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


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Tamtrooper

Registered:
Posts: 384
Reply with quote  #1 

In my league the handicap is 90% of 230.  Pretty common these days and I think the best bowler in our league is in the mid 220s so no problem there.  I'd like 80% handicap and I'd have no problem with capping it at 220 to give the better bowlers an edge but I know I'm waaay in the minority even on these boards which are populated with better bowler.  I'm a mid 190's guy.  Not good but not a disaster.  What is a problem with having a handicap so high is the scores that can result.

Currently in my league the high handicap game is 332.  Huh?  This has always bothered me.  How can you get pins beyond the maximum score in the game.  I've been told before that there's nothing that can be done about it.  I say nonsense.  If the computer can't adjust a 170's average bowler shooting a 279 or something just do it by hand on a league sheet.  The extra 32 pins over 300 or any amount over 300 should not count for winning a game.  You could reply that is it no big deal and I agree but if it is no big deal why not just do it right.

Fordman

Registered:
Posts: 3,567
Reply with quote  #2 
Let me tell you what happened in my league.  Our league rule is 90% from 1100 for points.  

In the pots it is 100% from 230.  About 10 years ago I had people like you who wanted it changed to a max of 300.  Within a month the H\C pots shrank to about half the previous size.

I have been the main pot collector for the last 20 years. H\C each game, H\C Perfecta and H\C Totals.
Rather than getting $125-130 per game it was $60.  Same for Per. and Totals.

I use BLS soft ware and one year I made 2 copies of the league after we were done with the season.  I went in to one and changed the H\C to 100%  the other to 80%.  Started in week one and opened each week until getting to the end of the season and compared the standings sheet.  Same teams won and points were very similar.  I was a little surprised. 
Careful what you wish for.

__________________
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
mrbowling300

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 11,770
Reply with quote  #3 
In our league, the handicap jackpots max out at 300.
Fordman

Registered:
Posts: 3,567
Reply with quote  #4 
All I am saying is that is what my experience with pots showed.
__________________
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
Tamtrooper

Registered:
Posts: 384
Reply with quote  #5 
I know pots are important to many bowlers--not for me.  I'm there to see how well I can do and for some fun competition.  If I put money into the equation it feels like work and not fun.  I guess participation in pots going down would be bad for the league but I'd reassert my point that how does having a score higher than is possible make any sense?
TheBigCat

Registered:
Posts: 894
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamtrooper
I know pots are important to many bowlers--not for me.  I'm there to see how well I can do and for some fun competition.  If I put money into the equation it feels like work and not fun.  I guess participation in pots going down would be bad for the league but I'd reassert my point that how does having a score higher than is possible make any sense?

Is that (having a score over 300, with handicap) different than having a score higher than the score you actually bowled? Neither are 'real', they're just there so a winner can be determined.

A lot of jackpots are 'over average' instead of 'with handicap'. Not much difference, really, but at least there wouldn't be any winning scores of 320. Instead the winning score would be something like '120 over'.
avabob

Registered:
Posts: 496
Reply with quote  #7 
I would argue that for all individual side pot and bracket purposes high games handicap should be maxed at 300.  They use a similar concept in golf all the time.  Low net scores are typically adjusted to no lower than the course record. 
TheBigCat

Registered:
Posts: 894
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by avabob
I would argue that for all individual side pot and bracket purposes high games handicap should be maxed at 300.  They use a similar concept in golf all the time.  Low net scores are typically adjusted to no lower than the course record. 


not arguing...just curious...
why would you begrudge a low average bowler who shoots WAY above his/her average (making their with-handicap score come out to more than 300) their jackpot, in deference to a very high average bowler who shoots 300, when that 300 is 'only', say, 55 pins over their average when the other person might have shot 100 pins, or, more over their average?

'over-average' jackpots are usually pretty much the same as 'with-handicap' pots and no one ever suggests capping those at any particular number of pins over average.


again...this is just for the sake of discussion. i don't get in over-average or with-handicap pots because if i were really trying my hardest every shot of every league night i would get no, or almost no handicap. i leave those for the guys that belong in them.
(yeah, i know what i used to do Fordman...but i've changed.)
[smile]
really...i have...
[wink]
Tamtrooper

Registered:
Posts: 384
Reply with quote  #9 
Jackpots might be a different argument in some respects but I'm talking about pins over 300 added to a teams score for purposes of league competition.  I don't think getting pins beyond 300 makes any sense.  As for jackpots I think I'd be miffed if I was a scratch bowler who shot a 300 and lost to a 170's bowler shooting 259.  I average in the 190's of late and I think I have an over 300 game in each of the past 5 years.  Shooting games of 290 and 279's and such.  How many 300s do I have over that time?  Zero.  My view is a bowler like you shooting 300 is better than a bowler like me shooting 279.  
TheBigCat

Registered:
Posts: 894
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamtrooper
As for jackpots I think I'd be miffed if I was a scratch bowler who shot a 300 and lost to a 170's bowler shooting 259.  I average in the 190's of late and I think I have an over 300 game in each of the past 5 years.  Shooting games of 290 and 279's and such.  How many 300s do I have over that time?  Zero.  My view is a bowler like you shooting 300 is better than a bowler like me shooting 279.  

That's why the forum is cool...we get to voice our opinions and discuss the sport we all love.

I think a lower average bowler shooting 279 is more deserving of winning that jackpot than a very high average bowler shooting a 300...even if their actual score, combined with handicap, is over 300. just my opinion...
As far as league competition is concerned I've never bowled in a league (as far as I recall) that uses head-to-head scores for awarding team points...so individual scores don't factor in...it's simply a team's total actual pin-fall plus their team handicap that determines points won.
Pullmyfinger

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,665
Reply with quote  #11 
In my once a month fun, no-tap league with my wife I struggled a bit the first month and really, really struggled the second month. It was so bad I missed the 6-10 spare 4 different ways. I worked on a few things during warm ups last month and finally broke out of my slump and shot an 850 something. We have small high game and series prizes for scratch and handicap at the end of the year. I never win handicap prizes because I normally don't get any pins. Well last month I did and I think I'm a lock for those this year at 331 and 940 something. LOL! 
Fordman

Registered:
Posts: 3,567
Reply with quote  #12 
If no bowlers are over the 230 or what ever the cap is then it is exactly OVER AVERAGE.  It is just a different way of saying it. 
I have always wondered why in league play each bowler would get H\C it is a team league.  Besides most leagues use 90% different from pots?  If you don't like someone bowling 319 change it to over avg. they rather than 319 the 180 guy is 89 pins over avg.

__________________
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
SpinBowler300

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 826
Reply with quote  #13 
The USBC actually recommends that each bowler get handicap as a percentage from a set base score. The team handicap would then be the sum of all of the individual handicaps. In my opinion it is the proper way to do it. Where I have been elected league secretary. I always get the rules changed to use that method.
__________________
Fall Leagues: Monday - Five Star Lanes, Tuesday  & Thursday - Astro Lanes.
Balls: Motiv Trident Abyss, Motiv Forge Fire, Motiv Hydra & Motiv Hyper Sniper. All made in the USA.

Fordman

Registered:
Posts: 3,567
Reply with quote  #14 
We do it to control the team avg.  For years it was the bowlers avg. that was in question.  Now as long as the team is under 1050 they can have two 240 bowlers and it don't matter.  It really makes no difference unless you pay for high H\C individual game and series.  We pay for scratch only for individuals and H\C only for team highs.  That is why we have bylaws every league is different. 
__________________
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.