Yet another one of these "this is what is wrong with bowling posts." I agree with some points in the article and disagree with others. The bottom line is that in the "glory days" of bowling, there were not nearly as many recreational options as we have now and most of work in the country was 9 to 5 jobs in a manufacturing facility. Well, times have changed the average American works more hours and has many more options on how to spend free time. That is just as big a part of the decline as anything that the sport has done to itself.
We as high level bowlers did not get what we deserved. We got what the ball manufacturers wanted us to have-- a game dependent on disposable equipment. And the ABC/USBC and to some extent the PBA let it happen. Shame in them.
I agree with the general comment that the sport created a scenario where this may indeed appear to be true. There have definitely been bowling balls that don't last. Lane machines being able to duplcate an oil pattern and the progression of the "Great Wall of China" shot is more responsible for being "dependent" on equipment. The ABC didn't really enforce the lane condition guidelines that were set down and Pandora's box was opened. It will be bad for the business of bowling to try to close it now. What needs to happen now is that more a distinction needs to be made between "Recreational Bowling" and "Competitive Bowling". PBA Experience Leagues / Team USA Experience Leagues are a step in the right direction. The sanction fee for recreational bowling should be decreased as well as the rewards for reacreational bowling accomplishments. Steps are being taken in the right direction but it's not enough. What "high level" bowlers deserved or didn't deserve is irrelevant, bowling center owners need to do what's best for business. The other problem I have is that the definition of "High Level" Bowler is a little fuzzy.
We deserve a game where the high level player is visibly superior at the game than the low level player to the untrained eye. At this the game fails miserably.
We deserve a game that identifies the skill of the individual player. We ended up with a game that identifies the skill of the ball rep (pro level) ball driller (league level) more often than not.
How do you define a high level player vs a low level player ? I believe the author in this article uses high level player and power player as interchangable terms. You can be a high level player and not be a power player and conversely, just because you have a 400+ rev rate doesn't make you a high level player. I think the big thing that happened with resin is that the carry advantage that the power players enjoyed due to the fact that they could create more entry angle was eliminiated. It was no longer an advantage to be able to "hit" the ball at the bottom of the swing and I think that power players to this day are still ticked off about it. It's been 20+ years, GET OVER IT, your wrist, elbow and shoulder will thank you later. Definition of bowling skill changed from who could hit the ball the hardest to who could repeat shots the best. Which one you prefer depends on the era you bowled in.
We deserve a game that rewards accuracy and penalizes errant shots. We ended up with a game that penalizes accuracy and rewards errant shots.
I definitely agree with the author in respect to what I call recreational bowling. If you want this, join a sport shot league, it's as simple as that. Again USBC and the bowling industry as a whole needs to reward compeitive bowlers more and recreational bowlers less if the sport is to regain some credibility.
We deserve a game where technique provides power. We ended up with a game where technology provides power to such an extent that high level players purposely use weaker technique to compensate ('be nice to it' 'take my hand out of it' 'let the ball do the work' 'sarge easter grip' does this all sound familiar?).
I can sympathize with the author on this one, but again high level player doesn't mean power player, there are plenty of high level bowlers out there that don't have a 400+ rev rate. More evidence that this is the classic power player complaining because his carry advantage was taken away when resin came out.
We deserve a game that does not require pros to carve their shot in practice. We ended up with players forming alliances for television shows to carve a shot; players using sand blasted balls to destroy an opponent's shot etc.
Do you honestly believe this hasn't always been done on tour ? Granted the damage to the pattern can be done significantly faster now, but I think it's naive to think that this is something that only happened during the resin era. What changed is that instead of carrying the oil down the lane, they burn it up in the front part.
We deserve a stable playing environment. We ended up with lanes that transition every few frames and on the pro level squad success that is often more impacted by your luck of the draw cross than your actual bowling.
People buy the most expensive ball out there and throw it on league night in a high friction house that uses lane conditioner that breaks down fast anyway. As far as the Pro level goes, versatility is the key skill now days, not power. Do you think that Norm Duke, Chris Barnes or Bill O'Neill care who the crosses are ? That being said, I do wish the lanes would be a little more stable then they currently are.
We deserve a game that is simple to learn yet difficult to master. We ended up with a game where numerous unskilled players reach the pinnacle of the game (300) and higher level players routinely approach and even reach what was once thought to be impossible (900 for 3 games).
This is why the distinction needs to be made between recreational and competitive bowling. Any league bowled on a "China" shot should be considered a recreational league, period. Competitive leauges are bowled on something more difficult than a "China" shot.
Edited by CHawk15 on 1/31/2011 at 4:25 PM
