Author Topic: Scoring still not a problem? (Read 4901 times)

EagleHunter · « **on:** June 28, 2009, 01:32:18 PM »

First off, I have no intention of high-jacking any other threads that are congratulating other bowlers on some tremendous scoring at Nationals. The bowlers that are leading any of the events have bowled spectacularly and deserve kudos and a tip of the cap.

This thread though, is not about those bowlers or their accomplishments. It is about the scoring pace/level at Nationals. Early on, after Ron Vokes scoring record, some on these boards stated that a problem existed with the scoring pace (I happened to agree with them). Others stated that this was an isolated incident.

Here we are almost at the end of the event...yet another record was broken. Can anyone still suggest that this is an isolated incident?

If, as Riggs has earlier suggested, USBC is attempting to make the condition more "friendly" to the average player, which apparently is resulting in the better than average player making the condition look like a house shot, does the USBC risk damaging the credibility of the event itself?

Records are made to be broken, but not on a regular basis. At what point can it be said that a problem exists?

riggs · « **Reply #1 on:** June 29, 2009, 05:03:27 AM »

Can you define what the "problem" is?

I look at the leaderboard and don't have a problem with the ability of any of the players in the top positions.

Scores are just numbers and are all relative to the environment -- bowling is not the same game it was 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 50 years ago. There's hardly any other "sport" I can think of where records are less meaningful considering the changes in technology and standards bowling has seen.

The few unreal huge scores that have been shot would not have happened if 1) the oil volume was less (this year is the most ever), and 2) if minor events were on fresh.

Atochabsh · « **Reply #2 on:** June 29, 2009, 05:17:41 AM »

Is it possible that more home centers are putting the shot out for practice and that those centers that have been doing so, have bowlers that have worked on this pattern for longer periods of time? Or that word has gotten back to bowlers that are bowling later dates on how best to play the lanes?

Erin

Dewey24 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 29, 2009, 06:41:42 AM »

I bowled this year in Vegas horribly. This is my own fault. I didn't take advantage of all of the information which is out there now a days. In years past I have taken a lesson with Mike Jasnau, didn't do that this year. I totally miss interpreted the lane conditions after bowling the BTM, which has supposedly the same shot out but on a different lane surface. I didn't take advantage of my center being willing to put out a more difficult oil pattern. I made poor ball selections.

My point is right now there are many ways in which a bowler can make them selves better. Some of the folks that bowl the tournament take advantage of the resources out there. Some of the bowlers do not. The bowlers who take advantage of the resources that are available, will continue to rule the leader board. These folks will also have the chance to set records that the rest of us will not be able to do. Put how ever hard a shot on the lanes you want someone will figure out a way to beat it. I was struggling to beat the shot in Vegas and the kid the next pair over was making it look like a house shot.

Edited on 6/29/2009 6:41 AM

mainzer · « **Reply #4 on:** June 29, 2009, 07:20:14 AM »

Who says next season the scores won't fall back through floor? This could be something that happens just this season. You never know with this sport every now and then you will get someone that matches just right and lights it up like a slot machine.
--------------------
''If their is a life after death,
then their is no death,
and if their is no death,
we do not live''

Progressive Metal Band
EVERGREY

MainzerPower

Krumpy300 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 29, 2009, 07:31:10 AM »

I grinded out two 600's before I caught a broken down pair in Singles and had a nice set. Riggs is correct, if all the events were on fresh, the pace would be way lower.

It was my first year out there. I have some ideas on what I may do for next year in Reno, but I highly doubt the shot will be the same.

You basically have to make very good shots and having a good reaction doesn't hurt either

--------------------
Repetition is everything..

Phoneman · « **Reply #6 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:02:17 AM »

I personally found the shot to be as tough as usual. Yes you have more people scoring very high this year. A lot of it has to do wiht the ability to practice on the conditions before hand and having a game plan going in. I shot 1823 in all events this year about 70 pins lower than last year mainly because I shot 70 pins lower in team event this year (started the first 2 games in the wrong part of the lane) I missed a total of 8 spares and had another 6 splits. I threw the ball well but the thing I found most troubling was when the lanes were transitioning I was not able to read it fast enough. I spent a few frames trying to figure out if it was me throwing it bad or if the lane was changing. On a house shot It only takes me one frame to know the difference. Example singles 266 173 246. First game Hyroad playing 20 to 10 second game that was burning up and I could not tell if it was me or the ball. I switched to the Twisted Fury Pearl late in game 2. It was good for game 3. If you are aware of the lane changes quickly you can keep on it and shoot very well.

Jorge300 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 29, 2009, 10:03:46 AM »

quote:
First off, I have no intention of high-jacking any other threads that are congratulating other bowlers on some tremendous scoring at Nationals. The bowlers that are leading any of the events have bowled spectacularly and deserve kudos and a tip of the cap.

This thread though, is not about those bowlers or their accomplishments. It is about the scoring pace/level at Nationals. Early on, after Ron Vokes scoring record, some on these boards stated that a problem existed with the scoring pace (I happened to agree with them). Others stated that this was an isolated incident.

Here we are almost at the end of the event...yet another record was broken. Can anyone still suggest that this is an isolated incident?

If, as Riggs has earlier suggested, USBC is attempting to make the condition more "friendly" to the average player, which apparently is resulting in the better than average player making the condition look like a house shot, does the USBC risk damaging the credibility of the event itself?

Records are made to be broken, but not on a regular basis. At what point can it be said that a problem exists?

When is there a problem? When this happens year after year. Until then this is BS. How about you take a step back and look at the people throwing the scores before you open your mouth again. Bo Goergen was just coming off tour trials, where he finished 9th, only a few pin out of making the exempt tour for next year. He just bowled 5-6 days under some of the most stressful conditions, on some tough shots. He was prepared to hit a very small area and took advantage of that. It's not like he took over the A/E lead too, he bowled decent in the other events. As far as Vokes goes, we've already discussed this, it was a career two days, again you try to make light of his achievement by calling the lanes "easy" and taking away from how great he threw the ball for 9 games. And now you do the same for the new Doubles leaders, before the ink is even dry writing down their scores. You seem like someone who is jealous that your name isn't up there with these great bowlers and the only way to make yourself feel better is to bring them down.

Just an FYI, people complained about the scoring in Billings, where some of the old records were set, saying the USBC (or ABC at the time) was damaging the tournament, yadda yadda yadda....and it took 7 years to break the records set there. Only if we see scores like this year after year is there a problem. Also remember, you have the second largest field ever, doesn't it stand to reason that more "honor" scores would be shot then some of the prior years, as there are just more bowlers?

Oh wait, that can't be it, it is it the fact that the lanes are too easy. This was a joke the first time you posted it, it was a joke the second time you posted it.....and it's still a joke here the umpteenth time you've posted it.
--------------------
Jorge300

laddog54 · « **Reply #8 on:** June 29, 2009, 11:05:26 AM »

Bowled the same squads as Del Ballard, Paul Flemming and Kelly Kulick. They all bowled well but didn't destroy. It is all about getting lucky and getting a pair that breaks down correctly and matching up to it. Our doubles pair was decent and I shot around 600, but our singles pair was screwd. Was shooting 22 at the arrows 8 at the marker with a 2000 AB SD-73 on the left lane and 24 to 10 with a Lane #1 XXXL on the right. Pair was just broken down badly and hacked all up. Shot was sill nothing like a THS get it right of 7 and pick off 3. In fact I took out the 6-9 once.
--------------------
http://www.allbowling.com/journal/public.php?uid=4002&leagueid=2552
http://www.allbowling.com/journal/public.php?uid=4002&leagueid=2587
http://www.allbowling.com/journal/public.php?uid=4002&leagueid=2715
ROTO GRIP - King of Them All

EagleHunter · « **Reply #9 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:04:20 PM »

Riggs,
I have no problem with the bowlers leading their respective events. Every one of them is incredibly talented and bowled tremendously. They took advantage of what was out there, nothing more...but as we had discussed earlier, when is a score too high?

The U.S. Open is the premier event on the PBA schedule. Of all the Majors, it is the Open that any PBA professional wants to capture. Nationals is the same for the members of USBC (IMO).

Now as I said, the bowlers leading are very good (understatement). The PBA players are equally good, if not considerably better. But can you honestly tell me that PBA players would not have a gripe if the Open turned into a "typical" event, with the leader averaging 250+? Are you suggesting that PBA players wouldn't be bemoaning how the integrity of the event was compromised?

Despite the fact that the Open would not likely turn into such a strike-fest (would it?), can you see where I am coming from? USBC is doing this very thing by attempting to make things "better" for the average player(as you have suggested). As a result, the better than average bowlers are having a field day and posting record scores...that is, if they manage to catch the right "draw."

Again, great bowling is great bowling. 550, 650, 750, 850 could ALL be considered great bowling. For some reason, some on these boards and others (Jorge, for example), can't seem to understand that great bowling is not necessarily defined by a record score. Your 1997 AE score is now the 5th best all-time, but I would rank it as possibly the best overall bowling since you went 90-clean. No one else can claim to have done so...that is great bowling.

Here's the point...when Vokes went 850+ for 2300+, many here claimed it was an isolated incident and already gave him two eagles. Bo Goergen comes along, in another apparently isolated incident, and passes him by with 862. Then the doubles record, previously set in 2007 (2003, 2002, and 2000 before that...5 times in 9 years, is that a pattern Jorge?), falls in yet another isolated incident. Fool me once, fool me twice...a third time? I am no fool.

Lastly, to Jorge's point of more bowlers...your point depends entirely on the caliber of bowlers who decided to come out this year that did not previously. If an extra 3,000 average bowlers came out...then no it would not lead to more honor scores because their is little chance that those bowlers are talented enough to shoot one on the THS. If more of the better than average bowlers are coming out, then it is possible that more honor scores would result. However, I truly believe the majority of extra bowlers this year are in Vegas primarily for the vacation with the bowling being a side event.

Gazoo · « **Reply #10 on:** June 29, 2009, 02:51:02 PM »

Scoring only seems to be a problem for those who aren't doing it. You will never able to shut out everybody. Someone is always going to get hot at the right time.
--------------------
"I don't want to be remembered, I want to be forgotten"

Edited on 6/29/2009 6:31 PM

Jorge300 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 29, 2009, 03:22:30 PM »

EagleHunter,
Do you not believe in luck? Does luck check itself at the door when you enter the USBC Open? With added bowlers, you WILL have more honor scores, statistics prove this, regardless of the skill level, people get lucky. It happnes.

You passed right over the explanation for Mr. Goergen. Do you not think he was in a different mindset, perhaps "in the zone" after coming off a very impressive showing at the Tour Trials, or does that not matter to you. Think of all the practice that went into preparing for that event, then competing, then coming to the Open. But I guess to your way of thinking, that doesn't matter, it's all because the lanes are "too easy".

And you picked one event to prove your point. Doubles is influenced by the team that bowls in front of you. I would wager since 2000 there are more teams that have come to the realization that they need to work together to break down the shot so they can score better then prior to 2000. So odds are that you will have a better chance to get a pair with a playable area for Doubles, then prior to 2000. So it is no surprise that this is one score that has hadit's record broken more then the rest. If that was occuring with ALL the records, every year, then we have issue. Again as has been pointed out time and time again this seems like a big case of jealousy on your part, nothing more.
--------------------
Jorge300

EagleHunter · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2009, 04:04:41 PM »

It is an established fact that bowling on something very difficult will hone one's skills much better than competing on the THS. Obviously this was the case with Mr. Goergen. However, I think you are glassing over the fact that he is an exceptional bowler. If you are I competed along side him at the Tour Trials and happened to bowl on his pair for Singles, do you think either of us would have posted 862?

As for luck...are you suggesting that these "ISOLATED" record scores are the result of luck? Are you even suggesting that the bowlers shooting honor scores are lucky? A bowler may get a lucky break or two...but to get 12 strikes in a game at Nationals, where the bowlers still stop to watch thus enhancing the pressure...sorry, I don't see where any bowler lucks into that. If you believe that, good for you.

I only picked one event? Wow, a great argument when presented with facts you claimed didn't exist. As for teams working together...that practice took off after Team event went to all fresh oil, which wasn't until 2002 or 2003 if I'm not mistaken. I cannot recall for sure, I'm sure that Riggs or someone else could confirm. I do know that it wasn't on fresh during 2001.

On top of that, while many teams may attempt to "work" the lanes, there are but a talented few that actually KNOW what they are doing. It would be a rather large coincidence that the bowlers rolling such record scores happen to be following such teams. I would argue, at best, 10% of teams even attempt to "work" the lanes for their advantage.

As for your claim of jealosy...I have no ill will toward those bowlers shooting these scores. They are doing there best on what is out there. I also have no delusions about my own abilities. The last two events I attended, I was very poorly prepared and bowled poorly...as expected. Prior to those events I was much better prepared and bowled much better...as expected. I am proud that my overall tournament average is over 200, but I have no delusions that I am an elite bowler like Riggs or those leading now.

I feel that the winning scores are simply too high for our most prestigious event. You seem to think that such scores are not a problem. Would you ever consider them a problem?

riggs · « **Reply #13 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:11:09 PM »

2003 was the first year of all fresh team.

EH, I would never compare the U.S. Open to the USBC Open Championships. Apples and oranges. And BTW, U.S. Open scores have been very high at times in history. Go back and check the records. It's better the way it is now but that's a totally different tournament.

I am mostly in agreement with a lot of your analysis. I just don't get caught up in scores cuz they are all relative.

Did they miss on the "easy" side this year. Maybe a little bit. Again I reiterate that the problem is not the pattern shape but the volume, which in combination with not having all minors on fresh has created the opportunity for a handful of enormous scores ... all by worthy players.

Good may come of this if USBC realizes that it needs to get ALL squads on fresh -- minors included.

riggs · « **Reply #14 on:** June 29, 2009, 08:18:55 PM »

I actually would not have a problem if someone shoots 900 in doubles or singles -- can't be done in team, IMO. I hit the pocket pretty much flush every shot in my 743 singles this year and was a couple of dead nuts taps (8, 9 and couple 10s) from 820-ish and some additional lucky breaks from a potential 900.

If the trade-off (of more oil creating higher scores) is letting the average bowlers be happy standing on the big dot and throwing at the second triangle, as the saying goes, which keeps entries high, I have no problem with it. As long as the pattern starts out Sport solid players will win.

In a perfect world, I'd rather see winning scores of 3,200, 1,400, 775 and 2,100 but I'm not unhappy with the current situation ... although having 2 10,000 plus team all-events totals that won't win does kind of stink!

Author Topic: Scoring still not a problem? (Read 4901 times)

EagleHunter

Scoring still not a problem?

riggs

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Atochabsh

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Dewey24

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

mainzer

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Krumpy300

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Phoneman

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Jorge300

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

laddog54

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

EagleHunter

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Gazoo

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

Jorge300

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

EagleHunter

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

riggs

Re: Scoring still not a problem?

riggs

Re: Scoring still not a problem?