Bowling Forums, Bowling Discussion and Bowling Talk
Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Oldbowler

Registered:
Posts: 290
Reply with quote  #1 

__________________
Old bowlers never die, they just fade away.
Fordman

Registered:
Posts: 3,649
Reply with quote  #2 
I very seldom watch videos over a minute, but that one was worth it and I probably will watch it again.
__________________
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
Oldbowler

Registered:
Posts: 290
Reply with quote  #3 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordman
I very seldom watch videos over a minute, but that one was worth it and I probably will watch it again.


What I find interesting is that he was disqualified for there being a walled oil pattern after two leagues had bowled.  All you can find at a bowling center today is a walled pattern put down for league play.  If you bowl on the new synthetic lanes they are more slippery after league play than we used to get for league play.

Doesn't make sense to me.

__________________
Old bowlers never die, they just fade away.
Dare

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,229
Reply with quote  #4 
Allie Brandt had the record since the 30's probably a walled
up shot and his friends at the ABC didn't want it broke. USBC
should right this wrong
themrfreeze

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,773
Reply with quote  #5 
The USBC's "reassessment" of Glenn's 900 is just another example of how utterly useless the USBC is.  It's an organization bereft of integrity.

The reasons why his 900 was initially rejected can probably be debated ad infinitum with no clear answer.  Maybe somebody in the local ABC organization didn't like him.  Maybe somebody thought it could never REALLY happen.  Maybe somebody was protecting Allie Brandt's record.  Fact of the matter is that an entire bowling center full of sanctioned league bowlers watched this man throw a conventional grip plastic ball down a wood lane 36 times in a row and strike each time.

The reason the USBC has declined to sanction the 900 after their "reassessment" has nothing to do with Glenn's accomplishment...it's because it would cause THEM problems if they did.  Seriously? How many problems has it caused Glenn that they didn't recognize it?  How many endorsement deals might he have signed?  Maybe the guy wouldn't have to keep working at the age of 85 if he had been able to take advantage of being the first man in history to throw a sanctioned 900 series.

All they needed to do is to put an asterisk next to his name and say "The USBC recognizes that this 900 series was thrown but is unable to sanction it due to the rules in place at the time the series was bowled".  That's it.  That's all Glenn wants, that's all those who support him want.  And they can't even do that for a guy who has devoted this life to this sport.

And we pay these jokers money each year so they can treat bowlers like this.  [mad] 

Pullmyfinger

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,677
Reply with quote  #6 
I truly believe at this point the only thing holding it back is the Mushtare fiasco. If they allow Allison's they have to allow Mushtare's third 900 or open themselves up to litigation. It was a bitter pill to swallow to approve the two because no one believes he bowled one, let alone three. No chance they allow another. Unfortunately Allison has to suffer.  
themrfreeze

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 3,773
Reply with quote  #7 
The 900 Mushtare "bowled" that was denied was the first he claimed to have thrown.  IIRC it was denied because the league's sanctioning paperwork hadn't been submitted prior to the series being bowled.  It's a legit reason for denial...I see no basis for Mushtare to litigate it now if Glenn's 900 is approved.

The fact that the USBC changed the rules to deny post-bowled honor scores AFTER they awarded Mushtare the 2nd 900 proves they don't believe he shot them either.  He gamed the system and got away with it.

Dare

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,229
Reply with quote  #8 
Ray Orf a fine pro from the golden age had a
890 turned down by the ABC in the early 70's.
Protecting Brandt as well
Dare

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,229
Reply with quote  #9 
https://bowlingbook.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/feb-6-1972-ray-orf-bowls-890/
avabob

Registered:
Posts: 413
Reply with quote  #10 
I have bowled 44 300 games in my life. The first 2 were with plastic balls on wood. Both were sanctioned by the local association although the lanes were totally walled off the corner to a much greater degree than anything Allison bowled on. The lanes were not compliant with the rules at the time, but legal was in the eye of the local association secretary. Of the 42 I have shot since, most were on conditions that would have not been legal in 1982.
Pullmyfinger

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,677
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by avabob
I have bowled 44 300 games in my life. The first 2 were with plastic balls on wood. Both were sanctioned by the local association although the lanes were totally walled off the corner to a much greater degree than anything Allison bowled on. The lanes were not compliant with the rules at the time, but legal was in the eye of the local association secretary. Of the 42 I have shot since, most were on conditions that would have not been legal in 1982.


Worked at a center in my teens. The shot there was always walled up. We made our own shims out of Plexiglas. When an award score was shot the night manager always called the local association late so they wouldn't come out until the next day (They got burned on that once). We weren't allowed to touch the lanes. After we closed would strip all the lanes and re-oil every pair except the award score pair. On that pair we would push the oil to the edges and then run them with the lane duster from rear to front. We would then bowl about 10 or so games on the pair playing different areas of the lane. Never saw one turned down. 
avabob

Registered:
Posts: 413
Reply with quote  #12 
Ah, yes! The old century machines and the telescore sheets used for shims. Interesting that pros still refer to shim line although modern machines are totally computerized
Pullmyfinger

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,677
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by avabob
Ah, yes! The old century machines and the telescore sheets used for shims. Interesting that pros still refer to shim line although modern machines are totally computerized


The old Brunswick telescore plexigass covers were the exact same length as a shim, but way thicker. All you had to do was cut them in threes. 
CA_NEbowlervet_803

Registered:
Posts: 96
Reply with quote  #14 
I understand why the USBC doesn't want to officially recognize the 900 series.  If the USBC would reverse that decision now, it would open a can of worms regarding previous series' that were rejected at and/or before that timeframe.  The USBC doesn't have the time nor resources to manage that kind of workload.
__________________
AKA: Bowling290 (2008 - 2013) 

Can't stand watching bowling on TV or old Youtube shows!  Actually, bowling is boring to watch! I'd rather play than watch!




avabob

Registered:
Posts: 413
Reply with quote  #15 
What woukd be the downside of recognizing all the disallowed scores from 1976 to 1984 ( the period amendment 4 was in affect ). Nobody is saying they should get rings, just acknowledge the scores with some kind of certificate upon a request from the bowler. Most of the disallowed scores were by bowlers with multiple 300s over the years and few would even bother to request them.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.