BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: Aloarjr810 on July 25, 2017, 08:02:56 PM
-
One of the new USBC rule changes for 2017-2018 season is leagues can now cap handicap scores.
100g. Handicap
5. A handicap game or series shall not be capped unless otherwise provided by league rule. If a league adopts such a rule, a game or series cannot be capped below the highest possible scratch score.
-
Seems like that would go without saying. Apparently not.
-
Seems like that would go without saying. Apparently not.
Never underestimate the stupidity of bowlers. Everything must be laid out.
-
I guess a bunch of scratch bowlers got upset they couldn't win scratch AND handicap awards.
-
Seems like that would go without saying. Apparently not.
Why would that go without saying?
-
Handicap scores should never have been allowed to go over the maximum scratch score. It makes no sense, yet you see it all the time. That should actually be a rule.
-
Seems like that would go without saying. Apparently not.
Why would that go without saying?
Because if high games and series are set at (imaginary) numbers that scratch bowlers can't reach why would they bowl?
If it's a tournament where leading singles score for 3 games is 907 and you have 0 handicap you have zero chance to win. If capped at 900, you have a .0000001% to at least tie.
Or if high game is 317 etc.
It will depend on the league or tournament.
-
Handicap should be capped at max 300 a game. Give scratch bowlers a chance if bowling against someone else playing the game of their life
-
Seems like that would go without saying. Apparently not.
Why would that go without saying?
Because if high games and series are set at (imaginary) numbers that scratch bowlers can't reach why would they bowl?
If it's a tournament where leading singles score for 3 games is 907 and you have 0 handicap you have zero chance to win. If capped at 900, you have a .0000001% to at least tie.
Or if high game is 317 etc.
It will depend on the league or tournament.
Which is why they put this rule in, so there was a option to set a limit on handicap scores if a league so chose because there wasn't one before.
-
Why not cap it at 299? A perfect score of 300 should only be had with a perfect 12 strikes in a row.
-
This rule doesn't do anything different than before. Leagues could have capped the scores before or let them run as high as they liked. This rule simply identifies a situation seen in leagues. It does zero regulating.
-
I don't have a big opinion on this. In my mind I've always felt felt it should be capped at 300 since that's the highest score score anyone can get
-
I would agree with this rule, you shouldn't be able to go above the max score possible. For example this is from a very popular tournament and the leader with handicap score is above max score.
MEN’S SINGLES:
1 ED SOBLESKIE - MILTON, FL – 916 (PENDING)
2 KEVIN RORKE - BELLE VERNON, PA – 892 (PENDING)
3 RONALD SUAZON - COURTICE, ONT - 866
4 CHAD NOLAN - NORWOOD, ONT - 857
5 JASON BEAUDOIN - OMEMEE, ONT - 854
6 RONALD B MANN JR - ASHEVILLE, NC - 852
-
Yeah... I've lost doubles plenty of times to scores over 600. When you shoot 670 and don't even get 3rd cause the 3 highest scores are above 600, it's time to save your money
-
I would agree with this rule, you shouldn't be able to go above the max score possible.
Just to be clear, the rule says,
A handicap game or series shall not be capped unless otherwise provided by league rule.
So the rule is you can go over unless the league says otherwise. So if no rule is in place, handicap scores can go over 300 or 900 (or however number of games).
-
A group of tournaments that I have bowled in over the years is now following the usbc's lead and capping handicap scores at 300 and 900. While I do understand the argument for it, if a person with handicap has a career game or set he is only going to get credit for it as if he bowled a much lower set. Say someone was getting 30 pins a game...if they bowl a 270 that's a 300 handicap game...if they bowl a 290+ they would only be credited the same as if they bowled a 270. In that scenario there is no reason(beyond personal integrity) to bowl higher than a 270 because it will not provide any more benefit than simply bowling a 270. I could conceivably see someone purposely not bowling a higher scratch game that would otherwise have been counted as a 300+ handicap game because they would gain nothing and raise their avg and lower their handicap. I could see someone somewhere doing that.
Brad
-
A group of tournaments that I have bowled in over the years is now following the usbc's lead and capping handicap scores at 300 and 900. While I do understand the argument for it, if a person with handicap has a career game or set he is only going to get credit for it as if he bowled a much lower set. Say someone was getting 30 pins a game...if they bowl a 270 that's a 300 handicap game...if they bowl a 290+ they would only be credited the same as if they bowled a 270. In that scenario there is no reason(beyond personal integrity) to bowl higher than a 270 because it will not provide any more benefit than simply bowling a 270. I could conceivably see someone purposely not bowling a higher scratch game that would otherwise have been counted as a 300+ handicap game because they would gain nothing and raise their avg and lower their handicap. I could see someone somewhere doing that.
Brad
One game does not a series make.
Unless they are bowling the last game, I don't know why they would want to throw pins away.
-
Local golf tournaments have had a similar rule for years. Handicap scores are adjusted back up to no lower than the course record.
-
A group of tournaments that I have bowled in over the years is now following the usbc's lead and capping handicap scores at 300 and 900. While I do understand the argument for it, if a person with handicap has a career game or set he is only going to get credit for it as if he bowled a much lower set. Say someone was getting 30 pins a game...if they bowl a 270 that's a 300 handicap game...if they bowl a 290+ they would only be credited the same as if they bowled a 270. In that scenario there is no reason(beyond personal integrity) to bowl higher than a 270 because it will not provide any more benefit than simply bowling a 270. I could conceivably see someone purposely not bowling a higher scratch game that would otherwise have been counted as a 300+ handicap game because they would gain nothing and raise their avg and lower their handicap. I could see someone somewhere doing that.
Brad
This is ridiculous. Not much more to say about it. Max scratch score is 300. Someone with 0 handicap can't break 300. Why should someone with handicap be able to? Seems to me to be a common sense rule, but for some reason going above 300 is allowed.
-
Max scratch score is 300. Someone with 0 handicap can't break 300. Why should someone with handicap be able to?
^^^^
-
While this might not come up often, I can see one possible downside to capping handicap games and series (a 300 & 900).
It could conceivably cost a team a game and/or series wins.
Example say one of your teammates shoots a 320 handicap game, your team wins that game by 19 pins. The cap chops the 20 pin off your team has now lost that game by one pin.
-
A group of tournaments that I have bowled in over the years is now following the usbc's lead and capping handicap scores at 300 and 900. While I do understand the argument for it, if a person with handicap has a career game or set he is only going to get credit for it as if he bowled a much lower set. Say someone was getting 30 pins a game...if they bowl a 270 that's a 300 handicap game...if they bowl a 290+ they would only be credited the same as if they bowled a 270. In that scenario there is no reason(beyond personal integrity) to bowl higher than a 270 because it will not provide any more benefit than simply bowling a 270. I could conceivably see someone purposely not bowling a higher scratch game that would otherwise have been counted as a 300+ handicap game because they would gain nothing and raise their avg and lower their handicap. I could see someone somewhere doing that.
Brad
AND this is the definition of sandbagging which is against the rules & in some jurisdictions will be criminally liable & held accountable.
-
A group of tournaments that I have bowled in over the years is now following the usbc's lead and capping handicap scores at 300 and 900. While I do understand the argument for it, if a person with handicap has a career game or set he is only going to get credit for it as if he bowled a much lower set. Say someone was getting 30 pins a game...if they bowl a 270 that's a 300 handicap game...if they bowl a 290+ they would only be credited the same as if they bowled a 270. In that scenario there is no reason(beyond personal integrity) to bowl higher than a 270 because it will not provide any more benefit than simply bowling a 270. I could conceivably see someone purposely not bowling a higher scratch game that would otherwise have been counted as a 300+ handicap game because they would gain nothing and raise their avg and lower their handicap. I could see someone somewhere doing that.
Brad
AND this is the definition of sandbagging which is against the rules & in some jurisdictions will be criminally liable & held accountable.
Yea, I just can't see this actually happening. It's league night and the 185 avg bowler is coming up in the 10th frame with 8 of the first 9 and a spare. EVERYBODY is watching. He pauses before grabbing his ball, looks at the score and says you know I'm gonna throw 2 in the gutter because it doesn't really matter and the game is capped at 300 anyway. Sorry I just can't see that scenario playing out. Like you said he would probably be held accountable out in the parking lot, or shunned and banned from that league for life.
Like I said earlier, just cap the game at 299. A perfect score of 300 should only be earned with a perfect game of 12 strikes.
-
Last night I watched a guy next to me, a 149 average roll a 695 scratch 857 handicap series with a 320ish game for the 1st game. And they were playing the ghost team so all they had to do was bowl their average to get the win. Sorry I just don't see 140-180 average guys purposely sandbagging at any time so they don't get score over 300. They are too busy having fun and bowling the game of their life.
And I don't see a 210 average guy with a low handicap not trying to bowl a 300 after getting the first 8 or 9. He will go for that 300 every time. Maybe chuck the last ball down the lane without a care if getting a spare in the 10th, but who hasn't done that???
-
Last night I watched a guy next to me, a 149 average roll a 695 scratch 857 handicap series with a 320ish game for the 1st game. And they were playing the ghost team so all they had to do was bowl their average to get the win. Sorry I just don't see 140-180 average guys purposely sandbagging at any time so they don't get score over 300. They are too busy having fun and bowling the game of their life.
And I don't see a 210 average guy with a low handicap not trying to bowl a 300 after getting the first 8 or 9. He will go for that 300 every time. Maybe chuck the last ball down the lane without a care if getting a spare in the 10th, but who hasn't done that???
It's not the 140-180 average guy that is the problem. It's the 220+ level Piece Of Sh!+ that "bags" their way down to that 140-180 average so they can continue their scam in tournaments. You can bet that if you have some in your area, they will flock to a league like this in droves.
-
Example say one of your teammates shoots a 320 handicap game, your team wins that game by 19 pins. The cap chops the 20 pin off your team has now lost that game by one pin.
We should have never won that game to begin with.
-
Wow. I have seen a few guys bag over the years, but not sure I ever saw a 220 caliber bag that much.
-
While this might not come up often, I can see one possible downside to capping handicap games and series (a 300 & 900).
It could conceivably cost a team a game and/or series wins.
Example say one of your teammates shoots a 320 handicap game, your team wins that game by 19 pins. The cap chops the 20 pin off your team has now lost that game by one pin.
If your league uses individual handicaps to figure out wins/losses, then that's the way it should be. You can't bowl 320 scratch. So again, why should someone be able to bowl 320 with handicap?
A lot of the leagues I've bowled in use team handicap instead, so this really never comes up.
-
Wow. I have seen a few guys bag over the years, but not sure I ever saw a 220 caliber bag that much.
There is a local ass who did just that. Went into tournaments with a 180ish average while being a 220+.
The tool would still be doing it if he could get away with it. But he isn't the only one, in the SF Bay area, there are quite a few bowlers with this same level of personal moral standard.
-
I can see this rule in a tournament situation but not really in a league.
For all the complaining about it, how many have shot 300 and lost to a handicap 300+?
I have and I will tell you losing the league point was the last thing on my mind as I punched out in the 10th. I shook his hand and said good game afterwards.
-
For all the complaining about it, how many have shot 300 and lost to a handicap 300+?
I have. Lost to a 305 "score". It does happen, and everyone in the league including the guy that beat me thought it was ridiculous that I "lost" while shooting a 300 game, but those were the rules of the league.
-
Pretty hard to imagine why handicap should allow a person to exceed the maximum achievable score.