|
Post by MrPerfect on Jan 11, 2006 12:46:54 GMT -5
Yes, there was a time when the Hall of Fame first started, it wasn't distinguished between Performance and Service....I guess nothing can be done about that but with the new USBC governing rules on Hall of Fame, I think it has cut out a few, maybe half, that were able to vote before. One thing I think that should be considered for change by the Hall of Fame Inductees and Board members over the Hall of Fame Committee when deciding on who is inducted. I think the nominee's forms should be looked at for a week by the voters before voting on who they like. To me, passing out the application forms for all to review for 5 or 10 mins. and listening to a 60 second presentation of each nominee (but a very nice one I might add) is not sufficient time to review the applicants.....Also, I think an open floor discussion between the Hall of Fame voters only, could be done voicing they're opinions of the applicants qualifications before voting. It may or may not change anyone's mind but it could help to know what others think and their reasons why they are voting a certain way, but it shouldn't be anyone that has nominated an applicant, it should be from the people that are unbias....JMO.... Good idea about having the nominations out for review... I have often wondered about the lack of discussion concerning applications and stats... as I begged voters last month to discuss and review applications and ask any questions... I was amazed at the number of ballots being folded and turned in as I was speaking... and the bom and I had cussed and discussed and debated our votes for a week... It just goes to demonstrate, in my opinion, non-members of an institution should not be voting on inductees... like Baseball Hall of Fame... why do the Sportswriters vote and the Hall of Famers only vote for veterans passed over after 15 years... Makes no sense to me... That first paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about....people voting on bias feelings or friendships instead of looking at the application and voting based on the merits (I know they're still subjective to one's opinion) but how can you prove to me, they reviewed the applications and voted fairly and unbiased, when they are filling out and folding their votes before you finish all the presentations and before any possible discussion that may incur after the presentation?.... That's not fair to anyone...IMO.... and those people that did it, shouldn't be given the responsibility of being able to vote on matters as important as this....JMO...
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Jan 11, 2006 15:05:34 GMT -5
"and the bom and I had cussed and discussed and debated our votes for a week"
I can take it from that statement, that the bom wasn't going to vote for me as his #1 pick or even at all...lol...
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Jan 11, 2006 15:51:49 GMT -5
"and the bom and I had cussed and discussed and debated our votes for a week" I can take it from that statement, that the bom wasn't going to vote for me as his #1 pick or even at all...lol... I don't think we mentioned you.... lol Just kidding...
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Jan 11, 2006 15:56:19 GMT -5
"and the bom and I had cussed and discussed and debated our votes for a week" I can take it from that statement, that the bom wasn't going to vote for me as his #1 pick or even at all...lol... OK Perfect...just come on out and say it. You think I got voted in because the board thought it would be centimental to put me in because of my cancer issue. You know that is what you are thinking. ; #grrr# #batte_fou#
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Jan 11, 2006 16:03:27 GMT -5
"and the bom and I had cussed and discussed and debated our votes for a week" I can take it from that statement, that the bom wasn't going to vote for me as his #1 pick or even at all...lol... OK Perfect...just come on out and say it. You think I got voted in because the board thought it would be centimental to put me in because of my cancer issue. You know that is what you are thinking. ; #grrr# #batte_fou# None of this has anything to do with you or Eddie.... This to me is strictly proceedures in how we do this in the future.....you are a deserving Hall of Fame Inductee....and there are others not in that will be.... it's only a matter of time...... And I've never said anything to that effect.....as far as your cancer
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Jan 11, 2006 16:13:21 GMT -5
I didn't tell anyone this but if it had turned out that I was inducted and you weren't, I would have withdrawn my name, if it meant you getting in..... Because you are deserving and you as a friend, I would have wanted you to enjoy it why you were alive, if worse came to worse...... But as it turns out, you are doing great and appear to be in total recovery and remission.... This is great news to all.... and the greatest gift of all.... sorry for any confusion by me.
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Jan 11, 2006 16:15:21 GMT -5
OK Perfect...just come on out and say it. You think I got voted in because the board thought it would be centimental to put me in because of my cancer issue. You know that is what you are thinking. ; #grrr# #batte_fou# None of this has anything to do with you or Eddie.... This to me is strictly proceedures in how we do this in the future.....you are a deserving Hall of Fame Inductee....and there are others not in that will be.... it's only a matter of time...... And I've never said anything to that effect.....as far as your cancer ZINGGGGGG!!!!!! Caught me a big fish that time. ;D ;D ;D LOL...I was just messin' with you.
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Jan 11, 2006 16:30:07 GMT -5
#doh#
perfect foiled again...
I will have to say, Whiner's cancer did not influence the way I voted...
I would give a 1 point vote to almost anybody nominated... including perfect!!
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Jan 11, 2006 16:32:02 GMT -5
None of this has anything to do with you or Eddie.... This to me is strictly proceedures in how we do this in the future.....you are a deserving Hall of Fame Inductee....and there are others not in that will be.... it's only a matter of time...... And I've never said anything to that effect.....as far as your cancer ZINGGGGGG!!!!!! Caught me a big fish that time. ;D ;D ;D LOL...I was just messin' with you. Well I'm glad.... I just don't want any misunderstandings going around. Especially amoung friends. Hall of Fame voting is a very subjective to the people voting.....Just because some people got in before others, does not mean they were or are a better bowler than those that didn't get in, they just didn't get in that same year. If one or two other Hall of Fame Inductees would have been there and voted, the outcome could have been different for some of us but again, maybe not.... I hear the voting was tight and could have gone either way for many of us.....as it turns out, some of us will have to wait a year, like me, Jimmy Young, Charlie Mills and others.... I am glad you and Eddie made it...as I'm sure in the future y'all will be happy for me as well....
|
|
olepro
New Member
2000 HOUSTON HALL OF FAME,3 TIME STATE CHAMPION,2 TIME PBA PAT PATTERSON AWARD WINNER.
Posts: 47
|
Post by olepro on Feb 5, 2006 10:01:53 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel.
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Feb 5, 2006 10:58:40 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel. Well, it's no secret that anytime a vote is taken, personal bias comes in to play. A blind ballot will eliminate that to some degree, but, then, bias is not entireley eliminated because some may still know the stats of a nominee, or carry a preference for service over performance or anything... there is no guaranteed fix for voting procedure. You can, however, ensure that voters are more "qualified". In Pasadena, with the merge happening, the Hall of Fame members will vote on the nominees, and forward their results to the new Board for ratification. While that is probably still not perfect, at least the voting body will be Hall of Fame members...
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Feb 5, 2006 14:14:46 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel. Jimmy...first of all, I'm not a house bowler. My honor scores come from 10 different houses in and outside the houston area. I'm sure they looked at that, too and not just the accomplishments in Pasadena. So I don't where you get off making that comment. Granted there are some that are in the hall just on Pasadena accomplishments, but those accomplishments were before honor score were an every night thing.
|
|
|
Post by XBOM on Feb 5, 2006 16:00:21 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel. Let's NOT FORGET it's the PASADENA HALL OF FAME #notworthy# Not all of Pasadena Bowlers who are HOF worthy have traveled the country bowling #batte_fou# Some of us who are in the HOF have bowled Nationals and are not proud of how we've bowled there and bowled State and done well a few times #thcheerleader# But a local HOF in my opinion should be decided by LOCAL achievments not by being one of the few who've been able to bowl PBA events, Nationals 25 years in a row, Nationals average being in the top 20 % of bowlers for the last 10 years and so on. #nobodycares# If your trying to get in the State HOF or USBC/ABC HOF All achievments should be considered. IMHO #notworthy#
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Feb 6, 2006 9:19:32 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel. I'm sorry but I have to agree with olepro on this one. I have honor scores in 11 different houses, including a 300 at State and a 300 in Pasadena City Tourn. and in a PBA Qualifier back in 1984. A testament of a bowlers true ability comes to light in SCRATCH Tourns., bowling under the pressure of bowlers of the same ability, not in league play or Handicapped Tourns. To me, league play is practice and is no where near the pressure of scratch tourns. bowling against top level bowlers....JMO... It's not our fault that some of you didn't bowl PBA events and/or Nationals at all or not as much as some of us. We weren't lucky, we were good enough to attract backers and they put up their money based on our ability...
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Feb 6, 2006 13:05:05 GMT -5
What good does it matter to compete locally when your are overlook EVERY YEAR Hall of Fame. Hall of Fame should consider all bowling not just a local bowling.Anybody can be a great house bowler. A great bowler competes in all facet of the game. Sorry thats what I feel. I sorry but I have to agree with olepro on this one. I have honor scores in 11 different houses, including a 300 at State and a 300 in Pasadena City Tourn. and in a PBA Qualifier back in 1984. A testament of a bowlers true ability comes to light in SCRATCH Tourns., bowling under the pressure of bowlers of the same ability, not in league play or Handicapped Tourns. To me, league play is practice and is no where near the pressure of scratch tourns. bowling against top level bowlers....JMO... It's not our fault that some of you didn't bowl PBA events and/or Nationals at all or not as much as some of us. We weren't lucky, we were good enough to attract backers and put up money based on our abilities... So what you are saying in short is that unless the honor score is in a SCRATCH tournament, it's not worth mentioning. Most scratch tournaments aren't sanctioned, so most people don't keep up with those honor scores. It's like shooting 300 in a pot game...it doesn't count for anything except winning the pot that game. It's not mentioned or anything. The pressure of shooting a 300 in a HANDICAPPED tournament is the same as a SCRATCH tournament, so I don't know where you get off with that statement.
|
|