Author Topic: Team Handicap Max ?? (Read 9152 times)

THIRTYSIXRED · « **on:** April 25, 2010, 08:20:56 AM »

We are a struggling league, and allowed a couple teams who although have improved during the season are still well below the skill level of many of the top teams.

Too many top tier teams are threatening to quit the league if a Team Cap for handicap is not enacted. Right now handicap is set at 90% of 230 (with no team or individual max).

Anyone ever have to set rules to try and keep all parties happy. If the league loses just a couple more teams it will most likely dissolve before next season. Thanks.

Hogsharley · « **Reply #16 on:** April 25, 2010, 09:25:31 PM »

The 2 men's leagues that I bowl in have handicaps of 90% of 240 and 90% of 235. In the 90% of 240 league, the top average teams have not placed in the top 3 during the first 2/3rd's In the 90% of 235 league, the top average teams are doing much better and have already won 2 of 3 of the quarters. Neither league has an team caps. Teams caps around here are a thing of the past.
--------------------
3 holes of fun!!

captzap · « **Reply #17 on:** April 26, 2010, 03:23:54 AM »

The 2 mixed leagues I have bowled in both use 100% of 200. Never really like the 100% but no one wants to change it back to 90% or 80%.

CaptZap

lenstanles703 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 26, 2010, 05:35:17 AM »

The league I bowl in is 100% of team difference. We don't get to pick teams or teammates. They are chosen to balance handicaps as close as possible, but it is still competitive.
--------------------
Len

Phoneman · « **Reply #19 on:** April 26, 2010, 06:32:25 AM »

Ok so here we have the usual debated about handicap. The recommendation from USBC is to use the highest average from the previous year and base you handicap from that. (ie guy averages 235 then it would be XX% of 235). So yes it may be INSANE but the real problem is the averages not the handicap.

Nutsforbowling...Just from what you said in your posts, are you bowling in the Pioneer men's league in Greenway this year? Who is running away with that league this year. Ko's team? They probably have the highest team average again this year.

shelley · « **Reply #20 on:** April 26, 2010, 08:52:20 AM »

The high average bowler who thinks he's giving more pins because the base for handicap was moved above his average is a scared fool. Scared because his opponent is no longer spotting him pins and a fool because he doesn't understand fifth grade mathematics.

It's the same crap every year. The guy averaging 230 in a league that uses 220 to figure handicap should be winning far more games than anyone else in the league. His opponents are spotting him no less than 10 pins, average-to-average. If he's losing games, it's because he only remembers the 160-average bowler who shot his first 600 against him and doesn't remember the dozens of 150-average bowlers he beat the snot out of.

As soon as the league changes to using 230 as a base for handicap, his advantage (yes, advantage) is gone and he's competing fairly with everyone else. It should not be the league's fault that he is used to a safety net. Tell him to be a fscking man and that he can't win them all. If his ego is as big as his average, there are surely dozens of scratch leagues in the area that would gladly take him.

The base for handicap should be above the highest average in the league. That is fair to the league, not necessarily the sissy-boy with the 230. But that's what fair means.

And I don't see why 90% of 230 would be any more or less insane than 80% of 210, unless you wanted to bias the results in favor of higher average teams. If there are several people in the league averaging 225 or higher, using 210 for handicapping purposes is completely foolish. But I only have the benefit of mathematics behind me, not ego or pride or some sense of "how things should be" because of how things were 20+ years ago.

SH

trash heap · « **Reply #21 on:** April 26, 2010, 02:56:48 PM »

I agree 100% with Shelley's reply.

You need to give a math class to these ding dongs. Some how people think the ranking should be based on average. What a bunch of sore losers you have on that league.

In most cases the higher average teams win. USBC study pointed it out that it would have to be something like 110% of the base to even out.

For whoever stated 80% of 230, that is too much of an advantage for higher average teams.
--------------------
Always the last one to POST!

ImBackInTheGame · « **Reply #22 on:** April 26, 2010, 03:27:53 PM »

My league (80% of 210 I believe) before this year had a cap of 50 pins of handicap. This rule was put in place because of the higher average bowlers complaining of some bowlers getting "too much handicap". At our banquet last year we took a vote and got rid of the cap. And what happened? Nothing changed. The one team that was able to take "advantage" of a handicap of more than 50 pins finished, you guessed it, dead last as usual. The better bowlers have an advantage, but they never look at it that way. They just see the 60 pins of handicap they have to overcome. Sure that 150 average bowler is going to hit 200 once in a blue moon, but they more often roll games under their average. Just concentrate on your own game and more often than not, you will come out on top.

nutsforbowling · « **Reply #23 on:** April 26, 2010, 04:20:56 PM »

quote:
Ok so here we have the usual debated about handicap. The recommendation from USBC is to use the highest average from the previous year and base you handicap from that. (ie guy averages 235 then it would be XX% of 235). So yes it may be INSANE but the real problem is the averages not the handicap.

Nutsforbowling...Just from what you said in your posts, are you bowling in the Pioneer men's league in Greenway this year? Who is running away with that league this year. Ko's team? They probably have the highest team average again this year.

Yep, that's the league. They won the first half but are middle of the pack this one. I will be glad that we are done in another 3 weeks.

Crash7189 · « **Reply #24 on:** April 26, 2010, 04:37:41 PM »

We have a 26 team mens league with a waiting list of a least 4 to 6 teams a year to get in. Our's is 85% of the difference of the team ave. The lower ave Bowler's complain every year they need more handicap to compete. They only bowl 3 games per week never practice, never get coaching and have a ball that is 10+ years old. And they wonder why they suck. Every year the lower ave teams quit and go to the higher handicap leagues and we get better teams, that want to bowl the tuff competition. Know the down side of that. With the higher ave bowlers they whine a lot because they think every time the hit the pocket it should be a strike. So you got to put up with the house prima Donna's But it is easy to get in there heads. We also have a 10 pin drop rule starts the 1st night If you bowl ten or more pins under ave. you will get handicap for the 10 under your ave only. It works out well no one bags. I looked up our league ave is just over 200 for over 130 bowlers. lowest being 165 highest 242. So if bowl worst then the 165 guy and do not like our hadicap go find a new league. we have teams that have been waiting for years to get in. Just my .02

trash heap · « **Reply #25 on:** April 27, 2010, 10:53:17 AM »

quote:
They only bowl 3 games per week never practice, never get coaching and have a ball that is 10+ years old. And they wonder why they suck. Every year the lower ave teams quit and go to the higher handicap leagues and we get better teams, that want to bowl the tuff competition.

Tuff competition??? I like how higher average bowlers know everything about someone with a low average.

1. Only bowl 3 games a week: Maybe they have a family to take care of and they can only bowl 1 night a week. Maybe they have a job that is very demanding. Maybe they have school.

2. Never get coaching: Maybe they don't have the time. Maybe they don't have the money for it.

3. Have a ball that is 10+ years old: Again maybe they can't afford it. Not everyone can go out and buy 5 - 6 bowling balls a year.

Based on you statement, I wouldn't want to bowl in your league. You all seem like a bunch of little whiny elitists.

You are so scared of the bowler with the 165 average or lower that you make sure he has no chance against you. Because if he has that one or two nights that he beats you with his handicap...you all cry like little babies saying how unfair it is for him to beat you.

You want tough competition...make your league scratch.

--------------------
Always the last one to POST!

gsback · « **Reply #26 on:** April 27, 2010, 12:05:54 PM »

We have 90% of 230 and negative for those that go over 230. In our league we have 3 teams that would easily fall into the same issue as the OP's issue.

Now, there are 22 teams in the league. One team has a 599 average with 494 pins handicap....and is in 13th place. Another team has a 543 handicap with 544 pics handicap and is in 18th place. And the last team has a 538 average and gets 550 pins of handicap.....and they are in 21st.

We had a cap on average and we removed it because we found that these lower teams would have won all of a dozen more games in the course of the year. Mind you, we do the 20 point system, but I don't think it would have mattered even with a 7 point system. We found it better to give them a little more help than trying to restrict them because most of them really won't ever get better.

As for the handicap percent, sure....no one will ever be happy. The person winning the points race started with a 150 average and is now averaging 190. I don't know him....never seen him. But I don't see him as a sandbagger. He started crappy and is better, and should be after a year of bowling. But he's not that far ahead of everyone in terms of how many games he's won. I am 30+ pins over him in average and have 6 less games then he does and am 13.5 points down. Is that alot? Maybe.....but I think it's more because he's bowling better and more consistent now than the handicap.
--------------------
BR.com.....going down the toilet one nugget at a time!!

g thing is back....with a vengeance!!

www.visionarybowling.com - Accept no substitute for the very best there is!!

BrianCRX90 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 28, 2010, 06:26:23 PM »

quote:

Right now handicap is set at 90% of 230 (with no team or individual max).

There''s your problem...just like with some other leagues out there. Can anyone tell me why the hell you need to have the average 90% of 230? It would be fair if they capped max handicap at say 170. So that way if you average less then that you can''t get anymore handicap. I prefer leagues that have the average set at 90% of 210. The majority of the league isn''t going to average 230 and even if they do why should someone averaging 150 get more handicap?
I bowl on one league for 10 years now I try to make a motion to change the average to 210 but too many whiners want to keep it at 95% of 220. I don''t care how high you set the average or percentage really to a point but I don''t need 150 average bowlers having career nights against my team every freakin night. I never understood why there isn''t a USBC rule stating you can''t establish average above 200. 200 is par in the real world.

Edited on 4/28/2010 6:30 PM

Aloarjr810 · « **Reply #28 on:** April 28, 2010, 09:19:48 PM »

Just some more fuel for the fire.

MYTH: It is harder for a higher-average team to win because the lower-average team gets so many pins
handicap.
BUSTED: As shown below, when both teams bowl their exact averages, the higher-average team always wins unless
the handicap is 100% then the teams tie.
You must always look at the difference in averages as well as handicap. In the table the higher-average team total is 73% or
223 pins higher than the lower-average team.

See the charts and stuff here.
http://www.sblnyc.com/downloads/files/handicaps.pdf

Also heres-THE FACTS ABOUT HANDICAPS.pdf
http://home.earthlink.net/~litefrozen/downloads/THEFACTSABOUTHANDICAPS.pdf

But isnâ€™t it a fact that when 75 % handicap is used, the higher average team is giving its
lesser competitor 75% of the difference in team averages when they bowl against each
other?
FACT: True! But what of that other 25%? That is the real handicap, and it is given by the
weaker team, to the stronger one! (The same â€œreverse handicapâ€ situation is true at any figure
less than 100%, which is why it is not until the handicap reaches 85% that lower average teams
can win at all.)

Edited on 4/28/2010 10:15 PM

shelley · « **Reply #29 on:** April 28, 2010, 10:54:02 PM »

quote:
quote:

Right now handicap is set at 90% of 230 (with no team or individual max).

There''s your problem...just like with some other leagues out there. Can anyone tell me why the hell you need to have the average 90% of 230? It would be fair if they capped max handicap at say 170. So that way if you average less then that you can''t get anymore handicap. I prefer leagues that have the average set at 90% of 210. The majority of the league isn''t going to average 230 and even if they do why should someone averaging 150 get more handicap?

Yeah, you couldn't do math last year, either. I remember that. Our conclusion last year was that you were simply too good for handicapped leagues and should bowl scratch competition exclusively.

quote:
I bowl on one league for 10 years now I try to make a motion to change the average to 210 but too many whiners want to keep it at 95% of 220. I don''t care how high you set the average or percentage really to a point but I don''t need 150 average bowlers having career nights against my team every freakin night. I never understood why there isn''t a USBC rule stating you can''t establish average above 200. 200 is par in the real world.

If the higher average bowler should win all the time, what's the point of showing up? Have the secretary simply award the points to the higher average bowler and the higher average team. Problem solved. You win, exactly as you should. You don't really even have to bowl. We can even use last year's average. You'l save a fortune in lineage costs.

Ultimately, averages are only a single statistic, distilled from a large collection of data values. They in no way represent a "typical" game, an expected score, a likely score. One can easily go all season without shooting their average exactly.

I would wager that bowling scores are normally distributed (many data sets are, and if we consider weekly series instead of individual games, they are almost assuredly normal). One is likely to shoot scores closer to average, with the probability of shooting a score far above or below decreasing.

Now I must warn you: You will not understand what follows. You will not believe the things I'm going to write. It is unfortunate, but things need to be said, even if the rest of us are the only ones who will understand it. I make no apologies if your head asplode. You might want to have your mom there to hold your hand.

Given both your score distribution and your opponent's it would be easy to calculate the probability of you shooting lower than your opponent. It is elementary statistics and it's possible even without knowing if bowling scores are normal (in the statistical sense). That probability won't be zero, meaning that over the long run, the lower average bowler will win sometimes.

I pause here to allow you to catch your breath, regain your composure, and beg for maternal condolences. Mom: This is the part where you tell him that I'm lying, that it just isn't true, and that everything will be ok.

If you are bowling 150-average teams having career nights against you every night, statistically, that can happen. That probability, too, will be non-zero. Given the many, many bowling teams out there on the lanes every single night, it's bound to happen to someone. The rest of us are glad it's not happening to us.

However, that seems unlikely. The probability won't be zero, but it should be small. Far more likely, if you are bowling 150-average teams having career nights against you ever night, then perhaps the problem is in your head and your poor attitude towards this kind of competition. We all have our mental blocks, our hangups. Bowling is very much a mental game (which would explain why you are so frustrated with it). To go into a match, "knowing" that you're going to lose because of this totally unfair handicap system, it's a very heavy weight to carry on your shoulders.

Or, you could ask the secretary to give you a printout of your actual records against any given team and see if you really are losing the kind of points you think you're losing. With the computer data, it probably wouldn't be hard to figure out whether making the handicap 70% or 50% would help. Or maybe change the base from 230 to 220 or 210 would work. Or capping handicap at a 170 average. Again, computers are good at figuring out that stuff. I know you're not, so best to leave it to the automaton.

If you'd like more details, I'd be happy to provide them. I tried last year and clearly failed. Perhaps this year we'll see that spark between your ears that indicates grown-up, rational, analytical thinking. Since you seem to have hit your ceiling with the fifth grade math, though, I'm not hopeful. It's ok. I'll be here next year. See you then.

SH

Atochabsh · « **Reply #30 on:** April 29, 2010, 02:06:00 AM »

quote:
90% of 230 is an INSANE amount of handicap.

Its not unusual here.

But what you might suggest is a difference in point system. We do 90% of the difference between the two teams. That seems to even things out. A high average team might have to give 350+ pins a game, but its not easy to make up. Then you move the point system for 2 for each game and only 1 for total pins. Now it gets interesting. This doesn't let a winning team just run away with the night of points.

Author Topic: Team Handicap Max ?? (Read 9152 times)

THIRTYSIXRED

Team Handicap Max ??

Hogsharley

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

captzap

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

lenstanles703

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

Phoneman

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

shelley

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

trash heap

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

ImBackInTheGame

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

nutsforbowling

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

Crash7189

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

trash heap

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

gsback

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

BrianCRX90

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

Aloarjr810

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

shelley

Re: Team Handicap Max ??

Atochabsh

Re: Team Handicap Max ??