What happened was bowling lost its identity, and didnt know which way to turn, or what it wanted to be. When that happened, the floodgates were opened for all manner of changes to the sport, because there was nobody left to agree to say "NO" to anything that came along.
Traditionalists (I am one) wanted the sport to stay truer to its roots. Keep the game as simple as possible to play, limiting the technological advances to a minimum, and create and enforce rules of play designed to keep the sport simple to play, yet hard to master.
What we got was a "free for all" because the leadership we had at the time was asleep at the wheel. Too many changes came along too quickly, and there was nobody left to say "Were not doing that, because it isnt good for the sport in the long run". Instead, and probably because of financial greed, anything that came along was deemed OK for bowling, and looked on as an improvement.
Many of the things werent really improvements though. Change for improvement is one thing, but change simply for the sake of change is not improvement, its your leadership being financially coerced into allowing the people with deep pockets to instill anything beneficial for them into the sport, whether its good for the sport or not.
The two handed thing is different. Mark Roth changed bowling forever, but not with technology. He used a superior athletic ability and style to create power that most did not have, and was able to use it to dominate, at least until that style became prevalent. I look at the two handers the same way. They have a style and ability that allows them to create more power than others. It may create a paradigm shift in who is considered "good" and who isnt, but at least they are a NATURAL progression, and not an artificially created "technological" one.
Technology should've been granted a much more limited access to the arena, but to try to limit a players PHYSICAL ability is wrong. Mark Roth dominated because he could do something special and different with his own abilities. He changed the game forever with raw physical ability, and THAT is how sports should advance and change, not through artificial, technological means.
Two handers? I say leave them alone and let them play. They have a special physical ability that SHOULD be dominant. You want to compete with it, then either get as good as you possibly can one handed and take your chances, or learn the two handed style yourself.
Technology is artificial and should've been banned, or at least somewhat limited. Physical ability is NOT artificial, and should NEVER be banned, OR limited. The sport should ALWAYS progress along natural lines. Its slower that way, but better for the sport IN THE LONG RUN!
