What do you think constitutes a fair handicap?

[DanielMareina]

There is no way to make handicap completely fair. If you think about it, all of you know a true 120-130 average bowler. That person may shoot a 160 game every once in awhile but mostily right around their true average. Then there is the 140 average bowler who can't pick up a spare, but can string strikes together every once in awhile. These are the people that will do well with handicap. If this person shoots 105, 140, 200 there is no chance you are winning against 60 over average.

Here is what I prefer. I like a 90% of 220 handicap system. This allows people with a low average to have a good chance (200 average bowler shoots 200, the 130 average bowler only has to shoot 138 to win. That is picking up one more spare than usual) This also gives the higher average bowler less of a chance of having no chance to beat someone. I find that any more or less % and things start to sway toward one side or the other. Personally I bowl in a matchplay league. This means that all I have to do is bowl better than one person each game.

[mdmjdm]

I agree, 90% seems to work better than any other system, and you just set the basis so that only the top one or two bowlers receive NO handicap. I usually fall into that range, or close to it. My Monday league has a 90/220 system, and my average hovered between 218 and 222 all season, essentially giving me no handicap. My teammates average about 210(9), 220, 210(9), 185(31)...giving us about 48 pins per game.

The next lowest handicap in the league was 70 or so, highest was 240+. Even though we decidedly had the highest average team in the league...we did NOT lead it in wins, just won the title in a playoff. BUT, this was a men's league, lowest average being 160 or so....admittedly it doesn't work as well in a mixed league when there are averages in the low 100's.

When 100 average bowlers compete with 220 average bowlers, the 100's simply lose too many pins (24) in a 80/220 system to win half the time. 90/220 helps, but it's still 12 pins.

Whenever I see that type of disparity in averages in leagues AND hear the higher average bowlers complaining about it...I always have the same thought: Weren't YOU the lower average bowler once?

[americantrotter]

I dug this up rather than start a new thread. Last night was the first week of playoffs in my league. It's a fun league (plays music) but it's competetive. Handicap is 100% of 200. So everything varies wildly team to team.

Our team had a combined 213. The other team had a combined 386 handicap. Predictably we lost. All it took was us being off our game just a bit and the other team stringing a few strikes. We lost overall by a total of 66 handicap pins.

I know it's for fun, but it's also a competition. It makes you understand sandbagging.

It is so much easier for a 109 handicap to string a few closed frames than it is for a 45 handicap to string more than their average amount of strikes together.

I am obviously bitter, but I wanted to see how everyone felt about handicaps today.

[billf]

Tow of my leagues are match play and one team total. Anytime I bowl I try not to worry about what handicap I have or my opponent. I figure I'm always bowling against myself anyway, having no control over what my opponent does. That being said, I will try at times to mess up their line
The past week I just moved to play from the 1 through 5 boards and get to play there all by myself.

[bowl1820]

I am obviously bitter, but I wanted to see how everyone felt about handicaps today.

How do they feel? The same.

Looking around the forums the same feeling's are still here, Handicap has destroyed bowling because it makes everyone want to sandbag. Everyone except me and "thee" is a sandbagger.

The one main change is they have gotten away from arguing the numbers.

The new argument about the problem with handicap is. That it's easier for low average bowlers to bowl over their average, than it is for high average bowlers. That's why handicap isn't fair to higher averages.

And don't bother saying if you don't like handicap go bowl scratch, they have plenty of reasons why they can't.

Now if they could just figure away to penalize a low average bowlers for bowling good and keep them coming back and pumping money into the prizefund.

[Stormed1]

In many ways it's all relative to what the league wants. A prime example is my Friday senior league. sandbagging runs rampant in the league as the doubles pots are over 2 grand per game. We actually draw for which games are going to be the doubles games late in the 3rd game. One of the best handicap solutions i have experienced was 90% of the differences in the teams aveage of the players bowling that night. so for example if team a's averages total 1050 and team b's are 1000 team b would get 45 pins. Another solution is to make the league scratch with a team limit

[billf]

I believe a lot of it depends on who the person with the high handicap is. If it's somebody who tries every time, has bowled for awhile then the chances of that person shooting way above average is diminished. A scratch league where a 165 bowler goes against a 190 bowler doesn't seem much different or a 190 bowler against a 215 bowler. Given our low population these are real match-ups in our center.

[americantrotter]

I do want people to bowl. But it becomes that deal where unless I become a scratch bowler there arent many leagues for me to compete in and have a chance.

The other side is that this league that i bowl in is the only one that playes music. So I'd like to be able to compete in the league which I enjoy the atmosphere the best. which I suppose is a whole different problem, most accomplished bowlers probably hate music.

[DanielMareina]

Although I agree with a lot of what is said, and have my take earlier on the thread, I do think that a 220 average bowler bowling 50 pins over their average is more impressive that a 150 average bowler bowling 58 pins over their average. (which wins by one pin over the 220 average bowler). That said, I averaged 218 this year. My high game was a 279 and a low game of 148 (terrible!!!). Outside of the extremes, I bowled between 200 and 240 90% of my games. I ended the year winning 68% of my points in a 90% of difference in averages, matchplay league. All in all, I say it was pretty fair. There is no perfect answer, and there never will be one. The key is to find what works best for the majority of bowlers, and use that. We use 95% of 210 in our senior leagues, and in our mixed league. We use 90% of 220 in the rest, except the matchplay which is 90% the differnce in averages. As a good bowler, the matchplay format gets me the best chance to win points, without being unfair. All I have to do is bowl better than, or as good as the other bowler to win.

[billf]

Our scratch league lowered the average to qualify to 165 this year due to lack of bowlers. The captains drafted bowlers based off of average but you still end up with bowlers going against each other with 30 pin differences in average at times. Personally, I enjoy bowling against the better bowlers. Seems that's when I have bowled my best games/series. Last year I lost 784-686. At the time it was my all-time best series and I thank the other bowler for bowling his best every frame there by pushing me. I have a bad habit of losing focus/playing to the level of my competition. That's my fault, not the 120 bowler that beat me with his handicap.