Chris Barnes has no "A" game

[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.