Post by snead on Jan 24, 2019 15:02:02 GMT -8
Fellow bowlers:
I would like to create a thread discussing our grand finals format and lane conditions to make sure our organization's format lines up with what is best for the majority of bowlers - with the aim of continued enthusiasm and participation in our regular monthly events. Below is my opinion and I surely won't be offended if you disagree, have additional thoughts or bring up something that I didn't mention of haven't thought about.
These opinions are formed under the premise of what I view the SOBA/SOAS to fundamentally be: a scratch bowling tournament club for "league" bowlers in Southern Oregon that balances competition with comradery. In addition to a fundamental ethos that makes US historically successful : being both fun and affordable.
When constructing a grand finals weekend - I believe this will best serve the majority and thus promote continued participation if we keep in mind that we are catering to competitive "league" bowlers who want the weekend to be FUN as a primary function without costing a lot. Furthermore, the construct of Grand Finals needs to be rewarding for people that have competed all year to "make it" and the experience needs to leave a lasting impression of : I can't wait for next season to start. Grand finals is the "PRIZE" that is awarded to people that compete in ALL of the monthly tournaments at a high level AND the thing that helps drive entries for members to get in the FIVE tournaments they need to bowl the qualifier.
The past season we went to a 24 game round robin format on three different patterns. Bypassing the history of how we got to that format from having a tournament an champions and high points tournament in the 1990's in an effort to make the post smaller...I would like to advocate for a format from our recent history (3 patterns and 18 games) for the following reasons:
1. Fatigue/injury: Keeping in mind that we have a lot of "3 game a week league bowlers" that make up our membership - I feel like the extra six games is too much bowling physically for some. Not every one is in their 20's and bowls 4 days a week because : BOWLING IS LIFE. Keep in mind we will have some entrants in their 60's. We risk having people damage their bodies the longer the format. I believe the quality of bowling suffers the longer the format, which is a negative for the competitor and spectator. Grand Finals should not be a battle of attrition. Keep in mind that the people outside of the top 16 with five tournaments in have to bowl an additional 5 games (plus 40 minutes of warmup) Exhaustion/Sorness is not the lasting takeaway emotion/feeling that will lead to increased participation the following year.
2.TIME: Bowling 24 games vs 18 takes longer - time should definitely be a factor to consider with our increased footprint in the state. Last year GF was in Bend - which was great for people in Bend, however the drive home was 3 hours to Klamath, 4 hours to Roseburg/Medford and almost six if you lived in North Bend. This year it will be almost five hours home if you live in bend. Getting done a little earlier in the afternoon allows people to travel home at a decent time - which benefits people with jobs the next day, poor night vision, babysitters they need to relieve ect. - getting home before 10:30 P.M is going to sound appealing after bowling all weekend I am sure......
3.Increased Prize fund: Bowling more games costs more money. Six extra games for 24 bowlers @ 3 dollars a game is 432 dollars extra in lineage that is not in the prize fund checks. (if we are paying 2.75 ? it's 396 dollars). Assuming the top five of a prize payout would stay the same, that's an extra $22.73 for spots 6-24. That sounds a lot like dinner or gas money to me. We need to decide if the COST of bowling the extra 6 games is WORTH it. Often the Grand Finals check will be the biggest check all year for a lot of people and can help offset the cost of participation during the year.
4. Transition: without getting into the whole left vs. right debate - there is a devils advocate point of view on how transition has the potential to negatively impact the outcome of the competition regardless of hand. Before you get offended I am bringing it up hear me out. I think that we can ALL agree that the more games are bowled on a lane the more that transition of oil being depleted in the fronts and deposited on the back end effects ball motion. This requires adjustments in ball speed, laydown point, release, launch angle and equipment. This is a double edged sword when bowling on "patterns" whether you are left or right handed. Deleting topography out of the conversation as a topic beyond our control. Consider the following: Tougher patterns -If you are left handed and the pattern is a little tougher and your look isn't that great -guess what if never gets any better for the block (Ask Greg Hafner about last year if you don't believe me) If you are right handed there will be a friction zone that develops, which often makes the condition more scorable. Easier patterns -transition a great deal and ultimately becomes tougher the longer they are bowled on for right handers and generally stay easier for left handers playing from more direct angles which increases carry percentage. YES, that is bowling - but the longer a lane is bowled on the more differences good or bad depending on hand/pattern will effect outcome. This may be a small difference, but in my opinion it has the potential to take away from the belief that the person who wins the tournament is the one who threw it the closest, picked up their spares and made smart choices with lane play and equipment. With largely untested patterns, inequitable transition can have too big of a role in determining outcome. Not to mention, the less transition the less the reliance on a completely different "burn" arsenal. Some folks are packing around several balls just for the burned up lanes in match play. Not every one can afford that extensive of an arsenal.
5.Illusion of Equity: some may argue that if you bowl everyone once that is the only fair way to do it. That could possible be true if we reoiled for each game and used the same pattern for each of the games. Well no one would do that the tournament would take 3 days to bowl with 45 minute breaks between games. That's just silly right. It is often counterproductive to legislate fairness into a sport with an invisible playing environment in which the players change that playing environment. Life is not fair. Bowling each person has never been a priority in crowning a champion - look at the monthly tournaments - we don't have carryover - actually shortening possible number of games to decide winner AND we don't bowl everyone once. At the end of they day I have never heard anyone say that someone didn't deserve to win because they didn't bowl the guy that finished 14th??? Yep that totally would have changed everything. Also, if YOU have to bowl Brian Tinsley and Bob Reed and Chris Breshears on a pattern that plays the gutter one block that's a bad draw for you if that is not your strong suite- which is the same as one of them having to bowl Jason Taylor, Ryan Besaw and Tyger Miller when the best way to play them is off the left gutter cap and swinging it 20 boards. It is WHO you bowl WHEN under WHAT circumstances that effects the outcome - lets not pretend that by bowling everyone in a randomly generated scenario with varying lane patterns bowling is FAIR. At the end of the day, there is something to be said for styles make fights - that doesn't go away if you bowl everyone. 18 games is plenty of bowling to be able to crown a champion.
Oil pattern thoughts
I happen to really like the 3 different pattern idea. It has the potential to benefit competition by rewarding versatility, consistency and spare shooting. However, in keeping in mind who this organization is for (see above) and what should be our ethos (FUN) I think that there is an opportunity to improve our approach to selecting the patterns. I would like to point out that when you get too far outside the box as far as too short or too slick - it benefits the people with 18 bowling balls and more tournament experience. THIS IS BAD. While it is certainly not my intent to disparage anyone's ability, people with less experience and not on ball staff should not put at a disadvantage for the sake of hyper-competitiveness. Like I previously stated, the SOBA/SOAS is FOR the weekend warrior, 3 game a week league bowler. I don't want us as a group to lose sight of that. Hyper-competitive tournaments on really challenging patterns certainly are a thing - they are just not OUR thing. If that is YOUR thing, I welcome you to go bowl the PBA or OBA. The OBA bowls on mostly sport patterns and has 10x the population to "draw from" and their last tournament that displays results on their website they had 53 entries. Take this a step further - the PBA used to be affordable and there definitely was a prestige factor associated with it commonly getting over 100 entries- now the regionals are almost 300 dollars to bowl as a non-member and they are really lucky to break 40 entries at some places. I mention this to point out that the really challenging sport patterns approach to running a tournament club seems to be an abject failure even in areas with more scratch bowlers and/or more prestige associated with the competition. Our success is based on being fun and affordable. Bowling on patterns and averaging 170 is not fun, requiring an arsenal of ten bowling balls to be competitive is not affordable. The very perception of needing ten bowling balls to be competitive is bad for the this organization.
This particular section appears to be offensive to people from the north - I will attempt to further develop my position which may or may not make you as a collective feel better. First of all I would, I was mostly referring to the PBA regional program as an abject failure, but after re-reading my post I can see how the OBA thought I was taking a shot at them. Not my intent. And yes you guys have some really talented bowlers that make up your organization - and that talent level is much higher that the SOBA's from players 1-50. Again, the area has over ten times the population that Southern Oregon, so by the numbers that is what anyone would expect. Regardless - congrats. You are however different from the SOBA, and I don't feel like it is offensive in anyway to compare the two to develop a larger point about what is good for our organization (because they are different) - if you read my entire post I am telling you what the SOBA is and what it is not. The OBA is what the SOBA is not - a more hypercompetitive sport bowling tournament much closer to what the PBA regional program used to be in its "glory days". If that is the desire of your membership - a "premier" sport bowling scratch tournament than mission accomplished, you are successful by that measure. However, because of our demographics that is not viable - about ten years ago now the SOBA leadership adopted a more challenging approach to lane conditions and we went from 85 bowlers per tournament very quickly to 45, at which time the proprietors in Southern Oregon began to question whether they even wanted to host an event. Anthony Thompson has pointed out that OUR sport is in trouble - he is right. Scratch bowlers as a subset of league bowers not only have more of a hassle factor from a proprietors viewpoint, they spend less money than open play bowlers typically. The measuring stick for the SOBA success is participation - higher participation rates offset the potential monetary risk a center takes by allowing us to bowl. I believe that if we want to continue to participate in the sport we love we need to be aware of that and appreciate our host centers. To provide context to abject failure- this is the state of the PBA regional program. There was a regional @ double decker lanes that got 46 entries, 9 of them were from adjacent states, That means they got 37 entries from California? Rhonert Park is one hour north of San Francisco/Oakland and 2 hours north of San Jose. That's almost 3 million people just directly to the south of them, close to double that if you include all directions. The regional program used be way more successful when they kept the entry fee down - which meant more checks for everyone. There are always 3 groups of bowlers that make up a field regardless of level - the people that are looking to get better or just have fun and almost never cash - the people that cash pretty regularly that are a little better than the bottom group but cash somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 the time and the elite 15 percent that cash most of the time. When the PBA jacked the price up it got too expensive for the bottom group to justify the cost, they quit. The middle group was now the bottom group and half of them quit. The top 15 percent of the field still bowls and will always bowl. You can't make a living at bowling - it may be time to accept that and move out of your moms basement because your almost 30 now...Bowling is in bad shape because as an industry we skipped econ 211 or college altogether. When the price of things goes up the demand goes down, if you suck the enjoyment out of an activity for people that don't view it as an occupation the demand at any given price also goes down. Double decker lanes is a 50 lane center and had to PAY the PBA to host a regional - I think that would have penciled better for them if the place was full. Part of reason that scratch bowling is in trouble is that we forget that bowling is a business, decisions are often driven by some of the better bowlers short sided-ness about what is good for them. And if you are still looking for any reason to get offended - I am not calling anyone mentally retarded - I am just pointing out that what motivates bowlers to show up an participate can be very different from the elite bowler - but their entry fee goes into the prize fund and to the host center just like the participants that are PBA good or aspire to be.
Pattern one: I believe that one of the patterns should definitely be on the house pattern. Something relatively easy on both sides that is higher scoring. It should always be the final pattern. easier to bowl on if your a little sore or tired, not too tricky if your mentally fatigued and allows you to leave the tournament on a good note for the drive home and looking towards the next season. For the people that are in the bottom they should feel like they have chance to get hot win some matches and move up. It also requires less bowling balls to be competitive. The drive home is way better when you feel like your equipment for the last block was good and you averaged over 215 vs you averaged 162 and you couldn't get anything you own to wrinkle and now look to buy some 250 ball that hooks in the box, comes sanded and will roll like dog-crap on the league pattern. Basically a boat anchor you can carry around so you can be competitive at next years grand finals that you may not even bowl because you didn't have any fun all weekend.
Pattern two: I also believe this should be higher scoring - there are different version of Kegel patterns that are designed to be house shot-like - pick one that is different that the existing house pattern in either volume or length or both. Some house shots are easy and a little slicker, some are easier but require you to bend the ball more from right to left. Pick a pattern that compliments the existing house pattern and make it the first pattern of the tournament. Regardless of how Sunday goes, allow people to leave there and go out to dinner with a smile on their face and hope for the future. This is also a better scenario than driving for four hours to go to a 2 day bowling tournament and have to bowl on some piece of crap pattern (red square) average 173 and can't decide whether to spend 25 bucks on dinner at olive garden or 3.79 at taco bell because your checks going to suck or go directly to the hotel and drown yourself in the pool (not with alcohol...like literally stay under water until your dead.)
Pattern three: here is the chance to bowl on your sportier condition. first block on Sunday so you still have a chance to salvage a good time if it doesn't go well. Again - red square should not be a consideration. Some super short dry pattern that requires a urethane ball is also not what we should be looking for - again why allow the perception that you need to have an "extra bowling ball" to be competitive once a year maybe to bowl on a pattern that's not fun to have a basis in reality. Something challenging but playable like Eiffel tower is fine, or the last block pattern from the epicenter 2 years ago or something that's still 3:1 ratio between 37 and 43 feet. not super long or super short. The idea is not to embarrass anyone. Some people may bowl just fine on a really tough pattern for a variety of factors - again good job - but some of our membership will average 160. Not only is this no fun as a bowler - it can't be great as a spectator either (ask Steve Mead from last year if that was fun to watch).
The counter argument may be that : well we don't dictate what the centers put out. RIGHT (maybe)- but that's intellectually dishonest as an absolute. It is not some random miracle that Six out of 8 tournaments we bowl on the house shot. This is because that is what we tell them we want -There are two centers that like to get fancy with what they are putting out (you could argue at the detriment of their own league bowlers) with varying degrees of success - sometimes it's a change that maintains competitive scoring pace and sometimes its a dumpster fire. Now, there MAY some limitations depending on oiling machine/lane topography on what they CAN put out or some limitations on what they are WILLING to put out. But, it does not benefit the center who is in the bowling entertainment business to make the lanes so crappy it is hard to watch as a spectator in addition to decreasing the enjoyment level of their OWN league bowlers and the people that travel to compete in the their centers annually. The idea is to make these people happy so the come back and stay and keep spending money - lets not forget they do operate a business. Every center that deviates from the house shot during grand finals does that at the behest of the organization based on "what WE are looking for". This input may come from the board, tournament director or the people that bowl SOBA's from there. If this communication is 3 different sport patters one easy one medium and one hard you pick - this is setting us up to fail and will lead to scenarios like last year. WHO PICKS and ARE THEY QUALIFIED to PICK. The 157 average guy that unjams pinsetters is not, someone with no sport bowling experience is not. Last year what we got was one that has medium hard, one that was really hard and one that was impossible and much harder than any PBA condition EVER. I would like to petition Kegel to rename red square to Red flaming dogcrap. Seriously, that was not bowling it was satire. Furthermore, I don't know how many times we have had a center put something out and say : well that didn't turn out like I had hoped. Lets not do that again. They only say that when the attempt is made to put out something other that the house shot or the house shot with more oil in the middle so they hold up. Mostly the way in which things didn't turn out they way they had hoped is that THEY WERE WAY HARDER.
Without getting into specific instances but when you put down a sport pattern and people play them different with varying degrees of skill and surface prep from all over the lane - things tend not to go as good as people with higher rev rates all playing in the same area with similar surfaces because they've seen the condition before like the in PBA. We have had centers modify their pattern and result is exactly what is intended - a slightly more challenging condition which is still playable for most. However, 1/3 of the field averages under 180 and this is not ideal for our demographic. Sometimes things don't really go as planned and the top 1/3 of the field average between 180 and 190. Too difficult for our group, if you look at the bottom half of the field there are a lot of folks averaging in the 160's. This violates the ethos of what our organization is about and frankly will lead to less participation. Not the goal, which I think is important for some of the people who enjoy more challenging conditions to keep in mind. Would you rather compete on tougher lane conditions for 17 checks or softer ones for 32 checks. Seems like its not only better for you, but for everyone including the center.
In summary,
I believe that 24 games does not yield any positive aspect to Grand Finals weekend; the benefits of 18 games are listed above. Less time, Less transition, More Money, Less chance of Injury and less exposure to a condition that has the potential to suck for you (wrong equipment, wrong hand, wrong rev rate/style ).
In addition to keep consistent with what makes this organization successful, bowling on flat challenging PBA like patterns should be the exception not the norm for Grand Finals weekend. We crown champions and write checks all year and people are generally happy with the level of competition and feel like the best bowler won. There will never be a time when someone getting some breaks on carry or breaking up splits on horrible shots doesn't beat you sometimes - bowling on sport condition doesn't change the sport - in fact has the potential to magnify this phenomenon. Getting the right ball in you hand, your feet in the right spot and matching you game up to strike while picking up you spares is the recipe for success on house shot as well as a sport shot. If your mindset is that: Well people just spray the ball around and this isn't really bowling I'd be more successful if the lanes were "FAIR" because I throw it so close - newsflash you aren't that good at striking and creating area superstar - you go bowl the PBA and let me know if you start beating those guys when you are posting and then running out flat tens as you pure them. Or the bowl OBA's you could have been entry 54 and they could have cashed one more spot surely it be "you"!!!
My point is that I don't get the overwhelming sense that the majority of people WANT to bowl on sports shots - The Sport bowling is important mindset was amongst the leadership when we bottomed out at 40 something entries. I think it is that same mentality that is driving the sport pattern at GF decision making. Obviously the marketplace was telling you people don't like that , people that bowl our organization. They voted with their participation. I really think that the whole bowling on sport condition at grand finals has been promoted as something that we HAVE to do or that EVERYONE wants. I think that the reality is that the majority don't mind bowling on something slightly challenging once in a while during grand finals, but that to have 18 games of it is not really why they bowled all year and ultimately won't be fun. Which is the point right. FUN and COMPETITION.
In the infamous words of Steve Mead: Thanks for being able to read:)
I would like to create a thread discussing our grand finals format and lane conditions to make sure our organization's format lines up with what is best for the majority of bowlers - with the aim of continued enthusiasm and participation in our regular monthly events. Below is my opinion and I surely won't be offended if you disagree, have additional thoughts or bring up something that I didn't mention of haven't thought about.
These opinions are formed under the premise of what I view the SOBA/SOAS to fundamentally be: a scratch bowling tournament club for "league" bowlers in Southern Oregon that balances competition with comradery. In addition to a fundamental ethos that makes US historically successful : being both fun and affordable.
When constructing a grand finals weekend - I believe this will best serve the majority and thus promote continued participation if we keep in mind that we are catering to competitive "league" bowlers who want the weekend to be FUN as a primary function without costing a lot. Furthermore, the construct of Grand Finals needs to be rewarding for people that have competed all year to "make it" and the experience needs to leave a lasting impression of : I can't wait for next season to start. Grand finals is the "PRIZE" that is awarded to people that compete in ALL of the monthly tournaments at a high level AND the thing that helps drive entries for members to get in the FIVE tournaments they need to bowl the qualifier.
The past season we went to a 24 game round robin format on three different patterns. Bypassing the history of how we got to that format from having a tournament an champions and high points tournament in the 1990's in an effort to make the post smaller...I would like to advocate for a format from our recent history (3 patterns and 18 games) for the following reasons:
1. Fatigue/injury: Keeping in mind that we have a lot of "3 game a week league bowlers" that make up our membership - I feel like the extra six games is too much bowling physically for some. Not every one is in their 20's and bowls 4 days a week because : BOWLING IS LIFE. Keep in mind we will have some entrants in their 60's. We risk having people damage their bodies the longer the format. I believe the quality of bowling suffers the longer the format, which is a negative for the competitor and spectator. Grand Finals should not be a battle of attrition. Keep in mind that the people outside of the top 16 with five tournaments in have to bowl an additional 5 games (plus 40 minutes of warmup) Exhaustion/Sorness is not the lasting takeaway emotion/feeling that will lead to increased participation the following year.
2.TIME: Bowling 24 games vs 18 takes longer - time should definitely be a factor to consider with our increased footprint in the state. Last year GF was in Bend - which was great for people in Bend, however the drive home was 3 hours to Klamath, 4 hours to Roseburg/Medford and almost six if you lived in North Bend. This year it will be almost five hours home if you live in bend. Getting done a little earlier in the afternoon allows people to travel home at a decent time - which benefits people with jobs the next day, poor night vision, babysitters they need to relieve ect. - getting home before 10:30 P.M is going to sound appealing after bowling all weekend I am sure......
3.Increased Prize fund: Bowling more games costs more money. Six extra games for 24 bowlers @ 3 dollars a game is 432 dollars extra in lineage that is not in the prize fund checks. (if we are paying 2.75 ? it's 396 dollars). Assuming the top five of a prize payout would stay the same, that's an extra $22.73 for spots 6-24. That sounds a lot like dinner or gas money to me. We need to decide if the COST of bowling the extra 6 games is WORTH it. Often the Grand Finals check will be the biggest check all year for a lot of people and can help offset the cost of participation during the year.
4. Transition: without getting into the whole left vs. right debate - there is a devils advocate point of view on how transition has the potential to negatively impact the outcome of the competition regardless of hand. Before you get offended I am bringing it up hear me out. I think that we can ALL agree that the more games are bowled on a lane the more that transition of oil being depleted in the fronts and deposited on the back end effects ball motion. This requires adjustments in ball speed, laydown point, release, launch angle and equipment. This is a double edged sword when bowling on "patterns" whether you are left or right handed. Deleting topography out of the conversation as a topic beyond our control. Consider the following: Tougher patterns -If you are left handed and the pattern is a little tougher and your look isn't that great -guess what if never gets any better for the block (Ask Greg Hafner about last year if you don't believe me) If you are right handed there will be a friction zone that develops, which often makes the condition more scorable. Easier patterns -transition a great deal and ultimately becomes tougher the longer they are bowled on for right handers and generally stay easier for left handers playing from more direct angles which increases carry percentage. YES, that is bowling - but the longer a lane is bowled on the more differences good or bad depending on hand/pattern will effect outcome. This may be a small difference, but in my opinion it has the potential to take away from the belief that the person who wins the tournament is the one who threw it the closest, picked up their spares and made smart choices with lane play and equipment. With largely untested patterns, inequitable transition can have too big of a role in determining outcome. Not to mention, the less transition the less the reliance on a completely different "burn" arsenal. Some folks are packing around several balls just for the burned up lanes in match play. Not every one can afford that extensive of an arsenal.
5.Illusion of Equity: some may argue that if you bowl everyone once that is the only fair way to do it. That could possible be true if we reoiled for each game and used the same pattern for each of the games. Well no one would do that the tournament would take 3 days to bowl with 45 minute breaks between games. That's just silly right. It is often counterproductive to legislate fairness into a sport with an invisible playing environment in which the players change that playing environment. Life is not fair. Bowling each person has never been a priority in crowning a champion - look at the monthly tournaments - we don't have carryover - actually shortening possible number of games to decide winner AND we don't bowl everyone once. At the end of they day I have never heard anyone say that someone didn't deserve to win because they didn't bowl the guy that finished 14th??? Yep that totally would have changed everything. Also, if YOU have to bowl Brian Tinsley and Bob Reed and Chris Breshears on a pattern that plays the gutter one block that's a bad draw for you if that is not your strong suite- which is the same as one of them having to bowl Jason Taylor, Ryan Besaw and Tyger Miller when the best way to play them is off the left gutter cap and swinging it 20 boards. It is WHO you bowl WHEN under WHAT circumstances that effects the outcome - lets not pretend that by bowling everyone in a randomly generated scenario with varying lane patterns bowling is FAIR. At the end of the day, there is something to be said for styles make fights - that doesn't go away if you bowl everyone. 18 games is plenty of bowling to be able to crown a champion.
Oil pattern thoughts
I happen to really like the 3 different pattern idea. It has the potential to benefit competition by rewarding versatility, consistency and spare shooting. However, in keeping in mind who this organization is for (see above) and what should be our ethos (FUN) I think that there is an opportunity to improve our approach to selecting the patterns. I would like to point out that when you get too far outside the box as far as too short or too slick - it benefits the people with 18 bowling balls and more tournament experience. THIS IS BAD. While it is certainly not my intent to disparage anyone's ability, people with less experience and not on ball staff should not put at a disadvantage for the sake of hyper-competitiveness. Like I previously stated, the SOBA/SOAS is FOR the weekend warrior, 3 game a week league bowler. I don't want us as a group to lose sight of that. Hyper-competitive tournaments on really challenging patterns certainly are a thing - they are just not OUR thing. If that is YOUR thing, I welcome you to go bowl the PBA or OBA. The OBA bowls on mostly sport patterns and has 10x the population to "draw from" and their last tournament that displays results on their website they had 53 entries. Take this a step further - the PBA used to be affordable and there definitely was a prestige factor associated with it commonly getting over 100 entries- now the regionals are almost 300 dollars to bowl as a non-member and they are really lucky to break 40 entries at some places. I mention this to point out that the really challenging sport patterns approach to running a tournament club seems to be an abject failure even in areas with more scratch bowlers and/or more prestige associated with the competition. Our success is based on being fun and affordable. Bowling on patterns and averaging 170 is not fun, requiring an arsenal of ten bowling balls to be competitive is not affordable. The very perception of needing ten bowling balls to be competitive is bad for the this organization.
This particular section appears to be offensive to people from the north - I will attempt to further develop my position which may or may not make you as a collective feel better. First of all I would, I was mostly referring to the PBA regional program as an abject failure, but after re-reading my post I can see how the OBA thought I was taking a shot at them. Not my intent. And yes you guys have some really talented bowlers that make up your organization - and that talent level is much higher that the SOBA's from players 1-50. Again, the area has over ten times the population that Southern Oregon, so by the numbers that is what anyone would expect. Regardless - congrats. You are however different from the SOBA, and I don't feel like it is offensive in anyway to compare the two to develop a larger point about what is good for our organization (because they are different) - if you read my entire post I am telling you what the SOBA is and what it is not. The OBA is what the SOBA is not - a more hypercompetitive sport bowling tournament much closer to what the PBA regional program used to be in its "glory days". If that is the desire of your membership - a "premier" sport bowling scratch tournament than mission accomplished, you are successful by that measure. However, because of our demographics that is not viable - about ten years ago now the SOBA leadership adopted a more challenging approach to lane conditions and we went from 85 bowlers per tournament very quickly to 45, at which time the proprietors in Southern Oregon began to question whether they even wanted to host an event. Anthony Thompson has pointed out that OUR sport is in trouble - he is right. Scratch bowlers as a subset of league bowers not only have more of a hassle factor from a proprietors viewpoint, they spend less money than open play bowlers typically. The measuring stick for the SOBA success is participation - higher participation rates offset the potential monetary risk a center takes by allowing us to bowl. I believe that if we want to continue to participate in the sport we love we need to be aware of that and appreciate our host centers. To provide context to abject failure- this is the state of the PBA regional program. There was a regional @ double decker lanes that got 46 entries, 9 of them were from adjacent states, That means they got 37 entries from California? Rhonert Park is one hour north of San Francisco/Oakland and 2 hours north of San Jose. That's almost 3 million people just directly to the south of them, close to double that if you include all directions. The regional program used be way more successful when they kept the entry fee down - which meant more checks for everyone. There are always 3 groups of bowlers that make up a field regardless of level - the people that are looking to get better or just have fun and almost never cash - the people that cash pretty regularly that are a little better than the bottom group but cash somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 the time and the elite 15 percent that cash most of the time. When the PBA jacked the price up it got too expensive for the bottom group to justify the cost, they quit. The middle group was now the bottom group and half of them quit. The top 15 percent of the field still bowls and will always bowl. You can't make a living at bowling - it may be time to accept that and move out of your moms basement because your almost 30 now...Bowling is in bad shape because as an industry we skipped econ 211 or college altogether. When the price of things goes up the demand goes down, if you suck the enjoyment out of an activity for people that don't view it as an occupation the demand at any given price also goes down. Double decker lanes is a 50 lane center and had to PAY the PBA to host a regional - I think that would have penciled better for them if the place was full. Part of reason that scratch bowling is in trouble is that we forget that bowling is a business, decisions are often driven by some of the better bowlers short sided-ness about what is good for them. And if you are still looking for any reason to get offended - I am not calling anyone mentally retarded - I am just pointing out that what motivates bowlers to show up an participate can be very different from the elite bowler - but their entry fee goes into the prize fund and to the host center just like the participants that are PBA good or aspire to be.
Pattern one: I believe that one of the patterns should definitely be on the house pattern. Something relatively easy on both sides that is higher scoring. It should always be the final pattern. easier to bowl on if your a little sore or tired, not too tricky if your mentally fatigued and allows you to leave the tournament on a good note for the drive home and looking towards the next season. For the people that are in the bottom they should feel like they have chance to get hot win some matches and move up. It also requires less bowling balls to be competitive. The drive home is way better when you feel like your equipment for the last block was good and you averaged over 215 vs you averaged 162 and you couldn't get anything you own to wrinkle and now look to buy some 250 ball that hooks in the box, comes sanded and will roll like dog-crap on the league pattern. Basically a boat anchor you can carry around so you can be competitive at next years grand finals that you may not even bowl because you didn't have any fun all weekend.
Pattern two: I also believe this should be higher scoring - there are different version of Kegel patterns that are designed to be house shot-like - pick one that is different that the existing house pattern in either volume or length or both. Some house shots are easy and a little slicker, some are easier but require you to bend the ball more from right to left. Pick a pattern that compliments the existing house pattern and make it the first pattern of the tournament. Regardless of how Sunday goes, allow people to leave there and go out to dinner with a smile on their face and hope for the future. This is also a better scenario than driving for four hours to go to a 2 day bowling tournament and have to bowl on some piece of crap pattern (red square) average 173 and can't decide whether to spend 25 bucks on dinner at olive garden or 3.79 at taco bell because your checks going to suck or go directly to the hotel and drown yourself in the pool (not with alcohol...like literally stay under water until your dead.)
Pattern three: here is the chance to bowl on your sportier condition. first block on Sunday so you still have a chance to salvage a good time if it doesn't go well. Again - red square should not be a consideration. Some super short dry pattern that requires a urethane ball is also not what we should be looking for - again why allow the perception that you need to have an "extra bowling ball" to be competitive once a year maybe to bowl on a pattern that's not fun to have a basis in reality. Something challenging but playable like Eiffel tower is fine, or the last block pattern from the epicenter 2 years ago or something that's still 3:1 ratio between 37 and 43 feet. not super long or super short. The idea is not to embarrass anyone. Some people may bowl just fine on a really tough pattern for a variety of factors - again good job - but some of our membership will average 160. Not only is this no fun as a bowler - it can't be great as a spectator either (ask Steve Mead from last year if that was fun to watch).
The counter argument may be that : well we don't dictate what the centers put out. RIGHT (maybe)- but that's intellectually dishonest as an absolute. It is not some random miracle that Six out of 8 tournaments we bowl on the house shot. This is because that is what we tell them we want -There are two centers that like to get fancy with what they are putting out (you could argue at the detriment of their own league bowlers) with varying degrees of success - sometimes it's a change that maintains competitive scoring pace and sometimes its a dumpster fire. Now, there MAY some limitations depending on oiling machine/lane topography on what they CAN put out or some limitations on what they are WILLING to put out. But, it does not benefit the center who is in the bowling entertainment business to make the lanes so crappy it is hard to watch as a spectator in addition to decreasing the enjoyment level of their OWN league bowlers and the people that travel to compete in the their centers annually. The idea is to make these people happy so the come back and stay and keep spending money - lets not forget they do operate a business. Every center that deviates from the house shot during grand finals does that at the behest of the organization based on "what WE are looking for". This input may come from the board, tournament director or the people that bowl SOBA's from there. If this communication is 3 different sport patters one easy one medium and one hard you pick - this is setting us up to fail and will lead to scenarios like last year. WHO PICKS and ARE THEY QUALIFIED to PICK. The 157 average guy that unjams pinsetters is not, someone with no sport bowling experience is not. Last year what we got was one that has medium hard, one that was really hard and one that was impossible and much harder than any PBA condition EVER. I would like to petition Kegel to rename red square to Red flaming dogcrap. Seriously, that was not bowling it was satire. Furthermore, I don't know how many times we have had a center put something out and say : well that didn't turn out like I had hoped. Lets not do that again. They only say that when the attempt is made to put out something other that the house shot or the house shot with more oil in the middle so they hold up. Mostly the way in which things didn't turn out they way they had hoped is that THEY WERE WAY HARDER.
Without getting into specific instances but when you put down a sport pattern and people play them different with varying degrees of skill and surface prep from all over the lane - things tend not to go as good as people with higher rev rates all playing in the same area with similar surfaces because they've seen the condition before like the in PBA. We have had centers modify their pattern and result is exactly what is intended - a slightly more challenging condition which is still playable for most. However, 1/3 of the field averages under 180 and this is not ideal for our demographic. Sometimes things don't really go as planned and the top 1/3 of the field average between 180 and 190. Too difficult for our group, if you look at the bottom half of the field there are a lot of folks averaging in the 160's. This violates the ethos of what our organization is about and frankly will lead to less participation. Not the goal, which I think is important for some of the people who enjoy more challenging conditions to keep in mind. Would you rather compete on tougher lane conditions for 17 checks or softer ones for 32 checks. Seems like its not only better for you, but for everyone including the center.
In summary,
I believe that 24 games does not yield any positive aspect to Grand Finals weekend; the benefits of 18 games are listed above. Less time, Less transition, More Money, Less chance of Injury and less exposure to a condition that has the potential to suck for you (wrong equipment, wrong hand, wrong rev rate/style ).
In addition to keep consistent with what makes this organization successful, bowling on flat challenging PBA like patterns should be the exception not the norm for Grand Finals weekend. We crown champions and write checks all year and people are generally happy with the level of competition and feel like the best bowler won. There will never be a time when someone getting some breaks on carry or breaking up splits on horrible shots doesn't beat you sometimes - bowling on sport condition doesn't change the sport - in fact has the potential to magnify this phenomenon. Getting the right ball in you hand, your feet in the right spot and matching you game up to strike while picking up you spares is the recipe for success on house shot as well as a sport shot. If your mindset is that: Well people just spray the ball around and this isn't really bowling I'd be more successful if the lanes were "FAIR" because I throw it so close - newsflash you aren't that good at striking and creating area superstar - you go bowl the PBA and let me know if you start beating those guys when you are posting and then running out flat tens as you pure them. Or the bowl OBA's you could have been entry 54 and they could have cashed one more spot surely it be "you"!!!
My point is that I don't get the overwhelming sense that the majority of people WANT to bowl on sports shots - The Sport bowling is important mindset was amongst the leadership when we bottomed out at 40 something entries. I think it is that same mentality that is driving the sport pattern at GF decision making. Obviously the marketplace was telling you people don't like that , people that bowl our organization. They voted with their participation. I really think that the whole bowling on sport condition at grand finals has been promoted as something that we HAVE to do or that EVERYONE wants. I think that the reality is that the majority don't mind bowling on something slightly challenging once in a while during grand finals, but that to have 18 games of it is not really why they bowled all year and ultimately won't be fun. Which is the point right. FUN and COMPETITION.
In the infamous words of Steve Mead: Thanks for being able to read:)