Is your handicap league fair?

[bowl1820]

I must respectfully disagree that current lane and ball conditions somehow benefit lower-average bowlers more than higher-average bowlers. An equally persuasive argument could be made that only very good bowlers are able to take advantage of specific oil patterns and the monster hooks that today’s balls facilitate, giving poorer bowlers an even bigger disadvantage than they had before.

To say that "only" very good bowlers are able to take advantage of specific oil patterns and the monster hooks that today’s balls facilitate or to say it has inflated everyone equally is a little naive

Yes, Very good bowlers are able to make the best use of today's equipment and specific oil patterns. Which is as it should be, if they are better bowlers.

But lower average, less skilled bowlers have benefited greatly if not more from easy conditions and the powerful balls used today.

You can see it when the 200+ ave. house "Hack" goes to a tournament with a hard (compared to his normal THS) condition And their scores plunge. A actual "good" bowlers score may go down, but not like the house hacks will. The house hack's skill is dependent on equipment and conditions.

Beside bowlers even the USBC and most of the experts in the bowling industry have stated that easy conditions and equipment have inflated peoples averages.

In any case, saying any factor can allow a bowler to bowl over his or her average more often doesn’t make much sense to me. Even if specific conditions do raise a bowler’s average, that has nothing to do with being able to bowl above your average…which is presumably even harder to do after you’ve raised your average. At the end of the season, each bowler will have approximately the same number of games above and below whatever average he or she achieves. That’s how averages work.

It is harder for higher average bowlers to bowl over their average as compared to a lower average bowler.

Now this might not be worded well:

Lower average bowlers can bowl over ave. just by sparing more to begin with, But when you couple that with the easy conditions most bowlers have and balls that increase their margin of error and carry on poor shots. So When they do have a better night They strike more and their POA is able to go even higher.

High average bowler's on the other hand "have to strike" to bowl POA, They are consistent to begin with, not making as many mistakes as a lower average less skilled bowler. While the ball and conditions may be helping them some also, it's not helping like it does for the lower average bowler.


If you really want to see a discussion make that statement that you disagree that current lane and ball conditions somehow benefit lower-average bowlers more than higher-average bowlers." Over on Ballreviews.com, bowlingballexchange.com or forum.bowlingchat.net

Those are the hardcore bowlers and ones that have been around a long time. They'll give you a thoughts on the state of handicap, averages etc.

This is a beginner board.

[JJKinGA]

We are ignoring the biggest question: What is FAIR?
Is fair meaning any team regardless of skill has an equal chance to win the league? This was the USBC postition for 116% handicap
Is fair meaning the highest average team should win? then scartch is the fairest way
Is fair meaning that on any given night the lowest average team can beat the highest average team? If scores are normally distributed (They are pretty close - I have also read references that log-normal distribution is better) then you need the average minus one standard deviation for the highest team to be equal to the lowest average plus one standard deviation. I have never tried to convert that to a simple handicap formula (perhaps if I have time today I will see what works well for the data I ahve for the past few season in my league). I suspect it will be very difficult to find a simple way to make that work universally.
Is fair that the low average teams are not dead last, but the high average team has some benefit? For this you would want something like 100% of 180, so that the lower skill or casual bowlers can compete with talented bowlers, but the dedicated/talented bowlers have an advantage most of the time.


What does everyone think is fair to expect for a handicap league?

[bowl1820]

What does everyone think is fair to expect for a handicap league?

And there's the rub! What is fair!

Really there is no fair handicap, there's only the one that everyone ultimately agrees to settle for. Someone is always going to feel slighted.

Note for everyone about the USBC handicap study and the 116% handicap, they have never said that a league should use it.

USBC:

If a handicap percent of 116% would result in absolutely equalizing competition in
handicap leagues, then why doesn’t the USBC advocate the use of that percent of handicap
to the exclusion of all others?
FACT: Nobody wants to deprive the more skillful of the benefits of their superior skill. If the
more proficient bowlers have an edge, it is one they’ve earned. It is a premium, which comes
from more diligent efforts to improve their capabilities. That incentive should not be taken
away, regardless of the level at which a bowler competes.

Asking what a fair handicap is, is like asking what is a fair prizelist is. You'll never have one answer every agrees on totally.

[jab5325]

To say that "only" very good bowlers are able to take advantage of specific oil patterns and the monster hooks that today’s balls facilitate or to say it has inflated everyone equally is a little naive

Yes, Very good bowlers are able to make the best use of today's equipment and specific oil patterns. Which is as it should be, if they are better bowlers.

But lower average, less skilled bowlers have benefited greatly if not more from easy conditions and the powerful balls used today.

You can see it when the 200+ ave. house "Hack" goes to a tournament with a hard (compared to his normal THS) condition And their scores plunge. A actual "good" bowlers score may go down, but not like the house hacks will. The house hack's skill is dependent on equipment and conditions.

Beside bowlers even the USBC and most of the experts in the bowling industry have stated that easy conditions and equipment have inflated peoples averages.




It is harder for higher average bowlers to bowl over their average as compared to a lower average bowler.

Now this might not be worded well:

Lower average bowlers can bowl over ave. just by sparing more to begin with, But when you couple that with the easy conditions most bowlers have and balls that increase their margin of error and carry on poor shots. So When they do have a better night They strike more and their POA is able to go even higher.

High average bowler's on the other hand "have to strike" to bowl POA, They are consistent to begin with, not making as many mistakes as a lower average less skilled bowler. While the ball and conditions may be helping them some also, it's not helping like it does for the lower average bowler.


If you really want to see a discussion make that statement that you disagree that current lane and ball conditions somehow benefit lower-average bowlers more than higher-average bowlers." Over on Ballreviews.com, bowlingballexchange.com or forum.bowlingchat.net

Those are the hardcore bowlers and ones that have been around a long time. They'll give you a thoughts on the state of handicap, averages etc.

This is a beginner board.

Totally agree, 1820.

The team I bowled last week is a perfect example of what you're talking about. They have one bowler (fingerless cranker) with a 200 average, and a 150-average loud, obnoxious galute that literally heaves the ball to the arrows. The galute had a 215 and just shy of a 600 series last week by making spares and having an "on" night, while the fingerless cranker was just about 20 pins above his average and had something in the 620s.

[Amyers]

We are ignoring the biggest question: What is FAIR?
Is fair meaning any team regardless of skill has an equal chance to win the league? This was the USBC postition for 116% handicap
Is fair meaning the highest average team should win? then scartch is the fairest way
Is fair meaning that on any given night the lowest average team can beat the highest average team? If scores are normally distributed (They are pretty close - I have also read references that log-normal distribution is better) then you need the average minus one standard deviation for the highest team to be equal to the lowest average plus one standard deviation. I have never tried to convert that to a simple handicap formula (perhaps if I have time today I will see what works well for the data I ahve for the past few season in my league). I suspect it will be very difficult to find a simple way to make that work universally.
Is fair that the low average teams are not dead last, but the high average team has some benefit? For this you would want something like 100% of 180, so that the lower skill or casual bowlers can compete with talented bowlers, but the dedicated/talented bowlers have an advantage most of the time.


What does everyone think is fair to expect for a handicap league?

I agree that fair is a difficult concept I don't know that I think a 120 avg bowler should have exactly equal chances of beating a 200 avg bowler. I think the general idea is to even the playing field so the lower average bowlers have a chance. I will say I bowl a league that has a element of singles competition to it and beating bowlers who's average is over the handicap scale is darn near impossible short of them having a bad night and me having a above average night. League has a 90% of 220 handicap we have two bowlers who average in the low 230's I think their record is about 40-10.

[Aslan]

Aslan, you’ve put your finger on a key to success in a handicap league: in-season improvement.

You had me at "You've put your finger on a key to success…"

[bltuneup]

And there's the rub! What is fair!

Really there is no fair handicap, there's only the one that everyone ultimately agrees to settle for. Someone is always going to feel slighted.

Note for everyone about the USBC handicap study and the 116% handicap, they have never said that a league should use it.

USBC:



Asking what a fair handicap is, is like asking what is a fair prizelist is. You'll never have one answer every agrees on totally.

Granted, “fair” is a subjective concept. But that doesn’t mean fairness can’t be strived for in an objective way. Let’s start with an assumption I hope we can all agree on.

Any handicap league must give every team that enters a reasonable chance of success. If it doesn’t, it’s stealing money from and basically lying to the teams that have little chance to succeed. My company league recruits bowlers by saying, “It doesn’t matter if you’re not a good bowler because it’s a handicap league. Everyone has a chance. So come join the fun!”

If we can agree on this criteria for a handicap league, the fairness question boils down to simple arithmetic. If we can compute each team’s odds of finishing in first given the attributes of the league and the averages of the teams, subjective judgments could then be made about whether those objective odds give all teams a reasonable chance.

The problem, of course, is that no one has ever (as far as I can tell) tried to compute those odds. Many would argue (and have argued) that it can’t be done. If you accept that, there will be eternal debate about various theories (e.g., “poorer teams have the advantage because they have more room for improvement” or “modern lane conditions give poorer bowlers an advantage”) that don’t address the real problem. If any of those theories is true, averages will change in the predicted way, thus altering the odds of success in the way predicted by those theories. But who cares? You still haven’t determined if the specific handicap formula used for a specific league with a specific mix of bowlers and teams gives every team a fighting chance. Mathematics must be used to do that.

To see that odds can be computed, let’s consider an extremely simple four-team scratch league with one bowler per team bowling one game per week for 50 weeks, with the winner being the bowler with the most wins at the end of the season. If all four bowlers ended up averaging 180, I think we can all agree that each team has an equal chance to finish in first. If two teams tying for first both get credit for a first-place finish, the actual probability of a team finishing in first is closer to 27% than 25% because about one season in 12 will end in a tie. There. We’ve computed odds.

Now, what if one of the bowlers ends up averaging 181 instead of 180. We can all agree that bowler’s odds are better than his opponents’. But can we compute how much better? Yes we can. It turns out that the 181 bowler has about a 32% chance of coming in first, with the other three bowlers each having about a 25% chance.

I won’t lie and say it’s easy to come up with these numbers. If it were, someone would have done it years ago. I spent five years figuring out how to do it and implementing the solution. It involves using Monte Carlo simulations of every relevant aspect of a league and (as one responder suggested) relies on the fact that bowlers will bowl scores in an approximately normal (OK, log-normal) distribution around his or her average. I even allow characterization of each bowler on a range from rock-solid consistent to having wild swings in scoring. (For mathematical types, this would define each bowler’s standard deviation.) Using these techniques, complications like multiple bowlers per team and the use of handicap formulas can be easily incorporated into the model.

So, if one accepts that I’ve done a good job of modeling a league (I promise I have), then one accepts that the numbers my app comes up with can be trusted. At this point, we can discuss fairness in purely mathematical terms.

For instance, what do we say about a league’s fairness if the best team has a 33% chance of finishing in first (i.e., it can expect to come in first place one season out of every three this league bowls together) and the poorest team has a 1% chance (coming in first only one season in every 100)? At this point, subjectivity comes into play about whether this is fair. But now fairness is being evaluated based on actual numbers!

There is one additional complication. Just because a team enters a league with a certain book average, that doesn’t mean that’s the average that team will achieve. So we need to determine what kinds of improvements a team would need to make to boost its chances to compete on par with the best teams. My app lets you model this as well. Here again, fairness comes down to looking at numbers and deciding subjectively whether teams have odds that seem to fairly reward their hypothetical performances. Once you’ve done that, you’ve “tuned up” the league to optimize its fairness to all teams.

This probably all sounds more complicated than it is. The point is that right now, there is no way to determine with any certainty whether a sub-100% handicap league gives all teams a fighting chance to succeed. My app aims to change that.

[bltuneup]

Note for everyone about the USBC handicap study and the 116% handicap, they have never said that a league should use it.

USBC:
If a handicap percent of 116% would result in absolutely equalizing competition in
handicap leagues, then why doesn’t the USBC advocate the use of that percent of handicap
to the exclusion of all others?
FACT: Nobody wants to deprive the more skillful of the benefits of their superior skill. If the
more proficient bowlers have an edge, it is one they’ve earned. It is a premium, which comes
from more diligent efforts to improve their capabilities. That incentive should not be taken
away, regardless of the level at which a bowler competes.

The USBC’s contention that 116% absolutely equalizes the competition is absolutely laughable. I would challenge any league to try it for one season if it wouldn’t be so cruel to the bowlers. You would not find results that randomly mix up good teams and bad teams, which is what you’d expect if competition were “absolutely equalized.” You would find the very worst teams in the league at the very top of the standings.

I have tried to figure out how the USBC’s study went so horribly wrong. All I can come up with is that sandbagging, dumping, and too-low handicap base numbers were allowed to run rampant in the leagues they studied, skewing the results to the point that they became meaningless.

Also, plenty of leagues use 100% handicaps, which do absolutely equalize competition. While this is not a good approach for competitive leagues, which should reward bowlers for their superior skills, some bowling centers like to have “fun” leagues for bowlers who don’t take the game seriously and just want to have a good time. So I’m also in disagreement with the USBC that “nobody wants to deprive the more skillful.” Some leagues do want to do that.

[bowl1820]

Okay loaded up the trial version of Bowling League Tuneup.

Pros:
It has a nice clean interface, entering information is pretty straight forward.

Cons so far:
It requires you use Microsoft Excel.
(That's a deal breaker, I and many others use Apache OpenOffice (Which handles Excel files just fine, but doesn't appear to work with BLT.) or other spreadsheet programs.

Which I assume is what caused the error messages I received:
When clicking the Analyze button: BLT2.blt File not found or Contains invalid Data (The file is there in the directory, so it must be invalid data.)

When trying to save league: Error saving league file: ActiveX component can't create document.

Program is limited to 24 teams (We have several full house leagues of 32 teams)

While maybe not a major concern, it can't factor in the Match Point System. Which is a common league format.

Suggestion:
Program should include a sample league file (or a download link for one)

[bowl1820]

My company league recruits bowlers by saying, “It doesn’t matter if you’re not a good bowler because it’s a handicap league. Everyone has a chance. So come join the fun!”

Just curious, you've mentioned how your team "finished near or at the bottom of the standings for 10 straight seasons".

What handicap was your league using then? and how many teams did it have?

What was your team average then? and what were the averages of the teams that won?

When your ran the numbers for your league and it showed your company league was grossly unfair.
What did it say would have been a fair handicap for your league?