Author Topic: USBC has a Point (Read 4067 times)

Long and Hard · « **on:** June 30, 2005, 05:56:18 AM »

Here's a direct quote fron USBC on the bowl.com website.
http://www.bowl.com/articleView.aspx?i=10640&f=1

USBC wants to provide certified parameters of the game that result in the demand of a combination of skills. There lies the true credibility. To know when credibility has been restored, we must first define the virtues of athleticism that made bowling America's favorite game. In no particular order:

Technique.
Timing.
Accuracy.
Knowledge.
Strategy.
Power.
Consistency.
Versatility.
Focus.

I do agree with this. I see this throughout the leagues I bowl on. I have seen so many people with an awful approach, release and throw hard outside and I wonder how they can even appreciate what they are doing. Then they get a 300 and they think they own the world. Then back it up with a 150 and a 600 series. I'm sorry but if you have a 300 game you better be getting a 700 series at least if not a good push to 750. Most of these people I never see at any other house. If they do go to other houses they average 150 if they are lucky. I just have a hard time with the bowler who can't adjust. These are the same bowlers that if we bowled against each other at a neutral site I would kick his butt.

Anyways sorry for the rant. Let me know what you guys and gals think.
--------------------

1 more rev

There is only 1 way to hit the hole and that is long and hard and always from the left.

C-G ProShop-Carl · « **Reply #16 on:** July 01, 2005, 01:12:09 PM »

baccala,

I understand where you come from. There are no bowlers that I know of that take things as well as I do, because I blame myself no matter what. Last week I bowled and in each of the 3 games I left the entire back row. BAM- 8 pin, BAM 10 pin, BAM 9 pin. I blame myself for those shots.

I think the point of myself and some of the others here is that without the THS they cannot miss out to 2 board when aiming for 12 board and expect the ball to get pocket. You don't have to put out a sport shot to make a shot difficult. If a proprietor puts out a difficult shot that requires accuracy I don't care how the ball is drilled, if the bowler is spraying it around the lane they are not going to score well.

brenttsr · « **Reply #17 on:** July 01, 2005, 02:00:41 PM »

then take away the 900's with resin and give glen allison his just do and sanction his!!!!!!!!!!!!!

atomized · « **Reply #18 on:** July 01, 2005, 04:00:53 PM »

Changing lane conditions has yet to work. How often have you heard of house 'A' closing down and house 'B' stayed open because it gave better line ((more strikes)). Why is it the sport leagues or the PBA pattern leagues have trouble striving. Folks want to strike, even I want to be able to beat the big dogs now and then. The big dogs seem to be forgetting what is was like when they were trying to beat them. Bowling is a consumer base service. If they don't want a tougher shot they will not get one, because if you force it on them they simple quit or go somewhere else.

OK so static weights will stop being checked, that's good for us. Less to worry about. Don't agree with your thoughts on the 4x3 and label being the same but that's another thread. Still a number of strong or exotic drillings will no longer be around.

Now who is honestly going to profit from the changes? Think about it. If you think ball company's are on the side of the bowler then you are not knowing business. It is good PR to go up against USBC on this matter, but do you see any of them want to get off the band wagon and get on the new up and comer sanctioning group? For them it changes nothing but a logo which they change at a whim.

Ishmael · « **Reply #19 on:** July 01, 2005, 04:33:08 PM »

quote:
but if they take away the static rule

The new proposal are not taking away the existing static weight rules. They are in addition to those rules.

shelley · « **Reply #20 on:** July 01, 2005, 08:47:27 PM »

quote:
LOL gotten love this thread of messages. I for one love to hear the dumpers cry about not being able to use a weight hole. OMG you mean I may have to learn how to throw a good ball not just drill any ball up max leverage with a huge weight hole to get it to hook.

Weight holes don't make a ball hook. Nor does putting the pin in a leverage position. Have you even watched the videos? There are flaws in Brunswick's presentations, but those points are made quite clearly.

quote:
IF THEY WANT TO QUIT LET THEM WE THE REAL BOWLERS WILL NOT MISS THE ONCE A WEEK 210 dumper on a wall house bowler. I for one hope and pray that the USBC has the balls to put there new rules into play. THIS will get rid of the bad bowlers and junk want to be bowlers who SUCK. KEEP up the good work USBC.

You "real bowlers" will likely miss having leagues and tournaments. If you "real bowlers" are the only ones who should be allowed to bowl, then I think you're missing the point of the sport. At least if you get your way, you won't be allowed to bowl either, as there won't be any houses to bowl in.

SH

DukeHarding · « **Reply #21 on:** July 01, 2005, 09:03:24 PM »

quote:
Why is it so hard for Roger Dalkin and USBC to understand and implement rules that will help our game and not hurt it. I do belive bowling will survive despite USBC's "worst" efforts.

(Sorry for the highjack)

Because, Mr. Dalkin is an ADMINISTRATOR of the Rules, and believes, our
responsibility as administrators of the rules is to apply the rules of
record, at the time of an event, in a fair and equitable manner. (as he very plainly told me in an answer to an email back in Sept. of 2004.) He doesn't care if the rules are killing the sport.

Below is my email of Sept., 2004, and after that his response....

********************************************************

Dear Mr. Dalkin,
I can't believe the ABC approved Jeff Campbells' 900 series. 36 strikes in a row is a great feat, but bowling 900 while pre-bowling?
I don't know if it was bowled unopposed or not. I just think a pre-bowled 900 award cheapens the feat.
When is the ABC going to overturn the ruling on Glenn Allison's 900 series?
At least that series was shot under competitive conditions.
I find it distasteful and most serious bowlers feel the same way.

Respectfully,
Rich Meyers
ABC Member for over 40 years.

********************************************************

Dear Mr. Meyers:

The 900 series by Mr. Campbell was bowled in accordance with current
ABC rules and accepted league rules governing prebowling. The issue of
prebowling and bowling unopposed has been addressed and changed by our
delegates on a few occasions. However, the current rule of record
applies to this series.

Similarly, Glenn Allison's 900 series, while bowled in league session,
was bowled on a condition that was in violation of the existing ABC
rules at that time. I personally know Mr. Allison and while he did not
agree with the decision made back when he bowled his 900, he
acknowledges and accepts the ruling as well as the need for ABC to
administer the rules in a fair and equitable manner.

Please remember rules change, as voted on by the ABC delegates, but our
responsibility as administrators of the rules is to apply the rules of
record, at the time of an event, in a fair and equitable manner. This
was done it the case of both 900s.

If you have any further questions or comments, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Roger Dalkin
ABC Executive Director

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

--------------------
Duke Harding

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There's a Big Difference between knowing the game of bowling . . .
and playing the game.

C-G ProShop-Carl · « **Reply #22 on:** July 01, 2005, 11:54:47 PM »

There are balls out there on these walled up shots that have no weighthole and are within legal limits as far as statics go....and the high scores are still there.

I don't know if anyone would be able to change my mind about the lane conditions causing the scoring and the equipment not.

There is a guy that bowls around here, out of the 7 bowling balls he carried he had ONE with a weighthole. He averages 227 in the easiest house in our state.....infact 2003 and 2004 the highest women's average in the country came out of this house.....he goes to nationals and doesn't break 470.

Do you see the point of this? HERE IS THE POINT: He uses this equipment on a LEAGUE pattern and averages nearly 700 every night, but cannot score with it on a tougher shot at nationals. WHICH was the reason he bowled better on his league pattern? Was it the lane conditions OR was it the equipment (which only one had a weighthole)?

Borincano · « **Reply #23 on:** July 02, 2005, 12:35:52 AM »

It is the oil condition in the lanes that increases the scores. In my area there is a bowling center that everybody is going to because of the high scores they get. Lot's of 300's. The joke around is that when you join a league the first thing they do is to have the size of the finger in which you want your ring. I friend of mine bowls with me on Thursday in a different bowling alley and I average over him 10 pins. He bowls in the house of 300's and has an average of 220. When he comes from his Wednesday league bowling he tells me that I should bowl in that house because I can easy get a 300 and my 800 series a night. I say. No thanks. He still has not shot a 300 but has been close. He is a good bowler but he sees other persons bowling that he feels sorry for them if they bowl in another house.

So the point of the USBC is mute and far from what really is the problem. In this modern time of heath concerns and clean air who wants to be inside a house filled with gagging smoke in your face. Since the outbreak of what really smoking does to your health is when people started looking more to the outdoors for fresh air then to the stale smoky close environments.

The point of the USBC should be that bowling is a heathly sports because it has a place for all your family members. Because we are concerned about your family's health. No more taking home the smell of smoke in your clothes. Just take home the joy of a family gathering playing in harmony.

Sounds corny but that is the type of environment that my family and friends will like to have so we can be together and enjoy the time bowling. That is the point. Other sports have done it. Why can the USBC do it. Instead of the their unproven proposals. The effects of the smoking proposal is a proven fact.
That is the real POINT.

shelley · « **Reply #24 on:** July 02, 2005, 01:49:56 AM »

quote:
I bowl anchor on my team and get equally frustrated when a 175 (to whom I am giving 28 or so pins) goes out and drops 230 with his Absolute Inferno, never hits the same 3 board area twice, crosses over twice for a turkey, and beats me by less than a mark.

But that's how we define "winning" in bowling. It seems like you're frustrated with the fact that the number of pins knocked over doesn't accurately reflect the skill of the bowler. If that's the case, then we need a new scoring system, not new ball spec rules. We need a system whose scoring is based on "skill" and not on something arbitrary like "number of pins knocked down". Clearly, with so many different and bad ways to knock down pins, simply counting the number that fall down is a lousy way to measure who the better bowler is.

With, say, track and field events like running, the faster runner wins. There is no other way to define who the "fastest" runner is without timing them all and picking the one with the lowest time. But that's not true in bowling. There is too much chance and luck that goes into pin count to accurately assess who the better bowler is.

Bowlers can't control luck or chance, so it should be taken out of consideration. Maybe we could add a rule that says that late trips have to be respotted. And messengers. I mean, you're lucky to get a messenger, right? You can't "make" a messenger, there's no skill involved. They just happen sometimes and not other times. So eliminate them. Next time that head pin bounces off the left fence, taking out the seven on the way to the ten pin, stand the seven and ten back up.

We know what makes a "proper" strike. The ball hits the 1-3 pocket, the 3 hits the 6 into the 10, the ball hits the 5 on the way to the 9, the 1 drives the 2 into the 4 and 7 and the 5 takes out the 8. Eliminate all other strikes. No more brooklyns, no more high-flush trip 4-9s.

Eliminating luck and chance is what will restore integrity to the sport. Rewarding skills like accuracy and repeatability and versatility can only be done by eliminating the arbitrary scoring system we have in place.

SH

Edited on 7/2/2005 1:45 AM

Author Topic: USBC has a Point (Read 4067 times)

Long and Hard

USBC has a Point

C-G ProShop-Carl

Re: USBC has a Point

brenttsr

Re: USBC has a Point

atomized

Re: USBC has a Point

Ishmael

Re: USBC has a Point

shelley

Re: USBC has a Point

DukeHarding

Re: USBC has a Point

C-G ProShop-Carl

Re: USBC has a Point

Borincano

Re: USBC has a Point

shelley

Re: USBC has a Point