Have any merit nowadays?

I mean, to me. Ppl don't seem to care much on THS. this summer there were 3 300 and several 279/278 games shot by many. Guys who seemed not to get excited about their scores. There are multiple bowlers above 218 ave.

Back in 88' I remember seeing only 5 200 plus bowlers with 100 bowlers in my cousins league. Low 200's too.

I was overseas where they don't use house shots like we do here (they use world patterns) and average 194 for 12 games. I was told by one of their best bowlers that it was a respectable average. When I remember this comment, my current 220 doesn't seem to have weight.

Avabob, remember when averaging a buck 95 was a big deal? A 195 average might have been the highest in a house.

That was also the time when the PBA required a 190 or better league average for at least two consecutive seasons, a minimum of 66 games each year.

For a couple of years here we had an classic league where you needed to have an 195 average to be able to bowl in it.

The last league I bowled in was during the 1989-1990 season. It a big money scratch deal in South Florida in one of the former Don Cater alleys. Twenty-four, four-man teams. About two-thirds of us carried 200 or better (myself included).

The manager of it was John Weltzein, a former touring pro who once made an ABC Masters show and finished third. He had the highest average at 220. Bob Handley used to make cameo appearances as a sub. (His wife bowled in the league). There were also another dozen or so guys who shot regionals or a national stop or two. (They held what was once called Touring II status.)

There may have been about eight 300 games shot in that league. Sidepots? Well, it usually took a 260 or better. This was also during the ABC's short oil era.

Perhaps if anything a good bowler will always find a way to score regardless of era, lane conditions, or permissible bowling equipment being used. But it's my observation -- at least in 2017 -- a sport pattern is probably the only way to separate those with game or not.