Chado: My reference would be the person who posted earlier. He currently carries a 197 league avg but only has a 165 tournament avg. His league avg puts him in the Open division but his tourn. avg. puts him in Classified. If he were to bowl in the Classified division and shoot 1890 (just like this guy), someone would have a problem with it. And they would complain, start a thread and have over 400 posts. Just because he shoots 1890, doesn't mean his composite avg will go above 180. Now I suppose you could say that he should bowl the Classified division until he wins "X" amount in which he must bowl the Open division for "Y" number of years afterwards. That might work. I just don't want to make the true bowler pay. It happens to much in society today. And, if the true bowler pays, participation will decrease. Its happening already.
My reference would be the person who posted earlier. He currently carries a 197 league avg but only has a 165 tournament avg. His league avg puts him in the Open division but his tourn. avg. puts him in Classified. If he were to bowl in the Classified division and shoot 1890 (just like this guy), someone would have a problem with it. And they would complain, start a thread and have over 400 posts.
Just because he shoots 1890, doesn't mean his composite avg will go above 180. Now I suppose you could say that he should bowl the Classified division until he wins "X" amount in which he must bowl the Open division for "Y" number of years afterwards. That might work. I just don't want to make the true bowler pay. It happens to much in society today. And, if the true bowler pays, participation will decrease. Its happening already.
The chances of a "true" 165 average bowler shooting 1890 are pretty astronomical. And if his average at Nationals is 165, he belongs in the Classified division, I don't care what his house rat average is.
And just for WIW, the person whose bowling started this thread, has shot well over 1850 two years in a row. I'm not about to calculate those odds.
If they ever decided to allow your tournament average, I think it would be subject to the average correction chart for Sport Bowling, especially now that it is certified. In the past it wasn't certified but was said to meet Sport Bowling specifications. Since 165 adjusts to 179, that bowler might qualify for classifed, depending on exactly how the new rule were written (could a higher league average still prohibit a bowler from classified, etc.).
Belchmo: Maybe we should start using the higher of your league average and your tournament average.
Maybe we should start using the higher of your league average and your tournament average.
No matter what rules are set in place, people will always find a way around them. If a 210 bowler wants to show that he is a 180 bowler, he can always join a non-sanctioned league and bowl his average and then a sanctioned league and bag. This is I want to say the 3rd or 4th thread that has talked about this guy. At this point, nothing is going to happen to him. People may complain but he won't get DQ'ed or anything like that.
GenPounder: No matter what rules are set in place, people will always find a way around them. If a 210 bowler wants to show that he is a 180 bowler, he can always join a non-sanctioned league and bowl his average and then a sanctioned league and bag. This is I want to say the 3rd or 4th thread that has talked about this guy. At this point, nothing is going to happen to him. People may complain but he won't get DQ'ed or anything like that.
This may be true, but haven't you noticed how posters (myself included) just love to pummel equine flesh beyond life????
kellyv: GenPounder: No matter what rules are set in place, people will always find a way around them. If a 210 bowler wants to show that he is a 180 bowler, he can always join a non-sanctioned league and bowl his average and then a sanctioned league and bag. This is I want to say the 3rd or 4th thread that has talked about this guy. At this point, nothing is going to happen to him. People may complain but he won't get DQ'ed or anything like that. This may be true, but haven't you noticed how posters (myself included) just love to pummel equine flesh beyond life????
Now that is funny and I am guilty of it also. Time to put this one to bed and work on another one......LOL
Well, to anyone that knows anything about the law, here it goes.
When I agree to a set of standards and sign my USBC Membership card, that is a binding CONTRACT. I signed my membership card for 2007-2008 to abide by given and publically published established rules. I also sent in my money for inclusion into the 2009 Open Championships in Las Vegas, NV under those same rules. I received my confirmation and was assigned my date and time for bowling in Las Vegas, NV which completed the CONTRACT.
What happens when rules are changed which effect my eligibility to bowl in the Classified Division, which I requested, and currently have the CURRENTLY ACCEPTABLE CLASSIFIED DIVISION AVERAGE and the USBC agreed to that when they accepted my money? With the proposed rule change I now could become reclassified as a Regular Division Bowler. The reverse is also true when you could be a Regular Division bowler but now with the average limit being raised to cover Bowler K you become a Classified Division bowler. The CONTRACT now becomes null and void. When I ask for my money back there is NO RECOURSE to USBC but to refund it IMMEDIATELY.
Have I made any errors in my assumptions and statements?
joe1967: Well, to anyone that knows anything about the law, here it goes. When I agree to a set of standards and sign my USBC Membership card, that is a binding CONTRACT. I signed my membership card for 2007-2008 to abide by given and publically published established rules. I also sent in my money for inclusion into the 2009 Open Championships in Las Vegas, NV under those same rules. I received my confirmation and was assigned my date and time for bowling in Las Vegas, NV which completed the CONTRACT. What happens when rules are changed which effect my eligibility to bowl in the Classified Division, which I requested, and currently have the CURRENTLY ACCEPTABLE CLASSIFIED DIVISION AVERAGE and the USBC agreed to that when they accepted my money? With the proposed rule change I now could become reclassified as a Regular Division Bowler. The reverse is also true when you could be a Regular Division bowler but now with the average limit being raised to cover Bowler K you become a Classified Division bowler. The CONTRACT now becomes null and void. When I ask for my money back there is NO RECOURSE to USBC but to refund it IMMEDIATELY. Have I made any errors in my assumptions and statements?
Have you submitted a written complaint to the USBC?
AuburnBowl: Everyone on this thread, with one exception, talks as if they are all saints and would run to the registration desk with their 178 non-compliant sport average to declare themselves for the Regular division. POPPYCOCK !!! If your a true bowler, you're going to try to strike/spare every frame. I think that every bowler at Nationals is a true bowler.
Everyone on this thread, with one exception, talks as if they are all saints and would run to the registration desk with their 178 non-compliant sport average to declare themselves for the Regular division. POPPYCOCK !!!
If your a true bowler, you're going to try to strike/spare every frame. I think that every bowler at Nationals is a true bowler.
If you're a "true bowler" you don't think of ways to to bend the rules to meet your agenda (which in this case is crystal clear)
If you're a "true bowler" you report at the tournament registration desk that your 178 average was BOOKED in a league that put down a sport shot that was NON CERTIFIED AS SUCH so you can be RERATED into the REGULAR DIVISION where you BELONG.
That's the definition of a "TRUE BOWLER"
GenPounder,
No I haven't submitted a written complaint to the USBC but I did send several emails about the Bowler K SITUATION to Brian Lewis and even Arlene Schwab. I even sent an email to Chuck Landis the author of the arcticle in the Marion newspaper about the Bowler K Situation.
Because there is an individual that is in touch with other bowling contacts in Indiana (he is very upset too) I decided to let him and his contacts get together information about Bowler K. As I stated before, rerating him is not even an option but disqualification is.
joe1967.
To answer your question. Its at the time of the accepted original contract. If a rule is changed, regardless of what rule it is, the original contract is binding to the original rule. The only way this contract can be changed is if it has a claus which states that something in the contract can be changed either with both parties agreeing or if it states either/or party can change it. It is very unlikely that the lather would be stated. If that was the case, who cares about a contract if one or the other party can change it at will. Most of the time, your contract will state whether or not it can be changed and what/who can change it. If it states neither, then the original rule must be in effect for all the parties involved. In which no rules could be changed that would change your eligibilty.
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!
joe1967 :
I guess my point is that there are a bunch of people writing on here and making some pretty good suggestions. Why not put them on paper and send them in? E-mails are easily deleted/ignored. It happens all of the time. Written word is a much better way to get your point across.
For those that have suggested filing a formal complaint, it may or may not work depending on which division you are in. Last year, I was so upset by the Mustare thing that I looked into having a third party audit done of the whole issue. The answer that came back from the USBC was that since I was not an affected party, I had no rights to do so and it would not be allowed. I imagine the same might hold true here as well. Unless you are in the classified division, the protest may not be recognized. Personally I believe that we are all affected but from a legal standpoint, I understand the difference.
I will also say - WOW!! I cannot believe I am reading this about poor Bowler K.
Bottom line - if you are bowling in a house that runs a "PBA Experience" league that decides NOT to cetify as "sport comlpiant," (for WHATEVER reason) then YOU, my friend, are CHEATING - your ENTIRE LEAGUE is CHEATING.
I think "Sandbagging" can have many definitions. You dont have to throw balls in the ditch on purpose to be a "bagger." To bowl on a sport condition that is not "sport compliant" and then bowl in a tournament without adjusting your average using the "sport average" conversion table IS SANDBAGGING! Now, if you have no clue you are bowling on a sport pattern that is not sport certified, then, I may so OK - not your fault.
But IMHO, if you are an Association President, there is NO WAY you could be ignorant to this and if you are then you should NOT be the Association President.
dgarren: I will also say - WOW!! I cannot believe I am reading this about poor Bowler K. Bottom line - if you are bowling in a house that runs a "PBA Experience" league that decides NOT to cetify as "sport comlpiant," (for WHATEVER reason) then YOU, my friend, are CHEATING - your ENTIRE LEAGUE is CHEATING. I think "Sandbagging" can have many definitions. You dont have to throw balls in the ditch on purpose to be a "bagger." To bowl on a sport condition that is not "sport compliant" and then bowl in a tournament without adjusting your average using the "sport average" conversion table IS SANDBAGGING! Now, if you have no clue you are bowling on a sport pattern that is not sport certified, then, I may so OK - not your fault. But IMHO, if you are an Association President, there is NO WAY you could be ignorant to this and if you are then you should NOT be the Association President.
