBC putting together a database of averages in all centers and rerating bowlers in their particular center based on the data. The reason I say this is a lot of big dollar handicap tournaments have people averaging 185-190 that bowl in centers that have piss poor topography and low volume of oil and go to a tournament that has an easy shot and shoot 660+ with a lot of handicap. Also you have the typical baggers too.

You're 100% on that one. Riggs actually talked about that too. Would cost $$$ to get the test/results and owners wont want that expense

spmcgivern · « **Reply #12 on:** April 25, 2017, 05:19:12 PM »

The problem with this is it is completely voluntary upon the league to report. In theory, I could put out a 1:1 shot everyday for leagues and open play and it would be my THS. I don't have to report it as a sport condition since it meets the USBC limit of 3 units of oil. My bowlers would clean house in tournaments.

At the same time, the league could report as a Challenge league and put out the easiest of shots for 35 of 36 weeks; ultimately leading to everyone in the league with an inflated average based on some scale. I am wondering if there will be a minimum or maximum number of weeks where more difficult shots are used. And what will be the definition of difficult.

There is no way to keep this consistent and fair. It seems like a way for USBC to be able to rerate bowlers when they see fit if an average for a league is lower than what that bowler had in the past. You will see bowlers being rerated at Nationals based on USBC stating their league should have been a Challenge league.

Strapper_Squared · « **Reply #13 on:** April 25, 2017, 05:28:54 PM »

Bowlers in each area/region know. Rank from top to bottom...Supplement with house averages, comparisons of bowlers that have leagues in different houses, etc. The data is probably mostly there. Just need someone to Wade through it and make sense of it.

ITZPS · « **Reply #14 on:** April 25, 2017, 06:58:41 PM »

Unfortunately just too much work and too hard to enforce for what it's worth. I don't disagree with the majority of stuff that's been suggested on this thread or the other one, it's all theoretically great, but realistically not an option.

Quote from: Strapper_Squared on April 25, 2017, 05:28:54 PM

Bowlers in each area/region know. Rank from top to bottom...Supplement with house averages, comparisons of bowlers that have leagues in different houses, etc. The data is probably mostly there. Just need someone to Wade through it and make sense of it.

Author Topic: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article (Read 9475 times)

xrayjay

New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Impending Doom

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Olderdude

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

SVstar34

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Strapper_Squared

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Gene J Kanak

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

milorafferty

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Olderdude

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

tburky

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Olderdude

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

ITZPS

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Olderdude

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

spmcgivern

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

Strapper_Squared

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article

ITZPS

Re: New league designation to bridge gap between Standard, Sport - USBC Article