Mr Bowling 300 Forum

Sanctioned vs. non-sanctioned leagues General bowling discussion
Reply
Pro Member 1,757 posts BowlingOldies Pro Member 1,757 posts
BowlingOldies

There seems to be a new phenomenon (perhaps not all that new) that appears to have begun in the years I was away from bowling which has become apparent to me since I started up bowling again a few months ago.  I've noticed that there are now as many or more non-sanctioned leagues as there are sanctioned leagues.

I honestly can't recall there being any non-sanctioned leagues at any bowling center where I used to bowl in the '70s and '80s.  Certainly every league I ever bowled in was sanctioned, and I can't recall there ever being a vote in any league organizational meeting I ever attended to determine whether members wanted the league to be sanctioned or not.  It wouldn't have even occurred to anyone not to have it sanctioned.

Oh, I'd heard of the occasional bowling proprietor who went rogue and chose not to get his lanes approved by the ABC, thereby forfeiting his bowling center's ability to host any form of ABC sanctioned competition.  But that was rare.

Now, at one center where I bowl league, our league is, I think, one of very few hosted in that bowling center that are USBC sanctioned.  Most aren't.

And to make matters worse, it seems that the non-sanctioned leagues all get free practice games at the bowling center during the week.  I'm told that the reason why our league doesn't receive that privilege is that we're sanctioned, although I've yet to hear anyone explain why our status as a sanctioned league would prevent us from receiving these free bowling privileges.  (The implication is that there's something in the USBC rule book that prohibits it.  But I honestly don't know.)

I can't help wondering, other than saving the $15 on USBC membership (maybe it's more, I don't recall how much), what advantage there is to having a league non-sanctioned?  Is it this free bowling perk?  And is there really a USBC rule prohibiting you from receiving free games if you're in a sanctioned league?  WTF?

What possible reason is there why anyone would choose non-sanctioned over sanctioned?

Do you bowl in a sanctioned league or a non-sanctioned league?  Why?

Inquiring minds want to know.  :-)
Reply
brian1969 Pro Member 1,219 posts
brian1969
Never heard of an unsanctioned league, either. I've bowled a few unsanctioned tourneys, but that's about it.
Brian
Reply
epicbowling Beginner 6 posts
epicbowling
i have seen a few unsanctioned leagues, like no-tap leagues, Cosmic bowl leagues and most of the summer leagues are not either.
Bowling Tips to help improve your game
Reply
champ Amateur 377 posts
champ
I bowled a non sanctioned league this year on Friday mornings. 5 bucks got you three games of bowling and a breakfast of eggs, bacon, toast, and coffee. You can't beat that.
Reply
Fordman Pro Member 3,406 posts
Fordman
Florida is full of unsanctioned leagues.  Many are senior leagues. 

There is no USBC rule about not getting free practice.

The owner of the center you bowl at sounds like an A$$. 

Many leagues don't think the USBC gives any thing to anyone but honor score bowlers.  They just aren't impressed with the magnets.

They don't seem to have any problem using the USBC rules and that should be against some kind of patenting law?



 
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
Reply
brian1969 Pro Member 1,219 posts
brian1969
Pins, magnets, and patches get old after awhile, and I can certainly see why some people would say to heck with it and go unsanctioned. With the way the fees have gone up over the last ten or fifteen years, and the way people have to pinch their pennies, I can see people wanting to save the money.

The only reason I can think of off the top of my head as to why anyone would want to go sanctioned these days is just in case they shoot a 300 or some other honor score. They want the ring or the watch or the plaque they get from the USBC for that. Heck, those were the only awards I ever coveted when I was bowling. I have an entire box stashed in the attic full of patches, pins, etc., and I can't tell you how many I threw away. After a certain point in time, they become meaningless. But my rings, watch, plaques, etc....they're on the wall or on display in my bookcase.

If/when I get back to league bowling, I'd more than consider going the non-sanctioned route. To a point, though. If they're using the non-sanctioned thing as an excuse to put out the world's easiest wall-shot, then no...not for me.
Brian
Reply
str8drvr Master 926 posts
str8drvr

I am going to make a motion in the season starting meeting that the league I bowl in goes non - sanctioned.

The reasons are as follows:
1. The shot is being made ridiculously easier than prior years per AMF direction
2. There are 120 bowlers in the league, and there were 9 300's, and multiple 11 in a rows
3. As a group we could have put in $8 - $10 per man in a league fund instead of $16 into sanction fees. That $960 - $1200 would be spent on league awards instead of USBC awards, or just divide the money instead of awards.
4. Every year it is the same, with about 10 - 12 guys throwing most of the honor scores. We could give any "first timer" a better award or more money to welcome them into the honor score ranks.
5. I watch the magnets being tossed in the trash every time they are handed out, and think it's a waste of sanction dollars. (At one house the bowlers have been using the hvac ductwork as a place to throw the magnets where they stick, and now plaster the place with them.)
6. Personnaly I was a recipient of another 300 ring this past season and found the cheapening of the ring awarded to be indicative of the current economy and direction of the USBC. (No diamond as in previous years, and a general simple look.) I am sure it's due to the sheer numbers of 300's thrown nation wide, but is this the best they can do for our money? I believe because as stated above, most awards are earned by a low percentage of participants who generally don't care about another plaque, watch, ring, or magnet.

The ONLY reason I would want to be sanctioned is:
If I rolled an honor score with it not being my first, I would have the amount of the ring donated to the Earl Anthony Fund to support scholorships for the kids. I believe Mike has given information in that regards somewhere in these boards in the past, and if he would be so kind as to do so again I would be appreciative. I don't know if many bowlers know that this option is available to them.

Sorry I rambled on a bit.
Cleveland Ohio
Reply
mikeanthony8 Master 553 posts
mikeanthony8
str8drvr wrote:

I am going to make a motion in the season starting meeting that the league I bowl in goes non - sanctioned.

The reasons are as follows:
1. The shot is being made ridiculously easier than prior years per AMF direction
2. There are 120 bowlers in the league, and there were 9 300's, and multiple 11 in a rows
3. As a group we could have put in $8 - $10 per man in a league fund instead of $16 into sanction fees. That $960 - $1200 would be spent on league awards instead of USBC awards, or just divide the money instead of awards.
4. Every year it is the same, with about 10 - 12 guys throwing most of the honor scores. We could give any "first timer" a better award or more money to welcome them into the honor score ranks.
5. I watch the magnets being tossed in the trash every time they are handed out, and think it's a waste of sanction dollars. (At one house the bowlers have been using the hvac ductwork as a place to throw the magnets where they stick, and now plaster the place with them.)
6. Personnaly I was a recipient of another 300 ring this past season and found the cheapening of the ring awarded to be indicative of the current economy and direction of the USBC. (No diamond as in previous years, and a general simple look.) I am sure it's due to the sheer numbers of 300's thrown nation wide, but is this the best they can do for our money? I believe because as stated above, most awards are earned by a low percentage of participants who generally don't care about another plaque, watch, ring, or magnet.

The ONLY reason I would want to be sanctioned is:
If I rolled an honor score with it not being my first, I would have the amount of the ring donated to the Earl Anthony Fund to support scholorships for the kids. I believe Mike has given information in that regards somewhere in these boards in the past, and if he would be so kind as to do so again I would be appreciative. I don't know if many bowlers know that this option is available to them.

Sorry I rambled on a bit.


Thanks for posting this about the scholarships ($25,000 each year).   Here's the link and basic information:
http://bowl.com/Scholarships/Honor_Awards/Awards/USBC_Earl_Anthony_Memorial_Scholarship/  

USBC Earl Anthony Memorial Scholarship

If you are a senior in high school or a college student with arecord of strong community involvement and academic achievements aswell as financial need, you are eligible for this scholarship.Bowling success is not considered in awarding this scholarship.

 

  • USBC presents this prestigious scholarship in honor of thelegendary pro bowler, Earl Anthony. USBC will award five USBC Youthmembers with a $5,000 scholarship. Financial need will also beconsidered. Eligible candidates must be enrolled in their senioryear of high school or presently attending college and must becurrent members of USBC in good standing. In addition, candidatesmust have a minimum cumulative GPA of 2.5 based on a 4.0 scale (orequivalent). Individuals may win this award only once.
  
Mike Anthony
Reply
str8drvr Master 926 posts
str8drvr
Thanks Mike,

What's your take on this? (non - sanctioned vs. sanction)
Cleveland Ohio
Reply
mystrsyko Master 843 posts
mystrsyko
I think the main reason there are so many non sanctioned leagues now is due to bowler commitment. The vast majority of league bowlers nowadays aren't "serious" bowlers, they're the coveted "casual" bowlers. They don't really have any qualms about not showing from week to week, and in some cases don't want to commit to something as strict as a weekly league. For the most part they just plain don't care enough about bowling to bother. So the unsanctioned leagues are the best fit for them, because then they don't feel like they're walking away from a serious commitment.
Reply
mikeanthony8 Master 553 posts
mikeanthony8
mystrsyko wrote:
I think the main reason there are so many non sanctioned leagues now is due to bowler commitment. The vast majority of league bowlers nowadays aren't "serious" bowlers, they're the coveted "casual" bowlers. They don't really have any qualms about not showing from week to week, and in some cases don't want to commit to something as strict as a weekly league. For the most part they just plain don't care enough about bowling to bother. So the unsanctioned leagues are the best fit for them, because then they don't feel like they're walking away from a serious commitment.


Heading out to golf with my wife, but I'll write later.   I was (along with my Dad's support) back in 1981 one to fight the ABC as we had an issue at our Danville Bowl, in California.  Kind of a long story and I will want to present it properly....so until later!  Overall I do truly support our sanctioning body.
Mike Anthony
Reply
champ Amateur 377 posts
champ
The one reason I prefer to join sanctioned leagues is the oil. Generally, around here, non-sanctioned leagues get no oil. They bowl on whatever left over crap is on the lanes, and in hot, hot Tucson, that's usually nothing. In bowling, there is nothing I hate more.
Reply
Fordman Pro Member 3,406 posts
Fordman
When those non sanctioned leagues get a new bowler they will look up their average on bowl.com or in a year book.  They will have a rules problem and pull out a USBC rules book.  Just don't want to support them financially. 

I don't like the USBC using my dues to support the PBA or Team USA but not enough to go unsanctioned.
Shake a Vets hand you owe them.
Dearborn Mi. Home town of Henry Ford
Reply
themrfreeze Moderator 3,820 posts
themrfreeze
I bowl in both sanctioned and unsanctioned leagues.  The winter men's league I bowl in is sanctioned, and the adult-child league I bowled in was sanctioned.  The summer version of the same adult-child league is unsanctioned.

I personally couldn't care less if my leagues are sanctioned (and this coming from a guy who threw his only 300 game in the unsanctioned league, so no ring for me).  I fully understand what the USBC does in terms of league rules and allowing fair competition in tournaments and the such. However, in my case, I don't think we get good value for the money we pay them.  USBC awards are based on what passes for the "norm" these days, but Parkview is way more challenging than the "norm", so the awards are inadequate for the accomplishments.  A 750 series at Parkview is a rare beast, and deserves more than a stupid magnet.

IMHO, we'd be better off if everybody chipped in $15 towards a Parkview award pool that properly recognizes *our* honor scores.

The only reason that Parkview's leagues are still sanctioned is to keep our bowlers eligible for local tournaments.  Since our Parkview averages are lower than what we'd average in other halls, we usually crush when we send teams to handicapped tournaments. 

 
Reply
Chipper Pro Member 2,161 posts
Chipper
I know a lot of the summer leagues are unsanctioned, and they always ask the fun  leagues if they want to be sanctioned or not.  I never considered what would be the true difference as the individual bowler would have to pay the sanction dues anyway if they wanted the award rings and all that.  I never thought of the fact that sanctioning forces a fresh pattern, and that not sanctioning can let the house just put whatever out there (or not oil at all).  I would always want some oil.
High sanctioned game: 300
High sanctioned series: 812
High league average: 218

Reply
Reply