Discussions about tournaments, you've entered, lane conditions, results, how you are preparing for your next tournament.
by M Black » Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:13 am
There is an error in the rules that needs correction before the tournament starts. Rules 9 and 19 contradict on one and rules 9 and 21 contradict on the other. Hope the heck 19 and 21 will be stricken (waiving rules 319 D and E for those receiving Handicap). Otherwise there will be next to no protection against sandbaggers.
Also, there is still a chance to raise the HCP base yet further. As I predicted before last year's tournament, the top of the HCP leaderboard was dominated by bowlers with averages well over the HCP base of 200. The top five in regular HCP 4-game included three PBA players, averages of 241,229,235,217 and one sandbagger who had significant prize winnings and a +15 tournament average. It is just not right to disguise a tournament as HCP, when in fact bowlers recieving HCP pins and using LEGITIMATE averages are at an enormous disadvantage. Most state tournaments use a HCP bases between 230 and 250. Should be the same here. The tougher conditions of the BTM are mostly irrelevent, because entering averages were not established on those sort of conditions.
M Black
-
M Black
-
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:58 pm
- Location: Wyoming
by editor » Mon Feb 09, 2009 11:36 am
Hi Mike. Thanks for the heads up on the rule. As for the handicapping percentage, our hdcp base was raised to 80% of 210 this year. We feel this is a fair percentage for this tournament. No one averages 240 on "The BTM" pattern. The 1-2-3 Tournament is new this year and is based on the same percentage. It will be conducted on the USBC pattern. We aren't "disguising" anything. We are trying to provide tournaments for bowlers to bowl in when they visit the USBC Nationals that are fair and reward good performances. The bowlers who won last year were "scratch bowlers" who bowled very good. Scratch bowlers made up most of the entries and therefore, most of the prize list. Hopefully, more lower average bowlers will bowl this year and more will do well on the prize list. As for a state tournament using any handicap percentage, I think it is silly. A state tournament should reward the best bowlers and those states who have bowlers divided into classes instead of handicap are doing it right. A few years ago, a legitimate 140 avg bowler shot 1010 in the 3-game singles event in Mississippi, therefore making half the field ineligible from winning that event. That's just an example of what can happen when handicapping percentages get out of hand. We appreciate your feedback though and know that you will always keep us on our toes.
-

editor
-
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 9:17 am
-
by M Black » Tue Feb 10, 2009 12:27 am
Jim,
Everyone has a different idea of what a HCP structure should be and while I agree with USBC guidelines of having the base equal to or greater than the highest entering average, I also much prefer your 80% and caps than USBC's suggested 100% HCP (yuck). With mostly high level bowlers entering the BTM, the BTM HCP tournaments might really be considered HCP/scratch hybrids. It is true that the lower average bowlers will have some chance where they previously had very little. For those like me (211), we are bowling scratch against those with higher averages and those below will get considerable help.
The new 1-2-3 on the USBC pattern is a great idea and look forward to it and as always wish to see growth in the tournament. I will be out in April and maybe even sooner too!
Mike
-
M Black
-
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:58 pm
- Location: Wyoming
by M Black » Mon Jul 13, 2009 8:50 pm
Since I have previously expressed some criticism in it only fair to also express my compliments to great changes in 2009.
First, I applaud the BTM for eliminating the HCP division of the actual "BTM" and keeping the challenging flat condition. This maintains this tournaments integrity in it's entirety.
Second, the HCP 1-2-3 is great way to expand and attract a wider cross section of bowlers. While I did not choose to take the time to investigate bowlers on the top of the list for statistical data often present with sandbaggers, none of the names popped out at me as repeat offenders. I would like to think that tournament management /rules/structure successfully deterred the sandbagging sorts.
Third, the opportunity to practice on the Open pattern for only $1 per game was fantastic.
My only regret is getting to bowl the BTM only twice and the 1-2-3 once! Great Job and I'm very much looking forward to RENO in 2010.
M Black
-
M Black
-
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:58 pm
- Location: Wyoming
Return to Tournaments
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: bemyPlellaDal, carpinteyroivkt, crijikrg, dfaferss, fsmotdwv, sjrhwzgi, vjhznmis, vodvrwtj, yemawmpz and 1 guest