BallReviews
General Category => USBC Tournament => Topic started by: milorafferty on March 07, 2016, 03:16:45 PM
-
I just registered a couple of teams for next year's Open at Southpoint.
Does anyone else think that Vegas is going generate a large number of teams?
With only 60 lanes available in the new venue at Southpoint, it is possible that those 60 lanes are used for team and the 70 lanes in the casino building will be for doubles/singles which would open up the tournament for a record number of entries.
-
I personally am really excited for Vegas. I think the participation numbers will increase.
-
I personally am really excited for Vegas. I think the participation numbers will increase.
Yea, I'm looking forward to it myself. I'm in Reno 6 to 8 times a year for bowling as it is, so I love it when the Open is held elsewhere.
-
I also think there will be a large number of bowlers for Vegas. Just a hunch.
-
I just registered a couple of teams for next year's Open at Southpoint.
Does anyone else think that Vegas is going generate a large number of teams?
With only 60 lanes available in the new venue at Southpoint, it is possible that those 60 lanes are used for team and the 70 lanes in the casino building will be for doubles/singles which would open up the tournament for a record number of entries.
It definitely could. Plus with it being at South Point, accessibility won't be a problem. You practically needed a car when they had it at Cashman Center last time it was there. This also doesn't displace leagues which will still be going on.
I wonder.. If they indeed do this, and host minors in the lanes in the casino, would they open up those lanes for open play after the conclusion of the day for the tournament?
I know they normally wouldn't, but if they did, that could offer players more access to the actual pattern than getting it from the USBC site, running down to a local house and try to convince them to lay that pattern down.
Obviously, you'd have to be local for it, but could this provide even more exposure than what the USBC is trying to prevent?
BL.
-
I'm excited for it. Only 1 1/2 hours away so I'll definitely be going
-
I just registered a couple of teams for next year's Open at Southpoint.
Does anyone else think that Vegas is going generate a large number of teams?
With only 60 lanes available in the new venue at Southpoint, it is possible that those 60 lanes are used for team and the 70 lanes in the casino building will be for doubles/singles which would open up the tournament for a record number of entries.
It definitely could. Plus with it being at South Point, accessibility won't be a problem. You practically needed a car when they had it at Cashman Center last time it was there. This also doesn't displace leagues which will still be going on.
I wonder.. If they indeed do this, and host minors in the lanes in the casino, would they open up those lanes for open play after the conclusion of the day for the tournament?
I know they normally wouldn't, but if they did, that could offer players more access to the actual pattern than getting it from the USBC site, running down to a local house and try to convince them to lay that pattern down.
Obviously, you'd have to be local for it, but could this provide even more exposure than what the USBC is trying to prevent?
BL.
Good point about the pattern, I had not thought of that one. It's going to get out to some people no matter what they do. But for 95% of us, knowing the pattern and even practicing on it doesn't seem to help. ;D
-
I am hearing well under 10k teams for Reno this year. I think there will be a big one time bounce back for Vegas, but I doubt it will be even close to big venues 10 years ago. With new classifications, the money is going to be poorer and that will push more guys into not going in the future.
Just not near enough new guys going to nationals to replace us old codgers.
-
I am hearing well under 10k teams for Reno this year. I think there will be a big one time bounce back for Vegas, but I doubt it will be even close to big venues 10 years ago. With new classifications, the money is going to be poorer and that will push more guys into not going in the future.
Just not near enough new guys going to nationals to replace us old codgers.
Agreed...my team dropped out this year, we had about all the Reno we could stand for a lifetime. After seeing plans for the additional division and bringing in the tour players for 2017 we won't be back. If I wanted to donate my money to tour players I would enter the USBC Masters.
-
Letting a handful of tour guys in means nothing. There are already plenty of tour caliber guys bowling the tournament every year. However, the splitting into more divisions, and the idea of not even releasing the lane patterns bothers me. Guys living around Vegas will have plenty of opportunity to go to school off the early entries, and will most likely find out the pattern anyway.
-
Couple of problems with allowing tour guys IMHO...
1. The pattern isn't being announced, but players can practice on the showcase lanes and Bowlers Journal Tournament and have greater access to drill balls onsite which isn't really cost effective for the average bowler. So you're already at a disadvantage because they're the best bowlers in the world, but even a good bowler is picking his best 6 balls with no knowledge of the pattern and hoping he matches up. If they really want to level the playing field, shut down the showcase lanes and don't allow players to enter the Bowlers Journal until they have completed their open championships competition.
2. The elite players in our sport already have a tournament sponsored by the USBC, it's call The Masters. If I wanted to compete against touring players, I know how to sign up...but I know how good those guys are so I save my money.
3. As you said, we now have another division thanks in large part to the addition of the touring players. I guess we will have to wait and see, but in all likelihood the prize fund will be watered down.
I have no doubt you will see an increase in entries because it's in Vegas, the next several years will tell the story but with the continuing decline in membership, the pool of members to draw from is getting pretty dry.
-
I'm sure those tour players are just smacking their lips at all the bracket money they will make. But, I don't think they will make as much as they think. Those of us thrown into the deep end of the pool will not put money in brackets when we know the sharks are in the water with us. It was feasible for us 220 house hacks who shoot 170's-190's at the Open to play the brackets, but not when 220 sport shot average bowlers are there.
So guys like Anthony Lacaze who made a ton the past couple of years probably won't do very well.
-
The addition of more pro tour guys won't impact anything. I don't like the new divisions because its going to easier for the sandbaggers to do their thing. They won't have to shave chunks of pins off their average...only pins, to get under the limit for a division. One of the reasons for not releasing the patterns was the lack of access to practice on it by all bowlers. By not releasing it they are amplifying the very reason they chose not to release it...the only people that will have access to the pattern are the locals that can go to the venue.
-
The most prolific player at the open championships the last 5 years prepares exclusively onsite using the showcase and bowlers journal lanes. You just made it easier for all the players with the luxury to drill balls and practice onsite...Matt McNeil loves the new rules.
-
Whining about something that hasn't even happened yet. Quitting before even trying it once. All I can say is, "Wow."
Bowler's will go to certain local and out of town tournaments every year that are held in the exact same place and never complain. The Hoinke, Petersen and Hamtramck to name a few. But oh no, the USBC is holding a tournament in the same place once every three years and that's too much. You guys crack me up.
-
I dont understand the avg adjustment part on bowl.com website for the conversion.
Ive shot 5 tourneys and my avg in them is 184, not great. But i have to bowl off a 212 avg. I have shot 1 set over 1800, 1808. I dont understand how they come up with the averages. If the tourney was being held on non-sport conditions, i can see using the sport adjusted average to use but as far as im concerned, the USBC Open Championships ARE contested on sport conditions so shouldnt they take the your tourney avg bowling on sport conditions?
-
There is ZERO chance of D/S on the casino lanes. The Open is not held in commercial centers and the logistics of two scale rooms, etc. would be tough to make work.
-
No, because the entering average for the tournament is a house or league average. Here's the way it works:
210 league bowler most likely averages 180ish in the tournament. It wouldn't be fair to take your 184 tournament average and put you in the middle division, where you're likely to shoot your average, while others with a 184 house average are shooting 150s and 160s. Because house average is the qualification, and because there's such a variance in house conditions, they're trying to put you in the correct division where you're likely to average 30ish pins lower than your entering average, because with all their data, that's what they have concluded is the average dropoff from an average or typical house shot to the league conditions.
So say your tournament average is 190, but your house average is only 200. Well, in their minds it wouldn't be fair to put you in a division where others with an entering average of 200 are going to be shooting 170s. So instead, they upconvert your average to 220ish to put you with other entering averages of 220, who will most likely be shooting in the 190s right with you. They're trying to make it as competitive as possible AND eliminate sandbagging. With 3 divisions now, sandbagging would be really easy to do. But using the tournament average and upconverting is a very solid way to cancel out sandbagging, because NO ONE will sandbag at the tournament because there's no point.
I dont understand the avg adjustment part on bowl.com website for the conversion.
Ive shot 5 tourneys and my avg in them is 184, not great. But i have to bowl off a 212 avg. I have shot 1 set over 1800, 1808. I dont understand how they come up with the averages. If the tourney was being held on non-sport conditions, i can see using the sport adjusted average to use but as far as im concerned, the USBC Open Championships ARE contested on sport conditions so shouldnt they take the your tourney avg bowling on sport conditions?
-
All im saying is that if you do have a tournament avg for set amount of games at the nationals you should go off that avg and not your league THS average where your most comfortable and not shooting on sport shots. Many tournament clubs have their bowlers compete on the tournament avg. Heck, our local city tournament goes off of your city tournament avg for the past # of years. So basically ill be bowling against all the pros whom bowl on this crap everyday to make a living. How can i compete? Im just a casual bowler, not a competitive bowler anymore, who averages high on THS and not on sport conditions cause i dont have the time, single father of 2 kids, to get better on tough shots. I may get lucky and shoot a 240 or something but not average 228 like i am on THS. Maybe its just me and nobody else feels like the nationals should use a tourney average, say minimum of 3 years participation to set an avg. If i have to bowl off a 212 avg when i have never averaged 212 for 1 single tournament at nationals, wheres the motivation for me going and spending $1500 on a trip? Im not a brackets player, and maybe thats where im losing focus on cause im just looking at the scoring of the tournament.
-
Yes, but most tournaments are contested on house shots, making tournament average more meaningful. Plus for those coming into the tournament, how do they fairly calculate their average? Maybe they bowl on a tough house condition, get in the middle division and clean up.
Bowling against the pros? You mean the other 210-220 bowlers also in that division who will most likely be shooting 170s and 180s? Why would it be fair for you to be in the middle division while they stay in the higher one? And if you're 228 on a house shot, you'll be in the upper division no matter what. It's the highest of the 3 options, house average, upconverted tournament average, or whatever the other one was. I don't know what you're missing here, it's not about tournament average, it's about entering average. You won't be going in with 212, you'll be going in with your house average like you and everyone else does every single year. That's why they upconvert the tournament average as one form of qualification. So based on your tournament average, your projected typical house shot average is 212, but your real one is 228, so your entering average will be 228, which will put you in the top division easily.
And it's a tournament, not league. Yes, I realize you have a family and don't have much time to practice . . which is the same story for the vast majority of the people going. But yes, there are also single professional amateurs with staff contracts who practice every day and have connections, but why should they handicap it so that you can compete with those guys, how is that fair? Then they would be neutralizing all the work and effort those guys have put in. What's next, a 4th division for the 225+ guys? I find it odd that someone who doesn't have the time to practice still wants to go to a tournament, but have it adjusted so they can be successful.
And what you said is the very point. The vast majority of the people going are in your same shoes, they're big average house bowlers who never see a sport pattern and who usually average 30-40 pins less on sport conditions. By taking your highest average, converted or not, they're placing you right where you belong, against other people in the same boat. If they use tournament averages, you'll still be competing against the exact same group of people.
They can't change it to go off tournament averages alone because of how hard it is to adjust for all the differences across the country, and you have thousands of new entries every year and the tournament conditions vary. One 230 bowler doesn't equal another 230 bowler. Matt McNiel averages 235-240 on a house condition, but averages about the same at nationals, or at least here recently. The bottom line is there's always going to be people at the bottom end of every division feeling like they got the shaft. How about me? My house average is putting me in the top division next year too. I've bowled exactly 5 games on a sport condition lefty in the last 5 years.
All im saying is that if you do have a tournament avg for set amount of games at the nationals you should go off that avg and not your league THS average where your most comfortable and not shooting on sport shots. Many tournament clubs have their bowlers compete on the tournament avg. Heck, our local city tournament goes off of your city tournament avg for the past # of years. So basically ill be bowling against all the pros whom bowl on this crap everyday to make a living. How can i compete? Im just a casual bowler, not a competitive bowler anymore, who averages high on THS and not on sport conditions cause i dont have the time, single father of 2 kids, to get better on tough shots. I may get lucky and shoot a 240 or something but not average 228 like i am on THS. Maybe its just me and nobody else feels like the nationals should use a tourney average, say minimum of 3 years participation to set an avg. If i have to bowl off a 212 avg when i have never averaged 212 for 1 single tournament at nationals, wheres the motivation for me going and spending $1500 on a trip? Im not a brackets player, and maybe thats where im losing focus on cause im just looking at the scoring of the tournament.
-
Wow, none of you guys get this. Starting a new post.
-
Simple solution. I just wont go. Ill support local tournaments.
-
Local tournaments with no divisions and possibly handicap . . I find the new rules to make the Open more fair and more competitive than its been before. Some of the rules I don't like or agree with, such as the pro rule, but there are a lot of people not happy with the rules because all the sudden a 230 house bowler can't go out and shoot 580 and cash, taking advantage of all the 185 averages that enter and shoot 480. Now they're trying to even out the skill plane and that's bad? For the first time, the 180-209 bowler is going to actually have a chance to place and make money rather than it just being a glorified vacation. I know a lot of big average house bowlers who aren't going anymore because they won't be able to take advantage of the 180 guys . . who also have families and no time to practice. I can't think of a single reason those guys ever had to show up before because they have had ZERO chance to cash.
Simple solution. I just wont go. Ill support local tournaments.