KnuckleHead
Vic Represent
Feel so sorry for this girl who did not get this approved.
Sport League 300 Shot Down
The other case, which I want to focus on here, involves 21-year-old Junior Team USA member Jamie Foster, who rolled 299 and 300 games in back-to-back weeks in her Junior Gold Sport League at Rowlett Bowl-A-Rama in Rowlett, Texas. She shot 300-656 on October 6 and 299-676 on October 13, 2005. She also rolled a 300-822 in her non-sport league on September 24. As a result of the two high series, her Sport League average on 10-20 after 18 games was 209. Her non-sport average in the non-sport King Pin League for 12 games was 241. As usually happens in these cases, Jamie appealed the initial rejection of the scores, and on January 6, 2006, she got a letter from USBC CEO Roger Dalkin telling her the USBC Legal and Legislative Committee denied her appeal.
Dalkin's letter was short – only two sentences, and the key words were "not recognize the 299 and 300 games as Sport Awards", meaning she would receive normal USBC non-sport recognition. The difference? Nothing, or a beautiful crystal trophy (for the 300) worth several hundred dollars, not to mention her name in the record books as one of the few youth bowlers, and even fewer females who have achieved the feat. There is an award for a non-sport 300, but only one per year, and since she already had one in her non-sport league, she received no new award. Apparently, her achievement will only be remembered by a few numbers on paper with asterisks.
When Rowlett Bowl-A-Rama owner Chuck Lande got his copy of Dalkin's letter, he responded with an email to Roger asking for more details of the reasons for denying the scores and the appeal, and Roger deferred to USBC Rules Counselor Michael Spridco. Spridco's reply to Lande was a little terse, and only three sentences. It ends with "Feel free to contact us should you have additional questions regarding this matter."
Duh! Of course Lande has additional questions! That's why he asked for "more detailed information". When you get two sentence letters and emails about such a serious matter, it's easy to understand Lande and Foster's frustration. They want to know EXACTLY why the "lanes were not compliant". It seems a little arrogant for two professional people to send such short letters about this, as if they don't have time to explain the process or details. It's as if they are saying 'How dare you question our authority?'
Chris
Sport League 300 Shot Down
The other case, which I want to focus on here, involves 21-year-old Junior Team USA member Jamie Foster, who rolled 299 and 300 games in back-to-back weeks in her Junior Gold Sport League at Rowlett Bowl-A-Rama in Rowlett, Texas. She shot 300-656 on October 6 and 299-676 on October 13, 2005. She also rolled a 300-822 in her non-sport league on September 24. As a result of the two high series, her Sport League average on 10-20 after 18 games was 209. Her non-sport average in the non-sport King Pin League for 12 games was 241. As usually happens in these cases, Jamie appealed the initial rejection of the scores, and on January 6, 2006, she got a letter from USBC CEO Roger Dalkin telling her the USBC Legal and Legislative Committee denied her appeal.
Dalkin's letter was short – only two sentences, and the key words were "not recognize the 299 and 300 games as Sport Awards", meaning she would receive normal USBC non-sport recognition. The difference? Nothing, or a beautiful crystal trophy (for the 300) worth several hundred dollars, not to mention her name in the record books as one of the few youth bowlers, and even fewer females who have achieved the feat. There is an award for a non-sport 300, but only one per year, and since she already had one in her non-sport league, she received no new award. Apparently, her achievement will only be remembered by a few numbers on paper with asterisks.
When Rowlett Bowl-A-Rama owner Chuck Lande got his copy of Dalkin's letter, he responded with an email to Roger asking for more details of the reasons for denying the scores and the appeal, and Roger deferred to USBC Rules Counselor Michael Spridco. Spridco's reply to Lande was a little terse, and only three sentences. It ends with "Feel free to contact us should you have additional questions regarding this matter."
Duh! Of course Lande has additional questions! That's why he asked for "more detailed information". When you get two sentence letters and emails about such a serious matter, it's easy to understand Lande and Foster's frustration. They want to know EXACTLY why the "lanes were not compliant". It seems a little arrogant for two professional people to send such short letters about this, as if they don't have time to explain the process or details. It's as if they are saying 'How dare you question our authority?'
Chris
