Handicaps

[Bigsy]

Hello All.

I am just curious as to what the handicaps are based on for other leagues.

Ours was 90% of 230 but changed to 95% this season.

It was done because some of the lower averaged bowlers felt they were being hard done by.

Just wondering other peoples thoughts on this. My thought is rather than relying on handicap, why not try to get your avaerage up.

Bigsy...

 

[AJD]

One league I am in is 89%, the other is 90%.

If you do the math (tabulate the averages, then calculate what the score would be if a bowler bowled average and added the handicap), you would see that lower average bowlers are diddled - if both bowlers bowl average.

 

[Tezza01]

The league I'm in is 80% of 200. Was almost changed this year to help lower average bowlers but wasn't in the end. It was going to be changed to 80% of 220, which wouldn't have helped anyway.

 

[Roysa]

Hi Bigsy,

Interesting topic. What average are the bowlers that are being hard done by? Also what is the average of those bowlers who are beating them? Just curious.

 

[jayboybriz]

100% is the fairest as long as all bowlers are below the average you set as the benchmark.... we played a 110% league last year and it was tough on the higher averages

 

[amagill]

I bowl a double league that is 85% of 230. If you get your average up over 230, in this league, you will then go into negative handicap.
A trios league I bowl in is 80% of 210.
The other league I bowl in is scratch.

 

[Bambi252]

I bowl 2 leagues with 80% of 220, sub in one which is that handicap system as well and my other league is 80% of 210

 

[AJD]

Bigsy, Roysa.

The attached spreadsheet illustrates the difference if bowlers can bowl average. e.g. if 150 bowler and a 200 bowler can both bowl average, then the final handicap pins difference is 10 pins - advantage higher average.

 

[jk12x]

Sadly, this post fails to account for the travesty of 'sandbagging'. Whilst I believe handicap is necessary - when adjusted scores are often over 250 and sometimes 300 with handicap, makes it difficult for the higher averages to even compete.

Is it really about the higher score over your average wins - I love Bigsy's first comment - 'why not try to get better'. Isn't that what it's all about.

At some point someone needs to bite the bullet and at least try to remove either the 'sandbagging' or restrict the average so it's not so financially rewarding at the end of league seasons.

As in open tournaments and anything scratch, the better bowlers usually do win. It's a great cycle and incentive for all to get better / practice / buy more balls - WIN WIN for all.

Of course, this is not aimed at the lower average bowlers in any way shape or form - it's for those who fall into the 'average management' category. You know who you are - LOL ......

Cheers
JK

 

[Loose Cannon]

Handicap, Sandycap leagues I stay clear off, for me it's all or nothing scratch all the way. I heard an old sporting quip that said " to be the best you must beat the best" . I've seen bowlers in my centre who have joined scratch leagues clearly out of their depth but have improved their averages simply by bowling against better bowlers.

 

[jayboybriz]

Enter trying to beat Belmo next week ;-P

 

[Loose Cannon]

Enter trying to beat Belmo next week ;-P

Don't have the funds unfortunately car rego coming up.

 

[Roysa]

My goal in the 1 handicap league I bowl in is to have no handicap at all. It's currently 4. Getting too far into the league now for it to shift in a hurry.

 

[Mistagear]

Averages for handicap purposes should be "Moving Average" would eliminate sandbagging and make each match more reflect the current abilities of each player/team

But, that's never going to happen because once Bowling has a bad idea, it sticks to it forever

 

[Tezza01]

My league actually had an 8 week rolling average until this season when it got voted out. Still doesn't necessarily rule out sandbagging. To some extent it probably makes it easier to manipulate your average all year round.

 

[Mistagear]

My league actually had an 8 week rolling average until this season when it got voted out. Still doesn't necessarily rule out sandbagging. To some extent it probably makes it easier to manipulate your average all year round.

8 weeks is longer than optimum, with the usual cumulative average system they calculate on the first 3 weeks, so a 3 week (12 games) moving average fixes sandbagging pretty well

 

[Bigsy]

Hi Bigsy,

Interesting topic. What average are the bowlers that are being hard done by? Also what is the average of those bowlers who are beating them? Just curious.

Most of the league averages between 130 - 160.

There is one bowler in the league who averages about 203 (25 or 26 h/c) and one bowler who averages 228 (1)

A couple of the lower average bowlers are saying that 90% makes it tough because they lose handicap as opposed to 95%. My comment was that the closer you get to scratch, the less you are affected by handicap, so try and bowl better.

 

[Bigsy]

Bigsy, Roysa.

The attached spreadsheet illustrates the difference if bowlers can bowl average. e.g. if 150 bowler and a 200 bowler can both bowl average, then the final handicap pins difference is 10 pins - advantage higher average.

This I

Bigsy, Roysa.

The attached spreadsheet illustrates the difference if bowlers can bowl average. e.g. if 150 bowler and a 200 bowler can both bowl average, then the final handicap pins difference is 10 pins - advantage higher average.

This my point.....but once it hits 100% the higher average bowlers have no incentives. I too am trying to get off scratch in this league too.

 

[Mrs P]

My Triples league has 80% of 220
My Doubles league is 80% of 230 - with a maximum handicap of 80.

These averages and handicaps have worked for many years. League votes at the AGM for each year.

 

[hamster]

My Triples league has 80% of 220
My Doubles league is 80% of 230 - with a maximum handicap of 80.

These averages and handicaps have worked for many years. League votes at the AGM for each year.[/QUOTE