Author Topic: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k) (Read 5345 times)

spencerwatts · « **on:** July 11, 2017, 12:53:47 PM »

It appears this year's Proprietor's Cup was a success, and it may have cemented a growing tradition for scratch competitive bowling. (I've yet to bowl in it but this year an arthritic hip has severely limited what I can do until an early fall operation.)

Here's why I'm posting.

This year's Proprietor's Cup prize fund was over $150k, paying $27,500 to the winner. There were about 250 entries. There's few PBA tournaments that can rival it outside of majors like the Masters, U.S. Open, and the Tournament of Champions. (I was apprised elsewhere the Oklahoma Open had a similar prize fund of $150k).

The Proprietor's Cup had me thinking back to nearly 30 years ago when a $150k prize fund was almost the norm for a PBA national tour event. At least for me it really spoke of the state of bowling in 2017.

DP3 · « **Reply #16 on:** July 14, 2017, 11:58:52 PM »

Quote from: northface28 on July 14, 2017, 07:52:16 PM

Quote from: Impending Doom on July 14, 2017, 04:59:59 PM
Quote from: northface28 on July 11, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
You're odds are better beating those guys when they are hard. Didn't Simonsen legit miss 4 times over a 4 game period? 279, 279, 300, 299. Check that, he missed 3 times in 4 games.

"Missed" lol

I mean seriously some people on this site don't strike that much in a month of league.

I haven't struck that much in 2017 period. Simonsen is such an anomaly. That dude can flat out bowl.

Brandon Riley · « **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2017, 02:13:25 PM »

Quote from: northface28 on July 11, 2017, 06:39:32 PM

You're odds are better beating those guys when they are hard. Didn't Simonsen legit miss 4 times over a 4 game period? 279, 279, 300, 299. Check that, he missed 3 times in 4 games.

I disagree. Simonsen's big set was an outlier for the event and higher scoring patterns remove much of the advantage that pros hold over the better amateurs (accuracy, shot making, the ability to quickly make see + significant moves, speed changes, hand position changes).

The results prove it too - there were pros that missed the cut at the Proprietors Cup, while there were names in the top 10 with whom I am not familiar. Its not often that we see amateurs or lesser known names even make match play at the Masters or US Open

Steven · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2017, 03:22:09 PM »

Quote from: Brandon Riley on July 15, 2017, 02:13:25 PM

Quote from: northface28 on July 11, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
You're odds are better beating those guys when they are hard. Didn't Simonsen legit miss 4 times over a 4 game period? 279, 279, 300, 299. Check that, he missed 3 times in 4 games.

I disagree. Simonsen's big set was an outlier for the event and higher scoring patterns remove much of the advantage that pros hold over the better amateurs (accuracy, shot making, the ability to quickly make see + significant moves, speed changes, hand position changes).

The results prove it too - there were pros that missed the cut at the Proprietors Cup, while there were names in the top 10 with whom I am not familiar. Its not often that we see amateurs or lesser known names even make match play at the Masters or US Open

Ain't that the truth.....

avabob · « **Reply #19 on:** July 16, 2017, 04:30:41 PM »

High scoring patterns favor lefties, flatter longer patterns favor righties. Just the way it is.

northface28 · « **Reply #20 on:** July 16, 2017, 09:20:13 PM »

Quote from: Steven on July 15, 2017, 03:22:09 PM

Quote from: Brandon Riley on July 15, 2017, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: northface28 on July 11, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
You're odds are better beating those guys when they are hard. Didn't Simonsen legit miss 4 times over a 4 game period? 279, 279, 300, 299. Check that, he missed 3 times in 4 games.

I disagree. Simonsen's big set was an outlier for the event and higher scoring patterns remove much of the advantage that pros hold over the better amateurs (accuracy, shot making, the ability to quickly make see + significant moves, speed changes, hand position changes).

The results prove it too - there were pros that missed the cut at the Proprietors Cup, while there were names in the top 10 with whom I am not familiar. Its not often that we see amateurs or lesser known names even make match play at the Masters or US Open

Ain't that the truth.....

Actually it's not. And the fact that this guy has no idea of any of the names in the top 10 of the PC shows how disconnected he is.

What? It happens. Brett Wolfe

Quote from: Steven on July 15, 2017, 03:22:09 PM

Quote from: Brandon Riley on July 15, 2017, 02:13:25 PM
Quote from: northface28 on July 11, 2017, 06:39:32 PM
You're odds are better beating those guys when they are hard. Didn't Simonsen legit miss 4 times over a 4 game period? 279, 279, 300, 299. Check that, he missed 3 times in 4 games.

I disagree. Simonsen's big set was an outlier for the event and higher scoring patterns remove much of the advantage that pros hold over the better amateurs (accuracy, shot making, the ability to quickly make see + significant moves, speed changes, hand position changes).

The results prove it too - there were pros that missed the cut at the Proprietors Cup, while there were names in the top 10 with whom I am not familiar. Its not often that we see amateurs or lesser known names even make match play at the Masters or US Open

Ain't that the truth.....

Steven · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2017, 09:46:42 PM »

I've bowled the Senior US Open and the Senior Masters in Vegas the last few years. Of the 40 guys who move onto match play, you can almost mail in 30 of the names ahead of time.

I haven't followed the regular division of these tournaments that closely, but I'd be surprised if you don't see the usual suspects take the majority of match play slots.

Of course some lesser known players also make the cut. It's that dream that keeps scrubs like myself trying again and again. But the numbers don't lie.

itsallaboutme · « **Reply #22 on:** July 17, 2017, 06:52:16 AM »

You can't compare seniors to young guys when it comes to "names" making the cut. Everyone needs to start somewhere, so there will always be young guys that are great bowlers that you don't know about yet. There are very few Ron Mohr types that make a name for themselves as a senior.

avabob · « **Reply #23 on:** July 17, 2017, 01:47:34 PM »

Actually there have been quite a few seniors like Mohr over the years. Bob Glass and John Hirscina to name a couple

Brandon Riley · « **Reply #24 on:** July 17, 2017, 01:48:14 PM »

Northface, it appears that you misread my comment. "There were names" refers to 2-3 names in the top 10 not being full time touring pros, as opposed to all of them.

Brett Wolfe crushing the stadium remains memorable 15 years later because he was an amateur (not to mention that he threw urethane at a time when bowlers had all but forgotten about that technology). My point is not that lesser known names never have success on tougher patterns, its just a rarer occurrence.

Steven · « **Reply #25 on:** July 17, 2017, 02:03:50 PM »

Quote from: itsallaboutme on July 17, 2017, 06:52:16 AM

You can't compare seniors to young guys when it comes to "names" making the cut. Everyone needs to start somewhere, so there will always be young guys that are great bowlers that you don't know about yet. There are very few Ron Mohr types that make a name for themselves as a senior.

It's true that in the regular Open and Masters, some of the names that you can't mail in ahead of time will be stars of the future. That's almost non-existent at the Senior level. Still, it doesn't change what I said earlier -- you can list ahead of time the majority of the guys who will move onto match play. The last regular US Open was an extreme example. 19 of the 24 slots went to name players you've seen on TV more than once.

As far as Ron Mohr, he's extremely talented. If he hadn't decided to work a full-time career as an Air Traffic Controller in Alaska, I have no doubt he would have competed effectively on the regular PBA tour. He's on my list of the 30 senior players I mentioned previously.

avabob · « **Reply #26 on:** July 18, 2017, 09:39:34 AM »

There was a time 15 or 20 years ago when I had pretty good success in the Masters as an amateur. I always felt that I was helped by the fact that the Masters patterns were different than what the touring pros were seeing at the time. Straighter players seemed to fare better on these patterns. Wins by Schlegel, Jason Queen, and Brian Boghosian support my theory.

bergman · « **Reply #27 on:** July 18, 2017, 10:16:35 AM »

I can vouch for John Hricsina. He was from the Pittsburgh area (as I am). Even years before he hit the PBA senior circuit, John could flat out bowl. He was a special talent.

ignitebowling · « **Reply #28 on:** July 18, 2017, 12:17:03 PM »

Every area has tour talent that aren't bowling on tour. They stay amateur and bowl all over typically.

Scores from the Open Championship confirm it when looking at the names that aren't PBA putting up very impressive scores on a very difficult pattern.

avabob · « **Reply #29 on:** July 20, 2017, 11:42:37 PM »

There are a heck of a lot more really good bowlers than just the PBA guys. Its just that most of them can make more money in any kind of 9-5 job than with s bowling ball. Always been that way

Author Topic: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k) (Read 5345 times)

spencerwatts

Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

DP3

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

Brandon Riley

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

Steven

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

avabob

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

northface28

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

Steven

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

itsallaboutme

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

avabob

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

Brandon Riley

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

Steven

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

avabob

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

bergman

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

ignitebowling

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)

avabob

Re: Propretor's Cup prize fund ($150k)