Tba new rules

[SQJunior]

Is there anyone else out there annoyed at the fact that TBA droped the entering avg for Walter De Veer, does that leave anywhere for your A grade and Classic bowlers anywhere to bowl at that level of competition. With TBA dropping these avgs we believe that this will lower the level of competion at the nationals in 2004. What are the bowlers, who are no longer eligable now supposed to compete in a state rep level. Does TBA believe they will bring in something appropiate to accomadate these bowlers who can no longer roll WDV and are not at a sufficient level to roll rachuig. Hello people everybody makes a national tournament possible to run not just the select few who can make rep teams.

Tillie & Jnr
(because of this ruling, this now makes a majority of this years SQ team not eligible to roll off for 2004)

 

[Damage]

According to reports from around the traps, most will be severely affected.
Received word that Tasmania's current team (2003) will be completely decimated by the latest decision.

Hmmmmmmmmmm......... :roll:

 

[ms]

DITTO!!

South Australia will be in the same position as EVERY other State too!

I think TBA have well and truly stuffed with this one up! Its very disappointing to see that some very talented people that WERE in the average bracket for De Veer now have to either continue just bowling their leagues and no chance of being a State Rep again or get laughed at trying out for Rachuig.

Not that i personally would laugh at De Veer bowlers trying out for Rachuig as I do think its good experience for the unexperienced bowler.. HOWEVER there are shallow, self minded people that think that Rachuig is for them and not for the lesser bowler!!

TBA, have a look at what you have opened up! This is a very poor decision and HAS to be looked into again!!

What will happen to those Ladies with averages of 160-180 and Men with averages of 170-190 that wouldnt be considered for Rachuig??!?!?!?!?!?! Guess they will become victims of the Total B******t Association that it is becoming!

VERY VERY DISAPPIONTING!!!

COME ON AUSTRALIA, LETS PULL TOGETHER ON THIS!!!!

Yours in bowling,
Martina Smith!

 

[Jerry8-10]

All the current team (TASSIE) are SPEWING, one bowler is quitting bowling,
from what I gather the format now caters for bowlers closest to the entering averages (no Handicap), poor mr 130 ave is now without any hope.
I think they should change the name, for mucking around with the format that Walter was accustomed to, maybe "Walter de queer"?.

 

[CJ]

Over here in WA we have the same situation.... most this years team players will be affected by the lower ave. I personally am not affected by it..... but still think it is crap. I know for me personally - yes I did bowl above ave during WDV....however past tournaments have shown that yes.... I do bowl better in a tournament condition - maybe the hype - maybe the adrenalin - or maybe just the fact that having a great bunch of team mates there beside you not only from your own state but from other states as well, does give a completely different atmosphere to that of your regular league night playing doubles.

And as others have commented....what happens to those bowlers to high for WDV but not up the standard that Rachuing is set at ???
Will TBA have a new tournament that bowlers in the "limbo" average range can compete in ?

The one thing I would like to ask is....TBA reviews and then drops the ave cutoff for WDV......Is TBA again going to lower the ave cutoff if the same problems develop regarding entering averages???

If this is the case - where does it stop ? Or should I start prepping my 8 year old for WDV in a few years time - I am sure her 78 game will be good enough ?

 

[OZGAL]

I find this a very interesting read as well as reading about the change in roll off formats for Shield, De Veer and Rachuig in certain states.

HAS ANYONE ASKED THE BOWLERS WHAT THEY WANT??? (And I mean ALL of the bowlers?)

 

[kahlua]

Well well well. :shock: :shock: :shock:

We are about to change the rules again. (Shock, Horror)
Scratch tournament :?: 169 average for men - 159 average for women

The format we had was working ok with a few MINOR changes it could be easy. Perhaps 80% of 200 might be worth a try. Then at least those bowlers entering above the cut off average would be handicaped accordingly. Your never going to please everyone but by the look of it you are not going to please anyone with this decesion.
The competition is strong now with alot of interest. Lets keep it that way. The De Veer tournament is on the way up and now in my opinion if the changes stay the tournament will lose alot of interest.

CJ is so right about your team mates not only from your team but other states as well. We need everyone there to make the tournament what is is now. There are so many friendships made during the De Veer Tournament and that is what it is all about.

Changing the rules is going to take away everything that we have built up during the past few years. I have been involved in Walter De Veer for only a few years and I have made so many friends. We all look forward to the next year to meet old friends and make new ones too. There will be so many people not able to roll off with the changes and most states will struggle to find enough to make a team. There will be so many friends I will miss greatly.

There will be so many bowlers left out in the cold with no where to go and i think you will find that it is those bowlers who are most interested in tournament bowling.

If we all stick together something might have to be done to change things. There are so many people in SA that will not be eligible, lets see if we can turn things around to get everyone there again and make it a fantastic tournament.

Cheers
Pam :mrgreen:

 

[Damage]

Many good posts and good points made in regard to the aforementioned decision being made.

Like the previous correspondant <Kahlua> mentioned, Walter De Veer is more a mixture of competitive bowling and friendships - a very IMPORTANT part of the game.

One looks at the bitchiness and self destruction of some our Rachuig teams, and realises the spirit of the game is something that is NOT to be tampered with - ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT IT TO SURVIVE :idea:

:idea: NEWSFLASH :idea: Is there ANYBODY out there in this great game of ours that has the capacity to show leadership AND common sense....................... :?: :?: :?:

 

[Luke D]

if i'm not mistaken, then wasn't De Veer originally there for the lesser average bowlers to get a few years national experience so that Rachuig wouldn't be as daunting for them.

having it on scratch give it a bit more credibility, and lessens the impact of a 200+ bowler sandbagging to be under the De Veer cutoff until the tournament and then shooting the house down with 40-50 pins above his entering average.

and if it means mr 130avg bowler has to say goodbye to his chance of making the side for that year, then it will give him something to strive for the next year cos a way you'll get better at your bowling is by bowling against the better bowlers and learning something extra every time you do come up against them.

lets get it back to being what it was set up for. and then maybe, just maybe, it won't be looked at (by some people) as being for the people that can't cut it, instead of the breeding ground for the next set of top bowlers.

thats my bit.

and if anyone wants to respond to this, as there probably will be a few seeing that this is a different opinion to the ones expressed before in this topic, Make sure you read EVERYTHING properly before you respond!!!

 

[mannah]

New WDV rules

Well there goes my hopes or chances of ever making a State Team again. I struggle to get a game now with a lower average. I have no hope of ever bowling a 155 average to have a chance of getting a fair go under the new scratch format. Even lowering the handicap to 180 of 200 will make it too hard.

Maybe the only way is for everyone to Email TBA themselves, let them know just what all the actual bowlers think about the new Rules and see for themselves just how this is affecting everyone.
After all they are the ones who make the rules and they are the only ones who can change them back to what we want.

Instead of having 4 people in our household enthusiastic to try to make State Team we now have one maybe. One young male is already in the land of limbo with a 190 average but is honest enough not to try to sandbag.

I thought the new 2003 rule allowing review of entering averages based on the prior years WDV performances was a method of trying to even up the playing field. Perhaps this needs to be reviewed to include all the bowlers performances during the year in tournament/travel leagues/seniors & youth competitions etc.
Maybe we need entering averages to be at a date closer to the WDV tournament date or at a random date to be selected by TBA (and announced say the end of September) thus not giving possible sandbaggers a chance.

No guessing we won't be going to the Nationals next year and saving over $7000 it cost us this year. If we do go it will be to catch up with the friends from other States but there again there will be a lot missing.

Let us all join together and make our thoughts heard.
Singularly we may make a whisper - together we can make one hell of a noise - go WDV Team Australia (all of us together)
Lyn from SA Team (well at least I was last year)

 

[Reg Gooch]

Congratulations to the tba for one thing finally the deveer tournament is scratch. Something that should have been from the start. I however don't agree with lowering the averages not good. I belive this has made the gap to the open teams even bigger than before. I bowled in deveer this year and i was quite disapointed with the tournament on the whole. However these changes will hopefully make a difference to stop the sandbaggers as mentioned before. 8)

 

[bm2]

I have been fortunate enough to have bowled De Veer for the last 7 years - I only missed the first year as I wasn't bowling then! I have thoroughly enjoyed my experiences every year I have gone away, whether we won, lost or were just mediocre. I have forged great friendships in that time, and also have learned quite a deal with regard to my bowling and the performances of my peers.

This new ruling means that I too, now will miss out on any further State representation.....I am too "old" to even consider striving for Rachuig, not old enough for Seniors (though, won't be too long I 'spose! :roll: ) and my 163 yearbook average is 4 pins too high for the new ruling. I am disappointed, but there is not much that I can do about it.

I just wanted to say that whilst there are a lot of very unhappy bowlers who are affected by this the same as I am, I did contact TBA and voice my displeasure at the new average changes. I was advised that the changes were made to the competition as a result of a) the survey form that we bowlers were asked to compete in Townsville, and b) most importantly, changes that were requested by WDV managers during the managers meeting prior to the commencement of this years competition - and some of the managers actually wanted the changes to be input prior to this years challenge, which was not a viable concern. All TBA have done, is to take these concerns, together with the suggestions made at Kirwan, and implemented some following discussions with the State Managers at their AGM held between De Veer and Rachuig. I was also told that these managers, both State and WDV, were speaking for us, the bowlers. I am further led to believe that there will be a breakdown of these changes /discussions in the next Tenpin Topics.

I for one, was not asked by my State or WDV manager if I had any concerns with regard to the running of the tournie, nor was I told (as a state team member) of any concerns that were raised by the DVeer managers at their meeting - so I am angry because I feel that I have not been consulted, and someone else has put words in my mouth. I have my own ideas as to how the comp could have been altered slightly to improve it, and get rid of the sandbaggers that have been plaguing it for the last couple of years, and I took the time to write it down on the survey sheet. I agree with it being a scratch tournament, especially now with the averages being so low. What I do feel, however, is that we as bowlers should not be looking to bag TBA out so quickly without all the facts - if our managers both State and WDV were acting on our behalf, then they should be the ones that are telling us why they voted for what they did.

State Representation and the Nationals - it was nice while it lasted, and I did get 7 reasonable good years!
I suppose the good thing to come out of it for me is that now I don't have to find $2000 to go away to Nationals anymore :cry:

Broni Morgan

 

[Andrew S.]

Hi Broni,
I can tell you why you were not informed of these intended changes by anyone from the Qld State Office. Quite simply, TBA did not tell us. This is the first I have heard of the changes so once again TBA has failed to communicate with Qld State office.

Having said that I think they have made a good decision to go scratch. De Veer was rapidly losing both credibility and entrants - I can remember an early Qld roll-off at Ipswich having 70 bowlers compete for the spots. These days we are lucky to get 2 full teams.
The averages are a worry though. I also think they are too low. A ceiling of 180 men and 170 women would have been a good starting point. We will most certainly be discussing this at the next Qld board meeting, personally I feel that a wider range of people should have been consulted bt the National Body than just those at Townsville.

 

[wchester]

I have been fortunate enough to have bowled De Veer for the last 7 years
This new ruling means that I too, now will miss out on any further State representation............and my 163 yearbook average is 4 pins too high for the new ruling.


I have my own ideas as to how the comp could have been altered slightly to improve it, and get rid of the sandbaggers that have been plaguing it for the last couple of years, and I took the time to write it down on the survey sheet. I agree with it being a scratch tournament, especially now with the averages being so low. Broni Morgan

Broni....I have something to say..and I don't want you to take this as an attack..simply as an observation. For only you know the true circumstances.

It is my opinion that anyone who bowls their way (with handicap) onto a WDV State side for 7 years in a row..IS A Sandbagger. Either that or the luckiest bowler in Australia.

This new format will not rid the event of Sandbaggers...what it WILL do is increase the scoring level as those same 170 + average bowlers suddenly have an "off" year in their leagues and only manage an book average in the 150's

Anything less than true scratch representation is bound to be fraught with cheating. That's the way it has always been..and unfortunately, that's the way it is doomed to remain.

 

[bm2]

Wayne - i don't know you except from your posts on this forum, and you don't know me either - but let me state categorically here and now :

:evil: i am not now, nor have i ever, been a sandbagger. :evil:

seven years ago at the ripe old age of 34 i took up tenpin. my first year i went away to deveer with an average in the very low 130's. unfortunately(or fortunately if you consider the numbers of the bowling population) for me, i lived in darwin - a city with one bowling centre, and, at the time i started, limited level 1 coaching from within the centre. unless you are a natural, which i and others who do know me can easily say i am not, it is very hard to improve leaps and bounds without proper coaching in a one centre town. for 6 years i represented the nt, and by the time i left the state, my average had risen to the high 150's. not a lot of growth in 6 years, but at least i was going up!
i came to qld, and wow, wouldn't you know it, but there was access to proper coaches, ball drilling facilities - you name it, and by being able to utilise these facilities, not to mention having had to have had all my equipment "fixed" when i first got here, my average is slowly getting better all the time.

am i a very lucky bowler?? if i am, then i am not alone.....a simple look at the lineups of several other teams from states with a greater bowling population than the nt has will show quite a few bowlers who have been to at least 5 of the deveers that i have. i take my bowling very seriously - my grand aim was to finish this year with a 171 average so that i could not roll off in 2004 - sadly for me, i wasn't able to achieve that goal this year, but i will put my head down further and make sure that i achieve it next year.

i am proud to admit that i have been a state rep for 7 years, for both nt & sq, and am prouder of the fact that i have done it honestly. it is a sad fact of life that there are a few "cheats" out there, and as you said, Wayne, they will always be there. it is just not fair that those of us who do the right thing, within the boundaries that are available to us at the time, are penalised for their misdoings.

yours in bowling
broni morgan 8)

 

[wchester]

Thank you Broni....I now know all the facts. I didn't realise you had represented the Territory and did not know your bowling history other than what you had stated in your post....It's all clear to me now and please accept my apology for lumping you in the same pile of crap as the real cheaters...Now you know why I said only you knew all the facts.
Keep up the hard work and your average will steadily improve.

Wayne

 

[pixie]

I think you will find that many of the teams have legitimate bowlers who bowl each year on WDV as they are not constantly pushing themselves to be Rachuig bowlers and feel that they should not be slurred or punished just because their average is where they want to be.

coming from a state with a very limited store to choose from (last two years we had 8 women roll off for 7 spots), we have found that this has already impacted on several women (half the ACT team) and several who intended to roll off for next year and now can't.

I find it hard to believe, judging from the reaction that the bowlers were the ones who requested this and perhaps further explanation from TBA is warranted,

changing the format to scratch will also severely disadvantage some states who have legitimate bowlers trying to come through the ranks. the idea of handicap is to even out the playing field....those states who have a very small store, now even smaller just might need the handicap to have some chance against the bigger hitters with a larger bowling base. ACT will get there, eventually.

I am still eligible for one more year, but doubtful after that, unless TBA come to their senses.

 

[gjelectrics1]

Pixie.
It is not just the ladies all the mens team bar Lance are gone due to the changes but something had to be done to stop the sandbagging by certain teams and individuals who "bent " the rules in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage for themselves and or teams