|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 13:37:39 GMT -5
David...from that listing you have, does it show what the top 8 scores were from Armadilla? That's what I wanted to see. I know I shot 681.
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Dec 12, 2006 13:40:36 GMT -5
With what you have posted so far, it's sure looking like Diamond was higher scoring over all by more bowlers.... Just like I was saying yesterday.... ;D The cut after Diamond was 667- Danny Trevino Kaleb Pugh had 689 and Rusty Davis had 699, they shot 573 and 585 @ Armadilla and got knocked out of the Top 8. Garland and Mike moved into the Top 8 after having 632 and 658 @ Diamond, they shot 737, 708 @ Armadilla. Jesse Rose missed by 1 pin, he had 635, 666. Top 8 and scores at each house Jeremy- 725, 802 perfect- 721, 664 Garland- 632, 737 Mike- 658, 708 EFB- 687, 658 Corey- 759, 584 Al Haynes- 693, 616 Danny Trevino- 667, 635 Top 8 @ Armadilla Jeremy E- 802 Garland- 737 Mike- 708 Austin Thurston- 683 Whiner- 681 Jesse Rose- 666 perfect- 664 EFB- 658
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 13:59:02 GMT -5
The cut after Diamond was 667- Danny Trevino Kaleb Pugh had 689 and Rusty Davis had 699, they shot 573 and 585 @ Armadilla and got knocked out of the Top 8. Garland and Mike moved into the Top 8 after having 632 and 658 @ Diamond, they shot 737, 708 @ Armadilla. Jesse Rose missed by 1 pin, he had 635, 666. Top 8 and scores at each house Jeremy- 725, 802 perfect- 721, 664 Garland- 632, 737 Mike- 658, 708 EFB- 687, 658 Corey- 759, 584 Al Haynes- 693, 616 Danny Trevino- 667, 635 Top 8 @ Armadilla Jeremy E- 802 Garland- 737 Mike- 708 Austin Thurston- 683 Whiner- 681 Jesse Rose- 666 perfect- 664 EFB- 658 9 pin cut difference between the top 8 at each center. Pretty close. And that was the 2nd 3-game block. I'm pretty sure some people were either already tired or gave up because they couldn't make the cut, or who knows what the real scores could have been at Armadilla.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Dec 12, 2006 14:12:06 GMT -5
Really, the most accurate way to do this, would be to take all scores from Diamond and all from Arm I (Div. 1 only that is).... Throw out the top two overall (Jeremy and me) and throw out the low two overall in our Div. and add up the series of the remaining Div. 1 bowlers for each house separately and see what the difference is in total pins fall...JMO...
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 14:15:20 GMT -5
Top 8 at each center
Diamond----Armadilla 759-----------802 725-----------737 721-----------708 699-----------683 693-----------681 689-----------666 687-----------664 667-----------658 5640---------5599 total
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Dec 12, 2006 14:17:09 GMT -5
Diamond Armadilla 759 802 725 737 721 708 699 683 693 681 689 666 687 664 667 658 5640 5599 Not just the top 8.... all bowlers in Div. 1....
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 14:19:14 GMT -5
What I'm trying to do is see what the cut was if we wouldv'e started at Armadilla. +58 and the final cut after 6 games was +102.
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 14:20:14 GMT -5
It still didn't double as you initially were talking about as far as how to gauge which house was better scoring. That's all I was trying to compare.
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Dec 12, 2006 14:24:11 GMT -5
I think the brake may have hurt the scores at Arm I. Sometimes when you are warmed up and going it is easier to just keep bowling without stopping. It happens a lot when you have lane problems, when you start back up a lot of people struggle finding the shot even if they couldn't miss before the stop.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Dec 12, 2006 14:32:40 GMT -5
It still didn't double as you initially were talking about as far as how to gauge which house was better scoring. That's all I was trying to compare. If we would have started at Arm I and the cut after 3 games was +58 and after Diamond scores were added, the final cut was +103. That is an increase of 45 pins at Diamond. The cut at the end on Diamond for 8th was +67 and the final cut was +103 that's just an increase of +36 pins after Arm I..... That is an indicator that Diamond was higher scoring by the field..... not just the top 8 qualifiers but that proved it to by a little...
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Dec 12, 2006 15:37:38 GMT -5
Really, the most accurate way to do this, would be to take all scores from Diamond and all from Arm I (Div. 1 only that is).... Throw out the top two overall (Jeremy and me) and throw out the low two overall in our Div. and add up the series of the remaining Div. 1 bowlers for each house separately and see what the difference is in total pins fall...JMO... The average of the bowlers is the average. It doesn't do any good throwing out the highs and the lows to find an average of the "average". It is what it is. Overall the scores were lower @ Armadilla. By 3 pins.
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Dec 12, 2006 15:40:42 GMT -5
It still didn't double as you initially were talking about as far as how to gauge which house was better scoring. That's all I was trying to compare. If we would have started at Arm I and the cut after 3 games was +58 and after Diamond scores were added, the final cut was +103. That is an increase of 45 pins at Diamond. The cut at the end on Diamond for 8th was +67 and the final cut was +103 that's just an increase of +36 pins after Arm I..... That is an indicator that Diamond was higher scoring by the field..... not just the top 8 qualifiers but that proved it to by a little... I think the brake may have hurt the scores at Arm I. Sometimes when you are warmed up and going it is easier to just keep bowling without stopping. It happens a lot when you have lane problems, when you start back up a lot of people struggle finding the shot even if they couldn't miss before the stop. There are several different ways to look at it and you can still throw the numbers around. I also feel if we start at Armadilla the scores would've been higher there overall due to what the doctor said. This is one of those issues that can be disputed until we die and would never get resolved one way or the other, so this will be my last take on this issue. Again, congrats to all that won and cashed. I hope everyone had fun and look forward to next years tourney.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Dec 12, 2006 15:51:29 GMT -5
Really, the most accurate way to do this, would be to take all scores from Diamond and all from Arm I (Div. 1 only that is).... Throw out the top two overall (Jeremy and me) and throw out the low two overall in our Div. and add up the series of the remaining Div. 1 bowlers for each house separately and see what the difference is in total pins fall...JMO... The average of the bowlers is the average. It doesn't do any good throwing out the highs and the lows to find an average of the "average". It is what it is. Overall the scores were lower @ Armadilla. By 3 pins. That is true PBA but the total pins is only closer to Diamonds because of Jeremy shooting a ton at Arm I....on one pair I might add, once he got off that pair he didn't do so well.... but anyways his scoring in qualifying I feel is skewing the numbers a bit....JMO.... But my point is, Arm I has always been a higher scoring house and for Diamond to just be close is doing good. Either Diamond's shot has gotten better or Arm I's lane machine isn't putting out as good of a shoot as it once did.... For the last 6 weeks at Arm I, except mixed State the week I bowled, the lane have been different from when the year started and have gotten squirrelly and weird at times. And when I hear that the lane man at Arm I tried fixing something and did something he didn't need to do to try and fix it and stripped out some bolts that now Jimbo has to try and fix..... Makes me wonder why the lanes have been a little squirrelly lately at Arm I.. Not saying they are unscorable just not as good as before...JMO.... This just about isn't anything more important at a bowling center than a properly running and properly maintained Lane Machine...JMO....So if there is a problem, I hope they fix it....
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Dec 12, 2006 16:10:25 GMT -5
The average of the bowlers is the average. It doesn't do any good throwing out the highs and the lows to find an average of the "average". It is what it is. Overall the scores were lower @ Armadilla. By 3 pins. That is true PBA but the total pins is only closer to Diamonds because of Jeremy shooting a ton at Arm I....on one pair I might add, once he got off that pair he didn't do so well.... but anyways his scoring in qualifying I feel is skewing the numbers a bit....JMO.... But my point is, Arm I has always been a higher scoring house and for Diamond to just be close is doing good. Either Diamond's shot has gotten better or Arm I's lane machine isn't putting out as good of a shoot as it once did.... For the last 6 weeks at Arm I, except mixed State the week I bowled, the lane have been different from when the year started and have gotten squirrelly and weird at times. And when I hear that the lane man at Arm I tried fixing something and did something he didn't need to do to try and fix it and stripped out some bolts that now Jimbo has to try and fix..... Makes me wonder why the lanes have been a little squirrelly lately at Arm I.. Not saying they are unscorable just not as good as before...JMO.... This just about isn't anything more important at a bowling center than a properly running and properly maintained Lane Machine...JMO....So if there is a problem, I hope they fix it.... OK, I took out Jeremy's 802 and the Armadilla average drops to 210.27. That makes 6 pins per game difference overall. In order to be fair and equitable, I also figured diamond's average without the #1 score there (759) and the average drops to 214... so the number returns to close to what it was before, 3.78 pins per game.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Dec 12, 2006 16:22:29 GMT -5
I was just thinking, since it took +68 to be 8th at Diamond after the first 3 games, I just figured that it would take +136 or there abouts to make the cut (8th place or better) after bowling Arm 1. I was just a little shocked that it was only +103.... about 33 pins less than what I figured in my head it would take and possibly more since Arm I is usually higher scoring and there were more Arm I bowlers bowling this than Diamond qualifiers in Div. I...but could be wrong on that..as far as which center had more bowlers. So I expected most of the Arm I bowlers to do really well and possibly drive the cut up higher.... but that didn't happen.... My only logical conclusion was that a greater majority of bowlers struggled at Arm I than they did at Diamond....
|
|