Has the game changed THAT much?!

[Aslan]

Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pASl3K3rm14

If you saw the tall lefty bowling in your local alley...you might offer him some advice...maybe to throw with more speed. Maybe add hook. Maybe not "lean forward" as he gets to the foul line. And then he'd say, "in 1979, I was the all-time leader in tournament championships."

If you saw the other guy...you might critique him that he lifts his balance leg in the air or his balance at the foul line.

If I bowled like Earl Anthony...my coach/pro would roll his eyes and shake his head. Yet Earl Anthony in the late 70s and early 80s was THE dominant force in bowling...a "game" that has not changed. So has technology changed SO much that the average league player with a 200+ average could defeat an Earl Anthony...with Anthony throwing an old urethane ball and the modern day player throwing a reactive resin Marvel-S??

[Aslan]

I just watched a cool PBA open from the 60s...same thing...guys walking up, legs in the air, leaning over...

Does anyone know if they were just bowling on house oil patterns? Or have their always been differences in oil patterns from house to pro??

[J Anderson]

Look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pASl3K3rm14

If you saw the tall lefty bowling in your local alley...you might offer him some advice...maybe to throw with more speed. Maybe add hook. Maybe not "lean forward" as he gets to the foul line. And then he'd say, "in 1979, I was the all-time leader in tournament championships."

If you saw the other guy...you might critique him that he lifts his balance leg in the air or his balance at the foul line.

If I bowled like Earl Anthony...my coach/pro would roll his eyes and shake his head. Yet Earl Anthony in the late 70s and early 80s was THE dominant force in bowling...a "game" that has not changed. So has technology changed SO much that the average league player with a 200+ average could defeat an Earl Anthony...with Anthony throwing an old urethane ball and the modern day player throwing a reactive resin Marvel-S??

Earl was a tremendous natural athlete and his style worked for him and the equipment and lane conditions of the time. I believe that he was even more dominant than just the number wins would indicate. He finished second many times after having dominated the qualifying and match play rounds, only to lose to a player who was dialed in on the pair. There are a number of bowlers from that era who had a "better" technical game, but Earl had that combination of confidence and focus that let him go into and through every game believing that he had a chance to win no matter what the score.

The game has changed. If your typical house bowler w/200+ average could go back to 1979 with a Marvel S, Anthony would chew him up. Partly because the ball wouldn't match up with the lane condition and partly because Mr. 2013 has never had to play a tight line or worry about making spares since he "knows" that he's going to get a string of strikes to make up for any opens. Bring Earl from 1979 to 2013 with his equipment from '79 and he's going to struggle a bit, again because the ball most likely won't match the conditions.

[Aslan]

My opinion is, that back in the 60s/70s...you had to be a better bowler to score in the 200s than you do now. Everyone threw a relatively straight ball...and the best players could pick up spares. The guys who won were the guys that could string together some strikes and avoiding open frames.

Nowadays...anybody can go get a big hook reactive ball...and string 4-6 strikes together. And because of the greater pin carry, they're unlikely to leave anything but either the 10-pin or the 7-pin...so all they have to do is throw their "spare ball" cross lane and likely pick it up. So, to keep "everyone" from being a "PBA pro"...they've made the lanes more oily a longer way down the lane...and in creative ways...that make it harder for an average Joe to just throw his massive rev/massive hook ball and consistenly hit the pocket.

It's an interesting development. Most sports, the equipment gets better...but the players also get better. Bowling seems to be more like car racing...where the athletes have gotten worse, but the equipment has changed the game.

[e-tank]

i agree that it prob takes less skill to be better and its very evident in my own league where some of the best bowlers have no idea about why they throw a certain ball or changing with conditions. Its just a house shot so its technically easy mode. At the same time though i score just as well with my urethane from the 80's as i do with my newer balls. Its just a matter of knowing what you and your ball can do and adjusting to that. I mean if bowling was truely as easy as buying a top of the line reactive super ball and throwing it down the lane and stringing up strikes then wed all be pro by now

[Aslan]

I mean if bowling was truely as easy as buying a top of the line reactive super ball and throwing it down the lane and stringing up strikes then wed all be pro by now

That was what I meant about the lane conditions/oil patterns. If the Pros didn't have to bowl on tighter sport oil patterns...anyone COULD be a pro. Back in the day, that wasn't the case. Look at how many 200+ league averages there are now in most house leagues. How many of those players play tournaments? How many of those players try sport patterns? How many guys do you know that DID try to go out and bowl PBA and come back from their first tournament saying, "Wow...it was way harder than I thought. I bowled 70 pins under my house average."

Back in the old days (60s/70s)...your best bowlers would bowl 208 averages...very few 800 series if any and it was done on sport oil conditions. As time progressed...equipment improved...now anybody with a $150 ball and a couple lessons can bowl a 212, 219, 235. That short list of 300 games...that used to be slightly bigger than the list of hole-in-ones at a golf course...now it's almost an entire page...mostly 1998 to 2013.

Imagine if the PBA bowled on house oil patterns. You really think the best team at your friday night league couldn't take down a PBA foursome on any given night? And thats not only the "joke" that is bowling...it's also what I think makes bowling great. It's the ONLY sport a regular ole Joe could beat a pro at. No matter how good you are at basketball, hockey, baseball, boxing, tennis, soccer, etc... You wouldn't last more than 5 minutes in a pro game. You couldn't score one goal...you couldn't get one hit...you'd be lucky to return one serve or make one basket. And new equipment won't save you. New bats, basketball shoes, a new racket, a new hockey stick...these things mean nothing. But on any given night at the lanes...you could beat a Dick Weber or a Norm Duke. It'd be tough...especially in a series...but you could do it.

[e-tank]

Well i think the advantages of a pro would be their accuracy and ability to change ball movements by changing the release, or approach speed. You do have a point though about getting a 200 average isnt that hard. Im almost there and ive only been bowling for 10 months. I saw a stat somewhere that said in the first season that reactive balls were used in usbc sanctioned games, the amount of 300 games went up dramatically. Im actually bowling a team tonight in league that are all over 200avg with 2 of them being over 230 and the other 2 being 200-220.

Also the thing with bowling though is its a passive sport. If you were having a 3 point contest, qb challenge, hockey penalty goal shots etc it would be the same thing as you would have a chance to beat pros and youre not physically going up against them per say.

[vdubtx]

Back in the old days (60s/70s)...your best bowlers would bowl 208 averages...very few 800 series if any and it was done on sport oil conditions.

Aisa,

Back then "sport oil patterns" didn't exist. They basically slopped the oil on and let the bowlers go to town on figuring out what to do. Later on they would start at about the 2 board with oil and the progressively get higher until they hit 20 and then back down again on volume essentially a Crown pattern.

[Aslan]

Aisa,

Back then "sport oil patterns" didn't exist.

1) Thats not my name.
2) Already addressed "sport" oil patterns in my other post. I didn't mean "sport oil patterns" as we think of them now...I meant a standardized USBC pattern that pre-dates today's easier house patterns.

[The German Shepherd]

Having been a product of the era Aslan speaks of, I can tell you that "back in the day" there was a premium on ACCURACY. When you threw your strike ball, you would need to be looking at a particluar board - a single board. The best bowlers I ever knew could place a dime on the lane and hit it with their ball at will. TODAY, you look at AREAS, not boards. The oiling patterns regualrly referred to as a THS (tyical house pattern) would have never been allowed. I bowled an 856 about 30 years ago (along with a 300 in that series) and the ABC threw it out and refused to sanction it because the oil pattern was crowned too much. Have you ever seen a score thrown out in your life? Probably not.

There has been a great deal done to try to re-popularize bowling as a sport and pass-time. Perhaps the greatest effort has gone into making the sport easier. Everybody loves to throw strikes, so why not make it easier to throw them?! Back in the 70's, the odds against throwing a perfect 300 was approximately 32,000:1. Nowadays, it is 11,500:1.

Would Earl Anthony score and win TODAY like he did if he were to throw the same polyester equipment he was so accustomed to throwing in his prime? No. But hten again, that would be placing him at an unfair handicap, since he would be bowling against great bowlers with more modern equipment. But give him the same advantages as your modern pro and he would still be a dominant force. Same goes for Mark Roth, Don Johnson, Dick Weber ec etc...

Jay