Aslan's Take on USBC Proposed Rule Changes

[Aslan]

I listened to Mo Pinel's response to the rule changes...I've read some things here and there...so here's my take on it:


First...Mo questioned the "purpose" of the rule changes...but he KNOWS the purpose. Most serious, USBC bowlers are seeing honor scores that mean much less than they used to. We've had this debate on this website numerous times and the data is there to support the argument that 'something' has changed in the sport and has made honor scores "less honorable". As averages rise...honor scores skyrocket...while bowling numbers continue to decline and one can argue the "knowledge" of bowlers also declines....there is obviously a problem...thus a "purpose" for rule changes.

Second...one of the biggest "hurdles" of addressing this problem for proprietors is recognizing that bowling has two very distinct and very different customers: sport bowlers and casual bowlers. Larger leagues are often made up of a mix of both. Making the game harder will likely cost you some bowlers at the lower, more casual level. Making the game easier will likely cost you sport bowlers at the higher end. This presents a problem for centers.

I agree with Mo that attacking the centers for lane maintenance and lane condition control is the BEST way to limit scoring. I've laid out a plan for this in many other threads...a lottery based system where centers are inspected randomly prior to league play with REAL penalties for non-compliance and rewards for centers that are compliant. The issue is logistics and the cost to the USBC to administer this type of inspection program. I think you'd need about 100-175 employees added to the USBC payroll...2-4 per State. Part of the cost could be endured by centers via fines they incur for non-compliance...but it would still be a financial burden for an organization with very little cash flow.

I disagree (although understand) with Mo's defense of manufacturers. Ball manufacturers have generally kept their profits secret...and have preyed upon bowlers by selling them "the next great thing" while offering them little information nor justification for why the new release is so "great". In some cases, they've done nothing but re-package older balls in new covers and claimed to have invented the light bulb. That being said, I DO think it's fair that centers bear some of the responsibility and it not be squarely placed on manufacturers.

A grandfathering system is easy to work out...I've done it when working with government regulators on certain private industries. It's simply a two-tier system where manufacturers are given 2 years to implement the change and pro shops and retailers are given an additional 2 years to "sell-through" their stock. After 4 years...no retailer can sell an "illegal" ball. The question is whether to put in a "use" restriction. In this case...I'd recommend an additional 3 years for legal "use" of out-of-spec equipment that would look like this:

No balls over 0.050 differential manufactured after 2019.
No balls over 0.050 differential can be sold after 2021 (so long as they are manufactured prior to January 1, 2022).
No balls with a differential over 0.050 can be used in USBC sanctioned events starting on January 1, 2025.


...SO LONG AS IT WAS LEGAL AT THE TIME IT WAS PURCHASED. In other words, the Motiv Jackal could not be used...because it was ILLEGAL when it was purchased. The 3-year provision simply allows the use of legally purchased equipment.

The difficulty with this system is how do you actually ENFORCE it? Legal entities have enforcement powers...the USBC does not. The USBC can penalize manufacturers, centers, can invalidate bowler scores/results....but the USBC can't penalize pro shops for illegal sales. That may mean you need to alter the dates so manufacturers can manufacture up to the end of 2019 and bowlers can only use the older equipment until the end of 2022.

Mo's feeling that manufacturers need a really short window is simply self-serving to the ball industry and an attempt to force bowlers to buy new equipment. That leads to REAL problem the USBC is going to face: Bowlers tend to use equipment until it breaks...and forcing them to buy new equipment will likely force them out of bowling or into non-snactioned leagues.

That leads me to my final (and least supported solution/change)...LEVELS.

As I've said before...a sanctioned center should not be able to have non-sanctioned leagues. If a center is allowed to have non-sanctioned leagues...with these rule changes...bowlers with illegal equipment will cease to take part in sanctioned leagues in numbers like we've never seen before. If we're going to get rid of non-sanctioned leagues...which we should have a long time ago...I propose a "levels" system similar to many other sports...DIVISIONS if you will.

BEGINNERS 0-159 average, USBC RED PATTERN, allowed to use ANY equipment*

INTERMEDIATES 160-189 averages, USBC WHITE PATTERN, allowed to use any differential balls (< 0.060) manufactured prior to 2020*.

ADVANCED 190 and up averages, USBC BLUE PATTERN, must use balls < 0.050 differntial starting in 2023.

Using the "division" system...a bowler can bowl in ANY division with a 0-159 average. But, once you hit 160...you can no longer bowl in beginner leagues until you've had two consecutive seasons of an average of 159 or less. Once you average 190 or higher, you cannot bowl in beginner NOR intermediate divisions until you have two consecutive seasons of a < 190 average...at which point you would be eligible to bowl in an intermediate division.

The patterns would be specified by the USBC. Anyone in the country bowing in a league would be sanctioned and know EXACTLY what pattern they are bowling on and it would be the same pattern in an intermediate league in Wyoming as an intermediate league in Kansas as an intermediate league in West Virginia. The USBC could make these patterns longer, shorter, wider, higher volume, lower volume...each year the USBC can change them...but everyone (in the same division) bowls on the same patterns. This also makes lane inspections easier...if you show up at Iceman's Bowling Barn and an intermediate league is starting in an hour...you know EXACTLY what that lane pattern should look like and can take a tape reading.

And FINALLY...the part that the USBC dreads...even more than angering ball manufacturers, centers, and bowlers...the USBC has to end 2-handed bowling. Rob is right...as is Mo. If the differentials are forced lower...one-handed bowlers will be at an enormous disadvantage against 2-handed bowlers. The USBC DREADS this fact...because 2-handed bowling is injecting some youth into the sport...but if you don't stop it now, the sport could be at an end. There is already too much animosity against 2-handers by bowling old-timers and once one-handers lose their ability to even the odds (slightly) with 0.060 differential balls...it'll be the end. One handers will simply walk away...and thats 95% of bowlers. Better to rip off the band aid now.

[mishatx]

What would a rule banning 2-handed bowling look like? Restriction of the offhand touching the ball after a certain point in the swing?

[Aslan]

What would a rule banning 2-handed bowling look like? Restriction of the offhand touching the ball after a certain point in the swing?

I'm not sure. There have been a few options thrown around...not sure what would be the best or if it would be a combination. Generally it would probably be only one hand in contact with the ball once the ball enters the downswing.

It's unfortunate that we even have to consider it given the life it injected into the sport as of late...but I can't imagine a thriving sport where more than 15% of bowlers bowl 2-handed. If the balls are less powerful...the advantage to 2-handers would just be tremendous and one-handers would start to disappear faster than ever.

But, the only other option is to design all USBC and PBA patterns specifically to make big hooks non-viable. I'm sure a pattern could be developed that only allowed straight shots...like a mushroom pattern where there was so much volume on the backend that the ball couldn't move regardless of coverstock or rpms. 2-handers could still bowl...but they'd be rewarded only for accuracy...their style would have no advantage on the backend.

[mc_runner]

I am not sure I see two handed ever going away, nor would I personally support that. However, there could be further ball spec restrictions for a one vs. two handed release (edit - should have said approach, not release) as well. Or, a combination of ball specs and oil patterns like you said... not sure.

I've said before while I see the merit of the "divisions", I think there would have to be a ton of caveats.

Case 1 - Around here, we already have leagues with league minimum averages. And others, that make a maximum handicap based on a, say, 150 avg. This might be a modification of the division thought, your top division is simply a league avg. floor and your middle one allows everyone in but penalizes those under a certain threshold.

Case 2 - My 5 man team in my league right now ranges from a guy with a 150 average up to me and another guy at 210+. The divisions rule would eliminate my team from bowling together. And most of the league's teams (many of whom have been bowling together for a long time) would get split up. Think my team would survive? I'd be the only one probably looking for a new team, the rest would "retire". Same with the league. If people can't bowl, outside of super-competitive leagues, with their friends - league bowling is done. Like, I've probably brought into the sport 4-5 people simply through bowling with them. i wouldn't be able to with a divisions split like that. There would have to be some major thought around letting people bowl together who fit outside of those average restrictions.

[ALazySavage]

I have commented on this before, I think divisions would be extremely damaging (potentially permanently) to bowling - especially on the league level. In my adult bowling career, 12 years, I can count 9 bowlers who I would not be able to bowl with if this was enforced (and I guarantee 6 of the 8 who are still sanctioned would never have started). Even if you were to open this up to where lower bowlers can join higher divisions, very few people would want to do this. There is enough difficulty for many houses to get consistent league play and all this is doing is making it more difficult and confusing for the mom and pop league bowler to continue.

[bowl1820]

I listened to Mo Pinel's response to the rule changes...I've read some things here and there...so here's my take on it:

Pretty much everything here if the USBC did it, would add so much confusion and red tape to bowling (and fines). Do all that stuff and pretty quickly the House's and players wouldn't bother to Certify/Sanction and the USBC would cease to exist.

We'd go back to the pre-ABC days when there were lots of small local/regional independent bowling associations.

Like this "a sanctioned center should not be able to have non-sanctioned leagues........." Your going tell the houses they can't have unsanctioned leagues and the players they HAVE to join that's not going to happen. You wouldn't have to wait for the bowlers with illegal equipment to cease to take part in sanctioned leagues.

All the Houses would just quit certifying with the USBC and the BPAA (and probably partnered with the ball MFG.) would probably ultimately set up their own association that the houses would join. (Which in someways if done right, might have some advantages, like join the bpaa.mfg assoc. and you get some perks from the bpaa and the mfg. awards, discounts on games and equipment etc.)

Discussions about using a average based division system has been brought up numerous times over the years, They never got anywhere there was always something that would cause problems.Trying to do it with Averages tied to lane patterns and ball spec's would just be a big quagmire that everyone would get tired of messing with.

And trying to ban the two handed approach, that won't happen.

[fordman1]

I thought the reason the USBC moved to Texas was to team up with the BPAA. Aren't they in the same building? They should team up and make the ball Co's stop the insanity and scamming.