Sandbagging is Cheating - What About Blocked Lanes?

[jason_doust]

Here's a contentious one.

From the "Sandbagging" thread, we (nearly) all agree that sandbagging is cheating. Good for us bowlers! Lovely to see such a show of integrity.

So what about the often outrageously easy "house shots" we bowl on each week? I see a lot of players today that I picked as 175ish averages when I started bowling again that average over 200 on these blocked lanes. Merry hell breaks loose if the lanes are oiled outside 10 board in some houses. Fragile egos inflame easily when the "auto-hook" outside 10 is switched off and bowlers have to do what they claim to. (i.e. Hit a target with a consistent release and speed.)

Does anyone else think that we are fooling ourselves to our own detriment?

 

[Denver Sporting]

Jason,

It is a combination of factors.

1) Lane blocking is rife an dit became legal when the ABC as it was then introduced the "System Of Bowling" which mandated a minimum of 3 units of oil on any particular part of the lane along with "Limited distance Dressing" or short oil. This allowed proprietors to put 3 units outside and as many as they liked inside. Bowlers grew to depend on all this free hook.

2) Bowling balls have progressed so far of late that what we used when you were still bowling before are no more than spare balls. I still recall using a Blue dot at the SPC in 1989, and I had more more hand then than I do now. todays equipment maximise the free hook characteristics of todays THS's (and if the weekend is any indication our tournament patterns from now on too.) in a way our old equipment never did.

3) Bowling pins are no longer a defence against todays high powered bowling balls. Their double voids ensure a high centre of gravity so they fly like never before as a result of the extreme angles of entry that todays equipment and lane conditions create.

Yes, in the main we are deluding ourselves, but I doubt that much will change because there are too many people and organisations that a vested interest in things remaining as they are.

 

[dunryc]

Does anyone else think that we are fooling ourselves to our own detriment?

Yep!

Jan

 

[terry penguin]

Here's a contentious one.

From the "Sandbagging" thread, we (nearly) all agree that sandbagging is cheating. Good for us bowlers! Lovely to see such a show of integrity.

So what about the often outrageously easy "house shots" we bowl on each week? I see a lot of players today that I picked as 175ish averages when I started bowling again that average over 200 on these blocked lanes. Merry hell breaks loose if the lanes are oiled outside 10 board in some houses. Fragile egos inflame easily when the "auto-hook" outside 10 is switched off and bowlers have to do what they claim to. (i.e. Hit a target with a consistent release and speed.)

Does anyone else think that we are fooling ourselves to our own detriment?

yes you are right alot of those bowlers you see like to have blocked lanes cause it would make them look good but it shows those type of bowlers dont know how to read different lane conditions, they want it easy

 

[jason_doust]

Jason,
It is a combination of factors.
1) Lane blocking is rife an dit became legal when the ABC as it was then introduced the "System Of Bowling" which mandated a minimum of 3 units of oil on any particular part of the lane along with "Limited distance Dressing" or short oil. This allowed proprietors to put 3 units outside and as many as they liked inside. Bowlers grew to depend on all this free hook.
2) Bowling balls have progressed so far of late that what we used when you were still bowling before are no more than spare balls. I still recall using a Blue dot at the SPC in 1989, and I had more more hand then than I do now. todays equipment maximise the free hook characteristics of todays THS's (and if the weekend is any indication our tournament patterns from now on too.) in a way our old equipment never did.
3) Bowling pins are no longer a defence against todays high powered bowling balls. Their double voids ensure a high centre of gravity so they fly like never before as a result of the extreme angles of entry that todays equipment and lane conditions create.
Yes, in the main we are deluding ourselves, but I doubt that much will change because there are too many people and organisations that a vested interest in things remaining as they are.

Hi Brenton,

As I would expect from you, good and well reasoned comments.

You're right. SOB did sanction lane blocking and some houses have taken it to awful extremes.

I deliberately left balls out of the equation, as they are the biggest culprit. On blocked lanes of old, if you tugged it, there was a good chance of a soft or ringing 10 (7 for lefties), as the balls skidded too far and deflected on impact. This does not happen with today's gear with anything like the frequency of old.

Pins have made it easier, but as tougher pins penalise lower average bowlers the most (proven by recent USBC research), I feel it's unfair on the average player to go back on that one. "Competition" pins would be great, but too expensive on the centre operator.

I should point out that I, like most folks would say if they're really honest, like easy conditions. Really. I just think we have taken things too far. We need to swing the other way a bit. I'll gladly sacrifice some average for the good of the game. We need to fill in the ditch a bit.

 

[tonx]

I heard 2 different types of comments from many bowlers this weekend at SA CUP.

First comment: Bowling tournaments need to have higher scoring conditions to entice the 170-180 bowler to come back into national tournaments. This is so the 170-180 average bowler doesnt shoot 150 and never come back.

Second comment: Bowling will never have 170-180 average bowlers comming back to national tournaments if they have to average 220 to make the cut. They want to see 190 averages making the cut because they believe they can score that if they get lucky.

These comments were made by several bowlers that have been in the industry for many many years. These guys can average what they need to win on anything.

Sounds like a catch 22 to me.

Bowling on easy house shots is a hollow feeling for those that know how to take advantage of them.

Meh.... I don't care anymore. There is enough people in this sport that have f***d it up for those that used to enjoy it.

HERE IS A THOUGHT?

Perhaps the answer is to ask the 180 average bowler what they want to see? The top certainly can't answer the question for them!

 

[Bigsy]

I am currently averaging around 170 - 180 and don't care what lane conditions I get. As far as I am concerned, there are more than enough boards and arrows and dots on the lanes to make little adjustments as necessary. A good bowler should be able to adapt to any conditions that arise. Whoa.....so you had a bad game........stiff sh*t, get over it and bowl the next one. Can I get an AMEN !!! brother.

 

[liquor box]

as long as every lane in the centre has the same preperation, I really dont care. i like to shoot high scores(for personal satisfaction) but if everyone is scoring 150-160 and i can bowl 161+ then i am happy.

You can only play against your opponent

 

[RobbieB]

With respect to the thread title, bowling on blocked lanes is certainly not cheating (unless the bowler gets hold of the oiling machine ). Blocked lanes are certainly a detriment to establishing a high skill level as a bowler, since bad shots don't get punished. That's not the bowlers fault though.
Whether we are deluding ourselves is another question. In my experience, most bowlers who average 200 on a wall really think they are highly skilled players. Bowling is a strange beastie in that the level of knowledge required to be a 'complete' bowler is very high, but the general level of knowledge of the average bowler is abysmal. Hence the 200 average OAW (on a wall) bowler who shoots 170 on a flat shot really believes that HE is not at fault, and the search for an excuse begins.
It's easy to blame the balls, manufacturers or the TBA, but the bottom line is that once the centre operators started pandering to peoples natural laziness, the die was cast. League bowling in Brisbane at least is simply a competition between centres as to who can spoon feed their players the most award scores, and by and large the bowlers love it. Nobody practices, spare shooting is a lost art and there's always a new ball around the corner to help you score better.
For many of those that we need to encourage into tournaments, league play is about as useful as playing pitch-n-putt to get ready for the British Open,and IMHO until the level of knowledge of the fringe bowler improves, nothing will change. You might as well lay out the THS ditches for the tourneys, let the house mice average 200 and get belted by Belmo & Co on 240+. At least they'll think they bowled well.

Sigh. Now I'm depressed.

 

[jhk67]

In response to how the 180 avg bowlers dont bowl in the major tournaments anymore, why cant we make a classic series of events for the bowler with a sub 200 avg. It could work if we get the word out and the bowlers who want an opportunity to win a bit of cash but are just not good enough for the open class.

 

[Rayzer]

I think I agree with you justin, the event won't be as big, but at least they'll feel like they have a chance to cut and maybe even play in the finals format that they normally just watch! I would love to bowl in something like the SA "classic" Cup with my 160 avg!!
But this also presents the problem of not having as much of a prize fund for the open class tourneys....
R

 

[odeor]

Yes, I agree about tournaments for 180 bowlers. But look out for the sandbaggers then!!
Blocked lanes or not, some people have more ability than others in every field.

 

[PeterB]

Does it really matter anymore? I mean seriously, the whole sport is out of control. Scores, averages, prices.......it's endless. Blocking isn't really such an issue when balls are being made to be more condition specific than they ever have been before.

Alarm bells should've gone off in 1991.

 

[Cam S]

Does anyone think our sport and the technological advances that have resulted in high scoring is any different to other sports.

20 years ago would people have taken you seriously if u said,
400 runs could be scored in 50 overs
80 points could be scored in a 1st grade rugby league match
A tennis ball could be served at almost 220km/h or a Golf ball could be driven 300+ metres

Theres an argument to say in some of those sports the technology has been in refining an athletes technique and building strength and conditioning but then also look at the advantages created by things such as Graphite tennis rackets, synthetic footballs and metal drivers and no one can say that surface technology (drop in pitches and bouncy hardcourts) havent increased scores and performances in other sports.

Maybe our sport is just going with the flow.

 

[}-Adam-{]

with the idea of having a series of classic events, it could work but then you leave yourself open to sandbagging, or ditch vs hard pattern averages, i know that myself and chris slattery have found ourselves with more handicap than expected at the start of our new league, 2 out of the 4 weeks we have bowled, it was 42 ft, flat with no cleaning program running on the machine, and only having the lanes dragged once! so we had alot of social carry down cause of school holidays. we are on 27 and 35, 90% of 220, does that mean we can bowl classic now?

 

[Easy Tiger]

Maybe our sport is just going with the flow.

Yup! Fighting technology and change is a losing battle..

 

[jason_doust]

Yup! Fighting technology and change is a losing battle..

Aaahh.. The old technology argument. a.k.a. "If we can do it, we should do it."

I (like many others) quit bowling in the 90's because of technology. It is only through the efforts of TBA and companies like Kegel, that I now play again.

Let's use golf, another sport involving swing, timing, accuracy and no defence as an analogue.

As this thread is about lanes, I'll only mention balls very briefly. Golf has very strict rules on the specifications of clubs and balls. Many have been banned. In fact, many are banned years after their manufacture, as golf regulations tighten over time. This will happen in bowling too. If today's bowling balls were golf balls, you could hit them 5 kilometres. They would never slice or hook and they would drop with terrifying rapidity at the end of their flight to stop almost exactly where they first touched down. Please do not ask me "What about pin carry?" That has never been easier.

Regarding lanes, I don't know what the specification is for golf fairway and green design and construction, but if every fairway ran downhill with a V-shape guiding shots to the middle of a smooth, funnel shaped green that rolled the ball into the cup, do you think people would take golf very seriously? You may average 36 for the course, but would you become a good golfer on a course like this?

Rob Buckley makes the comment about spoon-feeding bowlers the easiest house shot possible. This obviously is the case. Yet people pay good money to play tough golf courses. Golfers respect the skills needed to improve to play at the level of "par". Many bowlers seem to expect to buy par in a box, with side helpings laid out each week via the lanes. I do not blame them, as for many, it's all they've known, but it won't make them think and play like better bowlers.

 

[Easy Tiger]

Good points that you make there Jason, but in golf for example, while it is true it also involves accuracy, swing, timing, etc, much like bowling in those respects, bowling has one major difference and that is style - things like stroker vs cranker and the arguments based on friction.

If further stricter restrictions are placed on bowling ball manufacture, then that could severely hurt the industry economically, because people do buy the latest and greatest equipment just because it has "a new feature", a "revolutionary coverstock", a "groundbreaking ultra-low RG high flare core".. the list goes on. With tighter restrictions, this effectively goes out the window, and you end up basically with remakes of old gear, being reproduced time and time again. I wouldn't think that would be good for bowling ball companies' economic turnover, because people wouldn't buy as much. So that would hurt their sponsorship of events and bowlers. The only solution to that is ensuring balls die quickly.. then people are forced to buy new gear every few months and then people would leave the sport because it's too expensive to stay competitive.. (sound familiar?) I do realise that balls aren't built to last as it is now anyway.. but it just highlights another problem in the sport. Golf clubs don't wear out after 50 rounds..

 

[Denver Sporting]

Easy Tiger wrote:

Good points that you make there Jason, but in golf for example, while it is true it also involves accuracy, swing, timing, etc, much like bowling in those respects, bowling has one major difference and that is style - things like stroker vs cranker and the arguments based on friction.

Stroker v cranker = Long hitter vs short hitter
friction = spin

So in fact the two games are remarkably similar.

 

[Easy Tiger]

Yes, however in golf it's a given than you need to get the ball x amount of yards in the fewest amount of shots possible. As a short-hitter I assume you are therefore at a natural disadvantage in golf.

In that sense, bowling isn't the same.