|
Post by PBAHoFer on Mar 9, 2007 12:19:53 GMT -5
Just a reminder for weekend # 2 of the tournament:
Saturday we bowl @ Armadilla starting @ 1:00PM... please check in 45 minutes to 1 hour prior to the start so you can sign up for brackets and special features and check in and do all that stuff... we bowl doubles, then singles... so make sure your partner is there on time too...
Sunday @ Diamond: Bowl @ 11:00 AM... Time changes, so make sure you are on time... "Spring forward"... one hour... so you could very easily be one hour late if you aren't careful...
|
|
|
Post by WineUdotKing on Mar 12, 2007 7:27:13 GMT -5
Congrats go out to this year's City Champion, Jimbo "Mr300" Evans.
Also, congrats to Jeremy Evans for bowling every squad of the tournament...lol. Must be nice to be young.
I think the tournament went very well this year, but we are going to have to do something to get more bowlers under 205 to participate. It was suggested that the under 205 divisions be handicapped in their perspective divisions or even combine the other under 205 and be handicapped. Basically having 2 divisions, Division 1 205+ scratch and Disivion 2 under 205 handicapped. Maybe we should do a survey of our members to see what they think. It can't hurt to get their opinion, too.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Mar 12, 2007 9:31:34 GMT -5
Congrats go out to this year's City Champion, Jimbo "Mr300" Evans. Also, congrats to Jeremy Evans for bowling every squad of the tournament...lol. Must be nice to be young. I think the tournament went very well this year, but we are going to have to do something to get more bowlers under 205 to participate. It was suggested that the under 205 divisions be handicapped in their perspective divisions or even combine the other under 205 and be handicapped. Basically having 2 divisions, Division 1 205+ scratch and Disivion 2 under 205 handicapped. Maybe we should do a survey of our members to see what they think. It can't hurt to get their opinion, too. I to thought the Tourn. was run well and eventhough I didn't bowl very good, I had a great time. Also, my congrats to Jimbo Evans on some great bowling the 1st weekend of the Tourn. and to Darren Reeves for Singles... I bowled a set of Doubles with Jimbo this last Saturday and on his team Sunday at Diamond. He said he had a better shot the first weekend than he did the second weekend. But to me, catching the right pairs and bowling the right weekend at each house is part of the luck of the draw so to say.... I didn't get any of that this year but there is always next year... Again, congrats to all the winners.....
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Mar 12, 2007 10:06:19 GMT -5
Congrats go out to this year's City Champion, Jimbo "Mr300" Evans. Also, congrats to Jeremy Evans for bowling every squad of the tournament...lol. Must be nice to be young. I think the tournament went very well this year, but we are going to have to do something to get more bowlers under 205 to participate. It was suggested that the under 205 divisions be handicapped in their perspective divisions or even combine the other under 205 and be handicapped. Basically having 2 divisions, Division 1 205+ scratch and Disivion 2 under 205 handicapped. Maybe we should do a survey of our members to see what they think. It can't hurt to get their opinion, too. That may not be a bad idea Wine on the other Divisions.... combine them all together (Div. II thru IV) and make it handicaped..... But since 204 is the highest avg. in that Division....Handicap should be based off 204 but deciding on what percentage could be the tough part, 80%, 85% or 90%......but I have no idea if making it handicap will make a difference, if it will draw more lower avg. bowlers or not..... but I think it's worth a try to find out....JMO...
|
|
|
Post by spktatr710 on Mar 12, 2007 11:43:46 GMT -5
I tried to talk to several lower average men bowlers to participate in this tournament and they wouldn't bite. Handicapping the lower divisions might be the answer to get a few more entries. I think that the leagues should also recognize ALL the 1, 2, 3 (or even more) place winners in ALL the divisions, not just the first place Div I -- it only takes a few moments to recognize great efforts and the more we "talk it up" this year, the more people might be interested in participating the next year.
|
|
|
Post by spktatr710 on Mar 12, 2007 11:47:01 GMT -5
And congrats to thedoctor on winning the Div 1 Singles event.
Woooo Hooooo Way to go Darren
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Mar 12, 2007 13:38:19 GMT -5
I tried to talk to several lower average men bowlers to participate in this tournament and they wouldn't bite. Handicapping the lower divisions might be the answer to get a few more entries. I think that the leagues should also recognize ALL the 1, 2, 3 (or even more) place winners in ALL the divisions, not just the first place Div I -- it only takes a few moments to recognize great efforts and the more we "talk it up" this year, the more people might be interested in participating the next year. I tried to access last year's results to review all the division's winners from last year, and I was going to announce them if they were bowling... howver... I could not find them on the new site... they must have been lost in the transition. I announced James Long as City champ and division 1 doubles and team becasue it was perfect for doubles with Jack, and team was Mike and Garland... so I announced the ones I knoew offhand... I agree with mr. p... acknowledging defending champs adds a little prestige to the event and I plan on making it a tradition... or at least trying... I think the idea of handicapping is a good one... maybe... if we did 2 divisions I would suggest 200 and up, and then handicap off of 200... I'm not really interested in havinf 1600+ win doubles and 870+ winning singles... Whoever bowls best, or most over their average, is still going to win.. but maybe the word scratch scares some people off...
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Mar 12, 2007 13:52:33 GMT -5
I tried to talk to several lower average men bowlers to participate in this tournament and they wouldn't bite. Handicapping the lower divisions might be the answer to get a few more entries. I think that the leagues should also recognize ALL the 1, 2, 3 (or even more) place winners in ALL the divisions, not just the first place Div I -- it only takes a few moments to recognize great efforts and the more we "talk it up" this year, the more people might be interested in participating the next year. I tried to access last year's results to review all the division's winners from last year, and I was going to announce them if they were bowling... howver... I could not find them on the new site... they must have been lost in the transition. I announced James Long as City champ and division 1 doubles and team becasue it was perfect for doubles with Jack, and team was Mike and Garland... so I announced the ones I knoew offhand... I agree with mr. p... acknowledging defending champs adds a little prestige to the event and I plan on making it a tradition... or at least trying... I think the idea of handicapping is a good one... maybe... if we did 2 divisions I would suggest 200 and up, and then handicap off of 200... I'm not really interested in havinf 1600+ win doubles and 870+ winning singles... Whoever bowls best, or most over their average, is still going to win.. but maybe the word scratch scares some people off... I think that the word handicap scares off some people too. I have talked to someone on Wed night that said he would never bowl another handicap tournament. We was talking about Mixed State, but I think we was under the impression that City was handicap too. And he is a scratch bowler. It maybe that people aren't listening to the announcements, aren't there for the announcements, or they might not understand all the rules. I know a few years ago we had directors go from table to table to get people to bowl. That might help some too, that way all questions could be answered right then and there.
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Mar 12, 2007 13:52:54 GMT -5
And congrats to thedoctor on winning the Div 1 Singles event. Woooo Hooooo Way to go Darren Thank You.
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Mar 12, 2007 13:53:15 GMT -5
Congrats go out to this year's City Champion, Jimbo "Mr300" Evans. Also, congrats to Jeremy Evans for bowling every squad of the tournament...lol. Must be nice to be young. I think the tournament went very well this year, but we are going to have to do something to get more bowlers under 205 to participate. It was suggested that the under 205 divisions be handicapped in their perspective divisions or even combine the other under 205 and be handicapped. Basically having 2 divisions, Division 1 205+ scratch and Disivion 2 under 205 handicapped. Maybe we should do a survey of our members to see what they think. It can't hurt to get their opinion, too. I to thought the Tourn. was run well and eventhough I didn't bowl very good, I had a great time. Also, my congrats to Jimbo Evans on some great bowling the 1st weekend of the Tourn. and to Darren Reeves for Singles... I bowled a set of Doubles with Jimbo this last Saturday and on his team Sunday at Diamond. He said he had a better shot the first weekend than he did the second weekend. But to me, catching the right pairs and bowling the right weekend at each house is part of the luck of the draw so to say.... I didn't get any of that this year but there is always next year... Again, congrats to all the winners..... Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Mar 12, 2007 13:54:53 GMT -5
I tried to talk to several lower average men bowlers to participate in this tournament and they wouldn't bite. Handicapping the lower divisions might be the answer to get a few more entries. I think that the leagues should also recognize ALL the 1, 2, 3 (or even more) place winners in ALL the divisions, not just the first place Div I -- it only takes a few moments to recognize great efforts and the more we "talk it up" this year, the more people might be interested in participating the next year. I tried to access last year's results to review all the division's winners from last year, and I was going to announce them if they were bowling... howver... I could not find them on the new site... they must have been lost in the transition. I announced James Long as City champ and division 1 doubles and team because it was perfect for doubles with Jack, and team was Mike and Garland... so I announced the ones I knoew offhand... I agree with mr. p... acknowledging defending champs adds a little prestige to the event and I plan on making it a tradition... or at least trying... I think the idea of handicapping is a good one... maybe... if we did 2 divisions I would suggest 200 and up, and then handicap off of 200... I'm not really interested in having 1600+ win doubles and 870+ winning singles... Whoever bowls best, or most over their average, is still going to win.. but maybe the word scratch scares some people off... I thought that was very nice, I know Jack and I appreciated it very much. As I'm sure the winners this year will appreciate it next year. Long Jr., Falco and I were talking about last years winners for City during Team yesterday and Jr. remembers he won All -Events but wasn't sure who won Singles...lol... He goes, I thought I did but David didn't announce that yesterday, so he thought he was mistaken...lol.... Long Jr. was our Singles Champion as well as the All-Events or City Champ. last year.... I remember PBA's announcement and you did forget to mention Long Jr. Singles title for last year.....He wasn't upset or anything, he was just curious...lol... We all had funny bowling together yesterday and all of us wanted to do it again next year..... It's a shame we don't do 5 members teams any more or we would have Charlie Mills on our team as well..... And we'll name our team Jimbo's Spin to Win "The Dream Team"...lol.... Sounds good to me anyways....lol...
|
|
|
Post by spktatr710 on Mar 12, 2007 14:21:21 GMT -5
Again, the point I was trying to make was that only the Div 1 bowlers are what we focus on and usually recognize.
I was only trying to figure out a way to let the lower average bowlers know that a win in a lower division should be special also............. and that is what I meant by "talk it up" during league.
I bet half the people on this forum have no clue who won singles in Div 2 or Div 3 last year, etc. Nobody cares, right? THAT'S why we can't get them to participate.......
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect on Mar 12, 2007 14:29:48 GMT -5
Again, the point I was trying to make was that only the Div 1 bowlers are what we focus on and usually recognize. I was only trying to figure out a way to let the lower average bowlers know that a win in a lower division should be special also............. and that is what I meant by "talk it up" during league. I bet half the people on this forum have no clue who won singles in Div 2 or Div 3 last year, etc. Nobody cares, right? THAT'S why we can't get them to participate....... It's not unusal for Div. I bowlers to not know or care who won the events in other Divisions. That's like caring if a certain stock goes up or down when you don't own it....... It's up to the Assoc. to remember and make the effort to announce those people and talk it up among the league bowlers....JMO.... And as PBA said, if he would have had that information in front of him, he would have announced those people as well, if they were bowling this year....
|
|
|
Post by PBAHoFer on Mar 12, 2007 14:42:21 GMT -5
Last year's results ARE available online... I rememebr what happened now, I was trying to access the site @ Armadilla, but cold not get a strong enough signal to access the information...
That, and i forgot I wanted to do that on the first weekend....
You can look at the names of some of the winners from last year and some of them did n ot participate.. including some defending champions in various divisions....
|
|
|
Post by thedoctor on Mar 12, 2007 15:12:04 GMT -5
On another side note about why participation maybe down is that City entries and money are due at the sametime States and Nationals are due. With everything at the sametime, some people might feel they would rather just bowl State or National because they are out of town and can make it a vacation.
Plus another killer is I bowled City, Michele bowled also, plus she is bowling Women's City, Women's State, and Women's Nationals. With everything as I stated about hurts all on top of each other.
The only other problem is I don't think there is a better time to run the tournament, but it was just something to consider for reasons that entries are down.
|
|