I have a couple of questions that I have been wondering about. When I was younger the ABC defined "amateur" as someone who derived 2/3s of his income from bowling. The amateurs of today are making as much as the pros, which when you think about it is really riduculous.If all u do is bowl then you are a pro. the problem i have with that is that they can bowl in amateur tournaments, and that is simply wrong. Also, what ever happened to the concept of adjusting and moving on the approach instead of standing in one spot and changing balls till you find one that works?
Now the difference between the Pros and Amateurs is holding a PBA card. Many of the top Amateurs actually make more than the Pros since they can bowl in tournaments that have richer prize funds.
As for the adjustments, many still try to move before making a ball change, but these are generally those who bowled before the days of reactive resin or at least with out the huge choice of balls that is out there today designed for different reactions. Most of the bowlers from the very modern era believe that adjusting is changing balls and know nothing about changing hand positions or finger positions for a different reaction.
Robert, you can bet and win lots of money on the side of testing the very best amateur achievers to see if they do much more than just change balls to be very successful. When you get into saying this one or that one is too good and needs to be banned from bowling in open scratch tournaments because they are too successful it can quickly become a slippery slope when those marginally successful become the new highly successful.
There is a definitely a problem that needs to be resolved. Bowling balls are too important and for many affordability is a factor in their success or failure. Being able and having the knowledge to 'shim the lanes' at the National Open for the ten man Riggs combo, and a few other highly successful combos, is something that should not be possible but is in the game of today. In the very early stages of increasing the importance of the bowling ball there was one of the top stars of another era who got caught placing the label of the company that hired him on the ball of another company he felt was needed to be competitive.
Kegel has been active in the development of a tournament ball to be used by everyone and they have a very tough task since there are all kinds of successful bowlers that could do well with whatever they came up with while others would be hurt if they are successful crankers or successful strokers depending on what kind of ball they come up with.
I don't know if there is anyone out there working on this problem and close to a solution but bowling will be better if there is and whatever it is adopted and accepted.
Don Gates
Indeed, "adopted and accepted" will be the major challenge, no matter what the solution.
It is questionable to me whether or not the current SOB was adopted and accepted by anyone other than the bowling industry and the governing body. The memership numbers would indicate to me since it was adopted that quite a large percentage of membership perhaps did not accept it. Regardless of what those members may or may not have wanted SOB was adopted and accepted and today we find ourselves with far fewer members. I suppose we must all just adopt and accept the fact that bowling will never be a game worthy of respect and that bowlers will always be regarded as non athletes participating in a game without challenge. Integrity cannot be marketed.
The system of bowling was never accepted so far as ball companies makers of bowling pins,, bowling centers and bowling associations being willing to mutally agree to accept remedies that might hurt business competition and membership. There were far more members before SOB was even considered and membership dropped after with no proof that easy lane conditions had anything to do with it dropping.
You keep using the word we when it should be I since that is the one person you can speak for. What you know about System of Bowling can probably be placed on the head of a pin with plenty of room for thousands of angels. You could prove me wrong but I bet it would take lots of research for you to do it.
Shame on you for your negative comments Don. Robert thought that you was insulting him.
Don,
I am surprised at you. You know very well that while there is "no proof that easy lane conditions had anything to do with it [membership] dropping," there is likewise no proof to prove it did not. No one REALLY knows why membership is dropping, though our leadership should have some type of idea. On top of that, you and MANY others on these boards have continued to talk about how the SOB is a failure and how many of you were against it originally, yourself included.
Bottom line is that Skullpants is correct, the vast majority of members had nothing to do with approval of the SOB. Whether or not members have left because of it, that is a different question. But your outright disdain for Skull and his viewpoints is getting old. If you don't like what he has to say, that is fine. But for the benefit of all of us, please try to do it in 30 words or less. But your constant back and forth is getting as old as Fish's back and forth with Randy. Both are getting old.
Eagle Hunter, what do you think the system of bowling is that was not approved by the majority of bowlers? Can you name anything at all where the majority of bowlers had a hand in approving anything, the majority of men and women in anything at all having a hand in approving anything? Even in a national election only a bit over 50% will even vote so the winner will get only a bit over 30% of the population voting for them at best, probably less. It's pretty much a no brainer to say the majority did not approve S.O.B. when probably 90% and more do not even know what it is.
If you are talking about scratch bowlers representing the 2.5 million bowlers with views that have not been approved, what do you think the majority of them want that is not available to them right now? Is it not possible for scratch bowlers, like Skullpants passes him off as beng but is not, to bowl in PBA sport leagues on competitive conditions? Can't scratch bowlers compete in Regional PBA tournaments, High Roller type events, weekly and monthly events run by organizations for scratch bowlers on competitive conditions, create their own membership organization like so many others have for lesser skilled and conduct their own tournaments as as so many other organizations do? Can't scratch bowlers create and bowl in leagues using all plastic balls with no creative weight blocks if they want to? Are scratch bowlers forced to bowl in handicap leagues and tournaments on easy conditions with high handicaps?
There have been plenty of studies made on why membership numbers are decreasing and mine was one of them. In Syracuse we made 17,000 calls off our orphan bowler list ( men and women who once bowled but did not bowl in any sanctioned leagues the previous season in Syracuse) as a mid season attempt to fill holes. There was virtually no mentions of easy bowling conditions being the reason any of them left bowling. Even the men and womeh you hear complaining about easy conditions have not quit bowling.
[quote user="EagleHunter] But your outright disdain for Skull and his viewpoints is getting old. If you don't like what he has to say, that is fine. But for the benefit of all of us, please try to do it in 30 words or less. But your constant back and forth is getting as old as Fish's back and forth with Randy. Both are getting old.
So are you the moderator of the forum now? Are you and skullpants and Fishy the only ones allowed to have an opinion on these boards? Your opinion means no more than anyone elses here, just in case no one has explained that to you yet.
If it's old to you, just pass it by and move on to something else. My outright disdain for skullpants and Bill Herald is legit. One yammers away about being a (me, myself and I player) with absolutely no feeling toward his fellow teammates and the other yammers away about how his lackluster bowling career should merit Hall of Fame recognition.
Both are pathetic examples of what bowling represents whether you like it or not.
Don...so much for 30 words or less.
Paragraph 1 - the Don Gates' contradiction: "Eagle Hunter, what do you think the system of bowling is that was not approved by the majority of bowlers?" Followed up by: "It's pretty much a no brainer to say the majority did not approve S.O.B. when probably 90% and more do not even know what it is." Thank you Don. That was exactly what Skull had claimed earlier. The majority did not approve the SOB.
Paragraph 2 - 7 lines of babble with 5 questions...not sure what you are looking for. Skull claimed that the SOB was accepted and approved by "the bowling industry and the governing body" only, not the majority. Based on the number of posters here that believe that USBC leadership is in the pockets of industry integers, and not looking out for either the "good of the sport" or for the "good of its members," as well as your statements from Paragraph 1, it appears that perhaps Skull is on to something. Nowhere was anything claimed about the scratch player as you went on (and on) about.
Paragraph 3 - How many years ago was it when this Syracuse survey took place? You did your survey and got your results (however dated they may be). Others have done similar surveys and gotten results that were different from yours. Until USBC does a National survey and publishes its results to its membership, I will withhold judgement as to what the real many causes may be. But I will NOT disregard a possible reason, simply because some cannot believe it to be true.
Randy...you are lucky that I am NOT the moderator of these forums. By now, I would have issued warnings to you and Fish for your constant bickering, and possibly have banned you both! If you want to go at each other, go right ahead. Do it in your own post or do it via private messages. Most of us could care less about your never ending urinating contest.
I respect everyone's right to their opinion (even ones that are wrong), and I respect their right to post here. However, you and Fish have hijacked countless threads with your never-ending "old married couple" act. Recently, Don and Skull have been engaging in a similar, albeit far more civil, hijacking of threads.
There are countless opinions on these boards that I have the highest respect for. Personal attacks and constant rehashing of the same old thing...what is this the Presidential election? If you have an opinion about the SUBJECT THREAD, please post your opinions. If you wish to attack someone personally, or rehash an argument that already has countless pages dedicated to it, do it elsewhere.
Eagle Hunter/ skullpants what do youse consider the System of Bowling is that was approved by ???, not the majority of bowlers? What national surveys can youse referr to that list easy bowling conditions as a major reason for membership decreases?
My survey was conducted to try and bring those no longer bowling back with the four women callers I hired armed with a list of questions about that subject in addition to openings available at participating centers who supplied the info and contributed to covering the costs which included radio, tv, newspaper advertising that produced about 400 returneees plus one entirely new league.
Yes, it was taken many years ago so may not be relevant today, 1993 I believe but my senior memory might be off by a year or two in either direction. I had hopes of it becoming an annual promotion but it turned out to be a one shot deal when at at a BPAA meeting the centers wanted to continue but rather than offer to double their contributions to make it even better wanted to halve it which made it nearly impossible to conduct so it ended. However, all those calls went only to men and women who once bowled in SBA but did not bowl in any sanctoned league in SBA the previous season which landed them on the Orphan bowler list we worked from.
