BallReviews
General Category => USBC Tournament => Topic started by: UCFalum300 on April 30, 2014, 03:03:59 PM
-
I have been thinking of posting this for a long time but why not give it a shot.
I don't want this to turn into some a post where people bash each other for their opinions just a simple intelligent conversation.
The top 50 in points on the PBA tour are not allowed to bowl in the USBC open. I want your thoughts on this.
My opinion is why are those 50 bowlers not allowed to bowl in a so called "open" event? Do they not pay their USBC membership just like the rest of us? I do not see the reason for not letting them bowl. As the rule stands 2 pba members are allowed on 1 team and only 1 member in doubles. Why not allow the top 50 to bowl and make a rule where only 1 top 50 (or exempt or what ever they want to change it to) per team and so on?
I have talked with a few people in my area about this and it seems like the argument is always talking about Chris Barnes, Jason Belmonte, Sean Rash, etc. Which I can sort of see their point. My thinking is so what if Barnes or jones or anyone else bowls. They still have to bowl well to win. Believe it or not those guys have bad games or just cant figure it out at times as well. There are guys out there bowling every year that are just a good as a majority of guys out on tour. Its 9 games and without having a good team and/or doubles partner(s) the only titles they can win on their own are singles/all events. The rest take teamwork and a quality group of bowlers. I can name a few guys off the top of my head that bowl every year that could easily make top 50 in points every year.
But honestly how many of you out there can name or even know who lets say 30th-50th spots are? I'm going to go out on a limb and say not many unless you really follow the tour. If you were 30th-50th last year in points you earned between 30,000 and 15,000 on tour. This year alone Tony LaCaze (leading all events, did well in the side events) has the opportunity to make more in 9 games than his last 2 full years on tour. More power to him. I don't know him personally he bowls with some really good friends of mine and I don't see any reason why a bowler who does this for a living is banned from such a big tournament. Eagles mean as much to some people as any pba title.
Not to get into the talk of why there are less teams each year at nationals, why not allow a few more guys to bowl. Even if it is just 50 or more teams each year it is still more teams bowling which I don't ever see as a bad thing.
-
Because it would give Joe Average bowler one more thing to bitch about. And with the other 500 millions things he already whines and complains about...well...there just is not enough time in his day for all that moaning and belly aching. USBC is just doing him a favor. ;D
-
I don't think you are giving enough credit to how good the top 10-15 guys on the PBA Tour really are.
-
I definitely give credit to how good they are. I am fortunate to know some of them and they do agree on some guys I have in mind that don't bowl on tour due to other jobs do agree.
-
The is why they used to have the Classic div...to allow the elite an opportunity to compete
-
I agree, but I also dont.
While an open tournament should be open, lets look at it realistically.
If we let the top 50 in , we know they will bowl in it. At least a lot will.
Even if half do, thats 25 bowlers that are basically guaranteed to bowl well. The reason why they are on tour is because they can bowl tournaments competitively.
Every tour player that bowls means theres less of a chance for an average bowler, or even a regional bowler to win/cash.
While limiting it to one in 50 per team COULD go well, I see it being another reason why less people would be willing to bowl in that tournament.
Let the tour guys bowl tour, and let us have SOME tournaments at least.
Even the state/local tournaments here we have a local tour player along with other former regional/tour players and they ALWAYS do well in them. Its very rare I see them compete and dont do well.
If I was considering the USBC open for example, and found out Rash, Belmonte, Weber, Jones, and whoever else was in it, itd do nothing but discourage me from going.
Even the local/state tournaments here are similar, I see the regional/tour guys win too much for me, as a non PBA bowler, to want to bowl tournaments as much as I would otherwise.
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
"The US Open pattern is not very difficult". Ok, bro.
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
"The US Open pattern is not very difficult". Ok, bro.
I believe he was referring to the USBC Open. Now this year's scores look higher obviously even though it is a "sport pattern" But remember that there are 12,000 people that bowl, just going off the "top scores" isn't a good barrier. I'm sure there's hoards of people that go and bowl the Open and think it's impossible.
As far as the original topic goes. I believe they should be able to bowl, with restrictions on stacking a team so to speak. If you look at the 5oth player on the points list i'm he LOST money by bowling on tour, but still gets locked out which is unfortunate for a professional.
-
I say let them bowl and if they want to make up a super team or doubles. So what.
I doubt that many of the top teams bowl together in league situations. Many are pseudo professionals and are essentially professional bowlers except they don't belong to the PBA.
Many have ball sponsors or others paying their way.
We, USBC members, pay and train team USA and they go as a group to the tournament.
Why shouldn't all "professionals" be treated the same way.
-
And if you have an issue with brackets then have a designated squad they have to bowl on. You don't like it you can avoid it.
We have a team that goes from here that has several past PBA champions, even major winners and I don't believe any of them have their cards anymore. The team is put together just for nationals. Some are from out of state. One of their members will turn 50 by the time they go this year and they are drooling over the senior brackets.
-
I would allow them to bowl but with some limitations. One top 50 pro per team. Make the pros submit their entries at an earlier cut-off date and publish who will be bowling when. That way folks that want to bowl the same squad a pro is on or want to watch can and those that don't want to have all their bracket money go bye byewill know what squads to avoid if they want to. Robert Smith bowled team when my team bowled last year and he took 5K+ and is no longer a top 50 guy. That's where all my money went. (at least that's my story)
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
"The US Open pattern is not very difficult". Ok, bro.
obviously the usbc open pattern is what i was referring to i thought that would be obvious but apparently not
-
I would allow them to bowl but with some limitations. One top 50 pro per team. Make the pros submit their entries at an earlier cut-off date and publish who will be bowling when. That way folks that want to bowl the same squad a pro is on or want to watch can and those that don't want to have all their bracket money go bye byewill know what squads to avoid if they want to. Robert Smith bowled team when my team bowled last year and he took 5K+ and is no longer a top 50 guy. That's where all my money went. (at least that's my story)
I watched the team with Robert Smith in Baton Rouge. They had both Smith and Doug Kent. The team didn't do well and they both sucked that day. Their companion team took over 2nd place though.
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
"The US Open pattern is not very difficult". Ok, bro.
obviously the usbc open pattern is what i was referring to i thought that would be obvious but apparently not
Given your history and refusal to use periods to break up your post and construct coherent sentences. Can you blame me?
-
I would allow them to bowl but with some limitations. One top 50 pro per team. Make the pros submit their entries at an earlier cut-off date and publish who will be bowling when. That way folks that want to bowl the same squad a pro is on or want to watch can and those that don't want to have all their bracket money go bye byewill know what squads to avoid if they want to. Robert Smith bowled team when my team bowled last year and he took 5K+ and is no longer a top 50 guy. That's where all my money went. (at least that's my story)
Maybe he did take 5K, but how much did he put down to get there? Also they post a complete squad list in the paddock, not too hard to check the list and see if there's any heavy hitters and adjust how much you want to lose.
-
Nothing wrong with allowing those guys to bowl. I agree tho, post the squads ahead of time to help draw interest. Several people will both same squad as Weber, Belmo, Etc. just to say they have done it. Additionally, I find it hard to believe they will shoot 850 every set! 826 is leading this year and that guy is not a Top 50 PBA member. They will win a lot of money, and they will win a lot of bracket money. However, overall I think it would be benificial to the event and the BJ event.
I would say the majority of people that attend the Open Championships know they have no chance of shooting 850. I personally would enjoy watching the top pro's and think it would add an element to the event.
-
The Masters is the event all USBC members can bowl in including top 50 pros. I'm not sure allowing top 50 into USBC Open will add more teams than drop out. Would be nice to see tournament grow, but I doubt this will make tournament bigger overall.
I'd like to see division added that is open to all members. I'm just not sure what cutoff would be. Would be nice to use USBC Open tournament averages comprising 27 games as average for divisions. I worry about the low cashers or donators giving up causing entries to drop significantly.
-
The Masters is the event all USBC members can bowl in including top 50 pros. I'm not sure allowing top 50 into USBC Open will add more teams than drop out. Would be nice to see tournament grow, but I doubt this will make tournament bigger overall.
I'd like to see division added that is open to all members. I'm just not sure what cutoff would be. Would be nice to use USBC Open tournament averages comprising 27 games as average for divisions. I worry about the low cashers or donators giving up causing entries to drop significantly.
This is a good point. However, I would venture to guess that low cashers or donators go and bowl to be with their buddies and have a good time. They are there as more of a vacation rather than a money maker. Low cashers know they have to bowl well to cash and will not make that much. Doubt that allowing 50 additional players to bowl will raise the "low to cash" by a significant amount.
There are players that bowl the Open that are just a good as the top 25-50. John Janawicz for instance. More than anything, I believe it would be entertaining and an element to the tournament.
-
Two years ago I booked a 233 average on a house shot, won a local scratch tournament and threw four 300 games and two 800 series. So, with my chest puffed out I entered the senior masters to take on the likes of Walter ray, Mike Edwards, Amletto, etc. Needless to say, I went home with my tail between my legs and my ego severely damaged. Those guys are just SO MUCH better. They made that tough pattern look easy.
It's not just that they are both physically and mentally better, which they most certainly are, it's that they have so much more experience at such a high level of competion. They have access to the best equipment, the best coaches and factory reps. Their knowledge of balls, lane conditions and lane play is just so superior to even a good regional player.
With that all being said, if touring pros would be allowed to bowl nationals it wouldn't influence my decision to participate. My lifetime average at nationals is 189 and your not going to break the bank with that kind of average. For me the location of the event is way more important to me than what bowling studs are entered. I'm not after eagles, I'm looking for good times and fond memories.
-
Two years ago I booked a 233 average on a house shot, won a local scratch tournament and threw four 300 games and two 800 series. So, with my chest puffed out I entered the senior masters to take on the likes of Walter ray, Mike Edwards, Amletto, etc. Needless to say, I went home with my tail between my legs and my ego severely damaged. Those guys are just SO MUCH better. They made that tough pattern look easy.
It's not just that they are both physically and mentally better, which they most certainly are, it's that they have so much more experience at such a high level of competion. They have access to the best equipment, the best coaches and factory reps. Their knowledge of balls, lane conditions and lane play is just so superior to even a good regional player.
With that all being said, if touring pros would be allowed to bowl nationals it wouldn't influence my decision to participate. My lifetime average at nationals is 189 and your not going to break the bank with that kind of average. For me the location of the event is way more important to me than what bowling studs are entered. I'm not after eagles, I'm looking for good times and fond memories.
Well said. It is about the good times and making memories more than anything. To the majority of folks that bowl the tourny, that is what it is all about. If they come home with a little cash, that is just an added benefit. All around fun tournament, and would not mind seeing a couple pros there.
-
i get where your coming from i think they should be allowed to bowl as well i mean anyone can be beat they arent gonna bowl great everytime although majority of the time they will but not everytime and if you go out and bowl well and happen to beat some of those guys just think of how much more happy youd be just being able to say you beat them even if it is just one time. but on the other hand the us open pattern is not very difficult it does meet sport requirements but it is not very difficult so the top bowlers on tour would probably eat it up(ex. Anthony LaCaze) and just make it look stupid easy and probably take all our money in brackets and such it could go either way but personally i wouldnt mind if they bowled
"The US Open pattern is not very difficult". Ok, bro.
obviously the usbc open pattern is what i was referring to i thought that would be obvious but apparently not
Given your history and refusal to use periods to break up your post and construct coherent sentences. Can you blame me?
well be realistic man we are talking about the usbc open not the us open next time use your brain before you chime in on something!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Let anyone bowl. Unless they're allowed to cross the foul line and clear the deck by hand, I have a shot at beating them, and I have nothing to lose.
-
I have no problem with them bowling. I do however agree with the person who said one top 50 person per team. To me this would go along with the current rule of no more than two people with PBA cards on a team - one top 50 or two PBA card holders, not both.
Adding 50 people, even if they all cashed would hardly effect the bottom to cash scores at all. For example in 2012 at Baton Rouge(the data I could find the easiest online), 12,376 people cashed in singles, 6188 in doubles, 5144 in all events and 1309 teams. Assuming all 50 cash in each event they make up less than 1% of cashers except team event(3% of teams cashing would have a top 50 player). With all the ties in pinfall the low to cash scores wouldn't change that much, if at all. The exception might be team event, someone would have to compare the bottom to cash score to the 50th from bottom score to see what the difference is. To the average bowler participating, allowing the top 50 to bowl would have almost no effect on them.
To me the people this would/could seriously effect are the elite amateurs and regional guys that bowl and constantly finish high in the standings. I'd be curious to see what these people have to say about it because that's who it would effect the most. I might be going out on a limb here but I'm guessing most of those guys wouldn't care. The only thing it might make them do is change when they bowl due to brackets.
-
My only response to this post is this. Those bowlers-all of them- made a choice. They chose to chase their dream knowing full well it would come with restrictions. This is one of those restrictions. I, for one, find it difficult to justify letting them bowl when they knew upon joining that this might happen. That is their dream. This is ours.
-
Give it a few more years and all the top bowlers in the world will be at the Nationals because the PBA will be bankrupt. Those guys will have no where else to go or some will give up there tour card to make more money in other tournaments. I believe one of the biggest mistakes the USBC is making is not letting them bowl. Give them there own division for all PBA members. Who knows they might be on the pair next to you etc. The USBC seems to forget the Joe ave bowler is the reason they make money. The top elite amateur/Professional amateur who thinks it is because of them, There's Not enough of them to sustain bowling. with out us donators no one would make any money in brackets and at the Nationals. I go for the challenge and just maybe lightning strikes and I bowl one great set or a 300. With out us ave bowlers the USBC will also be bankrupt. Bowling & the Pba is on the decline do to mismanagement. Sure some of you would ask how would I fix it. It is a very difficult question and situation. we have lost so many league bowlers over the years. it will take lots of work to revive our sport. how to fix it is for another post. Look at it this way if you let the top 50 bowlers from the PBA in, worst case your team and or Dbls & singles positions could only go down by 50 places so what the big deal 3000 place or 3050 place.
I love to bowl and will never give it up for any reason.
Just my .02
-
There is no mismanagement Crash, for that to happen, you need management, which the ABC or USBC has not had for years. But they do have people with plenty of wallpaper.
-
There is no mismanagement Crash, for that to happen, you need management, which the ABC or USBC has not had for years. But they do have people with plenty of wallpaper.
Yes, it's true. The ABC/USBC is just that bad...it's all their fault: the downturn in bowling, they caused the economic crash in 2008, they blew up the Challenger, they shot Kennedy, they caused WWII, they caused WWI, they started the Great Depression and lastly they are the cause of the heartbreak of psoriasis. Did I miss anything?!?
If you think my first paragraph sounds stupid, and yet you are one of the people blaming the USBC/ABC for all that is wrong with bowling, you sound just as stupid. Now, don't get me wrong, I am not saying the USBC/ABC is doing a perfect job, or even that they are doing a good job, but they are not the sole cause for where bowling is today. And they have nothing to do with the PBA, so how in the hell can the cause the issues the PBA has today? Stop and think about what you are saying when you say the it's the USBC's fault. That means you must actually think there is a person, or a group of people out there, that if they were in charge of bowling they would have stopped the decline of bowling, stopped all the members leaving and made bowling today like it used to be in the old days. Do you really believe that?? And what makes you think, if there really were these people out there, that they would put their talent to use by saving bowling? Would you? Or would you take that talent to any number of corporations out there that would give a 6, 7, or more figure salary to use those talents?
Bowling has declined for many reasons. One is the popularity of other sports, other passtimes like soccor, that draw the youth away from our sport. Another is the fact that each dollar a person makes has to go further and further (and that started in the late 70's, early 80's), so bowling became something that had to be sacrificed in some people's budget. Still another is the fact that jobs are harder to find and people are working farther away from home, again this isn't new, even in the early 2000's there were stories from the SF area of people living hundreds of miles from there jobs due to the price of houses being too high, and now because people can't afford to sell the house they have. What about the centers, how many centers out there began catering to the open bowler, in fact there are centers now that don't even have leagues anymore, they are just entertainment destinations. Did the USBC have anything to do with that? How did the USBC drive away advertisers from the PBA. As the 18-35 yr old demographic became the focal point of advertisers, did the USBC change the demographics of the bowling watching public to skew away from that? Granted, if the USBC could have kept membership levels from decreasing, one could argue that the demographics of bowling may be lower, but enough to satisfy the advertisers, I doubt it.
This thread is titled Opinions, and while this may not be what they had in mind, it is certainly my opinion. Instead of saying blanket statements like the one I quoted here, how about we as bowlers come up with ways to help change the tide? Instead of complaining, we help. We work with our local associations to make an awards program better than what the USBC had. You work with your centers to come up with leagues and then take the time to call your fellow bowlers to get them interested. Do things in your local community to get bowling going. Talk with your local center(s) to do some promotions for leagues, get a local television or radio station to cover it.....do anything other than come on a website and complain. And if you don't have time to do any of this....then you should realize that the USBC isn't the problem (they may not be the solution either), we are, and we need to stop blaming it on someone else.
-
300
I think you missed my point, it's not ABC/USBC fault that the dynamics of the population has changed. It's their lack of not being pro-active to meet that challenge.
I think Chad Murphy if given the position to take charge of that organization, will move it in the right direction. The Arlington office cannot find solutions so they pass them on to local associations, that are why more underfunded then they are.
How much money did it cost Arlington to write a new rule for two-handed bowlers?
This I'm sure could have been spent elsewhere. The best thing they've done lately is signing a six year deal with South Point to help safe The Open Tournament. That location will attract more bowlers then any other city in the country.
As far as myself that you pointed out, I do promote the USBC, bowling and all that's connected to it.
On the Board of Directors at my local Association, High School Coach, Saturday morning volunteer, travel league coach, Level 1 and Bronze certified.
Help coordinate State Regional and District State Tournaments for The OHSAA.
My point is, any association, business, company or family venture will go broke without being Pro Active. USBC is not.
Have you tried to explain to someone the benefits for being a USBC member?
If you have, and I'm sure you have, be honest, it's a tough sell.
I've heard more talk this past session of leagues not going to certify for next season, then ever before. How do we stop that?
I'll be a member, but not sure all the leagues I bowl in next year will be.
Take care
Bob
-
There is no mismanagement Crash, for that to happen, you need management, which the ABC or USBC has not had for years. But they do have people with plenty of wallpaper.
Yes, it's true. The ABC/USBC is just that bad...it's all their fault: the downturn in bowling, they caused the economic crash in 2008, they blew up the Challenger, they shot Kennedy, they caused WWII, they caused WWI, they started the Great Depression and lastly they are the cause of the heartbreak of psoriasis. Did I miss anything?!?
I hear they were also responsible for 9/11. :o
-
Bob,
I may have used your post, but my response wasn't directed at you. It was for everyone out there. You are by far the exception. Most of those doing the most vocal complaining don't lift finger 1 to do anything to help stem the tide. I, for one, appreciate your efforts as I would like to see bowling stablize, as I know it will never get back to where it once was. But it is easy to say be pro-active....it is entirely another to know what to do. That was part of my point....there is so much causing the decline, that I don't think anyone could have been pro-active enough to stop it from happening. And if there were some people who were that smart, they wouldn't be working for the USBC making peanuts, they would be making millions working someone in the business world. So we can come on sites like this and complain and complain and whine and complain and......or we can come together as group and try to come up with solutions that might do some good. There are probably thousands of bowlers on this site....collectively maybe we can come up with an idea, and as each person adds to it, morphs it slightly, we can turn it into something useful. We have the advantage of having a user who has connections at the USBC, Riggs. If we can come up with a truly valuable idea, I am sure he would be willing to pass it along. If they don't use it....THEN we can all criticize them for not doing enough. I just get tired of seeing complaint after complaint, but when you ask how you fix it, everyone says it's not their job.
-
I hear they were also responsible for 9/11. :o
Milo,
You are correct. And they are behind all the issues in the Ukraine now too. It's amazing they have the time to screw up bowling with how busy they are. ;)