BMEWS
 

Curses, out-tacticalled again

 
 


Posted by Drew458    United States   on 05/18/2010 at 10:03 PM   
 
  1. I have never liked the rule of “bowl first, figure the handicap after, and add it back in”. Sadly, it’s an easy rule to adopt, in spite of the obvious incentive to sandbag.

    Using an entering average (usually high book) for 9 or 12 games is a great idea. But what do you do when someone doesn’t have a book average from the appropriate season?

    I think the best solution for such people is, assign them a relatively, but not ridiculously, high average, until they have enough games to “establish” an average in the league. Say, 210 for men, 180 for women, until 9 or 12 games are in.

    Yes, there will be the occasional top bowler who gets too many pins, and the frequent bowler who gets far too few. But hey, this is a recreational league and the assigned average only lasts a short time. The rule favors the established bowlers over the newbies, but just briefly. Get over it.

    But good luck trying to persuade the other bowlers to adopt such a rule before the season starts. “It’s not fair! Too complicated!” The benefits of inhibiting sandbagging just aren’t important to most bowlers.

    What do you think, Drew? With your 170 or so average, would you feel unfairly treated if you had to use 210 for a month, just because you sat out the previous season (perhaps a serious injury)? Or would you call it a reasonable price, to bowl in a league which was pro-active against sandbagging?

    Posted by KGrupa    United States   05/19/2010  at  10:26 PM  

  2. I would prefer the league consider averages going back 2 seasons, but if I was stuck with a 210 for 12 games I would treat every frame like it was the 10th frame and I was the anchor.

    I was in a league once that had a complicated but acceptable system:
    a) If you were in this league last year, we use your average from that.
    b) If you weren’t in this league last year, we use your best average from all the leagues you were in last year.
    c) If you weren’t in any leagues last year, we use your best average from all the leagues you were in 2 years ago.
    d) If you haven’t been in any leagues in the last two years, you will build an average for the first 12 games. That means your average for the first night will the be average of the games you bowled that night, your average for the second night will be the average of the first 3 games you bowled; for the third night it will be the average of the first 6 games you bowled, for the fourth night it will be the average of the first 9 games you bowled.
    e) bowlers who do have an established average will use that for the first 3 games only.

    In other words, the bowlers who have no recent average develop a new one a week at a time. That way the only time they have to bowl first and figure the handicap after is the first week. That’s a lot less work for the secretary than waiting 4 weeks and then recalculating all the scores from week 1.

    OTOH, bowlers who do have an established average use it only the first week. After that they build an average based on their past bowling this season just like the new folks do. While that is fair, it does encourage some sandbagging too. Since the above rule is from an 80% league, the higher average team usually tries to just barely win, or even to lose by huge numbers the first couple weeks. It’s worth it in the long run to their stats.

    Maybe the 4 weeks (12 games) fixed average for everyone is the better way. No sandbagging from the returning folks, and a real-world average applied ex post facto for the new folks. And starting week 5(games 13-15), everyone uses the averages they’ve created this season. The downside to that is that the standings don’t really exist the first 4 weeks, (which doesn’t really matter in a 30+ week season) and the secretary has a lot of work to do after week 4. But after that it’s clear sailing for everyone.

    Posted by Drew458    United States   05/23/2010  at  12:16 PM  

  3. Keeping the standings in limbo for a month, until all averages are established, is repugnant. It’s also unworkable and, I believe, contrary to USBC rules. For example, what do you do with scores bowled by substitutes, who may not get 12 games until April, if ever? You must have a rule for calculating handicaps each week, so that the wins and losses can be determined right then. And you can’t have one rule for handicapping regular bowlers and a different rule for substitutes.

    If you require 12 games to “establish” an average, then you need a rule for assigning an “entering average”, which is used until you get 12 games in. Unless the league agrees that you bowl scratch during that interim (odd, but legal).

    I bowled in the St Louis area for a while in the 80’s, and a common rule there was, on the first week, your handicap each game was based on THAT GAME. That is, if you bowled 160-125-175, your handicap was based on 160 the first game, 125 the second game, and 175 the third game. After that, your average was establshed.

    Interesting side note: If your league requires 12 games to establish an average, and a bowler misses one game, here’s what happens. He has 11 games to start week 5, so he uses his entering average to determine handicap in the first game. The secretary must then calculate his 12-game average to determine his handicap for the second and third games.

    When I was a kid, my mother was a league secretary, so every year she received a new WIBC rulebook, which I pored over (being hooked on both bowling and reading). Back then (the 60’s), they recommended 21 games to establish a winter league average! And 12 games for a summer league! Oh, for the good old days.

    Posted by KGrupa    United States   05/25/2010  at  11:40 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Next entry: Sunny Day

Previous entry: How To Drive Liberals Insane

<< BMEWS Main Page >>