I know I've posted something about this before, but I wanted to get some input.  I honestly don't think it has any chance of happening first of all, so I don't need any "reality checks" so to speak, but I was after some real suggestions as far as how to present it.  I want to send something to USBC to see if they will amend a rule or put in a provision for ambidextrous bowlers to be able to bowl with both hands.  I don't feel that it's unfair or any different to switch hands during a set or to pick up certain spares than it is to change balls or move where you're playing, it just seems like extra versatility to me.  Obviously they can do this on tour, though most don't mess with it. 

I fully understand why they don't currently allow it, there's all kinds of problems that arise with averages and handicap, BUT to fix this or allow for it, I have a suggestion.  If you are an ambidextrous bowler and want to have the option to use both hands, you waive ever getting handicap, period, for as long as you're sanctioned.  Even if you just decide to bowl with one hand in the future, to keep from having a mess figuring something out, if you choose this option, you forfeit handicap for the rest of your "career."  Now I think this is a perfectly reasonable proposition, but for some reason I doubt they'll go for it.  That's all I got though, I don't have any better ideas or suggestions.  I doubt they'd have many people that would go for that in the first place, which would make it easy to manage for them, so it shouldn't be that big of a deal.  Somehow though, I think I'll just get a polite email back saying no. 

But from their side, what can a reasonable argument against it be?  Yeah it creates handicap nightmares, but if you completely remove handicap, there's no issue, right?  They can't say it's unfair, because isn't it just as unfair for somebody who can afford equipment to lug 6 new balls in and use them against people with years old equipment?  Or for someone that can play 4 different arrows to move around all night while some people are stuck at 2nd arrow?  And obviously none of that is unfair, but that's the point.  I've put in a lot of time and practice, not to mention a couple seasons, bowling lefthanded, which I don't feel is any different than practicing up with one hand, or buying more equipment, or developing your mental game, etc.  I think it's just another way to be versatile, and I'd really like to have that option.  Thoughts?

The being able to use either hand during a game has been voted on at the ABC and USBC many times. It is always defeated rather soundly. Always seems to have some discussion and bottom line from my memory is an unfair advantage for the few that can do it.

I have bowled with both hands during a season but of course not on the same night. I don't think it creates an advantage that should be illegal. Being able to use either hand is because you're either ambidextrous or you practice a lot to become proficient to use either hand. Being good at both hands is not an dirty trick. It is only a handicap nightmare if you do it to affect your average (sandbag). Funny though you can bowl two-handed and also with your dominant hand and that's okay. I have a guy in my league that is bowling two-handed (just starting and is horrible at it and also with his dominant (right) hand. He bowls poorly two handed and then uses only his right hand when he needs to bowl well. Which type of bowling should really be illegal?

Jorge,

I couldn't agree with you statement about the two handed bowler. I think it's sandbagging also. I guess I'll find out this week as we bowl against him. People have already brought out the rule book and are finding it tough to do or say something because it seems to be ok in there. Have to see how this plays out.

Just look at all the pro's that do the same thing. Oh, wait none of them switch hands while bowling on tv. If there was a benefit, I'd think the pro would be doing it! Just my $.02, Bruce

Join the PBA, you can throw it however you want.