Mixed Trio Suggestions

[johndoe]

What suggestions do yall have for the next Trio tournament?
ie: handicap, 2 men-1 women, 1 man-2 women. Lets toss some ideas out and see what can be done.

[MrPerfect]

johndoe said:

What suggestions do yall have for the next Trio tournament?
ie: handicap, 2 men-1 women, 1 man-2 women. Lets toss some ideas out and see what can be done.

I like the 2 men - 1 women teams..... Since we will always have more men interested in bowling than women.... I don't think we would get as many teams having the ratio be 2 women - 1 man.... JMO...

Now as far as the men, we could have it be that one of them have to be 40 years of age and older and the other 39 and under and these age groups must bowl each other as the women do.... Just a thought to add a little twist to it...

I think we should seperate the handicap differently for men and women.

Say womens handicap be 85% of 210 since there are very few women if any over a 210 avg.

And the mens should be more like 85% of 215 or there abouts.... just an idea as far as a starting point.... I just don't feel that 215 and up bowlers should be getting any handicap, period....JMO...

[PBAHoFer]

OK, here's a math lesson.

Hdcp is 90% of 220

Woman A= 100 AVG. 120 x .90= 108 hdcp

Woman B= 200 AVG. 20 x .90= 18 hdcp

90 pin difference

90% of 200

Woman A= 100 x .90= 90 pin hdcp

Woman B= 0 pin hdcp

90 pin difference.

Why is it SOOOOOOOOOO hard for everyone to realize that the base number for handicap is irrelevant.

IF the base is set higher than the highest average in the world for every tournament, ANY average lower than that will get handicap, and, the pins the higher average gets from their average to the base is the same pins the lower average gets... so there is ZERO difference in the handicap. The extra pins offset each other.

NOW, when you handicap off of an average LOWER than the highest participant, you are limiting the amount of handicap available to the lower average bowlers. PLUS, the built in 10% advantage already handed to the higher average participant.

I have never met a 230 average bowler that wouldn't want the handicap based on 215. That's a 15 pin bonus (non handicap) on top of the 10% built in advantage.

Now, as we have said, if the lane conditions are dictating one's ability to not score their average, then the problem is the conditions... NOT the handicap. Also, about it being easier for a lower average bowler to make their average than a higher average bowler... is that really true? Average is based on abilitiy. It seems logical to me the lower the average the lower the ability.

[MrPerfect]

Unfortunately, you can't take out the lane conditions in the equation. Lower avg. bowlers don't play a lane condition, so lane conditions don't affect their scoring ability like it does the higher avg. bowlers.... it's a more random thing coming from luck and what spares lower avg. bowlers have to shoot at during the coarse of a game.

But if you feel you will get back all the higher avg. bowlers back on a handicap of 90% of 220 and get more handicap bowlers, then that is what the Assoc. needs to do..... but if you're going to lose a bunch of the higher avg. bowlers and not be getting more lower avg. bowlers to take our place... then this Tourn. will die.....JMO... So keep that in mind as well.... : )

[PBAHoFer]

I would be more inclined to lower the % of the handicap before I would want to lower the base number.

Or, maybe raise the base number and lower the %.

It has to be equitable for all bowlers. Of all abilities.

Now, as was mentioned, maybe we need to offer scratch events and handicap events... then bowlers of all averages have a format that is tailor made for their abilities.

Then, listen to the complaints from the scratch bowlers about lane conditions and the righty lefty controversy.

[PBAHoFer]

One idea that looks like it might fly is bowling a schedule instead of position each round. The time save between games could possibly allow for an 8 game tournament with 2 postition rounds on games 4 and 8... then cut to top 4. And of course it's always possible to just bowl 5 games then break for position standings... but then, you have a break right before bracket final game for 2nd set.. so maybe 7 games... 7th game position instead of 6... schedule and lane assignemnts would be based on USBC league schedules for however many teams...

[WineUdotKing]

I will say one thing right up front. No matter what we do, if it does not give Jeff an advantage, he is going to complain.

With that being said, I like the idea of a schedule. The downside complaint will be, "You didn't have to catch that team". Oh well...luck of the draw, just like a bracket.

Lane conditions are going to play a part in any and all tournaments, even State. Even from pair to pair like we saw a couple of years ago when our pair was nice and Ozio's pair was like bowling at 2 different centers on the same pair. That's just part of the game. There will always be lefty-righty issues. There will always be disputes of one kind or another about all tournaments.

At least the All-star is coming soon and MrP will only be bowling against other scratch bowlers. Until then, does GHoustonUSBCA offer you anything in the way of tournaments? I didn't think so. At least we are trying.

[MrPerfect]

wineudotking said:

I will say one thing right up front. No matter what we do, if it does not give Jeff an advantage, he is going to complain.

With that being said, I like the idea of a schedule. The downside complaint will be, "You didn't have to catch that team". Oh well...luck of the draw, just like a bracket.

Lane conditions are going to play a part in any and all tournaments, even State. Even from pair to pair like we saw a couple of years ago when our pair was nice and Ozio's pair was like bowling at 2 different centers on the same pair. That's just part of the game. There will always be lefty-righty issues. There will always be disputes of one kind or another about all tournaments.

At least the All-star is coming soon and MrP will only be bowling against other scratch bowlers. Until then, does GHoustonUSBCA offer you anything in the way of tournaments? I didn't think so. At least we are trying.

First of all, I wasn't complaining, only giving ideas and suggestions and interjecting some personal opionions. Secondly, I wasn't coming down on the Pasadena Assoc. like you seem to think I was, I am not. And because of the Pasadena Assoc. and it's board members great commentment to serving it's memership, is why I bowl Pasadena's functions and not Houston's.... So I object wine, to your whole primise that I was complaining and ragging the Pasadena Assoc. Nothing could be further from the truth....

[MrPerfect]

pbahofer said:

I would be more inclined to lower the % of the handicap before I would want to lower the base number.

Or, maybe raise the base number and lower the %.

It has to be equitable for all bowlers. Of all abilities.

Now, as was mentioned, maybe we need to offer scratch events and handicap events... then bowlers of all averages have a format that is tailor made for their abilities.

Then, listen to the complaints from the scratch bowlers about lane conditions and the righty lefty controversy.

I can agree with PBA on lowering of the % and not the base number... and the scheduling of the teams and having fewer position rounds....

[thedoctor]

One idea that I heard someone at the tournament come up with was draw for teams. Each woman would draw for who they bowled with. In this case no one can complain about a low average team of sandbagging or a high average team of running over everyone, it just ends up being luck of the draw. I don't remember who came up with this idea.

[MrPerfect]

thedoctor said:

One idea that I heard someone at the tournament come up with was draw for teams. Each woman would draw for who they bowled with. In this case no one can complain about a low average team of sandbagging or a high average team of running over everyone, it just ends up being luck of the draw. I don't remember who came up with this idea.

That's a thought but some people may only want to bowl with people they really know. It could be the only reason some of the bowlers will bowl..... And some people may not want to put up money on a random luck of the draw type thing....Strategy in putting together your team is part of it as well in my opinion.... But it's not a bad idea to throw out for disscussion...

[PBAHoFer]

mrperfect said:

thedoctor said:

One idea that I heard someone at the tournament come up with was draw for teams. Each woman would draw for who they bowled with. In this case no one can complain about a low average team of sandbagging or a high average team of running over everyone, it just ends up being luck of the draw. I don't remember who came up with this idea.

That's a thought but some people may only want to bowl with people they really know. It could be the only reason some of the bowlers will bowl..... And some people may not want to put up money on a random luck of the draw type thing....Strategy in putting together your team is part of it as well in my opinion.... But it's not a bad idea to throw out for disscussion...

I don't think a "draft" type of tournament is a bad idea... but, not in reaction to trying to "fix" the Mixed Trio Event... and I don't think it's a good idea to draw for the women that have the fortitude to enter... there are so few that are willing to participate in mixed events, subjecting them to competing with other bowlers they may not even know is not a great idea... and imagine the feedback if they bowled poorly and cost "good" bowlers a chance at winning...

I think many of the ideas that have been mentioned are worthy... you can't apply each idea or "fix" as many are "pro" or "con" or say apples versus oranges... I'm glad the Association is seeking opinions, but, for those that may be adopted or considered, there will be just as many discarded and not considered... I hope noone is offended if their idea is not put into effect... and I also hope anyone might understand majority rules and doesn't base their decision on participating based on whether or not we make changes or not...

[MrPerfect]

I won't get offended PBA... I'm use to it by now....lol...