Everyone,

This is sort of a moral delimma. I currently bowl on a mixed league that has 80 percent of 200 handicap. Normally I would not complain about this, but 1/3 of the men on our league have 215 + averages, and another 1/3 have 200-215. Now, I can average around 200 on this league. In fact right now it is 198. But what is the point. Even if I can average 200 -205 (which I believe I can do), I am really spotting the 215+ average bowler pins. If on most nights everyone averages, I will still lose. But, If I keep my average in the 190's, I get at least a few pins, which could make the difference in winning for my team.

Any thoughts?

Dj

I would agree with both comments, but I have been bowling for 10 years, and I have not ever been able to average better than 205. I practice 6 games a week and have had coaches and all that. I am a very consistent bowler. I bowl 200 average with a standard deviation of maybe 10 on any given night. I could also argue that the reason the league voted for the 80% of 200 instead of the 80 percent of 210 or 90 percent of 210 like other leagues is so that they have an advantage. I am not saying they shouldn't because they are the better bowlers, but this is a mixed handicap league. Even with 80 percent of 210 I would get 8 sticks. If I average 200, they still have me by 10 -15 pins, instead of 20 -25 pins.

I looked at the teams assembled, and every team except ours has a bowler with 220 average or better. This means I have to rely on 3 bowlers with handicap to bowl better than their average, and I just have to average to win. I guess what I am saying is that the 220 average bowler can easily bowl 240 where I rarely bowl 220. The bowler would have to bowl less than 200 for me to win, assuming on that game I threw a 200. Most 220 avg bowlers on the league don't have that kind of inconsistency.

What is the point of bowling your best when its hard to beat the top score bowler on the other team? Isn't the point winning? I am not suggesting sandbagging, it's an issue of handicap.

Dj