Your Bylaws

[fordman1]

That is a lot of smokers 60% of middle aged men? We don't have any time between games. When the last man finishes on the pair the score is recorded and I tell my lead off man that I got it and he steps up and goes. We actually have waitresses at our center they can take food orders and drink orders. Bathroom breaks are unavoidable unless you expect them to wear those diapers. I still can't get over that many smokers. I would bet we don't have 10%.

[drlawsoniii]

Actually Ford that's not what he said here's the Quote.



In WV about 40% of the populations smokes probably more like 60% if your looking at middle aged men with disposable income which is the primary bowling demographic. What usually happens is after the last shot the leadoff goes out you see the 4th guy come out you know its time to go back in. 15 minutes is a long time but if its between games it might annoy me but enough to single 1 group out probably not. I've often enough waiting that long for someone getting drinks from the bar, food, bathroom, getting another ball out of the car and I even bowled on a team with the lane mechanic for a couple of seasons. Something broke the game picked back up after he fixed it. Such is life I don't go to the bowling alley to stress over time I've got work for that. Really what difference does it make? I get to sit around with my friends for an extra 30 minutes, drink my drink of choice, and enjoy life. If I get home a few minutes late for my favorite show that's why they invented the DVR.

I think the part I found the most offensive is complaining about the smoke smell. If it offends you my apologies but it's my life and I'll do what I want with it. What's next? How about we ban people who only wear cheap cologne? I find that smell much worse. Maybe the guy that comes bowling directly from work and maybe isn't lily fresh? Maybe you don't like the smell of liquor or beer on peoples breath let's get rid of them. We start singling out groups of people who have something about them that you personally don't like it won't be long before theirs a rule against something you do too.

I stand by my statement 100% smoking is a life choice (not some uncontrollable condition) if it is disruptive to the game which in my case at the alley i bowl at, it is. I get tired of waiting around for people to smoke and people taking forever to go to the bathroom or get a drink isn't really an issue at my alley. The smokers on the other hand who reek of smoke and it just billows off of their clothes like pigpen in the peanuts cartoon is rough on my sinuses and really affects my wanting to associate or play against them. It is your choice to smoke it's not like it's an affliction, so if it disrupts the game then yes i want it banned.

[Mike White]

I stand by my statement 100% smoking is a life choice

Yep, smokers are choosing how to live, and how to die.

[foreverincamo]

I bowl in two leagues. Main league the smokers run outside and hit a cigarette for a few minutes and get back within 5 minutes. The other league is a trio league where the main reason to be there is to drink, smoke , and have a good time. Bowling gets in the way some nights. It's a strange bunch.

[foreverincamo]

As for the original question, perhaps changing the handicap to 80% of 200. Anything over 200 gets nothing.

[fordman1]

You do understand that any team or bowler under 200 would have no chance at all against a bowler with 210-215-220-225-230- or more.
You know that because you are not a stupid person. I think you are just trying to stir up some controversy. If not I guess I could show you some samples.

[NewToBowling]

I would vote for a cap on handicap. I've seen too many 90 avg bowlers bowl 150-160 games.

[fordman1]

No one knows what kind of bowler you are so your H\C opinion doesn't mean much. Your profile is blank.
All teams should get H\C as a team not as an individual. So a 90 avg. bowler bowling won't make much difference.
In our league we have H\C pots and now one get to use anything under 160 for an average. Not a bylaw matter because it is a side pot.
USBC has a chart that says that you would need 114% to make it a fair chance for low avg. bowlers.
There again that is what bylaws are for. To determine what is fair for every league. Just be careful when determining what to use.

[J Anderson]

No one knows what kind of bowler you are so your H\C opinion doesn't mean much. Your profile is blank.
All teams should get H\C as a team not as an individual. So a 90 avg. bowler bowling won't make much difference.
In our league we have H\C pots and now one get to use anything under 160 for an average. Not a bylaw matter because it is a side pot.
USBC has a chart that says that you would need 114% to make it a fair chance for low avg. bowlers.
There again that is what bylaws are for. To determine what is fair for every league. Just be careful when determining what to use.

And there is the problem, getting everyone to agree what fair is. The USBC study didn't say 114% was fair. It said that 114% was the point where low average teams would have an even chance of winning. Any time handicap goes over 90% the higher skilled bowlers want to leave. When the handicap goes the other way, new bowlers stay away.

Still a free country, anyone is entitled to express an opinion.

[Mike White]

I would vote for a cap on handicap. I've seen too many 90 avg bowlers bowl 150-160 games.

What is "worse", a 90 avg bowler shooting 160, or a 230 avg bowler shooting 300?