RobbieB
Rodentus scientificus
I know I said I was over it , but I promise this will be my final post on the subject.
If you are at all interested, have a read of An Analysis of Bowling Scores and Handicap Systems
There is a lot of information here based on mathematic calculation and probability, but if you jump down to the results section you will read the following:
the individual handicap system of 80% of the difference between the bowler's average and a base figure of 225 is the fairest handicap system to use in league or tournament play.
They mention the 'Remington Rand study' in this study, which found the following:
The Remingtom Rand study[8] processed over 100,000 league bowling scores and the results suggested that the individual handicap system of 80% of the difference between the bowler's average and a base figure of 225 is the fairest handicap system.
I am making an assumption here, but I would imagine that at some point in time the powers that be also decided that 80% of X was the fairest system - I refer to the TBA rule book:
RULE 333 HANDICAP - (Unless covered by a Leagues own Rules)
The handicap allowance shall be 80 percent and shall be figured on the difference between each individuals average and 200 scratch.
e.g. If the average calculated = 134
For handicap calculation, 200 - 134 = 66
Handicap (80% of 66) = 52
The calculation results in 52.8. Decimal places are not used and are therefore ignored.
Now obviously this assumes that nobody in the league has an average higher than 200, but hopefully you get where I am coming from.
I stand by my comment that 100% of X favours the lower average bowler. I know that others will and do disagree, but I can live with that. I can also live with bowlrig not wanting to be my friend.
Did you even read the study you quoted? It's a piece of donkey number crunching to prove the guy (who obviously knows nothing about bowling) is worthy of a Masters. They are marking the method, not the results. And apart from being based on one season of FIVE pin bowling, the only handicap systems investigated were 80% of 225, 75% & 66% of 200 and 66% of 220. So sure, 80% is the fairest - OF THE 4 SYSTEMS EXAMINED!
Also: "The Remingtom Rand study[8] processed over 100,000 league bowling scores and the results suggested that
the individual handicap system of 80% of the difference between the bowler's average and
a base figure of 225 is the fairest handicap system. We tried to get more information about
the Remington Rand study and their criteria of "fairest". Unfortunately we did not get
any reply from the Ontario 5 Pin Bowlers' Association on this matter."
As far as the TBA rules go, they were written in the good old days when believe it or not a 170 average made you a pretty good bowler. There simply wasn't the scoring disparity we see now between the unskilled, moderately skilled and expert bowlers.
Now, I am not suggesting that every league use 100% - or any league for that matter - that will depend on the individual league and its members, and what those members want from the league. But in terms of putting the bowlers on an equal footing, only 100% does that. Any less than that and the decision is simply how much of his skill advantage the higher average bowler gets to keep.