Chris Barnes has no "A" game

[sprocket]

Chris Barnes has no "A" game and I don't mean that as an insult at all. It's just that I can't think of any other bowler on tour that doesn't appear to have a favorite way of delivering the ball.

I don't think Chris Barnes has a favorite pattern or a favorite way of releasing the ball. He is simple so good at every type of release that it's impossible to say he's better at one thing than another. He can throw the ball hard or soft. He can go up the back of the ball or around it. He can play first arrow or fifth arrow and he can switch from one style to another in one frame with no apparent effort.

I don't know how he does it. How can he be playing fourth arrow with one ball, going around it and throwing with medium speed, and then in one shot change balls, release, speed and line and immediately have a good line to the pocket!

I remember his struggles in closing out matches on TV in the past and I often wondered if it was because he had so many tools in his arsenal that when he got nervous he would accidentally let one of his other "tools" slip in at the wrong time.

Anyway, he seems to have his sh!t together now. He was very impressive on TV today. ANYONE watching him today would have to come away with a new appreciation of just how great the pros are compared to us mere mortals.

[dnhoffman]

Agreed. One of the best bowlers I've ever seen mechanically speaking and just seems it be able to do everything in the sport well.

[MICHAEL]

Chris Barnes has no "A" game and I don't mean that as an insult at all. It's just that I can't think of any other bowler on tour that doesn't appear to have a favorite way of delivering the ball.

I don't think Chris Barnes has a favorite pattern or a favorite way of releasing the ball. He is simple so good at every type of release that it's impossible to say he's better at one thing than another. He can throw the ball hard or soft. He can go up the back of the ball or around it. He can play first arrow or fifth arrow and he can switch from one style to another in one frame with no apparent effort.

I don't know how he does it. How can he be playing fourth arrow with one ball, going around it and throwing with medium speed, and then in one shot change balls, release, speed and line and immediately have a good line to the pocket!

I remember his struggles in closing out matches on TV in the past and I often wondered if it was because he had so many tools in his arsenal that when he got nervous he would accidentally let one of his other "tools" slip in at the wrong time.

Anyway, he seems to have his sh!t together now. He was very impressive on TV today. ANYONE watching him today would have to come away with a new appreciation of just how great the pros are compared to us mere mortals.


Mere mortals.... NOT ICEMAN!!! LOL I am immoral!!! LOL #@^$#@!!!:rolleyes:

[dnhoffman]

Chris Barnes plays sport patterns though... Advantage: Barnes.

[Hampe]

I don't know how he does it. How can he be playing fourth arrow with one ball, going around it and throwing with medium speed, and then in one shot change balls, release, speed and line and immediately have a good line to the pocket!
My guess would be tens of thousands of hours of practice :)

[RobLV1]

Virtually every knowledgeable coach will tell you without hesitation that Chris Barnes is the best bowler on the planet, without question. I tend to agree with the statement questioning his struggles with "closing the deal" and suggesting that he may have so many tools at his disposal that he could have been confusing himself in clutch situations.

At one point when I was working on an article for BTM, I figured out that with my own personal stable of adjustments in combination, it could take me 9 1/2 games to get lined up. Perhaps that's why advocate learning to use ball changes quickly and effectively.

Rob Mautner

[GeoLes]

I agree. Chris Barnes is the man. Isn't that the goal? to master every aspect of the art. It is one thing to have a main effective tool that works in most situation with the ability to tweak as needed and quite another to effectively use the right tool for the right situation.

I want to be like him when I grow up.

[Aslan]

I don't know if I agree that everyone should emulate him because he's mechanically superior. Last time I checked there were still 5-10 pro bowlers with better stats in the PBA. I just think his style is "easier" to emulate because there aren't as many "quirks". But emulating is also about body type, etc...

What I like about Chris Barnes (I'd say my 3rd favorite bowler) is he is incredibly smart. His intelligence about the game blows the rest of the PBA out of the water. He can explain every term, every pattern, every motion...and not just explain it...but give very technical advice.

The "downside" to Chris Barnes is the pants. I just can't cheer for a bowler wearing lime green slacks. There's no reason for that unless you lost a bet.

[YODA]

Virtually every knowledgeable coach will tell you without hesitation that Chris Barnes is the best bowler on the planet, without question. I tend to agree with the statement questioning his struggles with "closing the deal" and suggesting that he may have so many tools at his disposal that he could have been confusing himself in clutch situations.

At one point when I was working on an article for BTM, I figured out that with my own personal stable of adjustments in combination, it could take me 9 1/2 games to get lined up. Perhaps that's why advocate learning to use ball changes quickly and effectively.

Rob Mautner

^^^^^^ THIS...... but also we don't even need coaches to tell us who is the best bowler in the world. its easy to figure out just by knowing who really is.

[Aslan]

^^^^^^ THIS...... but also we dont even need coaches to tell us that he is the best bowler in the world. its easy to figure out just by knowing who he is.

I totally don't understand what that means. Isn't the measure of the "best bowler in the world" a matter of lifetime average, titles, earnings, etc...??

[YODA]

I totally don't understand what that means. Isn't the measure of the "best bowler in the world" a matter of lifetime average, titles, earnings, etc...??


It can depend.. Look at it like this... The best basketball player in "the world" if you ask most people is Lebron James or Kobe Bryant, but if you compare them to Jordan they still don't touch him in titles, rings, etc... But they are still considered by many to be the best in the world.

[Aslan]

It can depend.. Look at it like this... The best basketball player in "the world" if you ask most people is Lebron James or Kobe Bryant, but if you compare them to Jordan they still don't touch him in titles, rings, etc... But they are still considered by many to be the best in the world.

Well, basketball is stupid. Not to mention it's a team sport. Jordan doesn't have "individual titles"...his rings were part of a team championship. Now...will he have scoring records and stuff like that by the time Kobe and Lebron are done playing?? Maybe. But I don't know.

Comparing Micheal Jordan to Kobe Bryant is like comparing Walter Ray to Earl Anthony. It's two of the best ever with the rings/titles/averages to prove it. And maybe someone could throw a Pete Weber and a Dick Weber in that conversation as well. But Chris Barnes? Sean Rash? Wes Malott? Jason Belmonte? Rhino Page? When those guys start amassing 25+ major titles over long, successful careers...then okay. But it's a little soon to start crowing "generation next" just yet.

As good as Clayton Kershaw is....he's not Sandy Koufax, Warren Spahn, or Cy Young "just yet". I don't even know if he's "Nolan Ryan" just yet.

It took Pete Weber the better part of 3 decades to place himself among the top 4. I think there are 15 pro bowlers still alive ahead of him (Barnes) in titles. He's top 10 (or close) in career eearnings. But his only record of distinction is one of only 6 players to win the triple crown. Well, other than the distinction as being on the most TV broadcasts and losing....which is a record I'm sure he''d rather NOT have if he had the choice.

He's my 3rd favorite bowler, despite his wardrobe being my 2nd least favorite, so I'm not "haitng" on the guy by ANY means. It's just in bowling people have the tendency to take the hot hand and crown them a little too early. And I think that detracts a little bit from the accomplishments of guys like Parker Bohn III or even Pete Weber (who I am NOT a fan of per se). Making the arguement for the Webers or Anthony or Williams is easy...but even guys like Bohn or Duke or Aulby or Roth were great players for a very long time. It's hard for me to move people ahead of them so easily.

A more interesting comparison would be...who's better? Chris Barnes or Wes Malott? Chris Barnes or Mika? Thats comparing him to other guys that are "sniffing" top 5 (current bowlers)...probably top 10. I could see all kinds of interesting arguements on all sides of those 3 guys....with no clear wrong or right answers.

But you're right Master Yoda...we DONT need a coach to tell us who the "best bowler in the world" is....it's the guy with 47 titles and over 4 million in earnings...on TOP of both those lists and probably the 1st or 2nd greatest bowler EVER.

[YODA]

Well, basketball is stupid. Not to mention it's a team sport. Jordan doesn't have "individual titles"...his rings were part of a team championship. Now...will he have scoring records and stuff like that by the time Kobe and Lebron are done playing?? Maybe. But I don't know.

Comparing Micheal Jordan to Kobe Bryant is like comparing Walter Ray to Earl Anthony. It's two of the best ever with the rings/titles/averages to prove it. And maybe someone could throw a Pete Weber and a Dick Weber in that conversation as well. But Chris Barnes? Sean Rash? Wes Malott? Jason Belmonte? Rhino Page? When those guys start amassing 25+ major titles over long, successful careers...then okay. But it's a little soon to start crowing "generation next" just yet.

As good as Clayton Kershaw is....he's not Sandy Koufax, Warren Spahn, or Cy Young "just yet". I don't even know if he's "Nolan Ryan" just yet.

It took Pete Weber the better part of 3 decades to place himself among the top 4. I think there are 15 pro bowlers still alive ahead of him (Barnes) in titles. He's top 10 (or close) in career eearnings. But his only record of distinction is one of only 6 players to win the triple crown. Well, other than the distinction as being on the most TV broadcasts and losing....which is a record I'm sure he''d rather NOT have if he had the choice.

He's my 3rd favorite bowler, despite his wardrobe being my 2nd least favorite, so I'm not "haitng" on the guy by ANY means. It's just in bowling people have the tendency to take the hot hand and crown them a little too early. And I think that detracts a little bit from the accomplishments of guys like Parker Bohn III or even Pete Weber (who I am NOT a fan of per se). Making the arguement for the Webers or Anthony or Williams is easy...but even guys like Bohn or Duke or Aulby or Roth were great players for a very long time. It's hard for me to move people ahead of them so easily.

A more interesting comparison would be...who's better? Chris Barnes or Wes Malott? Chris Barnes or Mika? Thats comparing him to other guys that are "sniffing" top 5 (current bowlers)...probably top 10. I could see all kinds of interesting arguements on all sides of those 3 guys....with no clear wrong or right answers.

But you're right Master Yoda...we DONT need a coach to tell us who the "best bowler in the world" is....it's the guy with 47 titles and over 4 million in earnings...on TOP of both those lists and probably the 1st or 2nd greatest bowler EVER.

Exactly...I agree with ya there... So you think Walter Williams Jr. is the greatest bowler :) I can agree with that...... for now :)

[YODA]

I think something was messed up in my last posts you think..... I went back and edited my one post to help better understand.. my thing was that whole most coaches consider Barnes the best, much like many consider Kobe and Lebron, that we really know who the best is (you mentioned him), and liek Jordan would be in basketball.. that help better? I think me and you are on the same page, but I did a poor job at explaining myself lol

[H3RBSKI]

hes great, but sounds like kermit the frog so i dont like to hear him talk lol

[Aslan]

I think something was messed up in my last posts you think..... I went back and edited my one post to help better understand.. my thing was that whole most coaches consider Barnes the best, much like many consider Kobe and Lebron, that we really know who the best is (you mentioned him), and liek Jordan would be in basketball.. that help better? I think me and you are on the same page, but I did a poor job at explaining myself lol

Yeah. And I don't want to give the impression that I think Chris Barnes isn't "good". He'd be on my list for top 10, maybe even top 5 of current bowlers. I just think that when people say he's hands down the guy you want to emulate or design your game/approach/release around...even though it's not a bad idea...it begs the question..."if he's so "perfect"...why is he not "the best"? Wouldn't you want to emulate "the best"??

I think who we should or shouldn't take after greatly depends on our current approach and our physical dimensions. I like Walter Ray and Mika because they're relatively tall. I like to "emulate" higher loft/amateur bowlers because I naturally throw that way. And I like to emulate strokers more so than crankers because it feels more natural. That being said...emulating Walter Ray is very difficult due to his "herky-jerky" motion. And Mika has an incredibly high back swing and forward tilt that is hard for me to duplicate. So I've tried recently to learn more of how Parker Bohn does it. But...he's a lefty, so it's trickier. I may end up emulating Chris Barnes just because those other 3 are too difficult to model my game after...even though...I think Bohn and Walter Ray are "better" than Barnes.

Basketball is tough. I personally think the greatest player ever...was Shaq. Obviously he is no Jordan, or Kobe, of Lebron. But the reason I'd take SHAQ over them...is there has never been a player like Shaq that when he was in his prime was SO unstoppable. He was just physically dominant. Great players make their opposing teams play differently against them. Shaq was the epitomy of that. Player after player would foul out playing "hacka Shaq" because there was no other way to stop him. But...at that size...his career was limited. So he'll never have the career of a Kobe or a Jordan or Lebron. It's like comparing Bo Jackson to Emmit Smith. Anyone that ever saw Bo Jackson run...has virtually no doubt that had he not gotten injured...he'd have been the greatest running back to ever live. But his career was so short...there's no logical reasoning to put him ahead of Emmit Smith.

[josheaton16]

I think the reason Barnes isn't the "best" is probably due to his mental game not physical. If you look at just his form, he is pretty much perfect, that's why people say to emulate him. As you said Walter Ray i=has a crazy approach but is still the best, even though he is not necessarily "perfect" in his delivery. But he doesn't fold under the pressure.

[J Anderson]

I just think that when people say he's hands down the guy you want to emulate or design your game/approach/release around...even though it's not a bad idea...it begs the question..."if he's so "perfect"...why is he not "the best"? Wouldn't you want to emulate "the best"??


As a long time fan of pro bowling, I've heard the color commentators endorse a number of bowlers as being "the one" to style your game after. Barnes is just the latest in a line that includes Parker Bohn, Johnny Petraglia, Brian Voss, and Dick Weber. I don't remember Earl Anthony (although he was pretty close to textbook for his era), Mark Roth (although lots of people copied him anyway), Walter Ray Williams, or Pete Weber being held up as examples to emulate. I'm not sure why in the case of P.D.W. since I've lost count of the number of times Randy Pederson has said,"Pete has the greatest physical game the sport has ever seen." I can only assume it's because he thinks Weber is a freak of nature in his ability to repeat his delivery the same way every time.

Generally speaking, athletes who are either considered to be the all time best in their sport, or even those who just dominate their sport for a few seasons, are outliers and there is a lot beside physical skill that sets them apart.

[tr33frog]

I think the reason Barnes isn't the "best" is probably due to his mental game not physical. If you look at just his form, he is pretty much perfect, that's why people say to emulate him. As you said Walter Ray i=has a crazy approach but is still the best, even though he is not necessarily "perfect" in his delivery. But he doesn't fold under the pressure.

Exactly. You don't want to try and copy someone that has lots of hitches in their approach, or a lot of walking sideways, or arm swinging behind their back in weird arc's. The more odd things you do the more odd things you have that can go wrong, and are harder to fix when you struggle.

[Hampe]

Yeah. And I don't want to give the impression that I think Chris Barnes isn't "good". He'd be on my list for top 10, maybe even top 5 of current bowlers. I just think that when people say he's hands down the guy you want to emulate or design your game/approach/release around...even though it's not a bad idea...it begs the question..."if he's so "perfect"...why is he not "the best"? Wouldn't you want to emulate "the best"??No, you shouldn't necessarily want to emulate "the best" (or most successful bowler). You should want to emulate the guy who's closest to having textbook perfect form. Winning takes more than just perfect form, it requires having a lot of other intangible skills as well. It's not a coincidence that WRW is also a 9 time horseshoe world champion. But there is still no question that Chris Barnes has better form than WRW.

[RobLV1]

Many coaches, myself included, consider Chris Barnes to be the best bowler on the planet today. So, what does this mean? It's partially his physical game that successfully combines traditional principles with contemporary requirements: he is the ultimate transitional bowler. But, it's really more than than. He is one of very few professionals who can truly play any part of the lane without any change in the way that he throws the ball. He's equally as comfortable playing the ditch as he is lofting the left gutter cap. A few years ago during match play at the Tournament Of Champions, Barnes had the front eleven, when his thumb insert came out of his ball. He went over to Wes Malott and borrowed a wooden mallet, hammered the thumb slug back into his ball, calmly stepped up on the approach some seven or eight minutes later, and threw a perfect strike to finish off his 300. That was impressive!

The thing about Barnes is that he's always there. It's pretty rare to see him crash and burn at any tournament on any lane condition. While his struggles on TV have been well documented, I think that he over-thinks things in pressure situations, which is something that many of the rest of us can certainly relate to. I know I can.

Rob Mautner

[sprocket]

"...without any change in the way he throws the ball"

You mean other than speed, RPM and axis rotation?

Other than that I am in complete agreement. I could be wrong too. I does appear to me that his speed and ball roll change when he makes big moves.

[Aslan]

But there is still no question that Chris Barnes has better form than WRW.

I agree Hampe. My point was, you don't win titles by having the "best form". It's not a dog show. There's no judge standing there watching you throw the ball and saying, "Okay...WRW through a 299, Mika a 279, Barnes a 254....winner is Barnes because he had the best form."

I like the advice that someone on the boards (talking about this topic awhile ago) made...that when emulating a pro (or high level amateur for that matter), you want to try and find the person with the most success who ALSO is the closest to you in style and physical make-up. If you're a tall righty who is a cranker..find the best tall righty cranker...THATs who you emulate. The trick for me isn't finding a tall righty with success....the trick is finding someone who hasn't transitioned from traditional to modern deliveries. It's hard when you're a "up the right side of the ball traditional bowler" and EVERYONE you see in the PBA has cupped wrists and/or is starting their release from the inside quadrant. Thats why I kinda like the old stuff...watching Hardwick and Limongello throw...because I watch them and think, "I could do that!" But if I watch Rhino Page or Wes Malott..I think, "forget it...I can't do that." I LOVE watching Mika bowl...he's probably 3rd favorite behind Parker and ahead of Barnes...but I see that backswing and it scares the POO out of me! I have nightmares that I'll try that and get to the foul line too soon...then I'm just bent over the foul line with my ball above my head like a bad Bugs Bunny episode.

[MICHAEL]

It can depend.. Look at it like this... The best basketball player in "the world" if you ask most people is Lebron James or Kobe Bryant, but if you compare them to Jordan they still don't touch him in titles, rings, etc... But they are still considered by many to be the best in the world.

the difference is this:

Your example is a GREAT PlAYER on an average team. I could point out many great NFL football players, like Tony Gonzallas that never made it to the Super Bowl, but were arguably the best at there positions.

Bowling, in singles, does not depend on anyone but yourself. I think a great barometer of who is the best that has ever rolled a ball is. WHO WON THE MOST TITLES, and if they didn't win where in the pack, and how often

A bowler is not like any other team player.... The Pro bowler either gets the job done, or not. He has no one to blame but himself!

[rv driver]

For me, the "best player" has nothing to do with stats, titles, etc. It has everything to do with how well they personify the sport. for example, Jordan may have gotten more press, but Larry Bird personified the sport more completely. Norm Duke personifies the sport more completely than Pete Weber.

[Aslan]

For me, the "best player" has nothing to do with stats, titles, etc. It has everything to do with how well they personify the sport. for example, Jordan may have gotten more press, but Larry Bird personified the sport more completely. Norm Duke personifies the sport more completely than Pete Weber.

ughhhhhnahhh...no.

Don't get me wrong...I above many appreciate bowlers less who act like jackaholes....like PDW, Belmo, and Rash...and sometimes Fagan. BUT...despite my personal problems with them...PDW has done enough to warrant his place as one of the best ever and both Belmo and Rash could join the club if they continue on the pace they are on.

The other issue, especially with the PBA, is some of those guys may not be as "bad" as they appear...they may be doing a WWF type of thing where they're just trying to get ratings. But, thats a slippery slope.

[rv driver]

ughhhhhnahhh...no.

Don't get me wrong...I above many appreciate bowlers less who act like jackaholes....like PDW, Belmo, and Rash...and sometimes Fagan. BUT...despite my personal problems with them...PDW has done enough to warrant his place as one of the best ever and both Belmo and Rash could join the club if they continue on the pace they are on.

The other issue, especially with the PBA, is some of those guys may not be as "bad" as they appear...they may be doing a WWF type of thing where they're just trying to get ratings. But, thats a slippery slope.
Oh, he deserves his place, all right. So does Jordan. But I'm not talking "raw talent" so much as I am attitude and image.