Post by: Gazoo on September 02, 2006, 08:49:46 AM
Post by: Robadat on September 02, 2006, 05:55:31 PM
I agree with your assessment as the bar is now in the 210 area. In my league that I've bowled in the last 5 years that would seem to be the case.
the 2000-01 season there were 3 or 4 bowlers over the 200 mark when we had 22 teams, last year we had 3 bowlers over 210 with 16 teams. So, that bar is a little better than the top 10%.
I think the problem comes in the next group, the people who are now in the 190-210 average group. 5 years ago, that group was 180-200, there were approx. 25 in that group out of 88 bowlers, about 30%, last year out of the 64 bowlers in league, in the 190-210 range, I would estimate that there were 30 in that group or about 40 or 45%.
This is the biggest reason you see the better bowlers complaining about the new tech in the balls. Today, you really don't need the physical ability to create optimum entry angles to carry strikes consistently. Five years ago I carried 172 ave. while my accuracy has improved some, this last summer league I finished at 193, I don't believe that I am 2 strikes better per game than I was 5 years ago, but with the newer balls that I am using, I will get those 2 extra strikes per game.
Post by: Rileybowler on September 02, 2006, 05:59:36 PM
--------------------
Carl
Post by: NateNice on September 02, 2006, 06:22:53 PM
Without doing any math and taking a rough guess, I would say par by your standard should probably be around 207 or so, +/- 1.
In regards to bowling averages as they relate to the overall handicap a player has, why isn't it calculated like golf in that it' based on potential? I understand an average should be the sum of all games divided by total games played, but for league handicap purposes, maybe a handicap calculated by potential would be more fair?
It just doesn't seem fair when a 150 average goes against a 210 average. The 150 guy can easily sore pass their handicap for a game where as the 210 bowler has a much harder time. Usually lower averages are an aggregate of terrible and great games where as the 210 average bowler is generally more consistent.
If we based it on potential then the 150 average bowler would probably be treated like a 165 average bowler and the 210 bowler would stay around the same.
From my paper experiments this makes it more fair in that since scoring is not linear and the 210 average bowler has a harder time going over average (because10 more pins on a 210 is much harder than 10 more pins on a 150..2 opens to convert a spare versus 4 or 5, for instance).
Also, usually someone around 150 is usually improving anyways and has the potential to have unbeatable games.
I should probably make this into a topic and discuss in more detail my intentions here.
Post by: Gazoo on September 02, 2006, 10:44:42 PM
I will bowl the 150 average every time, especially for money! No matter how much handicap they have! League or tournament!
Post by: NateNice on September 03, 2006, 03:41:58 AM
quote:
NateNice,
I will bowl the 150 average every time, especially for money! No matter how much handicap they have! League or tournament!
I'm not so sure I would. Someone who has a 150 and rising is a difficult opponent.
I grant you they will have some low games and you can get them one these because they don't have consistency, but they have a much higher ceiling.
For instance, a 150 bowling a terrible 120 is 30 pins lower. A 210 bowling 30 pins lower is a 180, which still takes a decent game to achieve. What I'm saying is that the 150 average guy can bowl out of his mind (we're talking 190 which is easy with a couple lucky strikes in a row) but still have the benefit of having a bad game not be so bad because it's hard to bowl a really bad game (120 or so).
So the consistency of the 210 bowler is nice and will win some of them, I've seen that they have such a small margin that if the lower handicap has a good game it's almost impossibly to beat them and if both have a bad game it's easier to win with the lower average.
I think since bowling isn't score linearly, averages shouldn't be used because it's a linear metric.
Post by: NateNice on September 03, 2006, 03:48:56 AM
quote:quote:
I think today with some of the house conditions being so easy and with the hook in a box balls people are hitting the 200 and above average much quicker than before although I am not one of those. Our house does not put out an easy blocked shot. I don't think the bowlers of today are as good as they were a few years ago and surely are not as talented and knowledgeable as a few years ago
--------------------
Carl
I guess bowling is the only sport where the athletes haven't improved.
Edited on 9/2/2006 11:17 PM
That's so true.
Yes, modern balls are nice and give many benefits, but the bowler still has to hit their mark and still has to roll it out to the breakpoint which is harder than it sounds. Especially with modern lane conditions. Lets face it, todays lanes ARE harder to bowl on, in general. Especially if you play a sport shot or something similar.
But like you said, we have improvements everywhere. Home Runs, golf scores, sprinting speeds, drag race records, and every other record being broken.
People take sports more seriously now days. They practice more and we know more.
Bowling has been studied much, much more than it was in the 60's. Coaches and players know so much more than we did now days.
Technology has improved the balls and also made the lanes more challenging.
Why is it so hard for people to recognize that todays bowlers have more access to knowledge and experience from others besides just the superior ball tech?
You can browse the Internet for a few hours, read enough articles and instantly know more about Bowling in terms of technique, research and basics than people from the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Our knowledge is growing. Ball tech is not the only reason for better scores.
Post by: BrianCRX90 on September 03, 2006, 12:09:45 PM
Simply, the bowler that averages higher then 225 will not get any handicap.
The bowler that averages less then 150 is capped out on handicap.
So if you average 150 and your handicap is 60 or whatever and another bowler averages 142...that bowler that averages 142 will only get 60 handicap opposed to more handicap. The less your average is should not mean you get more pins.
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 08:30:51 PM
quote: Why is it so hard for people to recognize that todays bowlers have more access to knowledge and experience from others besides just the superior ball tech?
You can browse the Internet for a few hours, read enough articles and instantly know more about Bowling in terms of technique, research and basics than people from the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Our knowledge is growing. Ball tech is not the only reason for better scores.
There are only a few people that do research on bowling. The stories I hear from Pro Shop guys are they get alot of the same requests from customers:
- I want a ball to play 2nd Arrow.
- I want a ball that goes long and snaps at the end.
- I want the biggest hooking ball out there.
quote: People take sports more seriously now days. They practice more and we know more.
Not true. Only the guys that want to improve practice. 1st Week of league started for me this past Friday. My father-in-law and my Wife are on my team. Neither one of them bowled since beginning of May. Father-in-law throw 614 series (3 games). My wife throws a 566 series, she rolled a 220 one game. I am sure that this happens alot in leauges.
quote: Yes, modern balls are nice and give many benefits, but the bowler still has to hit their mark and still has to roll it out to the breakpoint which is harder than it sounds. Especially with modern lane conditions. Lets face it, todays lanes ARE harder to bowl on, in general. Especially if you play a sport shot or something similar.
Now about hitting your mark: I have seen on nights that a mark can stretch across 5 boards maybe more. All the bowler has to do is get it out there, anywhere and the ball will funnel to the pocket. THS and Ball tech has made this game very easy.
Sport Shot has helped but only those who want to improve and are looking for a challenge want to play on this condition.
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 08:47:14 PM
Who are you referring to, as today's bowlers?
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 08:49:10 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 09:06:02 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 09:15:55 PM
Some of the more experienced bowlers on here might have a better view on this one.
Edited on 9/3/2006 9:10 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 09:39:46 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 10:00:31 PM
1. Strength: Agree! It has improved.
2. Agility: Improved? I am not sure for what purpose. I do not know much quickness and nimbleness is needed today vs. years ago. I going to state NO.
3. Endurance: Nope don't see any improvement here either. Guys bowled back then as much as they do now.
One out of three. Based on my LOGIC: I guess your right, bowling is the only sport where the athlete hasn't improved.
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 10:36:32 PM
Post by: scotts33 on September 03, 2006, 11:04:24 PM
Besides ball technology the largest reason averages are up is the THS lane condition with modern equipment. The funnel to the pocket IMO is the main reason for averages improving.
I doubt Joe average kegler has become a better athlete. There are more over weight people in the USA today than there were 20 years ago.
--------------------
Scott
Post by: trash heap on September 03, 2006, 11:28:36 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 04, 2006, 11:34:32 AM
Game 1: Take away high tech equipment and use conditions from 30 years ago.
Game 2: Use high tech equipment and THS.
My opinion is that the guy from 30 years ago would clearly win game 1 and if he doesn't win game 2 it would be alot closer than game 1.
Post by: trash heap on September 04, 2006, 12:01:11 PM
Post by: trash heap on September 04, 2006, 01:51:04 PM
Bowlers that compete today, have stockpiles of bowling equipment. Why? It helps them with their game. If they are so much more talented athletes now, they should be able to go to any tournament with one ball and win, Instead of:
If the lanes are light oil - Use ball 1
If the lanes are light/medium oil - Use ball 2
If the lanes are medium oil - Use ball 3.
If the lanes are medium/heavy oil - Use ball 4
If the lanes are heavy oil - They use ball 5.
If there is carry down - They use ball 6.
If the lanes are dry - They use ball 7.
Cheetah Pattern - Ball 8 or Ball 9 or Ball 10
Scorpion - Balls 11, 12, 13
Shark - Balls 14, 15, 16, 17
Chameleon - Balls 18, 19, 20
Viper - Balls 21, 22, 23
USBC Masters -Ball 23, 24, 25
Championship - Ball 26, 27, 28
Regional Pattern 1 - Balls 29, 30
Regional Pattern 2 - Balls 31, 32
Regional Pattern 3 - Balls 33, 34
Regional Pattern 4 - Balls 35, 36
Regional Pattern 5 - Balls 37, 38
Hoinke - Balls 39, 40
Super Hoinke - Balls 41, 42
Mess up my opponents Line in practice - Ball 43
Help my line in practice - Ball 44
I might be exaggerating this a little bit...or again...I might not be.
Post by: Rileybowler on September 04, 2006, 02:08:04 PM
--------------------
Carl
Post by: Rileybowler on September 04, 2006, 02:09:31 PM
--------------------
Carl
Post by: NateNice on September 04, 2006, 02:35:10 PM
quote:
Let's take today's top league bowler who has the following: Ability to throw faster, With More Revs, and more knowledge , and put him up against a top league bowler from 30 years ago.
Game 1: Take away high tech equipment and use conditions from 30 years ago.
Game 2: Use high tech equipment and THS.
My opinion is that the guy from 30 years ago would clearly win game 1 and if he doesn't win game 2 it would be alot closer than game 1.
You can have an opinion to be sure, but no one can be certain.
I could use my urethane ball and still throw 180+ on just about any oil pattern. I've known people to even do this on difficult shots where no one is scoring. Just throw that urethane with the mild hook and get some strikes and pick up the easy spares. Get a 190 no problem which is often enough to make a cut. The bring out the real equipment to compete with the high rollers. It's a strategy anyways.
My point is any good bowler from any generate can hit the pocket consistently. It's not that hard, with any kind of ball or any kind of shot.
Modern balls give much better angle and hit better therefore scoring better, no doubt. But the good bowler is going to pick up their spares just the same, and they do. Spare shooting hasn't changed at all in the last 30 years. It's a plastic or urethane ball thrown on a line with the pin(s) left.
So, if we can agree a good bowler today throws spares as well as a good bowler from 30 years ago (and spare conversion percentages have actually gone up!) and since spares are all about general accuracy, isn't it fair to say that todays bowler is just as accurate as bowlers from 30 years ago?
So, it's not like people are just tossing balls anywhere and they're striking. You still have to be accurate to strike well and often. You still have to be a good bowler to average around 200.
The modern ball helps and attacks the pins better than ever, but this is what technology does.
And so what? The game has changed. 200 isn't the barometer anymore. Bowlers are expected to score higher with modern balls. Fine. I think everyone knows this.
But the good bowlers still get their spares.
Lets also remember that bowling isn't the toughest game on earth. Anyone can throw a strike. It's a game of consistency and that's how it is scored. The game rewards the player who can do things over and over. The good player can do this.
Post by: NateNice on September 04, 2006, 02:40:26 PM
quote:
Definition of Athlete:A person possessing the natural or acquired traits, such as strength, agility, and endurance, that are necessary for physical exercise or sports, especially those performed in competitive contexts.
1. Strength: Agree! It has improved.
2. Agility: Improved? I am not sure for what purpose. I do not know much quickness and nimbleness is needed today vs. years ago. I going to state NO.
3. Endurance: Nope don't see any improvement here either. Guys bowled back then as much as they do now.
One out of three. Based on my LOGIC: I guess your right, bowling is the only sport where the athlete hasn't improved.
Agility in terms of release speed. People didn't have the release we have now days to generate a ton of revs. It's not so much a function of strength as it is a function of a quick, snapping release. The bowling swing and release are kind of a combination strength and agility.
Endurance probably not so much. Modern bowlers are often in better shape than bowlers of the past, but it's not across the board either way.
Post by: trash heap on September 04, 2006, 04:26:34 PM
I think there were bowlers 30 years ago that could rev the ball just as much as today, its just they didn't have equipment with cores and super friction coverstocks that could hook the lane and rip through the rack.
I don't think I have ever heard anyone refer to somebody's bowling agility. Most of the time, I hear it referred to as power and strength.
Post by: trash heap on September 04, 2006, 07:02:03 PM
The one ball theory really works for a beginner bowler. It teaches the fundamentals of learning to throw consistently. Putting the time upfront to work on a consistent release pays off. Sound mechanics with weak equipment will always beat Poor Mechanics with high end equipment. Getting some proper coaching can improve ones game quicker than a truck full of bowling balls.
I am pretty sure that wall shots did NOT go back to laquer days. THS was created to produce high scoring environment. Who ever figured it out should have got copyrights for it. He would be a millionaire today. There is no problem with centers doing what they have to do to keep customers. They are free to do what ever they want. Its just like it was stated earlier, people are achieving a 200 avg quicker today then in years past. My opinion is because of the THS and Ball Tech.
Post by: trash heap on September 06, 2006, 08:12:11 PM
The original question was....could you stand toe to toe with your father when he was bowling a higher average 20 years ago and on the condition he bowled on back then?
And I am assuming your answer is yes.
You are definitely one of the few who can score higher with your Crown Jewel, than your UI and SI. If don't mind me asking....
What is your average with the Crown Jewel in league?
Is your Crown Jewel your primary ball in league and tournaments?
Why take anything else?
You are definitely a better bowler without the new equipment.