This is Bowling Philosophy

Bowling Philosophy-January 2012

2012-01-10T12:40:00.000-08:00

"804...Determinism or Free Will?"
By Thomas Scherrer

There is a firm belief that when a bowler shoots an Honor Score (299, 300, 800, etc.), they had a break or two that helped enable them to achieve that mark. Usually, 300's do consist of a break or two in the course of twelve shots, but most people agree shooting an 800 series is today's high achievement in the world of bowling. Aside from good shot-making, an 800 consists of being matched up with the right ball, right speed, right angle of attack, and of course, right alcoholic beverage. Ok, I made up one of those parts...you don't always need the right ball in today's league game, but still.

Shooting an 800 series is, by all accounts, bowling's great work of art in a night. But I am not here to discuss art, I am here to bring forth a philosophical question that arises to bowling 800 or better: did I shoot 800 or did the circumstances around me determine that I shot 800? The concept of free will or determinism: what allows a bowler to shoot 800?

Before I continue, most thinkers always ask those questions, mostly regarding why a human being lifts and finger to their face to scratch their nose. Obviously, the brain senses an itch, and sends a response to the person to scratch it. The finger then tells the brain to lift said finger towards said itch and scratch it, but who is leading whom? People have had some alternate theories: first off, parallelism states that both mind and body act on their own, without any interaction. A second theory is epiphenomenalism, in which it only goes one way-brain to mind and not mind to brain. The rather illogical yet Tim Tebow'ed form of occasionalism also takes place on each occasion, a mind of immaterial nature wills movement of the body (and to think, I was the last writer in America not to discuss Tim Tebow until today...gosh darn it!), where the gods intervene to make a miracle happen. No...it is either your will (of choice) or determinism (a set of factors leading to the outcome).

Let's review: in the first week of the 2012 calendar bowling year, I shot 804 in the Thursday Knights league. A beautiful symmetry to artwork along with shooting an 800 is that there is no constant watching or observing like there is with a 300, the finished product takes 3 games, 30 frames, and about 2 1/2-3 hours. If we are to describe it artfully, shooting 300 is a graffiti sketch (almost impulsive, at points, reckless, but ultimately matter) while shooting 800 is a Mona Lisa (prolonged, detailed, long-term vision, and of course, significant). But I digress...what were the factors that helped me shoot 800? Physically, I didn't feel any better or worse than I had at all this season. If anything, I threw a few shots that I felt were questionable but raced back to strike and some perfect shots were taps, so theoretically, the law of averages, so to speak, were balanced out. I did not have a 300 game (my teammate, Jim Lovewell did in the 3rd game and got a nice round of applause for his performance, while my double in the 10th to shoot 800 was met with little noise), but did not shoot lower than 258 in any game I bowled. I did not change anything in terms of diet, sleep, work effort, or anything else intangible. I just put on my shoes, took out my bowling balls, practiced, then executed my way to shooting 804.

If only it appeared to be that simple...

Here are some other factors: I bowled with two other left handers that night in Ermie Malagrida and Ross Beaudette. Both Ross and Ernie play further left than I do, utilizing the dry boards on the gutter. I start out most of my nights right on the track area on the left side, which at Auburn Lanes is just outside the 2nd arrow (8-9 board), and usually work my in off that to get a blend of the dry boards and the track area as the night progresses. That is generally the case, no matter how many lefties are on the lane just as a matter of preference. However, two things changed in my method last week. First, I started 2-3 boards right of where I normally start, which places my ball path in the "overwalled" portion of the lane; the part where there is sooooo much oil that it makes me take a ball with a duller coverstock to allow the ball to roll in the oil. It was a far more riskier move in that an early miss right would either create a) overreaction making the ball go high or b) a dead fish entering the pocket leaving weak corner pins. With that comes the second part: the bowling ball. I went to my Columbia 300 Momentum Swing, finished at 2000 Abralon with a clean 'n dull touch to it before league began. There was a feeling of logic thinking that if I could play further inside of the other two lefties with a duller ball, it would simply erase their hold and their pulls would go face or split. I swear, I was actually trying to make sure both lefties did not get off and strike like crazy that night. Tangibly speaking, it hurt them and what they did helped me with shinier bowling balls (carrying oil down outside of the lane, providing an extra amount of hold for me outside and perhaps, keeping my ball from losing energy on misses wide). So yes, I made two choices that I would not normally make on league night, but I was also being helped by the other two lefties to allow everything to come into place. Was it exploitation? Was is talent? Or was it determined to happen instead of willed?

When you factor everything in like bowling Pla-Doh, an 804 happened to me last Thursday night. This is the philosophy of the mind at its highest language and ethos. If my brain operated in deterministic ways because of every variable surrounding me, was there any free will in my decision making? If I chose to freely pick the Momentum Swing over the Pure Swing or Perfect Rival, then were there other factors allowing this to happen? Ultimately, if this was all determined, then is there any space for free will, and in turn, personal responsibility? Does that make shooting 804 any less special? Does it take away from what a special moment for myself? It is all hard to say and hard to explain at the same time. I just know that for the first time since my Junior year of college, I shot 800 for a 3 game series in bowling. And I have more questions to answer as to how I can do it again.

For those with a love and knowledge for the Sport of bowling, this IS Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-December 2011

2011-12-06T12:20:00.000-08:00

""Plus/Minus"
Evaluating actual consistency in bowlers and a few thoughts on the Winter Meetings and Ron Santo

By Thomas Scherrer

Before the final BP post of the calender year, there are two baseball related issues I feel I need to address:

1) Jo'se' it ain't so! I have literally and figuratively watch Jose Reyes grow up from a 19-year-old can't miss prospect to a 27-year-old NL batting champion, whose skill set and offensive and defensive talents are undeniable and exhilarating to watch. I have often referred to Reyes as "the most electrifying man in baseball". Forget exciting, just electric. Every movement, every at bat, every megawatt smile was electric to not just Met fans but baseball fans. At both Shea Stadium and at Citi Field, Reyes' every step was worth watching. He would lead off in the bottom of the first, reggeatron blaring in the background, crowd cheering for hopes that this man, this leadoff hitter who flies around the basepaths like a point guard running the break in basketball and had thunder in his bat-thunder that could drive a rope into the vast Citi Field gaps and give fans an early reason to cheer: a triple with a customary head-first dive into third, a clap of both dusty hands, then mugging to his teammates with the "spotlight" gimmick, which showed off his flashiness (and in some cases, his on-field arrogance that turned off the opposition). It was magical...when it happened. Now, Miami Marlin fans will get to see Reyes' talents on South Beach as he signed a 6-year, $100+ million contract. The Reyes Era has ended and with many a Met fan outraged. Not at Reyes, but at the organization for not going to whatever lengths needed to retain Reyes.
Sensing this, I immediately put on my logic cap and applaud Met GM Sandy Alderson for standing his ground on a player who:
A) Averaged 98 games a season the past 3 years.
B) Has had half a dozen DL stints in his career, mostly to his legs. You know, only the lifeblood of his offensive game.
C) Despite being considered and elite leadoff hitter, has never walked more than 80 times in a season, and his career best in 2007 (77) included 13 intentional walks and...
D) In that infamous '07, was benched twice by Willie Randolph in games for not running out a ground ball, and in the penultimate game of the season/collapse (the Maine 14K, 1-hitter masterpiece), got into a near-brawl with said Marlins that only pissed a 90-loss team off, only to turn around the next day and pummel Tom Glavine to put an exclamation point on the '07 Fold Job.

All that being said, Met fans are sore at Alderson and the Wilpons (dubbed, the "Coupons" by locals) for not keeping Reyes at all costs. Met fans feel like they were screwed, but someone else got screwed just as much if not more. His name is David Wright.

Wright, in the final year of his deal with the club, has been a lifelong fan of the Mets, grew up watching the Norfolk Tides, was drafted by the Mets, has been a constant fixture, the babyface of the organization to all their younger fans. Older fans see Wright as a good but not great ballplayer, not very clutch, a defensive liability, and pretty much a player that has been traumatized/scared/underperforming by the far-reaching pastures of Citi Field toward his production numbers. Given the Mets current state of affairs, it seemed logical that only one of the duo would be a Met and Wright for the moment is the lone survivor. His future as well, might be open for a new address possibly by the end of the Winter Meetings, signifying the darkest week in the organization's now 50 year history. And that is saying something.

However, as a Met fan, I see the anger and hatred but this team was not likely to be winning for a few more years. Why start giving gobs of money when you don't know which direction your ballclub is heading? Plus, there is a option year for Wright in 2013 as well. By then, things might very well have changed for the Mets from a financial and performance standpoint. Plus, a baseball team is 25 players, not just one player. The Cardinals and Rangers showed us how valuable all 25 players were en route to a World Series. Yes, both teams had their superstars but you win baseball games as a team, despite it being a mask of individual performance. The Mets drew a line in the sand, Reyes got a better offer, and has moved to a team with a borderline franchise player/borderline clubhouse cancer in Hanley Ramierez. It might be something Met fans might actually be thankful for in years to come.

2) What in the Hall took so long??? If you woke up this morning as a Cubs fan, you finally get to see Ron Santo as a baseball Hall of Famer. If you are Ron Santo, sadly, you are still dead at the present time. Mr. Santo died last December and one year later, will be inducted into Cooperstown among the immortals. The Veterans' Committee voted Santo in this year, where in years past, his resume wasn't good enough for enshrinement. The only thing that has changed on his resume is that he is dead. If you care even a little bit about baseball today, you should feel sick about all this. Yes, I know the Veterans' Committee has been revamped this past year to help solve some injustices, but I am utterly disgusted that Ron Santo is now a Hall of Famer after his death. For the record, I'm a very hard grader on HOF players. I've stated before that Trevor Hoffman should not be one, yet he will be. I do believe that Curt Schilling, John Smoltz, and Josh Beckett, based solely off their postseason performances are and will be at some point. Bill Mazerowski, the man who hit the Game 7 1960 WS game winning homer, is a Hall of Famer and probably should not be. Roger Maris for his historical 1961 season, which with each dirty needle gets better over time, keeps warranting Hall of Fame merit, is still not a Hall of Famer and I don't think should be. Yes, Pete Rose bet on baseball but he is a Hall of Famer and they should just give him and Joe Jackson their plaques and move on.

Look, I'm not a ninny on Hall players but I want it to fully represent the best of what baseball has to offer and that includes how they get in as well. Santo's Hall nomination is great for the family and for Cub fans to remember a very, very, very good player. A great player, in fact. But not a Hall of Famer. The only reason I say no is that for many years, his body of work was not good enough for Cooperstown, so now that he is gone, it is suddenly good enough? I'm highly dubious about all of this. There are far greater injustices that the Veterans' Committee could have looked at. Hell, certain Hall of Fame caliber players have been dead for many more years, and yet, they weren't elected in this past weekend. Let's just move on before I throw my Kindle at something. At least Bill Simmons' Pyramid for basketball greatness makes sense. This does not. Again, happy for the Santo family...sad that Ron Santo won't be around to see it.

With that, let's get to something you would use in hockey: plus/minus bowling. Often, only good players are talked about in such tones: I like Bowler X; he's consistent...Bowler Y is a real solid player-averages 220, grinds out good games all the time, never gets shut out...bowler Z has got a lot of skills, can play anywhere and shoot a good score no matter what's out there.

All fine comments, and stuff you have surely heard or said or was even told about you. And once again, that little elephant in the room creeps up. A player's average. Look, this is solely for the use of team bowling because that is where most of bowl and how most of us actually make some type of money while bowling. Individual bowling is more based off how can you, the sole person, bowl against the field or against the conditions. Team bowling is a totally different animal: instead of bowling against 3 people on a pair, you are bowling with 3 people on a team, and against 4 other people. There is more lane traffic, with more shots, variable styles of play, some styles which make lane play, even on house shots, a challenge if not broken down correctly. Plus, there is the notion of what you average as a player. Take for instance we take two players, both with the same average or close to it and we chart their game score and do a running average after each game, as opposed to doing it by series (sidenote: why a league hasn't tried this formula as an average is perplexing...I know it takes some math but, seriously...how many times has a good player gotten beat by a lower average bowler because the latter has a higher handicap and pulls a 240 out of him? Shouldn't we calculate his or her average after that game to reflect a true average, and in turn lower their handicap? This would ultimately help out the better player, you know, as long as they weren't dumping or tanking themselves.).

For example...

Let's say Bowler 1 bowls the first game of their season and they shoot 227 and Bowler 2 shoots 246. After one game, their averages are 227 and 246 of course. Now Bowler 1 shoots 279 in game 2 and Bowler 2 shoots 235. After two games, Bowler 1 has a 253 average and Bowler 2 has a 240.5 average. On the surface, Bowler 1 has the better average but wasn't as consistent as Bowler 2 in their first two games. So, how do you use plus/minus in relation to all this? This is how we get there: Bowler 1's game 2 score of 279 made his average go up by 26 pins to 252, which if we do simple math (279, the game score-253, the player's average after that game), his plus/minus is +26. As for Bowler 2, his average after two games was 240.5, but game 2 was only 235, making his plus/minus -4.5. Again, on the surface Bowler 1 looks to have an advantage in this too. Or do they???

Why should having a wild influx of scores be considered a good thing? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a player who is closer to zero than it would be to have a plus/minus of 100? If you think about it, it means that yes, the player can be more explosive than maybe the other players, but is also a little bit more erratic and is prone to major drops as well? Look no further than my social experiment known as the Thursday Knights league. I looked at the 6 players that averaged over 235 and took one bowler that averaged 200-210 to see if I was either A) wrong or B) genius or C) drinking while I typed this. After 12 weeks of bowling the top averages went like this:

1) Charlie Pezanko (238.63)
2) Jim Lovewell (237.90)
3) Chris "Goof" Gauvin (237.24)
4) Steven "Wheels" Dale (236.19)
5) Myself (236)
6) Chris Monroy (235)

Now, we get to each bowler's plus/minus (starting from the highest plus to the minus):
1) Gauvin (+166.37)
2) Lovewell (+160.05)
3) Dale (+55.26)
4) Me (-5.48)
5) Monroy (-85.29)
6) Pezanko (-181.58)

So, lemme get this straight: Pezanko has the highest average, yet he is the most apt to swings in his game, according to plus/minus. Going back to the premise that the closer a player is to zero, the more consistent they are game to game, you are going to think this was a biased blog post by me:

1) Me (-5.48)
2) Dale (+55.26)
3) Monroy (-85.29)
4) Lovewell (+160.05)
5) Gauvin (+166.37)
6) Pezanko (-181.58)

Again, I have to state I started with my own numbers, saw the plus/minus and went through everyone else's numbers, thinking someone would be closer to zero than me or amazingly hit zero. Didn't happen. But what about the 200-210 bowler and where they stand in all this? I took just one bowler, thinking that their plus/minus would be at least in the 150 range. This is what I got:

Average: 206.11
Plus/minus (as of week 12): -102.02
Peak plus/minus (game 20): +165.79
Bowler: "Beamer" Stacy Beamanderfer

What does all this mean? I'm not totally sure. In a foxhole, would I rather have Lovewell on my team...wait, he already is, so that's easy. Of course I would. But what about Goof or Pezanko over Beamer? If I am looking at the more tangible numbers (average), of course. But if I needed a reliable bowler who I could trust with more consistent scoring...? It's open for debate at least. But there is one more thing to bring up: a bowler's peak plus/minus. I said Beamer's peak was +165.79 came after game 20, but that means over the last 12 games, she has a minus over 260, which is quite a drop off. So, let's look at that peak plus/minus and what game it came in (from lowest to highest):

1) Me (-79.57 after game 13)
2) Monroy (-85.20 after game 24)
3) Dale (+159.85 after game 14)
4) Pezanko (-181.58 after game 36)
5) Lovewell (+228.21 after game 21)
6) Gauvin (+246.35 after game 28)

OK, again shoot me. I have no idea what that means other than I am still trying to make sense of who is actually a consistent player. If, in fact my plus/minus is now -5.48, that means I am riding a wave where I am bowling better than I was earlier in the year, while Monroy's peak came the last game he bowled which means, for his great talent, is slumping a bit. Maybe consistency is truly unattainable, but perhaps knowing when you are peaking or slumping as a player could perhaps help players and teams match up against players of a similar pattern, which could make team bowling even more competitive than it ever was before. Hopefully, I didn't fry out your brain cells doing this. As always, consult your physician before reading my blog and Happy Holidays!!!

For those with a love and knowledge for the sport of bowling, this IS Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-October 2011

2011-10-24T09:50:00.000-07:00

"Divide and Prosper"
by Thomas Scherrer

Relegated (v.)
1. to move to a position of less authority, importance, ect.; demote
2. to demote to a lower division
3. to resign or refer to another of others, as for action or decision
4. to banish or exile
5. to assign to a particular group or category

In my early to mid-twenties, I listened to SNY analyst Keith "Mex" Hernandez often refer to poor teams in Major League Baseball as "going in the tank" or a "second division team". Of course, MLB has no other or second division, just the minor leagues, and baseball has it's independent leagues across the country, as we all know. Same goes for the NBA (as of right now, it doesn't even have a league-just a bunch of spoiled, locked out, greedy, uncooperative players and owners trying to divvy up the pie proportionately), the NHL, and the NFL. If you stink, you stink, stank, stunk. The only way you get better is by either hiring new personnel, drafting better, spending resources better, and so on. The truth is, like all sports with the huge TV contracts, everyone gets an equal amount of the pie. So, even if the Cleveland Cavs never appear on ESPN or ABC in a nationally televised game, they are still getting a check. They can be 10-72 and they are still getting a percentage of the television revenue, split 30 ways. The Miami Dolphins can tank for Andrew Luck this year, and know a) they got a shot at drafting a franchise quarterback for the next 15 years and b) they are getting 'x' amount of dollars from the national television deal. They do not get relegated to the NBA D-League or the UFL, they are in their prospective leagues-period.

Luckily, the English Premier League of football does relegate and so should league bowling if they are to make the sport better. Before I begin to tie it all in, the EPL goes under a pyramid structure of promotion and relegation in its leagues, and they are divided by the Premier League (1st division consisting of 20 teams), with the bottom 3 teams getting relegated to the Football League Championship (2nd division, 24 teams), where the 2nd division promotes the top two teams in the league to the Premier and teams 3-6 have a playoff to determine the third team to be promoted. In the FLC, the bottom 4 get relegated again to the 3rd division or Football League One with more leagues underneath it (up to 9 leagues in fact), with promotion and relegation trickling down based by division.

All that being said, it allows all clubs, from the Red Army of Manchester United to the little pitch club of Sutton United the ability of promote themselves up to the highest level in English soccer. Along with promotion comes the sponsorship and money. The Premier League is known as the Barclays' Premier League, which brings a title sponsor, television deals not just in England but on ESPN in "the colonies" as well.

Which finally brings me to bowling at long last! No disrespect to world's most popular sport, but I am not an expert on the game and its business. I am, however, pretty well-versed in understanding the nature of league bowling: elite league bowling is driven by a) money and b) ego. There is no c) for competition or d) for making the sport better-there just isn't. That is nobody's fault (OK, I lied: we're actually all to blame for the current state of bowling and league play but hopefully, we can change that), but perhaps we can start to create a system similar to what the EPL has where teams are actually based in leagues solely off their performance and not off of their averages, or their prize funds. With this, we have a combination of leagues that promote the top teams in lower divisions, and relegate the weaker teams. Wednesday, I had a brief conversation with Chris Laythe during the Worcester County All-Star league, and we both agreed that there are certain teams that just did not belong in this league. What type did belong, we never actually answered, but the question was there. For those of you who don't know, the Worcester County All-Star league at AMF Auburn Lanes on Wednesday and the Thursday Knights league Thursday are 1 and 1a in the bowling center. Which one is the top league is a matter of personal preference, but if go by sheer volume, Thursday Knights is the top league in the center and quite possibly in the area. 30 teams, 120 bowlers, names such as Dale, Gauvin, Cote, and Monroy head the marquee. The WCAS has just 17 teams but comparably good talent, with regulars like LaBrie, Dee, Diamond, and yes, Peloquin (note: some bowler bowl in both leagues which creates another mess in itself). The latter bowlers on both groups had input on this, and they went something like this:

Michelle (to me): you're gunna write about this, aren't you?
Me: sure, I think it's worth discussing.
Michelle: I gotta go throw another strike.

What Chris Monroy and I talked about went along the lines of a natural debate (via Facebook), that for purposes of editing and excluding all curses and grunts and stutters Monroy had went a little bit like this:

Me: So let's attempt to rectify this based on the system I'm attempting to create (yes, this whole conversation, with your permission, will be on my blog-I know my copyright laws).

Monroy: Feel free to quote me Tommy.

Me: If i were elected czar of bowling...which would be pretty cool..so let's assume we have 3 levels of league bowling. Level I, like I alluded to, the elite or premier league: min. average=220. Open to 16-20 teams who can get their shit together. Top 75% of the league remains, bottom 25% gets relegated ESL-style to the 2nd division. Oh, to make sure we're serious about this, your ratio on the lanes is at worst, 5:1. This will weed out the fakers and establish the true elite players.

Monroy: Perfect! Agreed on lane conditions...needs to be legit: 5:1 or 4:1.

Me: OK, 2nd divison, those fakers can all bowl each other...how does 210-219 avg sound?

Monroy: Good idea.

Me: OK, same amount of teams 16-20, but the top 25% in the league gets promoted to the elite league, because they have deserved a chance to be there, the middle, 50% stays, the lower 25% get relegated to the 3rd division-you have to keep incentive in all leagues.

Monroy: How do we get people to want to move to the elite division? Don't get me wrong.. LOVE the concept.

Me: OK, suppose the weekly dues are $25/week...let's say the lineage, secretary fees are $9, which leaves us with $16 for prize fund per bowler/week. Start locally, keep it an indie thing.

Monroy: And how long is the season?

Me: Ah yes...the length. I firmly believe that bowling leagues are TOO long-too many things happen in 36 weeks to bowlers.

Monroy: Might you want halves or even trimesters to allow upward movement? Agreed especially in today's society! Maybe even quarters!

Me: You can do halves but let's shoot for this: 30 weeks. First of all, makes every week really matter. Second, guys who try to "dump" (bowl for lower scores in an effort to keep their handicap in leagues up), cannot. Finally, we give players 22 weeks off to practice, bowl summer leagues, relax, work on a B or C game, ect.

Monroy: Good idea...would you do a try out system for level determination?

Me: Absolutely...

Monroy: Love the idea.. a pre-league tryout!

Me: Right, you only need to do it one time of course, because after season one, the regulation/promotions take care of themselves. Now...let's get to the money.

Monroy: Ah yes.. the cabbage, simolians, the tah dum ...good ole Mr.Green.

Me: I mentioned there would be $16/week/person leftover, times that by 80 bowlers. That is $1280 a week. Times it by 30 weeks and each league ponies up $38,400 for the season, times 3 leagues is $115,200.

Monroy: Are you suggesting that there is a HOUSE pool for league funds...not just a league by league prize pool?

Me: Sorta, I am lumping all 3 leagues in together. Of course, this is just an example. What if we put half of the money into the Elite League?

Monroy: A very interesting concept...so that would be the incentive to improve...you want more money...work hard to get into elite division!

Me:Now, you see it...half is over $57 grand, just for 20 teams!!!

Monroy: I love the concept! But it only works if there is no such thing as an unsanctioned league.

Me: Screw the USBC for a moment, if they were this effin original in their concepts, you (USBC) might not be in the shape you've been in.

Monroy: ABSOFUCKINGLOUTELY!!!

Me: OK, let's be blunt, if you win the Elite League, how much of that should be yours? 16 grand, 20 grand? Puts an emphasis on winning, right? Also, the whole league makes their money back, bottom 4 make their money back while going down a notch and away from that guaranteed money, so let's establish that each team in the Elite League is guaranteed $3600 ($900/bowler). OK, as for the other leagues, the top 4 in the 2nd division should get a similar bump in incentive so they too get $3600.

Monroy: I like it.

Me: We can appropriate money as we go down along the way, but it can be a sustainable model.

Monroy:So the concept is if you want to guarantee to not lose money.. get into the elite division.

Me:As for the lower level teams, they might not make their money back, but we can entice other incentives such as free games, lessons, bowling balls with pro shops, ect.

Monroy: Give them a reason to get into the bowling center and practice ...a great concept. So they really don't lose in the end! It keeps them in the center which would make the BPAA happy.

Me: And here's the best thing, I'm gunna give 2nd and 3rd divisions their THS so they can establish what they feel is a satisfying average. Pay some dues, right?

Monroy: But shouldn't there be a a standard condition so proper upward movement can be gauged? Paying dues...a great concept...FROM THE PAST! lol and sarcasm noted I hope.

Me: Perhaps, but I'm taking this into consideration. I know I won't lose the 220+ guys because it's good money not to pass up. I risk losing the 210-219 guys if I flatten 'em up. But perhaps, I can do this: all position rounds, we make the lanes a bit tougher.

Monroy: Agreed...how would teams be picked in elite division or would it be singles?

Me: OK, I can safely say that you should be able to make your own team in the Elite League because I know what it is like to be given someone you don't wanna bowl with.

Monroy: So no cap. How would you avoid the Monday situation? (In reference to the Monday Classic league that died out).

Me:I'm honestly not sure, Chris. You start pushing it, say...NOW?!? Instead of July???

Monroy:Obviously the lack of cap coupled with a more demanding condition scared people off notwithstanding the money.

Me:I love Eric (Mahoney-GM at Auburn), but I could not believe that the concept for the league was only brought to my attention in July. It is but I'm looking at it from a Utopian world where everyone would be in with this, but you have no way of knowing.

And that is where I ultimately come back to a few things: first, this is a totally Utopian idea because everyone is scared! They are scared of change or anything that they didn't think of first. Do I think a league like this can be structured and work for a long period of time? Of course I do, but I am one person, not 10, or 20, or even 40. Even if you chose to have each division be 10 teams, and do promotion/relegation with two teams instead of 4, I'm fine with that as well. In fact, that might make more sense, given a sense that not every league would willingly go with this, and for purposes of this article, leagues that consider themselves a top league in their area.

Secondly, the money issue. Yes, I am fully aware that no one like to lose money but the purpose of bowling is not to make your wallet fatter as much as it should be right now, making the game prosper to where a league like this could take off and top teams could make a decent amount of money. Instead, most team meetings to begin a year are usually surrounded by old rules that have been in place for 2 or 3 decades. The game has changed a lot in the last 15 years, making most rules before then obsolete. Why shouldn't the Elite Division be a 70% handicap league, while the 2nd division is 80% and, 3rd 90%? Because nobody is willing to stick their necks out and try it for a year. Bowling is decaying right in front of us and no one cares to try something out of the box, even if you lose a few dollars along the way? Sadly, that's the shape it is in right now.

Finally, the promotional aspect. I do not, by any means criticize Eric Mahoney for what happened Monday night, only because it probably was a quickly thought out idea that he thought could work given he has some talented players in the area. The truth is that most bowlers had their minds made up about leagues in the fall before the idea was even originated. Given the current economic state of things, it is very difficult for people to justify picking up another league, no matter what type of player you are. You make plans around your leagues, you make work schedules around your league, you spend time with you family around leagues as well. Early and aggressive promotion will at least help build a league from the start to where you might sneak in a few extra teams looking to bowl. The only way things get bigger and better is with innovation.

And I'm pretty sure what the answer will be...

For those who have a love and knowledge for the sport of bowling, This IS Bowling Philosophy...Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-September 2011

2011-09-02T13:16:00.000-07:00

"A Bowler's Thoughtful Observation in Two Days"
by Thomas Scherrer

It has only been two days since my "return" to "league bowling", and all I got to say is that since I have come back to the horror show that are house shots, I observed this:

In three leagues, there was already 3 perfect games shot and they were by 3 people that I never heard of before. Yesterday, I was a VIP to a 791...not that it was any shock to a series like that, it was only that the bowler (whose name escapes me and yes, I bowled with him all 3 games so sue me for being a bad investigator, but a damn good writer) accomplished a near 800 with a Columbia 300 "Fill In The Color But I Think Gold" Dot. If I am not mistaken, that ball was made when my mother was in high school. On a related note, my mom graduated high school in 1981-I think. Again, my investigative reporting is somewhere in between TMZ and Grantland.com.
My girlfriend Michelle bowled on Wednesday and, like all great scientists, observed a very unique difference in how Auburn plays now with the new Kegel machine and lane oil. The shot starts out roughly the same, with possibly a little more wet-dry to the gutters than what used to be there. It is as the lanes transition that seems to have gone a different undertaking. In the past at Auburn, the lanes were already burning up around late first game/early second. You noticed this even in a doubles league that the lanes were moving quick, lefty or righty. Imagine a 4-person team then and now you get a massive transition going on with players having to really get inside and circle the lanes with a lot of axis rotation with weaker equipment or cleaner surfaces to retain energy. Which leads to...
Players having to change their styles of play, and most importantly, play straighter angles through the front. Any directional moves going away from the pocket were not as successful unless you are a) more accurate than say, 99% of bowlers who have ever lived and b) had a ball with some grit to read in the oil better and get the ball to slow down rotationally. Example #1 and #2 were within 5 feet of me. My new teammate Jim Lovewell and a former PBA Experience teammate of mine, Eric Kollios had that going on and instead of seeing transition as drastic as everyone else, they saw results (to varying degrees: Kollios struck, Lovewell did not but his pocket percentage was better than most). This leads to...
The rest of us actually finding more success moving back outside late second/early third game with more ball speed...again, if can do it. Michelle did it Wednesday and shot a 279, basically maxing out at her top speed, which is probably her B-minus game. On an unrelated note: Michelle's prime is being wasted thanks to no women's bowling tour, so thanks PBA! I did it in the final game and shot 236, which you could consider my greatest strength. On a related note: I work in retail, but I digress.
I got bored with watching strikes so I came up with new statistics!

For readers who recall reading my "Numbers Game" blog in September 2010, I tried to devise some sabermetrical things to think of while bowling. When you inquire deep within the soul of the game, it is all about numbers. That is, how many pins you knock down. How many strikes you throw or how many spares you convert. Most importantly, did you win or did you lose? I came up with some simple ideas and tossed them around and tried to tabulate every player in the 2010-11 PBA League. First of all, too difficult to do alone at this point. We still haven't embraced the concept of looking at a player's scoresheet to tell us a broader story, so putting it all together for every player is right now, impossible. With that being said, I elected myself to test myself for the Thursday Knights league.

(Note: Yes, yes, and yes...I said last year that judging this off of a handicapped league on a house shot where there is the possibility of dumpers and sandbaggers would make certain numbers hard to judge properly, but I am neither of those things so I am basically telling everyone that I care too damn much about preserving a modest average and I wanna give everything I have to scoring as much as possible, each and every single game, so to hell with the Long Island Method).

Case in point: I referenced myself and Jim Lovewell, who struggled to carry despite having figured out how to play on the Brave New World of Auburn Oil. Had I tracked Jim's night, I probably would have seen him hit the pocket just as much as I did last night, he just didn't knock them all down at once. I did not talk about my other teammate, Jesse Cote, who shot 298 in the first game last night with his 12th shot in the first game being a massive tug, then he proceeded to not strike for the first half of the second game, and half of those were pocket hits, if that at best. Jim had nowhere near that trouble in terms of hitting the pocket, but Jesse had the better night, according to the recap sheet (to be fair, he struck from impossible angles and this is by no means, taking a shot at my anchor bowler. He had area and he used it all night, just like I did for the most part. Plus, he brought my onto his team so I gotta go easy on him, no?)

Or...did he?

Going Next Level on bowlers, I devised a few more stats to make you vomit or cringe or get excited about. First of all, we can look at my strike percentage for the night (67%), or my Nine or Better (NOB) number, which was 28/33 (84.8%), or PRO Rating (67 Strike %+ 70 Spare %=137, which made my elite-PRO number at 140 pretty close, with one major glitch: what if you don't spare all night, but strike every shot...that is, shoot 900? Like I said, the stats need some tweaking, but let's just assume 900's don't happen every week....they feel like it now).

Let's add these on for some better clarity:

Pocket Carrying Percentage Efficiency (PCP Efficiency)=Basically divide the amount of times you struck by the amount of balls that hit the pocket. We will take light mixers and high flush to trip 4/6's into account as pocket hits. Last night, I hit the pocket 28 times out of 33 shots. I struck on 22 of the 28, which makes PCP Efficiency at 78.5%, meaning that for every 4 times I hit the pocket, I struck more than 3 times last night. It gives the reader a sense of if the player a) hit the pocket and b) how often did the player strike when they did. Now let's try on this wrinkle on for size.

Average on Ball in Pocket (A-BIP)=taking a derivative straight out of baseball, they have done research computing pitchers and what the league hits off of them when a ball is put in play, known as BABIP. Consider this no different...sorta.

We are simply cutting bowling up into one simple and logistical premise: what did you average per game when your bowling ball hit the pocket? It details just how good you are actually scoring in this day's environment in relation to other bowlers (you can certainly add a wA-BIP, which would weigh your A-BIP against other players, but let's take this one step at a time) you are in competition with. This is how we go about figuring all this out: for shots that hit the pocket, it becomes it's own 10 frame game. For example, my first game last night, I was in the pocket every frame. My score was 246, so that is pretty self-explanatory. These were my results in the pocket for game 2: X, X, X, X, X, X, X, 9/...that is only 8 frames, so we still need at least two to four frames (remember, you can throw up to 12 shots in a game) to come up with a score for that game. In game 3, my second frame was in the pocket: strike. That was the 9th frame of my second A-BIP game. Then in the third frame of game 3 (10th frame of A-BIP 2), I left a soft 7 pin and spared, but now my next pocket hit would be a "fill shot" to finish the score, which game in the 4th frame: strike. This is what we come up with:

X, X, X, X, X, X, X, 9/, X, 9/X=259

Now, since I didn't have enough data for another A-BIP, my average would be for two games, which brings us to this A-BIP: 252.5. I then hit the pocket another 6 times to end the night going 9/, X, X, X, X, X, meaning I still need more data to complete that game, that is, next week.

School is most certainly back in session.

For those who have a love and knowledge for bowling, this IS Bowling Philosophy...Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-September 2011

2011-08-30T07:44:00.000-07:00

"The Disease"
by Thomas Scherrer

At the very least, status quo prevails...

I come to the bowling audience as man confused-very confused. It is time of the year once again for fall bowling leagues to commence in the way of making teams, deciding formats, electing officials, and the beginnings of a balanced prize fund to please the masses of bowlers across the country. One thing that is never mentioned, not surprisingly, are lane conditions. Not that league bowlers care anymore about the nature of "house shots", they just accept it as part of the culture in league bowling today. No matter how much people chatter about it, complaining that it is too easy and creates too much parity in this handicapped league world, the opportunity is there to openly complain about it yet never truly advocate for change. There are those, however, who choose to go outside the status quo and want to bowl on more challenging conditions or bowling in classic scratch leagues. There are others...they say they will go away from the status quo and follow those who dare to be bold and daring and actually find out what they are made of for close to 9 months. In the end, they are all talk and no walk. Too much bark and not enough bite. A bully being backed to the end of the bus. There is a better word and yes, this will be my harshest criticism yet: Mouthy Hypocrites.

The Mouthy Hypocrites are a minor yet all-too-important group of league bowlers: upper-middle to upper class league bowlers (220+ average), usually in the peak of their bowling primes (late 20's to early 40's-yes, it is that large an age group, which makes it all the more sad), who claim that they do not like the nature of bowling today, speak out on change and want change. However, when the possibility of change arises, they make excuses. Fair enough, we are in the middle of a recession so adding on another league to their portfolio is financially unsound. I respect that and understand that. But when the moment comes that they have a chance to make a decision, they ultimately do not put their money where their mouths are.

Sad but true.

Last night, I walked into Auburn Lanes (I left out AMF for purely selfish reasons, hope you don't mind Fredricksburg) along with my girlfriend Michelle and our teammate Eric Frost for what we would hope would be the inception of a brand new venture at Auburn. This would be the Worcester Country Invitational Scratch Classic League. Created by GM Eric Mahoney, the concept is to have a 3-person scratch league with some money behind it for two 15-week halves with a) no average cap, meaning you can have an elite bowling team and there is no rules against it-a veritable dream team of bowlers considering that Auburn is roughly 45 minutes to an hour away from bowling hotbeds such as Hartford, CT and Springfield, MA and even Rhode Island and also b) no house shots. But c) not sport shots, rather Kegel's Navigational Challenge Pattern series. These shots ratios aren't sport complaint 3:1 but 4.5 or 5:1 ratios. Not quite as challenging as the brand new Team USA Experience patterns, but nowhere near the atrocity of 10:1, 15:1, or heaven forbid 20:1 rationed house shots, where Ray Charles could average 210 today. Oh, in case you didn't know Ray Charles is blind and dead!

Mahoney had made his push for the league, heard lots of response from bowlers looking to embrace a more equitable challenge to bowling, made the fliers, and hoped the masses would step up. What did he get...?

STATUS EFFIN QUO!!!

Mahoney based his prize fund off of 20 teams (highly ambitious for a beginning league), and hoped for the best and he got, at best 5 teams to show up. Now, to be fair, hurricane Irene just swept through the east coast, finishing itself off in New England and leaving those without power, so all of this is subject to change. But it was sad to see certain people that surely said they were behind it in the bowling alley that night and not walk into the meeting. Should I be pissed as a bowler? Yep, but my league season is pretty much set despite all this. I'm tied into the highly competitive Thursday Knights league with Jesse Cote this fall as well as being a substitute for the Team USA Experience League Tuesday nights (depending of course, on if that gets off the ground with its status quo issues). But for Michelle and Eric, two highly talented bowlers with a passion to compete on the best with the best to get better, had this as their only league. Instead, with all the factors in play, Mahoney elected to push the league back to the beginning of October in hopes that more time and promotion will lead to more teams. Hopefully, it can work but unfortunately, it seems as if status quo has been set once again by bowlers. With that, Eric and Michelle no longer have a league to bowl in as of yet, and might very well miss out on a year of bowling. Two talented players with no home and no exposure.

So, what is the problem?

believe you are a top-tier bowler? Yes, yes, yes and sadly yes. (Note: that last yes was in relation to a certain bowler being called a house bowler while he was beating them in the summer's Experience session. Two things: 1) grow up-we are all house bowlers in some respects and 2) a best 11-out-of-21 plastic ball challenge is a fair way to settle this verbal spat. Toss some money around and we'll put it to charity for a good cause, but I digress...)

Perhaps, it is just too late for us to change as league bowlers. We are a part of the Bob Learn Jr. Generation. We walked into every bowling center for a league in the last 15 years and we have proprietors and GM's seeing the ability to manipulate lane machines to dress lane beds for maximum scoring potential. Every night is the Erie Civic Center across Bowling America. Scores of 300's and 800's being tossed up almost frequently, and in some cases a weekly occurrence. I recently looked at the Auburn Honor Roll wall and looked at the amount of Honor Scores thinking and joking out loud, Perhaps they should make a list of the bowlers who have not shot an Honor Score...it would be shorter! It has what we've become and there is no way of changing that...for us.

While we "practiced" last night after the league meeting discussing things on one of the Kegel Challenge patterns, John Zawalick, of DJ's Pro Shop was talking to Michelle about helping out on Saturday's with junior bowlers and lessons. Then, almost like the biggest DUH moment I have ever had in nearly 20 years of bowling: it might be too late for us, but not for the kids. Auburn has a very solid Saturday junior program, with more and more players maturing into future league bowlers in the area and, subsequently, future house bowler hacks and Mouthy Hypocrites. Why not at least give the junior bowlers a chance on the Challenge patterns? First of all, kids are still developing as players and this is the best way to at least mature players more properly. Will their averages drop a bit? Yes. Will it separate junior bowlers in terms of talent? True. Will it make them better. Absolutely-short and long term. No need to make kids bowl on near-flat lane conditions, but if you explain to them at a young age when they are not quite as jaded as us twentysomethings are, that they are tweaking conditions to make them better, most kids should be pretty receptive to it. In fact, how many junior bowlers actually know what they are bowling on now anyway, so what is to lose on that?

What is to gain on it is far more greater in that if this junior generation starts bowling on more challenging conditions and wants to bowl on more as they get older, you erase the Mouthy Hypocrites to the point of irrelevance. Perhaps it's time we simply concede changing the present and let's start trying to shape the future. It might benefit bowling in the long-term. It still might give us some hope for the future. As Andy and Red said in some movie, hope can be a good thing.

For those with a knowledge and love for bowling, this IS Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-June 2011

2011-06-17T17:20:00.000-07:00

PBA Tour-"Who's Really the Bitch?"
by Thomas Scherrer

   If one is an accident, then two is a trend.

   If you totally understand bowling, you know it is a true contest between yourself and the pins. One a living organism which some have the capacity to throw a bowling ball over 20 miles an hour and make it rotate up to 500 times a minute, all with dizzying and alarming accuracy. The other, an in-adamant object, roughly 3 and a half pounds, formed in wood and surrounded by plastic some 60 feet away from the foul line. It is a challenge enough to try and strike with other mitigating factors such as oil depletion, oil carrydown, differences in bowling styles, and outward distractions. Yes, noise...and lots of it. From the pins crashing to the sound of the machines whirring, noise is everywhere. So naturally, when BottleGate II went viral with Sean Rash "bitching" out Jason Belmonte for crinkling his water bottle-again-on national television, the reaction was instantaneous. We don't really know if was pure coincidence or timely gamesmanship (should Rash really care? Plus I bowled with him in college-he made some pretty obnoxious screams and yells while in competition, so noise should not be a factor in his concentration), strategy or bad timing, or whatever ebony and ivory comparisons you choose to make.

   But that isn't what I am writing about when I mean "one's an accident-two's a trend". No, this is in reference to the Professional Bowlers' Association, the PBA, the supposed caretakers for the sport of professional bowling not only making this a) a selling point to drive audience viewership and b) build up the Rash-Belmonte "bitch" comments to a seemingly OK form of professionalism. Did I watch it? Of course I did. Makes me shallow and pathetic? Of course it does. You wanna know why? Because I bought into it. I was literally forced into buying into it. And yes, I hate myself for even clicking on it. I became a prisoner to the moment of watching something that is rather vulgar and depressing to watch. So yes, if you ask me what the real problem was, the real issue was how the PBA featured this as generating mainstream attention.

   If you care even a little bit about bowling, this should disturb you that the actual talent of both Belmonte and Rash were both compromised by this whole incident. And that the PBA, pba.com, and bowling in general let this happen is what is more damning. If you were professional bowling, wouldn't you elect to showcase these players in a more glorious light than this? If you ever expect to generate a more casual fan base and keep your loyal fans in place, shouldn't you choose to show their creative talents on the lane instead of what they say or do off the lanes of after they bowl? It personifies a cry for help: a desperate plea for someone to listen to bowling, somebody please listen to us!!! We can't do it the old-fashioned way, we need to know that you all still care...

   I still care, just not about this. Turns out, bowling fans might as well have been the "bitch"...again.

For all bowling fans with a love and knowledge for the game, this IS Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Sports in General

2011-06-07T06:08:00.000-07:00

"The Blend"
by Thomas Scherrer


Could Rafa Nadal be holding onto more than just trophies?

   I often find myself searching for the proper words to discuss Rafael Nadal. He is part grunt, part graffiti artist, and part punk rock/thrash, but also part beauty, part Picasso, and part classical music. Mozart meeting Pennywise, Rod Ross meeting a gangbanger with a finesse side, a boxer meeting a puncher.
   Usually, we discuss these matchups when we refer to Nadal and his archrival, Roger Federer. However, that argument is no longer the case. Nadal is Federer. Most importantly, Federer is not Nadal. Cannot be Nadal. Never will be Nadal. After Nadal's record tying 6th French Open victory (and 4th against Federer on the red clay), the question which I slightly broached in February 2009 suddenly took on legs from the national media. It went like this:

" As for the vanquished, Federer sees Nadal, he sees a stumbling block to history. A stop sign to being the greatest player of all time because logic would dictate that in order for a legend to truly be considered amongst the discussion of greatest ever, shouldn't he/she have to beat their greatest rival? "

   It is a question that at the time seemed laughable but certainly worth addressing...at some point. History is such a fickle mistress in that we forget that Federer seemed to be on the way down. An epic Australian Open loss to Nadal, followed by tears and bitterness, then a stretch where Federer slammed rackets on the courts. And Nadal seemed invincible. Then Nadal's knee went south. Robin Solderling stunned him at Roland Garros. Federer swooped in. At Wimby, no Nadal...Federer outlasts Andy Roddick...and the world waxes poetic as they bear witness to the greatest tennis player ever.

   Did I miss something? Apparently, I did. Look, I know Roger Federer is one of the all-time greatest players to swing a racket. He is Cary Grant with jazz music. Ballet and tap dance. Usually, tap dancing all over opponents with an unbridled match up grace, poise, accuracy, and humility. All wonderful to watch. Boring at times only because he made it look so damn simple. Then you get a perfect rival in Nadal: exotic, effort-driven, emotional, spirited and all without the childish outbursts of a John McEnroe or ref baiting of a Jimmy Connors. You can see Nadal giving a crap every single point. Almost relentless with each UHHHH! Suddenly, Nadal saw what he needed to work on to become better than Federer: not become Federer but to incorporate more into his game such as a better serve; quicker points to save wear and tear on the body and allow him to endure the hard courts and grass that power players seem to dominate on. He has blended into an all-around player with little to no holes in his game. A polished, refined, glorious blend of power and grace. Fully aware of his skills and his body, Nadal is not only clearly the world's best tennis player, he might very well be the greatest male tennis player ever. Not that I predicted that or anything but Nadal has proven he can go to new heights and the only question that remains now is also something I wrote back in 2009: how many will Nadal win? We can no longer say this for Federer: he sees Nadal and wilts while Nadal sees Federer and he thrives. Is that how we are supposed to remember the greatest player ever? I thought so. So how do we compare Nadal favorably?

   If I were to compare, musically, what I see from Nadal, I look to Metallica to draw parallels. Both burst onto the scene with power-infused adrenaline and crush-crush-crush intensity with edges in their all-around ability (think Nadal's first 2 French Open wins and "Kill 'em All" along with "Ride the Lightning"-impressive performances but still with holes). Their potential shined through with transcendent performances (Nadal's 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 Aussie Open and Metallica's "Master of Puppets"-works of art that made you believe they could go to higher levels), then suffered through setbacks (Nadal's knee/abdomen problem and the death of bassist Cliff Burton-where you questioned their ability to bounce back), only to come out on the other side to provide true masterpieces (Nadal's 2010 romp through Paris, London, and New York and Metallica's "...And Justice for All" album, which is their true masterpiece-I consider it the last great metal album and thrash album and punk album in music. Only "Dookie" from Green Day and "Full Circle" from Pennywise touch it on punk levels). Their commercial success and status as an all-time great were fully cementer afterward (Nadal's latest win and Metallica's "Black Album"-showcasing the all-around talent and ability to push them above everyone else), however we know how Metallica's run has slowed down in the last 15-20 years and like most tennis players, Nadal will eventually stop winning majors and being a dominant, unbridled force. He'll have his share of"Load" and "St. Anger" days, but will still give you moments of his days of glory, much like when you hear a song like "Fuel" or "Judas Kiss" from Metallica. Rafa Nadal will still give you moments but how many more?

     The truth is that time is still in the future, years from now where a new young lion will come from the junior ranks to challenge Nadal and stop him from truly being the greatest tennis player ever, but for now the question refers to what his ceiling could be. We did say the same thing about Federer when he too, was 25 and looked to be on top of the world. Now, the Fed Express has worn the years of losing to Nadal poorly. He is 29 but he looks older, more haggard, more worn down by life and the expectations of beating Nadal one more time for a major to truly cement his status as the game's greatest. There is no other sport like tennis: your peak is only for so long and when it comes and goes, it never comes back. Thirty is to be considered a dinosaur in tennis, an aging relic of a past generation. There are only so few that can survive beyond that timeframe. For Nadal, his time is now. Time to enjoy the wave because you never know when it will come crashing to the beach. Vamos Rafa!

Bowling Philosophy-May 2011

2011-05-27T08:45:00.000-07:00

A Man's Man
by Thomas Scherrer


With one step comes a giant leap for Scott Norton.

Before we discuss Scott Norton, allow me to address one of the greatest flaws of social media and blogging-anonymous incompetence. As I was filing through my notes this past week, I came upon two messages: one detailing the harrowing way in which Mika Koivuniemi lost the US Open to Norm Duke (US Open Live Diary).
The other related to Kelly Kulick's historic win and in some respect, to the lack of big game chops Chris Barnes has shown over his career. To take up space for this person's comments, here it is:

Anonymous said...: I was mostly in agreement with your premises until you got to the piece about the TOC and Kelly Kulick. Really? No matter what your opponent bowls, a HOF bowler would beat them if they're a "non-winner", whatever that is... ( I "assume" that non-winner means no prior men's PBA title.)Seems like you've overlooked the obvious. She posted a 265 to win the TOC. That's a high end score for ANY title match. I won't even bother mentioning the rest of her credentials. So, you're essentially saying that any HOF candidate would always post the winning score, when "he" reaches the final match and is playing against a "non-winner". That notion is so patently absurd that I didn't bother to read the rest of your article.

   First of all, I appreciate the feedback of course-glad I have fans! Secondly, I wished you read the rest of the article because I do happen to give Barnes his proper due as a player-it is totally absurd on my part to think for one second that this isn't one of the 20 greatest players in bowling history, not PBA. But back in 1998, the talk was that Barnes was the "next one"; the natural successor to Walter Ray and he has disappointed from a standpoint of winning over his career. One note that is important now: a friend asked me what it will take for me to think he is a first ballot HOF'er last summer. My response was simple: win the World Championship. Done and done. He went out and showcased his talents that night to win the final piece of the Triple Crown. Historic in that he joins a select cast of players to do it. He walks into the PBA HOF the first year he is eligible. Overall, has Barnes been a success in his career? Yes, but not to the extent we all thought he would be. Finally, don't be afraid to put your name on your statement-nobody likes lurkers in the shadows. Be proud of your beliefs as I am of mine.

   Which brings me to Scott Norton. I stand before my readers today as a 27-year-old man and I can safely say this: Scott Norton is more man than I will ever be, here going forward. Norton, the 2010-11 PBA Rookie of the Year took one brave step by announcing on May 19th that he is a gay athlete. For the first time in sports history, and active participant of the sport they are in has come out of the closet. Truthfully, there should be no closets to come out of anymore but the fear and backlash gay athletes feel they might have has kept them in the shadows for far too long. For Norton, he has come out and he is proud of it, stating that being gay does not define who he is a person. He is just like everyone else-a human being. He just happens to like, date, and be in relationships with men.
   Admittedly, it is real easy for someone who is heterosexual-like myself-to applaud Norton's decision to come out because I didn't have to live with that secret inside his soul. It is also easy for me to applaud because I have no problems with anyone who is gay or lesbian or even bisexual. In bowling, unity means more to this group than other sports mainly because of the already false stereotypes that have been portrayed in media and in TV and movies (you should know this now but I have watched "Kingpin" and it makes me sad to think that this movie is used as an example of bowling), so Norton's decision carried even more weight. Why? Because there are others in bowling.
   When I worked in Syosset Lanes, every Monday night during the fall the Monday Fourplay league would take place and the league featured mostly people of an alternative lifestyle. Just like anyone else, they have jobs like bankers, teachers, cops, and just like anyone else, they used bowling for recreational relief from their jobs. Were they more open and flirtatious with someone like me? Very...however, I never had the pleasure of working a Monday night while I was there. But just like any other people, those league bowlers would come in to practice, have a drink, talk life with you. You know, actual normal activity that some other people who are far more close-minded would not even consider gays and lesbians to have. That should make you sick to your stomach that people still think that way but it does happen and you can't change that.
   In some respects, bowling has been trying to elevate itself from being a lowest common denominator on the sporting food chain to something far more respectable in the public eye and Norton, in some roundabout way, might have officially helped start this movement. Norton's candid, honest, and brave admission puts him on the upper echelon of those people in bowling trying to elevate it. In one fell swoop, Norton is the biggest man on the PBA Tour going forward and he did by being himself and giving us to who his true self is.
   If we were all like Scott Norton, bowling would be in better shape, but certainly society would be.

For those with a love and knowledge for bowling...this is Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosphy-US Open

2011-02-27T13:52:00.000-08:00

PBA Tour-United States Open Live Diary (via Amazon Kindle)2:36 pm: before we begin, most fans are wonderimg how in the hell Bill O'Niell gagged away last night's match to Ryan Shafer in the way he did. First off, Shafer was saved by the power of telvision. When ESPN went to a commercial break, Shafer had hit the pocket exactly zero times, as in not once, as in not at all. Billy O on the other hand, looked unstoppable- 4 in a row, possible 290- and he then had to sit for nearly 5 minutes before his next shot. His late game collapse can only be summed up in one word: tragic. Saying nothing about Shafer, but it would have been fun to see O'Niell go into Sunday as the reigning and defending champ, plus seeing him go through 3future HOF bowlers would have been a fan's dream. Damn having to pay the bills.

2:52 pm: Using the Kindle might slow up my updates but we are gunna give it a go. I have become immersed in the information age at long last! Watching Louisville-Pitt before the start and Rick Pitino has his white/cream suit out. Surely he used that du
ring his recent civil suit to woo the judge. Plus, he also offered the judge a package similar to when he coached and ran the Celtics basketball operations. Safe to say, the judge could not turn him down.

3:00 pm: Your are looking live at the sport's greatest bowling cathedral- Brusnwick Zone Carolier Lanes. Take that, NBS!

3:03 pm: We go to Randy and Shafer talking about BrooklynGate. Then to Mika..the only player to ever make all 4 majors in a season.

3:05 pm: Hey, Shafer hit the nose. Close to Brooklyn...spares it like a pro. Mika srtikes and then they show his trophy case. He might need to build a foundaion.

3:09 pm: There is the Brooklyn trip 6 forRyan. Mika then steps up and shows you a real strike. Another strike for Mika and early on, he has soom room.

3:12 pm: As for Shafer, he is dealing with the same issues he had last night. I would say that is trouble...oh wait, Mika struck again. Yeah, trouble.

3:14 pm: Commercials for Lumber Liquidators and Parker Bohn III. Last we checked, he was on a milk carton!

3:18 pm: Randy just used the word "lubricidy" to explain the flat US Open pattrn. Sure he needed some after the '95 TPC.

3:21 pm: Ladies and Gentlemen...Mike Birchtree-Penninsla doubles!

3:23 pm: Shafer just went 7-10. Awful break. Twelth major TV final for Shafer but yet no titles. Best player ever to not win a major.

3:26 pm: Light dancer strike for Mika- ballgame.

3:28 pm: Close Shave America...Close Shave Barbasol!

3:32 pm: Randy interviewing Steve Johnson about the BPAAs latest junior bowling concept. Perhaps having the kids bowl free year round? Nope. Some USA program that will likely cost bowlers more money. Johnson was asked to pick a winner and he chose either Mika or Duke. Like Tommy Jones is this weekend hack with a bad hip. That's me people!

3:38 pm: First spare shot for Jones looked ok with the hip. I am sure he took some pharmecuticals before the telecast. Perscription? Eh...

3:40 pm: Mika goes church and says something in Finnish. I'm certain the FCC is looking into that.

3:43 pm: Jones leaves a pocket 4-9 then whiffs on getting apin. Only leads by 2. In a tournament where pins are so precious, that could be a minute difference.

3:45 pm: Jones opens again (2-8-10) and looked stunned. Welcome to the United States Open sir. Mika up 30 going to break.

3:49 pm: Jones and Del Ballard talking. I always find this odd when a ball rep has two guys on the show. How is there any honest objectivity in that?

3:53 pm: Jones get bit again on the left lane, this time the 7-10. Mika can do this blindfolded from here. Duke-Mika title match. Replay of the '08 Open final.

3:57 pm: I bowl with USBC...for the beer! Chocolate milk...the choolate milk. Sorry, someone hacked my Kindle.

4:03 pm: Bud-weis-er! I heart the frogs.

4:06 pm: Mika starts off with a strike. Duke's first frame is a 2-8 and did very litte downlane. But no shock, both players right on top of each other.

4:11 pm: Duke collapses the bucket...we have action. Sit back and enjoy.

4:14 pm: First time Mika looks tight. Hard to tell...he never sweats or smiles or speaks in English. Now Norm whiffs one..and chops the spare. Wow. Now a plack 10...he is struggling with the feel suddenly.

4:20 pm: A solid 8 for duke! Mika now has his true opening. 8th frame by Mika is a bomb. And so was the ninth...wow.

4:22 pm: Duke got he first one. Got the next one. Keeps it close. He needs one more. Pured that one as well. Mika will have to make it happen in the tenth.

4:24 pm: Duke wth a 225. Mika needs a mark.

4:26 pm: Ringdime...MY GOD MIKA FLAGGED IT!!! Duke wins it...ungodly. Unthinkable

4:29 pm: Randy now has to interview Duke after that and Norm graciously puts the win on the backburner, saying hat his heart goes out t Mika. In a sport where sometimes skills get superceded by lck and bad breaks, Duke is super classy
in this moment. One final note: I was sitting next to Steve Peloquin, who said just before the spare attempt that Mika has not looked right on his 10 pin spares and lo and behold, Mika whiffed the dime. Coaches can sometimes tell before it happens.

Bowling Philosophy-U. S. Open

2011-02-25T16:05:00.000-08:00

PBA Tour-United States Open Live Diary

Live bowling?
U. S. Open?
Shot-by-shot diary?

Done, done and done!!!

6:25 PM: Whew...sorry folks, got in late due to some snow. Did you know it snows in New England...a lot? Anyway, we come into Mike J. Laneside talking to Tommy Jones just after his match play win over Norm Duke. The PBA is doing an unprecedented 3 day, live coverage telecast featuring match play round 1 right now. I'm so giddy right now...I need help.

6:29 PM: I bowl with USBC...for the torture! Oh, and the Sport Bowling. Cannot pass that up. The only reason to be bowling if you good and wanna see your game improve.

6:30 PM: Know the Wood time! 42 feet and flat, a slight change to past Opens where the pattern has been 40 feet, but it is the flatness. As we see Pete Weber (sans shades) lofting the cap and striking.

6:33 PM: Cut to Bill O'Niell vs. Jones as Mike J. reports that Jones' left hip appears to be giving him trouble again on spares. They are covering 4 matches at a time so this might be a little hard to keep track of. As Jones projects the ball a mile in the air, Randy Pedersen reports that it is bone spurs that is afflicting Jones. Rare injury to see for a player but probably not a shock to a bowler. Usually Jones only gets stopped by bad ball reaction or some other form of recreational activity.

6:36 PM: Jones vs. O'Neill, Duke vs. Belmo, Weber vs. Szczerbinski, and Shafer vs. Rash are the feature matches. Hmm...all righties, 7 power strokers/crankers and Duke going right up 10, with no lefties in sight.

6:40 PM: Randy recalls the Wheelchair event that they had at Carolier Lanes in 1994 while Johnny Petraglia shot 300 at the PBA National Championship. Top 10 PBA moment easily.

6:42 PM: Cut to an exasperated Weber and a cool and calm Belmo. The facial expressions of these players just trying to make a good shot on this pattern is worth the price of admission, which is for me, free.

6:45 PM: Pedersen: "You can see the look of wear and tear on Norm Duke's face. That is what this tournament does do you." That, and for Norm, many nights of action bowling, tequila shots, and Malboro Reds.

6:47 PM: Uh-oh...bankruptcy liquidation sale at the DCU Center this weekend! Now that's what I call a Public Service Announcement.

6:48 PM: Back to Jones whiffing the head pin shooting 200. O'Neill needs only a mark...TRIP FOUR for the wheat!

6:49 PM: To lanes 23-24 and the Belmo-Duke match. When Belmo hits the pocket, you ever wonder how the hell pins stand. It is almost unreal.

6:51 PM: Belmo gets 9 on his fill; Duke needs all 3 to win the match by a stick. One down...

6:52 PM: Stubborn dime as the messenger fails to comply. Shows you how tough this tournament is: Duke shoots 204 and threw one questionable shot in the match and still lost.

6:54 PM: Ahhh, Randy "Big Unit" Johnson...no explanation needed I suppose. Glad to see the PBA trying to usher in an younger audience with a Just For Men commercial. Although seeing the 'stache of Keith Hernandez is epic.

6:56 PM: Clip of Tommy Hess' Masters win, excellent win for Hess coupled with all of the emotion during the victory celebration.

6:57 PM: Top 10: Duke, Jones, O'Neill, Belmo, Marcus Berndt, Shafer, Mika, Barnes, Danny Mac, and Brian Valenta. Two two handers in the top 10. Duke finishes off interview with Mike J. saying, "That's all you got?" God Bless the Duke! Hopefully, we'll do this again tomorrow night, folks!

Sports in General

2011-02-24T19:06:00.000-08:00

"Broken Wings"
by Thomas Scherrer

Perhaps Adam Wainwright holds more

to the future of Cardinals than

anyone...

For several weeks, I have tried to show a degree of patience and calmness surrounding the Albert Pujols contract negotiations with the St. Louis Cardinals; seeing both sides argument very clearly and vividly as to what the Red Birds' first base slugger value is to not just the team but to a city. When no contract extension was agreed to last week, I safely assumed that this would be the biggest running story all season long. In a recent era where star players are leaving the middle and small market sports franchises and elect to "take their talents" to bigger markets, the sporting world desperately opines for a true small-town hero. That hero to most fans now is Albert Pujols. He made a smart decision by looking for an early extension and if he didn't not get what he wanted, he burned off contract talks until the end of the 2011 baseball season. However, with all that being said, nothing much else was left to say or to be creative on the subject. Yet, I waited.

Waited some more....

Still waited...

A little bit longer...

Then on Wednesday, it fell into my lap, or laptop. What it was, quite literally was Adam Wainwright's elbow ligaments.

One catastrophic injury changes everything in baseball, doesn't it? Wainwright, 29, coming off consecutive stellar seasons after closing for the '06 Cardinals in their championship season, will now be spending his season in a prestigious, if not dubious university: Tommy John U. Safe to say, you don't ever want to be there...especially now that your best offensive player (and possibly best in baseball) is ready to test the waters of free agency in the winter.

Let the true madness begin. Wainwright's injury is, first and foremost, a damning injury to a solid Cardinal rotation, featuring co-Ace Chris Carpenter as well as the Dave Duncan Rejuvenation Rotation. Sabermaticians will further compound Wainwright's loss by extolling his win percentage, Wins Above Replacement, actual win total, and so on...but ignore that for a moment. Right now, nobody really cares about that if you bleed Cardinal Red. Wainwright's loss without question changes the course of the St. Louis Cardinals franchise, perhaps forever.

Without Wainwright, the Cardinals now have to seriously re-consider their 2011 season. If anything, the Cardinals know that Pujols will be looking to sign the most lucrative contract in the game's great history and if the Cards cannot match up to what Pujols is asking for, he could possibly leave for free agency and leave the Cardinals with a 37 year old Carpenter, a fully rehabbed, but uncertain future in Wainwright, young but unproven players in Colby Rasmus and John Jay, and an always uneasy late-inning bullpen. This begs a few questions to ponder:

Question 1: If the Cards see themselves as "all in" for 2011, how do they reload their team?

Too early to tell in Spring Training of course, but there have already been whispers about the services of Kevin Millwood and, yes, that Pedro Martinez to replace Wainwright. Obviously, replacing Wainwright at this stage of his career is impossible in February, so the Cards will look to tread water, hope that Pujols, Matt Holliday and Yadi Molina carry the load offensively, and that Rasmus and Jay can show more signs of consistency, plus see if Lance Berkman has something left in the tank. Those probable "ifs" lead to...

Question 2: If the Cards are in the postseason hunt, do they go for it all in a sign of telling Pujols, "we're in it to win this"?

The Cardinals track record in the last few years has dictated that they will, in fact, be in the hunt to try and make a championship run. Manger Tony LaRussa and Duncan have been a stable, consistent duo running the ballclub on the field, GM John Mozeliak has not been afraid to look for solid deals in July, plus there is the allure of playing in a baseball-friendly city such as St. Louis, where only one beat writer follows you around. Crowds are usually supportive and professional, smart and understanding of the game and will be in full support of its players. It is like playing in a baseball bubble as opposed to the vacuums of Boston, Philly, and New York. It makes sense that the allure, more than anything, will help the Cardinals snare a potential player come the deadline.

However, what happens if Question 1 does not work out? What if Carpenter, who has had his share of injuries in the past few seasons, goes out for a stretch? What if Berkman and Molina show their age and decline offensively and defensively? What if Kyle McClelland and Ryan Franklin fail to hold leads late in games? What if, they are just not equipped to contend? This leads to...

Question 3: If the Cardinals are out of the race, do they do the unspeakable and trade Pujols, mid-season???

You almost have to, don't you? Don't you? I'll toss a Hubie Brown-ism at you: Ok, say you're the Cardinals; we have lost Wainwright all season, Carpenter is not the same pitcher he once was, and our vets are struggling. Now, we have Pujols asking for $30 million a year but we cannot afford that and we are down this season. Pujols will not likely want to play for a .500 team...can we trade him for max value?

Ok, now back to being Thomas: I say you gotta do it. You hate to do it, but you have to do it. There is no way you cannot do something, knowing that Pujols can leave you and for nothing in return. You can compare it, almost hauntingly with the Cleveland Cavs and LeBron James. The city of Cleveland and LeBron were tied together, almost kinetically and spiritually. They put their faith in one man, an Akron native; blessed with skills beyond our wildest imagination. They loved him, adored him, worshiped every step, every dunk, every powder toss...then, in a blink of an eye, he "took his talents" to South Beach, left Cleveland fleeing, without even giving thanks to a city and a state that made him feel like a god.

If you are St. Louis, you and El Hombre are tied together by some metaphysical power. You have shared a decade of joy and for the most part, success. A 2006 World Series championship is in your collective bank account. It never leaves the city or the player...however, Pujols deserves his place as the game's highest paid player. Consistently outstanding numbers despite playing in a relatively fair ballpark, solid (and underrated) base running skills, Gold Glove caliber defense, and oh yeah, has never been linked to those drugs that enhance one's performance. What if the Cardinals see that they aren't going to make it this year and you have this valuable trade chip at your expense? After all, you are in a business. You need to make a sound decision for your future, with the impending notion that Pujols can leave you at season's end (see Anthony, Carmelo and Williams, Deron). So why not trade him for max value during his physical peak if the 2011 season is going to fall short? You'd be foolish not to.

Question 4: If the Cardinals have to do the unthinkable and trade Pujols, where??

This is harder than you'd guess. Chances are the Cards would want to trade Pujols to a team that a) has a great farm system with future prospects, b) in the playoff race and c) needs a middle of the order, power hitting first basemen. It is option c that is the trickiest part. Let's quickly run through 2010's playoff teams and their first basemen going into 2011:

Giants (Aubrey Huff)

Rangers (Mitch Moreland)

Yankees (Mark Texieria)

Phillies (Ryan Howard)

Rays (Dan Johnson/Ben Zobrist)

Reds (Joey Votto)

Twins (Justin Morneau)

Braves (Freddie Freeman/Martin Prado)

In the case of the Yanks, Phils, Reds, and Twins, they are staying put. However, if John Mozeliak called Brian Cashman and said that Pujols was available, he'd be an idiot if he hung up...to be fair, every team would at least have to listen, right? This is Albert Pujols!!! Anyway, the Braves, Rays, Giants, and Rangers have more to listen to and in the case of all of those teams, they have the farm system to pull off a blockbuster for a Pujols rental in 2011. However, the Giants signed Huff in the offseason and would be reluctant if the Cards started asking for someone of the Jonathon Sanchez/Andres Torres type. The Rays flat out would not do it unless they won the Florida lottery (even then, they might pocket that to refurbish the warehouse out in center field). This leaves the Rangers and the Braves. I mean Atlanta...Freddie Freeman? Come on...son, that is a no doubter. But would they do it? The Braves would only do that if they were one piece away from toppling the Phillies in the NL and, yes they have the pitching, but not the late inning relief or consistent 1-8. Now the Rangers...ahhh, a suitor. I know the Rangers like Mitch Moreland but again, this is Albert Pujols!!! Plus, the Rangers got denied by Cliff Lee in the 2010 Hot Stove but for the most part, they are the same team that lead the AL West before acquiring Lee, so it makes sense that they will be in contention this summer as well. Wouldn't a Pujols/Josh Hamilton 3-4 basically make a pitcher wanna take up substituting 10 year olds rather than trying to retire those two hitters? I'm glad we agree. Plus, Pujols in Arlington with that ballpark and that lineup...mercy. He'd be a 45-50 HR threat every season, plus the Rangers were willing to shell out big money for Lee, so why not Pujols? It does make sense.

But what if the Rangers are not in the hunt? What are other solutions? Of course, the big market teams are more logical answers but Boston is OK at first base with Adrian Gonzalez, the White Sox (and Kenny Williams) have made it clear they want no part of a $30 million a year player, the Cubs are a mess right now, the Dodgers are in the middle of a divorce, the Angels will more than likely try to sign Pujols than trade their future, and the Mets are not exactly financially sound right now and that was being generous. This leaves us with a middle market team in pursuit of a gamble, trying to get to the postseason. They need to have a solid foundation of young players available in the farm to not compromise their major league roster, they must also have some semblance of being one player away from being a legit contender for the 2011 season, even if its just a rent-Al. It also must have an appealing fan base that will come out and see a winner.

That leaves us with San Diego, Colorado and Toronto.

All beautiful cities where baseball is the secondary sport, solid farm teams, over .500 last year, and all are in need of a slugger to help bolster their clubs and possibly make a postseason run. For San Diego, it is more complex. They have the arms to win with but they play in an offensively challenged ballpark. If Pujols is to waive his no-trade, he'd rather play in a more forgiving stadium such as Coors Field or Rodgers Centre or possibly have a root canal with no Novocain. Toronto doesn't jive well either because you can win 90 games and finish third in the AL East, but Pujols playing in Canada with a very sneaky dangerous offense would be fun to watch. Colorado fits all the criteria with one exception: Todd Helton. Would the Rockies organization part ways with its greatest player for maybe, when it is all said and done one of the greatest players of all time? A difficult moral dilemma to say the very least in Denver, that is, unless you are a complete fool. This is Albert Pujols!!! Run through the middle of that lineup again in Coors Field: Gonzalez, Tulowitzki, and Ian Stewart with Albert Pujols tossed in the middle of it with Ubaldo Jimenez entering the prime of his pitching career in a winnable NL West. I say we have a winner.

Except...let's look to the North Side one more time. The Cubs have had the personnel for many years to win but have failed. It is not a stretch to think that they can't finally put it together and then add their arch rival's best player to end a 103 year hex/curse/plague. Simply put, a story of the 2011 season was going to be Albert Pujols no matter what. Adam Wainwright's elbow just made it the story.

Bowling Philosophy-January 2011

2011-01-20T17:14:00.000-08:00

PPBA Tour-Reconnecting with a Lost Friend

by Thomas Scherrer

"When you come swimming into view/and I'm hanging on your words like I always used to do."
-"The Background", Third Eye Blind

In some respects, this is an obsession. Like all obsessions, it is a gift as well a curse. A gift for giving you purpose and pleasure in a sometimes sick and cynical world; a curse for giving you the blind passion to follow it even to its inevitable death. These are the opening words to how I start chronicling the 2011 bowling calendar year-a mixed bag of emotions. Seemingly, bowling has given its hardcore fans the feeling of being an on again-off again lover: the emotions and the dirty talk in private is great and keeps you hooked, but they are also crazy and insane, whether it be your wandering or lying eyes or you keep waiting for it to mature and grow up or maybe you have had enough of the lies and the BS and the late nights out with no phone call. You're done...you say you're done...you tell your friend you are moving on....you have to get on with you life. Then suddenly, that same lover comes back with the following: they say they have cleaned themselves up, modified their expectations, stopped being jealous or crazy or just plain immature and are looking to settle down and they want you to be a part of it. They also start off with a bang: they show you their commitment with a key to their apartment or their car and they want you to trust them. The highs won't be as high, they claim but the lows won't be as low.

You are not done.

The Tournament of Champions is that key, the PBA is that lover, and the quarter-million dollar check to the winner is their "I've still got it" moment to show you that all is not lost. This high will be far greater and more rewarding. Glad I turned bowling into a Carrie Bradshaw column.

Come Saturday afternoon, a bowler's life will truly change when they hoist the PBA's marquee trophy and its largest payout to a winner ever and the main question that will be on the minds of everyone is whether or not this change in the lover is something you will see once a year or is it a once-in-a-lifetime moment? A flash in the pan? One more notch to look out and say Damn, there's gotta be something better out there. Truth be told, is there anything better? Can this year's Tournament of Champions truly save bowling's erratic and often maligned past from becoming an footnote to its obituary? Hard to tell. There are some facts that need to be presented about this week's epic major bowling event: a) There is a million dollar prize fund for the TOC; b) The winner will might make more money in one week than they have in their entire careers bowling and c) After this event, bowling will either go back to the same song and dance or make the turn towards respectability.

The PBA has made it clear by their motives (not necessarily by their words) that they have put all their eggs in a basket with the TOC and in some respects, you cannot blame them. The recent events of the TOC in the last few years has given PBA fans the truly good and grand that bowling has to offer: clutch bowling, dramatic comebacks, dramatic collapses, dramatic failures, glorious drama, and of course with Kelly Kulick-history. The hope is that all of the past TOC moments come to fruition with more money on the line plus the coverage of ABC returning to man the the televised finals after a 14 year hiatus, which makes for the casual fan to stand up and say Wow, maybe bowling is making a return for the better. Let's go take our kids out to the lanes tonight and have some fun. Again, hope and faith are only so strong of words. I have belief that this will work out, but how do I truly know? The truth is that we won't know until much further down the line whether this one week could save bowling. Too many insiders have already said the simple and obscene: They sold the soul of the TOC to make this happen. What they mean is having all types of PBA winners (pro, regional, senior, and women's series) be eligible to participate. My answer to that-as a passionate caretaker of the sport-is to say so what?? Let's not be so cynical and obtuse about all of this for a moment and just savor what we are going to see on Saturday afternoon in Las Vegas. We are going to see a bowler become a changed man for life. The lottery ticket the PBA hopes will pay off for many years to come. Believe in it. Trust in it. Have faith in it. If not for the PBA, then maybe for yourself.

Sports in General

2011-01-12T19:51:00.000-08:00

A HOFfman?
by Thomas Scherrer

I come before you a torn fan of baseball. I torn and tortured fan of a game I love so much. So much, that I still envision my life surrounding standing on a major league field and toeing the rubber against Albert Pujols or Alex Rodriguez or Derek Jeter, with the dream of striking out a Hall of Fame hitter on a nasty circle change or maybe getting him looking at a backdoor 12-to-6 breaking ball. I also envision stepping up to the plate trying to drive in a clutch two out hit against Roy Halliday, Tim Lincecum, or Josh Beckett (again, I would say all are Hall of Fame caliber, pending disaster). Perhaps 9th inning, down a run, runners on 2nd and 3rd with two out and I've got to find a way to scratch out a hit against Mariano Rivera, the future Hall of Fame closer and greatest closer of all time.

Notice that I didn't mention getting that huge hit in the 9th off of Trevor Hoffman.

And this is where I am torn. I sit here a fan of the great American game uncertain that in 5 years, will Trevor Hoffman be inducted into Cooperstown into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Why write about this? Two reasons: 1) In recent days, I watched the Baseball Writers Association of America induct Roberto Alomar (easily deserving) and Bert Blyleven (openly debatable, however I don't know why he wasn't in sooner) and not induct Mark McGwire (steroids or no steroids, you remember how great it was to watch the chase and so do those writers, who mostly made their careers off of the Summer of '98, so they are hypocrites), Rafael Palmiero (ditto double-standard), and Jeff Bagwell (an atrocity of the highest regard considering everything I just mentioned by writers for their justification of keeping the previous players mentioned out of the Hall of Fame) despite their prolific, if not tainted numbers given the era they played in. I am in a state of complete confusion by the men who vote for Baseball Hall of Fame in that they seem to be claiming their supremacy as caretakers of the game of baseball, yet look the other way while moral debates are at place for the candidacy of each Hall of Fame player (yes, I mentioned each and every one of them), and 2) my girlfriend heard Trevor Hoffman's retirement and the subsequent Hall of Fame chatter for Hoffman, and heard my subtle groan and said, "I wanna see what have to say about it". Green light and go.

First of all, I want to say this about Trevor Hoffman. In an era where players are suspiciously and morally corrupt, Hoffman has maintained a distinguished career, filled with class, humility, and respect from his fellow peers and yes, baseball writers. His numbers truly speak for themselves and in baseball, tangible statistics help us distinguish the elite players more so than any other team sport. These are the simple facts when it comes to Hoffman's career:

Of all closer with 350+ saves, Hoffman trails only Rivera in save % (89% to 88.8%).
His career WHIP and K/9 inn. is better than that of the previous career saves leader, Lee Smith (Hoffman: 9.4 K/9 inn, 1.07 WHIP; Smith: 8.7 K/9 inn, 1.27 WHIP).
Of course his career saves (601).
40 Save Seasons: 9, including two separate 40+ save seasons for 4 consecutive years.
Three-year peak (1998-2000): 70.2 innings, 45.3 saves, 0.93 WHIP, 2.21 ERA

All of those tangible numbers reflect Hoffman's career for longevity and certain enshrinement into Cooperstown in 5 years. However, I am here to say stop it, stop this right now folks. If you think for one moment that these numbers translate into a first ballot Hall of Fame baseball player, especially in this era, then I really have no idea what to make of supposedly, the greatest Hall of Fame in sports.

I'll qualify this first and foremost by saying that I am a real hard grader for who a Hall of Fame player should be. Anyone who read my Chris Barnes article (April 2010) as to whether or not Barnes was first ballot HOF worthy got some praise and some criticism, most privately from someone who I trust in bowling circles, who read it and said to me, "If you think Barnes isn't a first ballot Hall of Famer, you need to either open your eyes or stop bowling". In related news, this comment was not made to me by a left handed bowler (Quick Note: Barnes has openly and nationally on television spewed vitriol toward southpaws with stupid comments such as, "...3 pins left on the lane every shot". And no, that did not at all help push myself away from Barnes being a first ballot Hall of Fame bowler-I try to stick to facts, thank you). Digressing back to Hoffman, it is clear that numbers suggest he is a Hall of Fame player. Now I ask you the most important intangible questions surrounding Hoffman's baseball career:

Intangible #1: Postseason career. In 1998, we look no further to our argument. The Padres were going up against the 114-win Yankees in the World Series and there was some logical debate as to who was the better closer, Rivera or Hoffman? We forget that Rivera wore goat horns in the '97 Divisional Series against Cleveland and that Hoffman was coming off a 53-save season and was a legitimate shut-down force late in games. However, look back at Hoffman's 1996 Postseason for some extra background info. Two appearances, no saves, one loss, 1.2 innings pitched, 10.80 ERA. Now let's flash forward to the '98 Series...yes, Game 3...yes, Scott Brosius
Intangible #2: Dominance. Certainly, any comparison to Rivera is rather dumb considering that you can make the argument that Rivera might be the greatest pitcher of this generation (yes, you can excuse me while I go run across the Mass Pike in my Mets apparel), closer or starter but was Hoffman even the best closer in his own league??? Billy Wagner's stats don't nearly compare in terms of saves-601 to 422 in favor of Hoffman-but Wagner's ability to totally humiliate hitters was evident in his K/9 inn (11.88), WHIP (1.00), and ERA (2.31) in relation to Hoffman (9.4, 1.06, and 2.87, respectively). This isn't lefty bias as well for Wagner, his postseason numbers are equally horrific or worse (1-1, 3 saves, 1.97 WHIP, and 10.03 ERA). Is that Hall of Fame worthy for Daddy Wags? No, and I still feel that Wagner at his peak was better and more dominant than Hoffman was.
Intangible #3: Star Factor: I remember this topic coming up when Mike Mussina finally notched his 20 win season and in his final season, to bring his win total to 270 which is 33rd best in MLB history. Was Moose a Hall of Famer? Well, he could be but my gosh, I don't ever remember turning on the television and saying I've gotta turn on the Orioles/Yankees game, Mussina is pitching. I said it for Pedro, Schlling, Beckett, Clemens, and they'll be Hall of Famers (Clemens should be, and I just ducked the avalanche in Worcester) . I'm saying it currently for Halliday, Cliff Lee, Lincecum, Hernandez, Johan, and Lester. I also tune in to see Rivera and Papelbon and Brian Wilson close games out. I didn't keep the TV on to see Mussina pitch or Jamie Moyer or to see John Franco close games, but I have a dirty secret: I did stop to see Hoffman close a game...which for some reason was a big game and a big blown save was sure to follow.
Intangible #4: Roided Up. This goes back to the NYT list and the 100+ players on that list. Until I know who is actually on that list (and now with leaks, it should be everyone-either no one or everyone so you might as well let the whole list out and let everyone decide the player's merit), how can I truly be objective when it comes to any ballplayer? If I had a vote for the Baseball Hall of Fame-don't worry, I still have time to get one-I couldn't decide how to fairly judge a ballplayer. That kills me. Best and most personal case for me is Mike Piazza. His stats as a catcher in this or any generation are truly remarkable. From an offensive standpoint, he is the greatest catcher ever, a truly exciting player to watch and see, had tremendously clutch moments (not as many though as most would want), and was a guy I'd watch play every night. But...his numbers came in the Age of Enlarged Heads, he had some freaky injuries during his career, and again...we just don't know if Piazza was clean. I can hope that he is as his body did fail him into his late 30's and he was not the same force. As for Hoffman, again I don't know for sure. He pitched in a high stress position for over a decade with little or no drop-off, pitching effectively well into his 40's and maintaining his velocity for a majority of it. Eyebrows raised? Question marks? You hate to say yes, but everyone who played in this era is judged to be guilty until proven innocent.
Intangible #5: The Question. I was always told when it came to whether or not a player was Hall of Fame bound, the question was always put as Do you have to think about it? It makes perfect sense in reality. This IS the Baseball Hall of Fame, right? The elite of the elite Hall of Fame? Anyone who you have to question certainly isn't Hall of Fame worthy. And that is where the beginning of my article was going. I am torn. Therefore, if I am torn then I am certainly not voting a person in. Suppose I ignore the steroid issue totally and I take every player in today's game and said who is a Hall of Famer, without thinking at all, I'd say Pujols, Jeter, A-Rod, Manny (suspect I know, but the most dangerous right handed hitter I've ever seen), Rivera, Beckett, Halliday, Ichiro, Thome and that is about it. Players like Andy, Wagner, Ortiz, Helton, Moyer, Chipper, Johan, Berkman, Texieria, Posada, and Damon you have to think about and Miggy Cabrera, Hamilton, Lee, Sabbathia, Howard, Mauer, Lincecum, Hernandez, Wright, and Cano are a few of the players that are too young to consider at this point. The point is that there are a lot of players that if their careers ended today, you'd have to debate on whether or not they'd be HOFers and that to me is not good enough.

Does all of this mean that Trevor Hoffman isn't worthy of HOF consideration? Of course it isn't. Chances are that in 5 years, when the debate reaches its full apex, Hoffman will be voted in to the elite of the elite. Jayson Stark thinks so, Buster Olney thinks so, Tim Kurkjian thinks so, but I don't think so. I don't have a vote and they do. Maybe that is a good thing for the time being.

Bowling Philosophy-October 2010

2010-10-21T12:49:00.000-07:00

"The Czar Rules: Article II"

by Thomas Scherrer

In the past few weeks, the PBA has a) filled up its WSOB roster and b) made a highly asinine Dick Weber Playoffs. So glad to see that they took some of my advice about what I felt should be a reasonable PBA Playoff system back in July.

OK, so they actually didn't use anything I had suggested and I literally came up with something in the course of a week while doing other things like practicing, working, and making dinners while the future Dr. Peloquin was working 10 hour shifts at the pharmacy. Unlike PBA bigwigs who pretty much had all summer to come up with something worth watching at the end of the year to determine a more valid, clear, and concise PBA Player of the Year and they came up with something that appeared as if one of Parker Bohn III's kids came up with while drawing in the nursery. Actually, knowing the Bohn kids, they could have come up with something about a thousand percent better than the PBA came up with. It draws two serious red flags for me in a truly arcane-looking 2010-11 PBA season.

Red Flag #1: The tour season has over 20 telecasts on ESPN programming, but only 11 events. Wasn't this version of the PBA Tour supposed to offer more tournaments and better, more consistent prize funds? They are throwing more into the major telecasts which is a great sign of things to come, but are they totally mailing in the rest of the season? This is as big a stamp-licking, 41 cent, LeBron James in Cleveland mail in season as you will ever see in professional sports. It has got me outright worried that the PBA execs hope that they generate enough dramatic coverage with the majors that casual and hardcore fans alike will be crazy for more bowling. It is possible, but risky in a time where bowling must be cautious about risk.

Red Flag #2: Does the PBA even care about attempting to identify the best player in the sport as opposed to exposing all of its talent at once and hoping someone "gets over"? I know on the surface, this doesn't sound all too bad, however bowling truly needs a legitimate top dog. Right now, that parity of talent in bowling is truly alarming because we aren't sure if any player can handle the torch of professional bowling for the next decade. It could be Bill O'Neill, it could be Rhino Page, it could be Jason Belmonte, or Sean Rash, or Mike Fagan, or someone yet to come along. The truth is that I could not say will...I said could and could only. Again, with little safety net, that is a dangerous situation to be in.
The other hope perhaps is that with all the exposure of its players, someone comes along and draws heat for the sport. Someone who fans do not like or dislike strongly, almost acting in pro wrestling terms, "turning heel" on the crowd. Most fans have their favorite and their least favorite players and they hope that fewer telecasts featuring more players could offer more polarizing, differentiating views by fans. It has a shot to work, but the PBA will need someone on the lanes become that.

Back to the Czar rules and Article II for the month of October. Ah, October...leaves browning and falling, cool weather, windy, apple picking, pumpkin carving, wood chopping, and every kids favorite holiday: Halloween. Everyone dressing up in ghastly or provocative clothing, basically showing off their ego/superego/Id side for one night. Doing makeup, adding appendages, removing articles of clothing that on pretty much every night except Halloween could land you a night in your local jail for indecency, Halloween is a rule-breaking night in terms of dress codes...

Article II: Establishing a Dress Code
...Don't worry, so is bowling, and that, my friends is what they call CLOSURE. On a scale of 1 to 10 for importance in dress codes in bowling should rank out to be 783. This is depressing to see, and should be altered.

The Disease: For two years, I was a bowling center supervisor before my "sabbatical" and I was anywhere from appalled to Tyson Zone appalled at how people dressed for a league: sweats, cut off shirts, tanks/wife-beaters, backwards hats, stained t-shirts...translation: sloppy, goodness gracious, make the madness stop! Look, I totally understand the need for bowling in comfortable clothing and perhaps some people have a lucky bowling shirt they like to wear while pitching the pebble. I get that and respect that-hey, we are all creatures of habit, some of us even have routines or superstitions. Hell, Ryan Shafer has a thousand superstitions on tour. He wears his clothes in a certain order, he only picks up the bowling ball with his left hand (I highly advise picking a ball up with both hands for safety purposes but I won't be making a Czar Rule for that so let's just move on), and only uses bowling balls with either a 5 or an 8 in the serial number.

However, Mr. Shafer is a 4 time PBA champion, a millionaire, shot a 300 on TV, 1987 Rookie of the Year, and the 2008-09 Steve Nagy Sportsmanship winner....oh, he also dresses nice!!! Whew...yes, I know he is a pro but we all should seek to amend our wardrobe while we bowl.

The Solution: a reasonable dress code first and foremost for all league bowlers. For men, it should be a collared shirt and a nice pair of jeans at worst and for women, a nice shirt and slacks or pants. I am not advocating for everyone to come walking into their local bowling alley dressing up like Brian Voss in $400 pants, just show some pride in the sport you are actively participating in. If you think I am being an uptight pantywaist on this (for which I thank you, I'll be dressed up each time I bowl competitively), I make the reference to playing 9 holes on a municipal golf course as opposed to mini-golfing. The muni course will make you wear a polo shirt or crew neck shirt and pants, relaxing a bit on the type of pants or shorts. Mini-golf is easily more liberal, so much so that now you see people trying to put the golf ball into the windmill wearing flip-flops. Those wouldn't even be acceptable if you were playing every shot out a bunker at the muni course. And let's be honest, how could anyone chip out of the sand wearing rubber thongs on their feet? We've all been to the beach, you know how hard it is to walk in the sand with no ankle support. You either buck up and go barefoot despite the searing heat of the sand, or you bring sneakers for more traction. No more sprained ankles for me on sand, thank you.

If bowling is to seek acceptance more culturally, try to appease not to the lowest common denominator but to the greatest common factor. That factor being having people of good manners, good taste, and proper attire, along with a biding respect for the game. I am not asking for opera attire or what you'd wear to your quarterly meeting, but to be more appreciative of bowling and to give it some decency. It feels like a no doubt change to me. One more note of interest: for some reason, bad clothing or people walking into a bowling center looking like slobs further enhances the notion that bowling is primal or guttural or devoid of class. The czar has spoken for this rule...people, dress more appropriately!

Sports in General

2010-10-02T04:56:00.000-07:00

New York Minute
by Thomas Scherrer

It's a shame to some extent that we cannot look inside ourselves and see just how fickle we are as sports fans. We want our teams to be everything good-successful, classy, respectful, and professional-and not have any warts to show the sporting world. However, no organizations are perfect, no man unblemished. No companies without the proverbial skeleton in the closet...they just are present; it is all a matter of how pronounced things are. When you work, live, and play in the city of New York however, the slightest of pimples can turn into Mount Everest. Sadly, hammers come down fast, newspapers run to sensationalism, and in the cutthroat world of high society, he who finds it first wins.

On Friday, a "source" unofficially officially ended the Jerry Manuel-Omar Minaya era for the New York Mets, and this goes without stating the obvious, but it was an era that many thought would not last much longer than this season when the 2010 MLB season started. This "source" was SI.com/SNY/WFAN baseball insider, Jon Heyman, a man who usually gets his stories right on target. Not always 100% accurate, but again, to err is to be human. This "report" was a "done deal" that Manuel and Minaya will not be retained in their current roles following the conclusion of this weekend's season finale in New York.

Not surprisingly, Heyman's "report" was piled on by the copious and carnivorous New York media saying that it was a done deal that both men would be gone after this season. First of all, the mere fact that Heyman's "source" is anonymous says all you need to know about: someone within the organization has a motive. Secondly, the mere fact that there are still 3 games left in this Met season and that there are two men whose jobs are not twisting in the wind, but livelihoods. At the genesis of Manuel's presser Friday afternoon, he reiterated that he was not given any indication of his future and that for now he is the manager. The same can probably be said for Minaya. Finally, media's enjoyment with all this. I am a native New Yorker, through and through. I now live in New England where the sensationalism is equally as high and I just cannot stand this anymore.

I consider myself a media type person: I have two blogs, a radio show that I volunteer for, I read a ton of information about all things. I like to be in the know of course. When you are not on the cutting edge, you are falling behind-hence the media's pile on approach after Heyman's story came out. You stay classy....New York Media. Editors, talking heads, tired acts like Joe Benigno speaking irrationally to a large, intense, and perceived smart fanbase. New York fans are street smart fans: they can smell a fake from a bridge away and that what they know best.

The whole circus is in town and the ringmaster (in this case Heyman) can be anyone in the media...the clowns (other members of the media) then come in from inside their Volkswagen and treat the ringmaster like his word is gospel and search to find more ways to pile on to the story. Instead of possibly holding judgement until after the season ended or maybe writing some as logical as Wait, this is unfair to Manuel and Minaya, they still have a job to do this season. Let's wait until after the season ends to speculate.

I do have an answer for this: anyone who risked writing that risks being unread or worse, laughed at. Anyone who read it wouldn't care. The Mets were another big market, overpaid disappointment this season, finishing under .500 again. Let's not ignore some facts: this was another injury-riddled season but there are no excuses for that most would argue. Fine. How about this fact? Jerry Manuel is a classy professional who handled adversity well but also handled said New York media very well. Another fact: when Manuel had a healthy team, which was for about 80 games in 2008 (before Billy Wagner's elbow turned into confetti), they played about 20 games over .500, so I don't get exactly where fans think Manuel is a bad manager. He won a division title in Chicago, was a former Manager of the Year, would have likely been one in 2008 had the Mets made it into postseason play. All of that though, doesn't matter to fans or media a like: the manager is a bum-get him out of town.

Could not be farther from the truth. Manuel has handled every grenade about as well as you can in New York, with one exception: winning enough. That is all it comes down to in this city is winning and winning big. Maybe fans don't care how you win anymore just as long as the ends justify the means. You don't win...we'll go find someone else.

As for Minaya, well perhaps this was coming as well. Overpaying for underperformed players, unable to solve staying away from guys with injuries, failing to sound competent throughout the whole Tony Bernazard fiasco last year...plus the lack of winning as well. However, another classy baseball man with a family, just like Manuel. Sadly, both of them are heading for the same bridge in New York. All sport fans know this bridge, call it the Unfinished Bridge.

The Unfinished Bridge always seems to look good, well built, functioning, and operating well. However, the bridge when you come to its end is unfinished, either by indifference, being torn town, or perhaps just never being committed to being finished. As mangers, coaches, and general managers drive along to the end of this bridge, they may or may not sense the bridge isn't completed and hit the brakes. Only the last part of the bridge is greased up, making the car skid out of control, spinning off to its unfinished end, and the driver and any passengers (family) suffer the end-the nadir of the Unfinished Bridge.

Most fans know that bridge exists, however nobody in the media wants to explain it. Why? Because it is an easy, easy, EASY mark for the media to help push the car further along to the end or in some cases, sabotage the brakes or even help tear the bridge down even more to help expedite the process. Nobody want to openly defend or support the Lame Ducks. Doing so is unimaginative or weak. It's easy to give someone the boot out than it is to give them you hand to be held up. Takes less effort, of course. That is why I felt compelled to talk about this...

Do I think that Manuel and Minaya deserve to keep their current roles in the Met organization? Of this, I am uncertain. I see how hard the Mets keep on playing at the end of this season, not giving in or going through the motions of a lost season. There is some promise on the horizon in the years to come with Ike Davis, Josh Thole, and some other young players who have played for just one major league manager in their tenure. I can see why letting of go of Jerry Manuel is the right decision. As a fan, you cannot be happy with losing. You can choose to be neutral and objective, but we aren't. Same goes for Minaya: 6 years, one playoff appearance, one historic collapse, one mini-collapse, and numerous questionable organization decisions but we forget that before Minaya arrived, the organization was rudderless: anyone forget the Howe/Duquette "we battled..." era...anyone? What, burned out of your brains? Thought so. So just remember what Minaya first made you feel like-we have a chance. You still might with him as your GM but again, understandable to see why he should not return.

Credit goes to maybe the best broadcast team in America: SNY's Gary Cohen, Ron Darling, and Keith Hernandez. Cohen addressed the issue on-air most of the same things I brought up and some more. They are great to listen to because I feel like they bring a true sense of clear and present objectivity. In Cohen's case, he was "puzzled" as to why this story was leaked. Darling called it "heinous" and questioned SNY and other network's coverage of lack of "personalizing" both Manuel and Minaya. Hernandez used "sensationalism" and said that it was created to buy papers and tune into talk radio, but Hernandez said that nothing has changed. Totally rational. And so was this line, which only was reported on the telecast. When a reporter asked Manuel what he would say to the next manager (which was probably the lowest shot you can take as a media member) to help him with the team to which Manuel said, "What are you doing here? This team is MY team" as Darling said over the telecast. May not exactly have been 100% accurate, but a great line by Manual. This is still his team until someone else tells him. Last night, Josh Thole won a ballgame for Jerry Manuel's team. Will he ever do it again is still a question that appears to already been answered.

Thomas Scherrer is a blogger who on occasion, makes sense. His regularly featured blog, "Bowling Philosophy" is available on the archive section on leftyism.blogspot.com.

Bowling Philosophy-September 2010

2010-09-09T06:11:00.000-07:00

"The Czar Rules: Introduction and Article I"

by Thomas Scherrer

Preface
To all bowling executives: I am here to help bowling, not kill it. Not crush it nor deface the integrity of it. I am simply here to help both the sport and the business. I'd be a fool not acknowledge the business side of it, and I'd be totally discredited if I didn't try to help the sporting side of it. I am here to help all...now with that being said, you guys are killing me-absolutely killing me. Or should I say us, my fellow readers, expanding now to 12 countries (Guten Tag or Bonjour...Luxembourg!), and desperate for some attention and respect when it comes to bowling. We are going to 'suppose' something for this essay and make some rational and possibly irrational changes to bowling that will help all parties involved.

By the way...did you know that the country of Luxembourg is the only country in the world to still have a constitutional monarch, ruled by a Grand Duchy? It also has the highest Gross Domestic Product per capita not just in Europe, not just the Western Hemisphere, but planet Earth. I think there is symmetry here, but I digress...

Introduction
Suppose the Powers That Be in bowling decide to take a sabbatical and let me take charge of all bowling decisions. Full power of authority to make any changes I want to bowling with one simple condition: whatever changes I make stay with me until my term ends as Czar of Bowling (I woulda gone with Grand Duchy of Bowling but of course, people would laugh at that-Czar is fine). In the end, I have to be very, very careful with what changes I would make because yes, bowlers are a sensitive and at times cynical breed and this is with good reason: the bowling world has been treated at low-brow, low-rent, slapstick comedy for the masses, with a movie like "Kingpin" depicting us as out-of-shape, non-athletic, fried fish and chips, beer drinking human beings who bring down the culture of sports. The recreational side has been marginalized, taken for granted as being a consistent means of revenue with little to no track record to prove that, yet insiders think they can take a family of 4 for close to 60 dollars for a night of Cosmic/Xtreme/Glow bowling and not have it do any long-term damage, in particular in this society. The sport side has been dwarfed by golf, tennis, bass fishing, and auto racing; the recreational side has been taken for a cheap ride with little or no redeeming values. ENOUGH!!! You all deserve better...you need better...you will get better...you have a leader who believes!!!

(Trying to relax...calming down...Namaste, Thomas.)

OK, we're good. Let's get down to the basics of what I am trying to push for. Simply stated, I am trying to improve the quality of bowling for both the sport and business as well. Most of these changes are to benefit the lesser indivduals, not merely professionals. You have to start change from smaller villages to rebuild a nation, no? I am looking towards youths, families, and league bowlers in particular. Advance our way to amateur and college bowlers, then finally push some professional changes. I am pretty certain not all of my ideas or reforms will be universally be accepted, in fact, I encourage people to not like what I am writing. Yes, I want some dissenting opinion about what I am striving for. I'm a Czar, remember? I can have you sent to the gallows if I really think you are questioning my tactics.

Naturally, I would advocate 10 ideas of concepts under my reign that will have you look at bowling in more respectable terms. Along the way, we'll look to make some money because, after all, this is a business. However, we are going to start off with a bang and blow your bowling doors off. Center GM's and Proprietors: I unleash bowling hell!

Article I, section A: Kids Bowl Free...Period.

The Disease: In honor of my online writing idol, Bill Simmons: The Sports Guy, let's do a Hubie Brown imitation.

OK, you're a bowling center manager or owner, your early afternoons during the fall are pretty much dead. You are competing with activities such as football, soccer, and cross country in school. You also have this "underlying myth" that bowling is too expensive for kids to start up. What do ya do?

The remedy: Have kids bowl for free not just in the summer, but how about all year round? Here's a simple checklist of requirements:

Ages 4-12 (Managers: if you dare charge kids under the age of 4 anyway, you are sinister and have little or no soul)
Hold a B average for your grades in school
Like to try bowling or want to try bowling

The Kids Bowl Free program that started in the summer of 2009 was wildly received by people and could only be considered a total success: kids got to bowl two free games each day during the summer and only had to pay for their shoes rentals (in the 3-4 dollar range) and food. Trust me, kids burn a TON of energy and will be hungry and they were. If we make this a year-round concept (same theory applies: kids bowl two free games each day during the afternoon hours when there are no leagues going on), bowling centers keep the goodwill going year-round, perhaps score some extra birthday parties, perhaps even discover some future youth bowlers and help expand your youth leagues. Who knows? You might find the next great young talent in your bowling alley and his cost of bowling games was exactly ZERO. Parents will win because their children are participating in a far less physical sport, such as football. Of course, Pop Warner football is nowhere near the violence of the NFL, but the possibility of freak injuries still exist at and level. Parents also win because you defray the cost of a sport, which we can all afford in this economy. Kids win because they are in a sport that, for the most part is easy to learn (much harder to master, but I'm the Czar of Bowling-I'll cover that in the future) and there are little to no weather issues that creep up. Finally, bowling in general win because their participation grows, number of games go up, and one would think with good promotion within, junior membership rises or at least levels out instead of continually dropping.

Article I, section B: Kids in the free bowling program rent shoes for $1.

Please, enough of this overcharging of kids shoe rentals. A dollar will do: now they are only spending one buck to learn how to bowl. Part of me would like to think Johnny Petraglia only laid down a few bills in his young days in Staten Island to work on his game and become a Hall of Famer, so why can't we go back in time and try to do the same? Chances are, parents will walk into the center's pro shop and fork over the $30 needed to buy their child their own bowling shoes. Now kids are really bowling for free! I love it, don't you? If you don't having their own shoes means probably their own bowling ball, then their own bowling bag. Your pro shop will love the extra business. It is also more likely to get kids bowling in leagues when they are well prepared and don't have to wear ill-fitting shoes or throw an ill-fitting ball. Once one kid joins up, they might be able to convince their friends to join them in a junior league. The vision of Saturday mornings returning to 30 lanes with 4 junior leagues rolling, including youth coordinators helping out, brings us all back to a better day in bowling. Full bowling centers all morning, and with the night bowling with all of its bells and whistles guarantees you an easy 5 digit day in revenue for about 40 of the 52 weeks.

Article I, section C: A dollar menu for kids in the program as well.

I am probably killing center managers for all of these changes but, damn it, why not? A dollar for shoes as well as small fries, small soda, slice of pizza, small popcorn, and any other reasonable deal from the snackbar. Fast food joints have dollar menu value meals, and they poison human beings, almost literally. Bowling alley food is not exactly going organic but you figure kids will burn it off and at a reduced rate. A bowling center probably won't lose much profit, in fact, you get your produce out of your center so you make something off your purchase order. In an unrelated, yet important idea, I suggest center managers invest in looking more at your local 10 day forecast. If you know there is rain forecasted for 2 days next week, you could order up on food, forecasting a higher volume of people during the summer. I would also bet that your snackbar associates wouldn't mind the extra business and therefore, extra hours. Nothing like a 16 year old having extra cash to blow at the mall for shoes, jewelry, fake tans, and Patron shots. OK maybe not the last one but I'm a man of the commoner...

Why it works? Every reason I just proposed along with the renewed sense that your bowling alley is the place to be in town. Of course, the main attraction is a center manager would have to promote the hell out of what their place brings.

Why won't it work? Three dirty, little letters: RPG, or Revenue Per Game. In the bowling industry, RPG is what currently drives bowling to the heights of unreasonable spending limits of a modern family. We need an example...

Suppose there was no such thing as Kids Bowl Free and a family of 4-2 kids, 2 adults-decide to bowl 2 games on a Tuesday afternoon in October. Shoes are $3.25 per child, $4 for adults, and games are $4 per person/game:

2x $3.25=$6.50
2x $4.00=$8.00
8x $4.00=$32.00

Total is $46.50 which when you divide it by the 8 games bowled comes out to an RPG of 5.81.

Now let's take the same family with both kids in the KBF program and look at the numbers:

2x $1.00=$2.00
2x $4.00=$8.00
4 free games=$0
4x $4.00=$16.00

Total is now $28.00 and when you divide the 8 games bowled comes out to an RPG of 3.50.

First of all, you notice the over $2 difference in RPG, but the second thing you see is that second scenario has the family of 4 is bowling for a 40% reduced rate. How often or where in American society nowadays can you say that you get that type of a deal for a family activity? The answer is NEVER!!! Plus, you now factor in that with almost 20 dollars saved up, the family can get a full taste of the bowling center. Snackbar, arcade, pro shop, you name it. Buying a pizza at $12 bucks for that second family brings the total up to $40 and turns the RPG to a 5.00, which makes managers smile more. Maybe a family decides bowling is something they can all enjoy and enroll themselves in an adult/junior league or maybe decide it is worth coming to bowl 2 days a week instead of one. Now you've really won a chance to establish two things: customer service and familiarity. Another added benefit is most bowling alleys offer birthday parties or corporate events. If you happen to bowl in any leagues, there is a possible discount in the works for yourself of your child's party.

As Czar of bowling, I would quickly erase RPG from the bowling lexicon and replace it with LUPH, or Lanes Used Per Hour. This shows a greater reflection of how busy your bowling center is during all times of a day. Volume and Value ultimately over Revenue and Regeneration of new bowlers.

Overall, a major success if used right, possibly the KBF program spawns one great bowler each year; suddenly, each local bowling center has a rising new star to carry a bowling center's value going forward.

The Czar has spoken! Au Revoir or Auf Wiedersehen...Luxembourg.

Pour ceux-la avec un amour et une connaissance pour le bowling...this Joue aux boules Philsophie. Namaste.

Fur die mit einer Liebe und Kenntnis fur Keglen...this Keglet Philosophie. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-September 2010

2010-09-04T17:25:00.000-07:00

by Thomas Scherrer

"It's a Numbers Game"

Before I begin, I have to say that it took me quite awhile to log on to my blog for some security/account reasons but after some quick long term memory recovery, we are back on track, continuing to spread the word of bowling. Apparently, the word is being spread now...globally. My blog site has updated a "stats" link and I am amazed that in the recent summer month of August, 80 hits were generated on my page, including 10 countries such as China, Russia, Canada, Albania, Latvia, and Vietnam...wow! I am big in the Eastern Bloc, thank you...thank you! Because of all that blog love or perhaps a case where some 16 year-old living in Riga was looking up the White Wagtail's mating habits and accidentally found my site, well...sometimes luck is where opportunity meets preparation. And...it fuels me to continue, so in the words of Karlis Ulmanis: let's talk par boulingu!

Speaking of stats, let's talk about them. Let's observe them. Let's discuss them. Let's destroy them.

Go back in time with me to 2006. I am out of William Paterson, back home, bowling in Long Island in my first full fledged adult league. Monday nights at AMF Sheridan Lanes, the Charlie Cap Classic. I was teaming up with local bowling stud Norm Ginsberg along with buddies of mine from high school and college bowling past, Mike Boble and Billy Shannon. As we are waiting to have our league meeting, which as you all know who bowl in high level leagues, have a bunch of good ole BS-ing about handicaps, prize funds, league secretaries, and so on, I overhear an idle conversation between two bowlers talking about their season's goals. One of these two players, a fairly decent player but no one you'd write an article about (OK, someone would-you're reading it) said that he would "want to average 230 or so".

It was almost at that moment that I was taken aback. Not by the number this player suggested he could average but that it was the first thing that came to his mind about a season. Answers more acceptable would have been "trying to add a straight game" or "work hard on spare shooting" or the more obvious answer to team bowling: "win the league championship".

First of all, what does a high average mean, anymore? This is not 1985 where average was a true barometer of a player's skill. We bowl in a much different world now than 25 years ago: we have super-advanced equipment, super-walled lane conditions, and super-sophisticated pro shop drillers that can punch a ball to make a player a little bit better. There is nothing wrong with this at all-in fact, it is the way the evolution of bowling should be. Players a quarter century later should be better than those that preceded them. But using average as a barometer to see who is better is borderline useless bordering on completely useless.

Secondly, how inherently selfish are we as bowlers to think that our statistics matter more so over how a team performs? Did we lose this somewhere along the way with the rise of the PBA and the decline of elite team bowling? One player alone doesn't win a league, but all 3, 4, or 5 players do. You win championships with unselfish, team-first players like Marc D'Errico and Clay Herrbach and Adrienne Miller on your teams (solid players, not their team's best player but capable of carrying them for stretches). You lose championships and teams with me-first, politically charged divas, and egotistical freaks who care only about their averages and their coveted "anchor" position (insert any player in the past two decades where their best player received lots of attention and hype, yet produced nothing amounting to a title).

I do not begrudge averages at all but seriously people? Averages are pretty much insignificant in today's game. Let's observer carefully why this is fact. First off, anyone who is reasonably good averages 200 if they give a crap. You have all the built-in advantages of technology at your disposal, with the ultimate cog being that house shots are literal magnets towards striking. Secondly, the mere fact that guys don't give a crap about averaging 200, yet still win leagues because they can be "lousy" for 4 months, then all of a sudden, get hot the last 8 weeks when it is money time, and their averages do not take a significant spike up (translation: sandbaggers) due to all the games bowled. Finally, there are so few classic leagues anymore. What I mean by "classic" is the taboo word in league bowling today: scratch. No one's average is worth a damn bit of good on leagues where handicap is 80% difference of 220, 230, 240, or in some leagues 250! It means little because the lower average players have a built-in advantage against the higher average, elite players by having at times, a 50 pin head start before a ball is thrown for score. Again, averages given this matrix are pretty much, irrelevant.

But they are moderately useful if you do have scratch bowling leagues, where numbers mean the simplest equation: win or lose. You still have to overcome the white elephant of a house shot on some leagues but there is some equity in averages in league where the handicap is zero for everyone. The other solution is to make tougher, flatter lane conditions, such as Sport Shot leagues or PBA Experience leagues. It actually makes averages very important and also very unimportant. Think critically for a moment: your average on Sport Condition bowling is going to take a dip, usually a big one. Suddenly, your average isn't as important as just trying to outbowl the other players. However, the other things that make a bowler good or are supposed to matter...matter once again. On the plus side of things, those with higher averages are clearly better players and we know this for a fact: no blocked conditions, no handicap interfering. We have rediscovered our identity. If you have both challenging lanes and no handicap, you have yourself the best of both worlds.

You also have the chance to change how we look at the game.

For so long, we have only used a person's average as a sign as to how good they are but we have the ability to look so much further into a player's game to find out how good they are. For example, we'll take the PBA Xperience Classic at AMF Auburn I bowled in the 2009-10 season for some documentation. The league average for the 12 bowlers bowling was a respectable 186.70. Twenty-eight weeks, the 5 animal patters, and two weeks each of the World Championship, Masters, US Open, and 50 foot TOC and we had some pretty solid numbers. First of all, 12 players is a small sample and understandably so, but I have little else to go off of at this point. The high average belonged to Chris Monroy at a fine 210.90. In fact, if you take the recent summer Xperience Classic, only two players averaged over 200 for both sessions and the other person is currently busy writing a blog, or something like that.

This is where we start peeling off the layers on how we can judge a bowler. A simple statistic to look at is how well did Monroy bowl in relation to the field (the other bowlers in the league) and we'll call it Average Differential. Before I continue, this stat has been around for years and is actually used as a stat in college bowling thanks to Karl Nickolai. Subtract Monroy's average from the league average and you get his difference, which would be +24.20. An exceptional average differential given the nature of the conditions, plus the small amount of bowlers in the league. To put it in comparison, my average was +15.00 (201.70-186.70). Pretty solid, but nowhere near Monroy's excellent effort. However, that only gives us a slice of the pie as to what happened during the season. Statistically, did Monroy have a better strike percentage than me? Yes. Did I have a better spare percentage than Monroy? I think. I think? Hell, how am I supposed to know? This is how I don't know for sure: because we only take note of the recap sheet and not the scoresheet. We only see the bottom line of things, sort of like seeing Bob Ross' finished paintings on PBS first, then telling us only a recap of how he painted it. Doesn't that sound boring???

Ooookkaaay....here is our finished picture of a beautiful landscape, with snowy white caps, and crystal clear water and clouds, happy clouds, happy white clouds. I didn't feel like painting it for 30 minutes in front of you, I have a hair appointment for my afro-perm, but enjoy the painting without any detail as to how I got there, in fact, you don't even know I actually made this. But stayed tuned for Sesame Street next on PBS!

Tell me that you would have turned off the station at that point? Please, I know we all have a soft spot for PBS and all of its great programming, but come on. Part of the beauty Ross and his paintings is how we got to the bottom line. Without it, we felt hollow inside. Empty. Cheated. Well, as bowlers we should feel the same way when it comes to our recap sheet. Does the scoresheet tell a different story? The right story? A story about someone else we bowled with? Not to get all baseball-speak on you but there is more to a player than just his average (or batting average, if you will...), than as to how he gets there. Consider this the first step into post-modern bowling.

Suppose we used the scoresheet as our guide to coming up with new statistics that further helps us establish who the best of the best are. Ignore using only your average as a crutch and let's hypothesize some possible "new" statistics to bowling:

Average Differential: we already mentioned it but we should also make it clear that both Monroy and I did not bowl every single game of the year so our average differential is slightly skewed. It should be differential for average during every week you bowled, not just overall. To say that this is my backbone behind this is being rather obvious.

Pair Average Differential: average of a bowler subtracted by the average on the pair they are bowling on. Can explain a tough pair or even a possible bad team matchup against your opponents (something highly overlooked).

Pattern Average: on sport shot leagues, in particular, this comes heavily into play as to which patterns are playing easier or harder.

Pair Average: general average of the pair, regardless of who is bowling on it. Unique approach to tournament play or leagues where bowlers switch pairs after every game or pair of games. Can also determine how well a pair is playing to elect being more aggressive or more conservative.

Those are numbers you can look at the recap sheet and get an idea, but also having a scoresheet to find out who is bowling where does help. Now, let's use the scoresheet to further evaluate a player:

PRO (Spare + Strike %): for example, if a player's strike % is 64 percent and his spare % is 90 percent, that adds up to a 154 PRO. PRO's above 140 should be considered pretty good (again, this is only an hypothesis).

NOB (nine or better): 9 or better for every shot you throw. Example, 8 nine counts in 11 shots (remember, you can throw up to 12 shots in each game, not 10) makes is a 72% NOB.

SINPIN (Single Pin Spare %): I don't know why no players keep track of these things. I did my senior year in college and was a 97% SINPIN. I was also looked at funny by my teammates for keeping track of it. Anyway, 95% or better good. You should, repeat: should make all single pin spares but it isn't as easy as that. We are, after all, humans. It is a great stat to keep if your team is need of a solid spare shooter. You want one if the conditions are not striking.

APD (Avg. + Avg. Diff.): consider it the equivalent of baseball's OPS-on base plus slugging percentage. A person's average plus their average differential. The perfect combination of a player's ability to score well but also grind when the field average is lower. Similar to that of a hitter being able to grind out a walk and also ring a double to the gap.

Again, these are merely hypothesis and not facts. Some might work, some might outright make no sense. But we do need a test to prove that it can work. Luckily, I bowl in the perfect league to try it in: the 2010-11 PBA Xperience Classic. I also have a built-in advantage of using the scoresheets from each game by simply printing them out at the desk after every week. Call it using your powers or persuasion. In any event, it is time we start looking at how bowling should be perceived: similar to other sports, it is more than just numbers but how numbers are used to make players more relevant than others. If you thought I was stopping at just the sport of bowling, just wait...the czar of bowling is coming soon and he has got some changes in store for the bowling industry. Oh, people in Latvia...don't take that literally. Just a fake czar.

Tiem, kas ir milestiba un boulinga zinasanas...tas Boulings Filozofija. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-August 2010

2010-08-23T13:48:00.000-07:00

A "Major" Dilemma?

by Thomas Scherrer

I should qualify what I am about to say as passionately displaced, yet refreshingly honest. I love the sport of bowling...anyone who knows me and has bowled with me knows as much. When I have a love and understanding of a sport, I try to brush up on the history of the game, its past, the present, the future. You want to know what direction is has been in, where it is going, and most importantly, what we can learn from the mistakes of the past to avoid repeating them. Usually, the longer the history, the better. I can get into golf and how The Masters is a "tradition unlike any other" and how the US Open is the game's greatest challenge, or as a USGA official once told me while working for the US Open at Shinnecock Hills, "we are here to identify the best player". The mere fact that I could delineate The Masters and the USBC Masters should be a pretty clear for bowlers that bowling's majors do not matter as much. That is, to be blunt, a very, very bad sign.

In March, the PBA Tour elected to change all of that by making its grand event, the Tournament of Champions, an event of epic proportions. The total purse would be $1 million, with the winner pocketing a record $250,000 prize. Earlier this month, they further offered details of the reformatted TOC.

Before we go into it, lets look into the old TOC rules from last year.

PBA Tour champions
Women's World Championship winner (Kelly Kulick, as we all know)
Senior World Championship winner (Henry Sullins)
Senior US Open champion
Senior USBC Masters champion
RPI winner
RPC winner
Hall of Famers
Past TOC winners

New additions:

The "Elite" field: any current 2010-11 exempt tour players, any member of the "50 Greatest", any Hall of Famer, any past Major winner, and any players with at least 5 PBA titles.
The "Champions" field (max. 180 entrants): 4 or fewer PBA titles, Women's Series winners, Regional winners, and Senior Regional winners. An added caveat is that all of those winners had to be PBA members at the time.
"Champions" field bowlers must qualify, so to speak, in two seven game blocks, one 7 gamer Sunday, the other 7 gamer Monday. Half the field joins the "Elite" field for 4 five game blocks, cutting to the Cashers round.
The Cashers round consists of two 8 game blocks, then cutting to the top 24 for some old-school round-robin match play.

As you can see, the PBA decided to give as many members as they could a chance at winning this prestigious tournament, on top of winning the largest check ever handed out for a professional event. They have made their bed trying to make this event as special as they can.

Or did they...?

I always remember a few great things about the Tournament of Champions. A) you had to have won a PBA National Tour event to be eligible for it. Not a regional, not a senior event, not a senior regional event...a PBA Tour event. You might remember them, the ones that Burton and Schenkel televised on ABC every Saturday? Yep, those. B) the patterns were usually demanding and in my high school years, loooonnng. Up to 50 feet long in fact. We'll talk more about oil pattern and their significance later. Finally, C) I knew the that the winner was winning the elite TOC trophy. I alluded to this in my last blog that the same title Wayne Webb won is the same title Earl Anthony won is the same title Mike Durbin and Jason Couch won 3 times is the same title Marshall Holman won twice is the same title that Kulick won last year while making history. Now from a standpoint of finances, I totally understand the new criteria for the TOC: more bowlers eligible=more bowlers participating=more prize fund=bigger payout for the winner=putting the PBA's marquee event on a higher level. Also, from a purist standpoint myself as well as others that are bemoaning the new criteria, they say that the TOC has lost its prestige and its glory and honor. That the PBA sold out its grand event for one thing: credibility.

As much as I feel for those people and feel for the historian in me, I see it. I get it. It is a calculated and some would say, morally sorry risk. However, if bowling is to be taken on a level with other high profile individual sports, the money aspect almost has to be there, doesn't it? I don't have to like it, in fact, not many will like it but it was something they had to do to make the sport matter more. We live in a capitalist society in which the almighty dollar controls our pockets and our hearts. The more lucrative, the more attention the media and people of a casual nature cover it. Sadly, I wish it weren't that way but this appears to be the direction the PBA is headed with its marquee event.

But what about its other 3 majors? Is there something we can do to make the other 3 majors more relevant without corrupting the integrity of the major itself? Fear not, Bowling America...I am here. Consider this an introductory course into being the Czar of Bowling. I like Ruler of Bowling better or King of Bowling, but King of Bowling would entitle that I could disgrace my sport by challenging an aging, shaved, news columnist to a bowling contest by using a plastic ball for which I could have used to bowl a tournament I did not embrace, then backtracked saying I would bowl if it fit my schedule, then when the event came around the following year in Long Island, I once again...no-showed for the event. I do love the power of the keyboard. But I digress...

PBA World Championship
Current Format: different (again) from last year. This year, they will use the World Series of Bowling as its actual qualifying. Each animal pattern has its own event which has 12 games of qualifying. Those 60 games will determine the standings for the PBA World Championship. New this year is arguably, its most exciting wrinkle: the television finals will be a 3 day, 8 person final. My best guess: it will be a best 3 out of 5 with all 8 players on Friday, then same deal Saturday with the final four, then Sunday will be likely be best 3 out of 5 for the winner and $50,000.

My Format: I actually do not mind using the WSOB as the WC's qualifying scores, but for 60 games of bowling, it doesn't really reward the better players for all their consistent bowling. I love the 3 day television format and my guess earlier was just that: an educated guess. If I were running it, it would no longer be a guess but a definite. Here is the added wrinkle: let's go with a 16 person final field for the 3 day TV finals, but let's reward the top 8 bowlers with a round off and the top 4 with two rounds off. If they are going to bowl 60 games over 5 days, they could use a day off. Done and done (copyright William J. Simmons). So, seeds 9-16 will bowl a best 3 out of 5 Friday morning and afternoon, Saturday the 4 winners will bowl again the 5-8 seeds in a 3 out of 5 format in the morning and in the afternoon the Round of Super 8 will have the 1-4 seeds bowling. The best bowlers over 60 games getting two byes, fresh as a daisy, hopefully not crapped out on the Vegas tables (at least this year) going up against tired bowlers who have bowled close to 70-120 games over the WSOB while the top 4 have some games saved on their arms. They too will bowl a best 3 out of 5 with the winners advancing to the final 4 Saturday night, best 3 out of 5 to get to the Championship Match. Sunday afternoon will have the same best 3 out of 5 to a winner and the check of $100,000. The finances are real simple: we are going to simply take the low to cash away and make it out over 60 games to the top 32 scores. The bowlers 17-32 will get 3 times their WSOB entry which means in the $2,500 neighborhood. We clearly place the emphasis on winning the major, so finishing 2nd might only be $25,000. Winner should earn 6 digits, period. Oh, don't forget that sweet Eddie Elias trophy.

Wait, what about what the match play will be bowled on? What better way to tie in some PBA history with an oil pattern. Let's see...Earl Anthony won this event-called the PBA National Championship-6 times. He's got an oil pattern named after him. It's pretty demanding. Let's use it then! I don't want to see anyone human being winning a major on a pattern named after a damn reptile.

USBC Masters
Current format: open field (pros and amateurs) all bowl 10 games, cut to a quarter of the field, bowl 5 more games, cut to the top 63 plus the defending champion. Match play is a double-elimination format, 3 game total pinfall wins. Get to the final 4, top seed is undefeated. Love it, don't ever want this to change. Can't argue with one open event that gives professionals and amateurs a chance at winning a major event that is both unpredictable and exciting.

My format: I loved Xtra Frame's free preview coverage of last year's Masters, so I am gunna basically call an executive decision and say that the PBA do this every year for this event (hell, I'm a Czar making decisions-just be thankful I didn't type this blog on a throne). It is easy to follow with bowlers bowling just 3 games against one another, the drama of seeing a bowler come back in one game to win a match is worth the dollar value and in this case, free. Most people simply remember Chris Barnes' final game 300 against Wes Malott to stay undefeated and feel like they were watching Barnes at his Master-ful best. It was amazing to see because fans were watching a moment and it was not happening on a weekend. They got to see an awesome comeback for free, which could only help drive their sales for Xtra Frame even more. I think you see my point. The Masters is first and foremost, a USBC event and not a PBA event, so the PBA should offer free streaming coverage of the event...before USBC does. During the Xtra Frame coverage, you heard that the seedings for the match play portion aren't exactly proportionate. For instance, the 14th seed bowls the 49th seed and not the 52nd seed in a traditional format. That was just an example, which isn't entirely accurate but you get the point. Let's just be simple and say 1 vs. 64, 2 vs. 63 and so on...

The defending champion gets the bonus of not having to qualify for match play but gets the 32nd seed. Why should their reward for winning their first match be...the 1st overall seed? How fair is that? Not really fair at all. In fact, it is a downright crime. The defending champion should get to at least be the 2 seed. You can relent on the top seed because that player earned that right over 15 games of bowling against roughly hundreds of bowlers, which is never easy given how much the lanes change during the block. We'll call the #1 qualifier the Harry Smith Masters leader in honor of the Tiger. This is for historical reasons: Mr. Smith, a Hall of Famer, 50 Greatest, and one of the first men to employ power into his game, won 10 titles but was probably denied more due to the original PBA scoring format. After traditional qualifying, all pins were dropped heading into match play. The Masters does not carry pins over as well. What better way to truly honor a PBA Legend in a more conventional, yet ironic way? As for the defending champion (#2 seed), we'll call it the Mike Aulby seed. Mr. Aulby is the only man to win this event 3 times and for a true gentlemen of the sport and all-time great, what better way to honor the past than at a major.

Oh, but I am not done...the trophy handed out by USBC should have always been and will always be the Frank K. Baker award. Not some creative, crappy design-it's a major and I want my trophies to have historical value. One more final trick: if the TOC shot has traditionally been a long shot (over 45 feet), another major should be a traditionally short shot (under 37 feet). Back in high school and my freshman year in college, the Masters pattern was 34 feet and pretty flat. Why can't we do that again? This is very doable and nowadays, they can go even shorter to like 30 feet or 29 feet...talk about backend reaction or in the days of these modern missiles...rollout?

United States Open
Current Format: open to all bowlers as well, 18 games of qualifying, cut to the cashers round, 9 more game, get right to match play that night for 8 games. Then 16 on Saturday morning and afternoon. 33 games in the last two days on a 40 foot, flat oil pattern? Yikes...that is a worthy challenge. We're not changing a damn thing with the tournament format...sorta.

My Format: last year, there was 352 bowlers that bowled in bowling's truest test. And here are some quick, simple, and disturbing facts. At the end of play last year, only 10 men averaged over 210. It is not a big deal considering it is a brutal pattern. It means that under 3 percent of the best players in the world found a way to average over 210. Let's look at the other side of the list, that is the bottom of the list. I personally consider anyone averaging on the US Open pattern less than 160 to a problem for the sport. Last year, 12 bowlers averaged under 160, 3 bowlers averaged under 150, and one poor soul averaged under 140. A somber note Mr. Anthony Dompe of Georgetown, Illinois. You can now be Googled forever on this page for averaging a rancid 138.78 on the US Open pattern. Congrats sir, you certainly earned it!

I hate to make fun of such a person, but if this is what the sport of bowling is trying to promote, which is bowling badly at a major, then we are in serious trouble. Let's change the "open" in US Open to include these rules:

The US Open field will be reduced to 150 bowlers.
The top 100 players in the Harry Smith Point Leaders list for the season are automatically entered into the tournament. Any player in that list not able or willing to bowl, their spot goes to the next in line and so on.
The other 50 spots will come from each state running a US Open Qualifier. Each qualifier will be a 16 game format, with 8 games of qualifying Saturday and then 8 games of match play Sunday. A cut to the final 5 will take place after the 16 games are completed, winner goes to the US Open, entry fee paid in full. All players (averaging 190 and over) are allowed to bowl in the event and you can only bowl in one state and of course, the pattern will be the US Open-40 feet and flat. You're gunna have to earn this.

Why would I want to restructure the US Open into making it an event where fewer players participate? It is simple...I hate seeing bad bowling on any major pattern. Where the TOC allowing winners of any PBA event to bowl is understandable because these players at some point, did win something that had a PBA banner on it, there are roughly 30 percent of US Open bowlers that don't stand a chance to win even on their best day. I am all for someone earning their way in via a qualifier and if he stinks up the joint at the Open, then so be it. Chances are though, is that they won't because they will a) be bowling with better players and the odds of them being able to match up better are greater and b) since they made it through the qualifier through the state, they have some game. I think this works, so much so that if I were the Czar so to speak, I'd make this mandatory. Would you lose possible money in the tournament? Possibly. However, if you make the entry fee for the qualifier reasonable ($100 seems reasonable for 8 games of bowling), more entrants would be able to bowl in each state and if you allocate funds toward the US Open, you'd make up the difference or at least be pretty close.

One more thing: the US Open trophy and Green Jacket award. Only one sport should have a jacket that is green for a major. Doesn't work in bowling. So let's get rid of it. Yes, I am actually getting rid of a tradition to start a new one. Instead, we should make a new piece of crystal and call it the Don Carter Trophy. Mr. Bowling deserves to be recognized as, with suitable logic, the greatest major bowler in history. If you add his 5 World Invitational Championships to the 4 PBAA All-Stars (US Open), 1960 PBA National Championship, and 1961 Masters title, that is 11 majors. That is one more than Mr. Earl Anthony and 3 better than Aulby and Pete Weber. Mr. Bowling deserves an award named after him that represents a major championship and what better than bowling's truest test, some would say its only true test.

Ladies and Gentlemen, your majors are set. We throw in some money, some history, some legends of the past and you have yourself majors that start to matter on a higher level. Maybe at long last, we can start truly evaluating players and where they stand in bowling history.

For those with a love and knowledge for the sport of bowling, This Is Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-July/August 2010

2010-07-21T11:39:00.000-07:00

Most Valuable Blog Post
By Thomas Scherrer

A study into the PBA's Chris Schenkel Player of the Year Award

There are 10 things I love about the PBA:

1) How each touring professional has their name embroidered on the back of their shirts. Each person's signature pretty much gives you a reflection into the actual person as we see them in competition. Whether it be Walter Ray (professional, full name, square signature) or Chris Barnes (all-american, classy, but sadly not edgy enough) or Wes Malott (regal) or Danny Wiseman (exotic, eccentric, versatile) or Brian Voss (cool, calm, and collected) or Parker Bohn III (slanted down to up from left to right, almost an exact replica of his finish position) or Pete Weber (anything given his various moods) or Tom Smallwood (darting to the right, doubled with the camo shirts he wears-he's a hunter, not a gatherer).

2) Along with the custom made Gemini shirts, it further shows the player's uniqueness.

3) The brand name of the Animal patterns. It has been a great boom to the genesis of the PBA
Experience leagues across the country, as well as giving each pattern a suitable animal name to go along with it. After all, seeing the turtle pattern resembling slow ball speed instead of the shark attacking the deep waters sounds much more cunning and powerful. No comment by the PBA as to the rabbit/cheetah pattern debate.

4) Along with giving pattern names to the two greatest bowlers ever: Dick Weber and Earl Anthony.

5) Seeing Carmen Salvino each week. A true ambassador to the sport of bowling as well as a symbol of a generation that is slowly fading away from us with recent losses to Dick Evans, Bill Bunetta, and Ms. Marion Ladewig. Watch him, listen to him, see how he dresses each week...we could all learn something from Mr. Salvino, just by observing.

6) The Extreme Swing events. We'll get into why they are vitally important as this blog goes on but you know you love them. Trust me, after this blog, you'll love them more.

7) Xtra Frame's coverage of events. Mike J and Jeff Mark do a wonderful job of answering questions by the fans online, getting players to come up and do interviews, discussing bowling balls and layouts, and even having some fun on the air. Xtra Frame is a must have for fans of bowling. I understand that money is tight and people are a little skeptical of shelling out extra cash for bowling purposes. I dig that. I understand-trust me, I wish I could splurge on the money to buy it but it's just not in the cards. However, if you have some extra money, love bowling, and like seeing the best in the world without having to drive around from city to city, Xtra Frame should be on your must haves.

8) Speaking of travel, there is The Truck. All PBA fans know about The Truck. The Truck where all the magic happens. Thousands of thousands of thousands of bowling balls drilled by the men in The Truck. As much as we like to credit the players for their skill and natural physical talents, they need the men in The Truck to layout that magic ball for them to make them even better. In the constant race between man and (oil) machine, The Truck give the pros some balance against the invisible demons known as oil patterns.

9) The Tournament of Champions trophy. I freakin' love it! Simple, timeless, classic, and most importantly, unchanging. The same trophy Mike Durbin won three times is the same trophy Jason Couch won three times is the same trophy Marshall Holman won twice is the same trophy Kelly Kulick won this past year to make sports history.

10) Finally, I love the Chris Schenkel PBA Player of the Year award. An award given so consistently, so organically, so simplistically to the best player each season of the Professional Bowlers Association.

(wait for it...wait a little bit longer....wait, almost there....)

Oh, I'm sorry, my computer froze. The PBA Player of the Year is one thing I do not love. OK, I really don't love it. OK, OK, I hate it. OK, OK, OK, I hate it so much that I cannot stand the sight of it. It is a flawed system...there, I said it. I don't believe in it. I don't trust it. I don't/can't/won't accept it. It is has more holes in than Gianmarc Manzione's mental game if you have read his Sport Bowling articles in Bowling This Month. It has more holes than an Obama health care bill. It has more holes than a Mike D'Antoni defensive scheme. It has more holes than Portland Street did during Worcester's repaving over the winter months.

Why does it have holes? Because there seems to be this long standing tradition amongst the PBA that the Player of the Year award should be an absolute mess. They cannot get it correct, even if they tried to take it away from the PBA membership and cast it towards who makes television the most/wins the most on television. It doesn't work. Why doesn't it work? First of all, any sport that cannot settle the argument on the field is in trouble. It is further complicated by the fact that people assume that since the POY has been decided in each of the last two seasons in the last match of the season, the system works. It's a fair argument if you wanna argue it but consider the odds that it would take for that to happen again and again season after season given the current format. I wish I had a mathematician for this article, but I would guess the odds are off the charts. So let's take some logic into consideration for a moment and say that if it were to happen again and each season, are the two bowlers actually both bowling for the POY award?

The finest possible example of this was 2009. If Chris Barnes does not leave that solid 8 against Mike Scroggins in the next to last match of the US Open and strikes, he would have faced Norm Duke in the championship match to determine the Open winner as well as the POY winner. It would have been a glorious ending to a tremendous season for both players. Yes, they both deserved POY as much as Wes Malott did, and as I've argued deserved it more than Malott. However, the 8 pin stood, Barnes failed to strike on his fill to force a tie, Scroggins wins the match, then beats Duke to win the US Open and Wes Malott sat in his house, drinking a beer, grilling a steak, and winning POY. Does this seem like the greatest let down in the history of organized bowling? You betcha...even if Duke had won, I'd argued that Duke took advantage of a flawed system in that he did not get the chance to bowl against Barnes or Malott to see if he was in fact, THE MAN. We never found out who was the best player in the game for the 2008-09 season.

Let's delve into this for a just a moment and then look ahead to my outstanding vision that I have edited 810 times in my head. The PBA Player of the Year for years had been decided by a player membership. In the last few years, the PBA took the vote away from the players and based it solely off of who had the most television success. Time for a Pro/Con argument...

Player Membership Pro: Who better to determine who the best players in the game are other than a jury of your peers? Sounds great, sounds honest, sounds pure, sounds so....1950's apple pie-ish. ICK!!! Grab me a leather jacket and a poodle skirt. This isn't 1958 anymore.

Con: Our societal changes are noticeable. We keep our guard up. We are suspicious of the person next to us in our cubicle as to what his/her intentions are. We don't trust them. When we do, we still keep our eyes open because we are in a society where being inherently selfish is commonplace. Voting for our own peers for an award has always got some backlash to it. I can pretty much know for a fact that the 2006-07 Player of the Year was a crime scene. There isn't a red-blooded American that bowls living that season that can tell me without sweating that Norm Duke was the alpha dog of the PBA that season. He won 3 times, dominated on television, ran through fields left and right, and almost captured the prestigious Tournament of Champions, which the PBA holds as being its marquee event. That has to count for something, right? Nope. In fact, Doug Kent won the award by winning two majors, and doing virtually nothing else that season. Yes, Kent's season for winning two majors was historic but it was unremarkable other than that. Any time your POY goes into a season saying that it is going to be his last season on tour doesn't make me feel like he cares about professional bowling much. Don't get me wrong; I love watching Doug Kent bowl. Great pro, great sense of bowling business, excellent form, a lock-it-up Hall of Fame bowler...but he was not the best player of the 2006-07 season.

Ready for some contradiction?

The 2007-08 POY race was another crime scene...Voltaire-style. Once again, Norm Duke was the victim. The '07-'08 season POY race was no longer a vote. In fact, they based it as a points race to determine who would win the award, but instead of the obvious criteria (who was the best player start to finish), they settled on awarding points to players who made television and television only. I can only speak for those who know bowling, but that idea was formulated ONLY to make sure Chris Barnes was a factor. Makes total sense, no? Get your sport's best all-around player, who makes a boatload of telecasts no matter the format of the event, and hopefully he wins once or twice and makes enough shows that he earns more points than anyone else to win the award. Thankfully, for the PBA, it did work. However, history was lost in the process. Duke, who had by his standards, a horrible first 2/3 rds of the season, got healthy down the stretch to win the PBA World Championship and the US Open. Not only did Duke win back-to-back majors, he joined rarefied air by winning the PBA's prestigious Triple Crown and Grand Slam with the US Open win. Had it not been a season determined by points by TV, Duke probably wins that season too.

Hold on a second, Scherrer, you cannot have it both ways!!!

Why can't I? Logically speaking, Duke deserved to win both seasons but the system he was bowling in both seasons cost him. In 2006-07, Duke was injured with a broken toe (a freak accident while working out) but tried to bowl through tournaments during the middle of the season. There should be some more dicussion however, to elaborate on by he "tried to bowl". Duke, an exempt player was automatically cashing for each event he bowled in. Therefore, just by withstanding some pain for a few games, Duke could "earn" his check, withdraw, and move onto the next tournament. While it is not the most ethical of decisions to make, there was no rule against it, so Duke, being a provider to his family and sensing that there was no violation, went about his business until he was fully healthy. Do you think fellow players took notice? OF COURSE THEY DID! They saw Duke for two things: a) stealing a check and b) not giving a bowler more deserving or at least more competent enough to qualify through the PTQ and possibly win a tournament. Let's remember, all PBA members had a vote and I'm guessing that anyone who had a chance at making a PBA main draw decided to screw Duke over in their POY vote. I'm pretty sure it happened-after all, none of those guys in Duke's position, would never have done the same thing, right? A little semblance of reality people, please. Everyone would have done the same thing Duke did, it's just that he was Norm Duke.

Flash forward to 2007-08...Duke is injured again, but this time, he can't bowl. He's floundering in the points list, 51st going into the World Championship, in danger of losing his exemption. Then he gets healthy right before the World Championship only to come down with the flu. Yet he puts it all together to win the tournament! An absolute gut check performance by the Mini Magician. His encore: finally winning the US Open. The one major that had eluded Duke through his whole career, he finally wins. Runs the ladder in fact in doing so. Does it the same week his grandfather passes away. Another magical Duke moment...yet, this is the new and improved PBA POY award list. Going into the televised finals, we knew that Chris Barnes was already crowned the '08-'09 winner. Seeing Duke win, and seeing Barnes smile broadly about finally winning professional bowling's highest single season honor, I said only one thing.

I wonder if Duke had another week, would he beat Walter Ray and Barnes? I feel cheapened...

If anything, that moment made me detest the Player of the Year system. I just wish that we saw something after the US Open that could give us an honest representation of the PLayer of the Year. After two long years of trying to figure out the PBA Tour schedule and what would work, I have come up with what I feel could provide insight, intrigue, and certain end of the year drama. By the way, if you are wondering if there has ever been a PBA Player of the Year given to a player for winning just one significant event, look back to 1995. Mike Aubly's clutch TOC victory not only gave Aulby the Triple Crown, but the Grand Slam and the now defunct Super Slam (Grand Slam plus Touring Players Championship) and his fellow peers deemed that historic enough to give him his second POY award. Like a Lifetime Achievement Award of some sorts in a season where no one player stood out.

Yes, the PBA needs a playoff. It really needs one to keep the fever going all the way to the last match of the last tournament of the season. And of course, it will need to be gimmicked up a bit. What, the PBA is allowed to make gimmicks and I'm not? Just because I have no social life and have been thinking about at my real job? Also, I want credit for what is about to happen. A PBA Playoff based off the most simplest of ideas: we are FINALLY going to use the Harry Smith Points Leader list and make it matter. How do you make it matter and then how do you formulate a playoff.

Step 1) The PBA Regular Season will be 14 weeks. Just 14 weeks? Sounds like too little tournaments to firmly establish who the best players are. I look at it the exact opposite way: it makes the regular season MATTER. OK, say we have it at 14 events, with the World Series of bowling (all the animal patterns and the World Championship-6 events), break for winter, and hit the West Coast swing for a few events. Let's make sure we get in the Dick Weber (7) and Earl Anthony events (8), definitely get some home cooking with the Pacific Northwest (Seattle or Meford, Oregon-9), then Vegas for the T of C (10), a doubles/team event after the T of C (11), the Masters (12), a midwest event in either Detriot, Ohama, or Wichita (13), then the US Open (14). Simple and sound. We stay in one big city for 6 events, honor the legends, stay warm on the West, travel back to a big bowling hotbed right before the US Open and we have our 14 event season.

Step 2) The Playoffs will be the Extreme Swing events with a cut after each event to thin out the field to our elite bowlers.

Step 3) The Harry Smith Point list will be our list for determining the playoff field. The top ranked player will win the Harry Smith Points Award, kinda like winning the President's Trophy in the NHL. Something nice, but ultimately, does not guarantee you a title.

Step 4) The season ending event (the newly named PBA Championship) will be a true test of who the best player in bowling was for that season.

Format: After the US Open, we cut the field down to the top 50 bowlers-this will also double as the exempt players for the following season (no carryover exemptions for winning majors, I want everyone to earn their way onto each tour season-makes for guys having to bowl each week and giving a crap about the sport and themselves). They have earned the right. We will also restructure the Points to where each player starts out 1,000 points behind each player (the gimmick) ahead of them in the standings with one exception: the player first in points will have no differential in points. For example, if Bill O'Neill leads the Harry Smith Points list with 120,000 points, second place Jason Belmonte has 105,000 points. Belmo won't automatically be set to 119,000 points, but he will stay at 105,000. The rest of the top 50 would go in that descending order. The top ranked player has to get some advantage, this would be it. After each event, the points list will be cut from 50 to 32, 32 to 16, then 16 for the PBA Championship and then Elite 8 during the PBA Championship. Winner of the event is the Player of the Year.

OK, congrats Top 50 players, you are in the first ever PBA Playoffs. Let's start with Extreme Swing event number 1.

First Round-Don Johnson Eliminator (somewhere in Ohio): Keep things the same for qualifying, which is 7 games on one pattern, 7 on another on day one. Day two, same deal. We now have 28 games in and we get to our top 32 bowlers in the eliminator pods. Nothing much changes really in this event. After the event, the top 32 players in points (not the top 32 in qualifying, the hardest decision I have made about this but the fairest in the end) after the event advance to the Plastic Ball Championship. Don't worry, the points system will be altered to where every player that bowls will have a chance to be in the top 32 in points after the event.

Second Round-Plastic Ball Championship (either in New York or New Jersey): We take away the bowler's precious technology and make them find a way to make polyester strike. We will keep things the same here too. 18 games of qualifying, cut to the top 24 for some round robin match play. 8 games, cut to the top 16 (pivotal because someone might swing into the final 16 of the next event if they bowl well enough in the first block of match play). 8 more games, top 5 stepladder, winner...blah, blah. After the event, we take the top 16 in points and move them onto the new Extreme Swing event wrinkle.

Third Round-PBA One Ball Only Championship (Connecticut or Mid-Atlantic area). Drill one ball, use it on two different patterns. Use the the entire tournament! Hey, I want my Player of the Year to earn this. We'll literally take the same format for the Plastic Ball Championship, with one small wrinkle: 18 games, no cut. Next 16 games, round robin match play-everyone gets to bowl against each other. Cut to the top 5 stepladder, winner gets the check and so on...cut remains the same. 16 bowlers, but remember the points will change. Note: I do worry about a certain few players having magical ball reactions and making a big charge up the points list, but these again, are the best in the world at what they do. Show me your talents!

Finals-PBA Championship (a mix of the Marathon Open and Match Play Championship, located somewhere in the United States where there is an arena finals). I LOVE this event. We are going to decide this on the field and we are going to give credence to the "cream rising to the top" and the winner will be the winner and the Player of the Year. Period. Done. We will mix up the Marathon Open and the Match Play Championship in the same tournament to get there. The points list still matters.

Marathon Element-all 16 bowlers bowl 9 games on Viper, Shark, Chameleon, Scorpion, Cheetah, and the Dick Weber pattern. 54 games all told. After all the games, we tabulate points again as if it was a separate tournament. The top 8 in points after the Marathon Element are your Elite 8.

Match Play Element-after much hemming and hawing between deciding to keep all 16 bowlers or shortening to 8 for match play, I elected to go with the top 8. Something a little too sketchy about having the player 16th in points after all the playoff bowling making a miracle run to win the Player of the Year, so let's go with 8. Match play will be seeded in double-elimination style, best 4 out of 7 games with the higher seed having a home field advantage of choosing with lane condition. Great strategy say if Mike Scroggins was bowling against Wes Malott but Scroggins is the higher seed, Scroggins would not dare choose the Scorpion pattern, but something shorter, like Viper or Chameleon (Cheetah would actually be to Malott's advantage) or flatter (Dick Weber pattern). The TV finals would have just two bowlers, best 4 out of 7, winner the PBA Champion recieving the brand new Chris Schenkel Award for being the Player of the Year. Reasonably speaking, the man who wins this prestigious event and championship could possibly bowl a maximum of 98 games that week to win it all! Now THAT is what I want out of my PBA Player of the Year.

I love it! I know it is not totally perfect but it solves all the issues surrounding not having the Player of the Year race decided on the last day...ever. You have PBA professionals having to show up, care, get in great condition, give a crap each and every week, and truly establish rivalries in bowling. Some healthy, some competitive, some downright hostile. We would finally get to see the Player of the Year settled free of television gimmicks or political or personal agendas. We can now update my list to all 10 things I love about the PBA.

For those with a love and a search for knowledge in bowling, This Is Bowling Philosophy. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-June/July 2010

2010-06-13T14:27:00.000-07:00

PBA Tour-A Team Effort

by Thomas Scherrer

As I sat down and viewed the NCAA Baseball Super Regional between Florida State and Vanderbilt, I got flashbacks. No, no...not to a Vanderbilt athletic head coach butchering his team's chance at advancing toward a national championship, but a flashback to my youth as a kid and taking it further, my days bowling in high school and college. Seeing FSU clinch a birth to Omaha made me think of how so many of us are united by sports and how we are all linked primarily to team sports. The joy 18-22 year old young men (gosh, did I say young men like I'm 50? I'm only 26. Alas.) share as they win something together, celebrate, pile on top of one another, party later that night with one another, and even enjoy a keg stand or truck party together. Okay, I over-exaggerated the last few parts, but still...they are a team that won and are on their way to possibly winning a national championship. How in the hell does this all intertwine with bowling? Simple: it is what most of us have done that bowl. For the most part, bowling is a team sport consisting anywhere between 2 to 5 people, and for the most part, anyone that has bowled at any level has been a part of team bowling. Most of us will never taste the bright lights of Megabuck amateur tournaments or PBA tournaments individually speaking. We bowl to form a bond with friends over a common goal: knocking over more pins than other teams to win leagues and possibly, fatten up the wallet. Could you see PBA professionals doing that over the course of 6 months? Of course not, it is why they are pros, the purists would scream.

Oh, how fickle our memories are. Back in 1960, the ill-fated National Bowling League was formed, trying to run alongside the fledgling PBA Tour. Both organizations were vastly different-team vs. singles, intercity matches vs. city to city, home and away matches vs. bowling centers across the country, and most importantly no TV deal vs. TV deal. That pesky television deal ended up killing the NBL after only a few seasons, folding after the 1962 campaign, while the PBA has continued to plow/thrive/tread/struggle/suffer/revive/struggle again/suffer again along. In recent years, pros and team bowling have come back with the PBA Geico Team Shootouts. The All-Star events feature teams of 6 bowlers bowling on specially constructed lanes outdoors in Baker matches, showcasing their physical, mental, and team abilities. It is a touch of nostalgia mixed with a touch of the unique. As I closely observe the team events the last few years, I often wonder inside my own head very often Man, could this happen for real on the PBA Tour? Ask no more bowling fans...this is why I'm here.

It most certainly could work. But how and in what way could it work? Let's take some very important factors into consideration. First of all, a "team" PBA Tour would mean that the very basis of Eddie Elias' dream of individuals bowling against each other would be dead and buried with a tombstone resting above its grave. Secondly, it would present a total reconstruction of players that for so long have been genetically wired to beat the holy hell out of each other to get along. Could you believe that? Imagine Pete Weber having to team with Walter Ray for a world championship? Imagine Nome Duke having to watch Chris Barnes come up short late in a match with a win on the line? Imagine Tom Baker and Amleto Monacelli (noted fitness freaks) trying to get Mike DeVaney's round shape to the gym for some cardio? Imagine anyone dealing with Patrick Allen for a whole year or years??? Third and finally, how can you possibly make the teams fair? Ultimately, would you want to make the teams even and fair?

While sports organizations strive for some form of athletic socialism to create parity, there has to be some dominant teams to create true rivalries in team bowling. Geographically speaking, you could reenact something comparable to the NBL team franchises and have the player most closely associated with said region. The old NBL had 10 teams (Dallas, Fort Worth, Fresno, LA, and San Antonio in the West; Detroit, Kansas City, New York, Omaha, and Twin Cities in the East), so it is not conceivable to have a super-duper star bowl on each team that fits their hometown or birthplace. Detroit could have Mika Koviuneimi or Bill O'Neill, Kansas City would have Weber, New York could have Allen or Mike Fagan, Omaha would have Sean Rash, Dallas can take Barnes, Fort Worth takes Wes Malott, San Antonio takes Duke (native Texan), Fresno takes Walter Ray (native Californian), and LA could take Rhino Page (ditto), and the Twin Cities could adopt some star without a town to their name (Mike Scroggins could go being that all the Texas cities are taken, Parker Bohn could go because he's an ambassador: he could promote bowling in the Arctic, Tommy Jones could go because well...they like their SEC football and their NASCAR and that makes them happy. Perhaps Jason Belmonte, but let's be honest, you are not sticking only the sport's most marketable star in the cold of Minneapolis. You think David Stern would let that happen to LeBron James or Kobe Bryant...? Hell No!) They could take...eh, um...OK, no offense but team bowling in Minnesota? We cannot resurrect Dick Weber sadly so we might have to relocate the TC to say, Ohio? Now we can work with this and say Robert Smith, Chris Loschetter, or Brian Kretzer can be their marquee star. It does work...sorta.

Perhaps, this solution works best. Suppose that PBA Commish Fred Schreyer and Deputy Commish Tom Clark said that starting in the 2011-12 season, the PBA Tour was going to a team season in a last ditch effort to save the ranks of professional bowling. There would be 12 teams of 7 bowlers, for a total of 84 bowlers. We will spread out the cities to make more sense to attract the major bowling cities of America, with 6 teams in each conference. The East would have New York, Chicago, Buffalo (an absolute no doubter), Orlando, Indianapolis, and Dayton. The West would have Detroit, Wichita, Dallas, Seattle, Vegas or Reno, and Los Angeles or San Diego. The teams would be formed first by a simple distribution of the top 60 players in the PBA Points List, which for all we know, means something. Right?? I mean we should use it because the tour uses it for precisely NOTHING except handing out an award. The remaining 24 players would come from the first ever collegiate draft, getting young players fresh out of college that have just come off of 4 years of team experience. You like this so far, right?

For the remaining 60 players, it would go 1, 13, 25, 37, and 49 for team 1, 2, 14, 26, 38, and 50 for team 2 and so on; the first team selection for the dispersal draft would be a lottery, with that team getting the 12th and 24th pick in the collegiate draft, the second team selected would get the 11th and 23rd and so on going up. Makes perfect sense to give the lower selected teams higher draft picks to help balance out the teams. So without further ado, I give you your twelve teams via dispersal draft:

Team 1: Walter Ray (1), Fagan (13), Eugene McCune (25), Mike Wolfe (37), and Anthony LaCaze (49).

Team 2: O'Neill (2), Couch (14), Andres Gomez (26), Robert Smith (38), and Tim Mack (50).

Team 3: Scroggins (3), Ryan Ciminelli (15), Stevie Weber (27), Lonnie Waliczek (39), and Dino Castillo (51).

Team 4: Barnes (4), Ryan Shafer (16), Ronnie Russell (28), Richie Allen (40), and Troy Wollenbecker (52).

Team 5: Malott (5), Loschetter (17), Steve Jaros (29), Stu Williams (41), and Derek Sapp (53).

Team 6: Belmonte (6), PA (18), Michael Haugen Jr. (30), Dave D'Entremont (42), and John May (54).

Team 7: Tommy Jones (7), DeVaney (19), Steve Harman (31), Nathan Bohr (43), and Jason Sterner (55).

Team 8: Weber (8), Mika (20), Jeff Carter (32), Todd Book (44), and Brian Walizcek (56).

Team 9: Page (9), Kretzer (21), Bohn (33), Doug Kent (45), and Amleto (57).

Team 10: Smallwood (10), Duke (22), Mike Edwards (34), Wayne Garber (46), and Cassidy Schaub (58).

Team 11: Rash (11), Machuga (23), Joe Ciccone (35), PJ Haggerty (47), and Osku (59).

Team 12: Jack Jurek (12), Brad Angelo (24), Voss (36), Mitch Beasley (48), and George Lambert (60).

A few facts from these 12 make believe teams:

Every team has at least one major champion and 5 have at least two major champions.
Every team has a great international/megabucks/amateur stud.
Every team has at least one former collegiate star with the exception of the Belmo team.
There is a Player of the Year on 8 teams, and multiple POY's on two teams. Ironically, the Page team has 3 POY's and they are statistically, the 3 lower ranked players.
Hall of Famers (current of potentially) on 10 of the 12 teams. We still need time to for Scroggins or Rash to build their career resumes to give them lock-it-up HOF status.

Roll all this together and you have yourself 12 really solid teams with young collegiate players looking to get reps and shots and most importantly, keeping the sport of bowling a young man's sport. You have an unquestionable Alpha Dog on each team that everyone will look for to deliver in the clutch and in some cases, dangerous chemistry issues between rival stars that all fans love to see no matter how they say they don't. You're not telling me you'd tune in to see Belmo and PA bitch about who bowls anchor in a huge Baker match? How Belmo could curse out PA in front of people and how everyone would still love Belmo's accent? How about who got the 10th frame shots with Rhino and PB3 if the left was playing well, especially when you consider Page's past with him being a prima donna while bowling for Kansas? What about the look on Richie Allen's face when Barnes gags late in another match, while Allen is absolutely fearless late in games? You wouldn't pay to see Allen go gangsta on Barnes' in the paddock area? Ok, ok...I'm not for condoning violence as a selling vehicle in any sport but let's look closer at these teams.

Best team (on paper): Team Page. Three Hall of Famers and multiple major champions on the other side of their career teaming with the game's best left hander.

Best team (talent wise): Team Rash. Nothing but versatile studs all over this team.

Best team (team concept): Team Malott. Any team with Derek Sapp on it has a great chance to win tournaments. Look at his college career again and you tell me how that team, coupled with Malott's talent could lose a tight match.

Worst team: none. They are all solid. We struck with parity.

Injury team: Team Smallwood. Any team with Duke is ready for Duke playing 55 games out of an 80 game schedule. Plus, the unorthodox games of Schaub and Smallwood, along with Wayne Garber's knees being made out of pages 322 and 323 of The Grapes of Wrath and you have some worries. Thankfully, Edwards is still a solid player in his late 40's due to his great fitness, he could rub off on his good buddy, the Duker.

Healthiest team: Team Barnes. No way he letting anyone slack off the lanes. Slightly ahead of Jurek's team. Closer than the experts think.

Best Chemistry: Team O'Neill. I can just see Couch and Mack taking Andres Gomez out to a bar and telling everyone he's the batboy for their beer league softball team. Even better, seeing Maximum Bob and Billy O doing chest bumps or keg stands or both at the same time. Have a camera with this team.

Funniest team: Team Walter Ray. Fagan and Wolfe are hands down comic relief. LaCaze could also bring down the house with his sarcasm. Might be countered by Walter Ray's moodiness. Might help him deal with humorous guys as well. Lots of possibilities.

Smartest Team (off the lanes): Team Walter Ray. The man's got a damn Physics degree. End of conversation. Fagan is an economics guy. He could double as the team's agent. Literally...I could see Fagan adopting Scott Boras' Lee Press-On Hair and his grave voice and then demanding the owners of the PBA to give players outrageous sums of money despite not doing anything except put up great regular season numbers. He might even convince LaCaze to sit out in his walk year due to some cracked ribs a la Jaboby Ellsbury to protect his stats.

(Waiting....)

KIDDING RED SOX FANS...sorta.

Smartest Team (on the lanes): Team Barnes. Along with Shafer, excellent in game tacticians. Don't be shocked to see these two talking to each other every 30 seconds. Make a great lead-off/anchor combo.

Best Lead-off/Anchor Combo (the Peloquin-Earnest Award): Team O'Neill. Timmy Mack steps up after Billy O rips the rack, follows it up with that sky high backswing, evaporates the pins and his teammates are ready to make his hands bleed as he comes off the approach. Goosebumps to see that one time.

Most Exciting Team to watch: Team Rash slightly over Team O'Neill. Rash, Choogs, and Osku all lofting the left cap, while Haggerty and Ciccone (great outside players) piping the rail? You'd appreciate watching that take place. Plus Osku literally lofting it 20 feet on the fly.

Most Exciting Match: Team Rash vs. Team O'Neill. Power all over the damn building, strikes all over the place. Guys trying to out hook the other. If i were sane, I'd be giddy with laughter over this matchup, especially on dry lanes.

Least Exciting Team to watch: Team Jones or Team Malott. Nothing to do with them but their teammates strike me as being...vanilla. No time for vanilla bowling.

Match You'd Pay to See: Team Walter Ray vs. Team Weber. Finally, Weber could crotch chop DeadEye back to the horseshoe pit without looking like a total ass.

Most Dangerous Team: Team Belmo. When motivated and healthy, PA could really give this team a look of "Oh, s*it!" when they got rolling. Plus, you know Double D and Mr. Lucky (May) are out to prove they one still has the game and other does have the game to be world class.

Other Most Dangerous Team: Team Smallwood...or Team Duke. Let's be fair for a moment: a healthy and confident Norm Duke can still leave a trail of PBA carcasses behind him. A healthy Duke has his own team and he's the Alpha Dog of this PBA League. No questions asked. Same goes for a mechanically sound Tommy Jones.

Most Explosive Team: Team Scroggins. Scroggs + Cim + playable left side of the lane=trouble.

Best Anchor Bowler: Voss. Even at 53, I'd still want Voss over every other player to get a clutch double. This includes Malott, Barnes, Duke, Jones, and Walter Ray. Voss doubles as Guy Who You Don't Wanna See in a Big Spot.

Guy You Do Wanna See in a Big Spot: Barnes. I really hate to do this but you know that would be a major discussion amongst players. One game Baker match, World Championship in Arlington, you really want Christopher Barnes making those anchor shots for you? I'd rather have Shafer up there, despite what logical wisdom tells me. Of Shafer's 4 wins, 3 of them he needed to strike in the 10th to win them. Barnes was one of those victims.

Best Bowler: O'Neill. He's your Number 1 overall pick if you were blowing this whole thing up. Late 20's, best young player on the planet, US Open champion. Most consistent player the last two years. Good for the next 10-12 years. No doubter.

Now that you are fully exhausted from reading all this, you say that this can't work for an entire season, I always have a Plan B (like we all should when we are bowling). The other option would be week before the prestigious (well...formerly prestigious) Tournament of Champions, have a team event with the top 84 ranked bowlers in the PBA Points List (12 teams times 7 bowlers each: same concept, sans college draft). Imagine the odd and near apocalyptic scenarios that could arise if you were to do that. Non-winners winning a team event to get a pass to the TOC, guys on the TOC bubble getting bounced off the list because one team had 4 non winners. Imagine that type of pressure: Barnes having to strike to get Troy Wollenbecker into the TOC and not closing the deal. Wollenbecker might have to call some of his buddies down in South Beach to "set Barnes straight". (Note: now that the TOC allows National, Regional, and Senior winners to beeligible for the TOC, it makes this idea less credible. You are better off with a team season, plus I don't want to waste a few thousand words on what I think could be a great idea. You're right...let's just move on before I throw something at Seattle). I think the team concept would work for this. However, I'm sure that is what the National Bowling League thought as well too...the truth is, we might know soon enough if really was ill-fated or long foreshadowing.

Bowling Philosophy-May 2010

2010-05-25T16:01:00.000-07:00

"Walter Ray Williams Jr.-The King or The Prince?"
by Thomas Scherrer

Back in 2006, Walter Ray Williams Jr. finally hunted down the ghost of Earl Anthony's PBA record 41 titles by beating Pete Weber 289-236, in the Dydo Japan Cup to win career title #42. Then play-by-play announcer Dave Ryan aptly started calling Williams "The King", an honor certainly deserving of his historic bowling credentials. In an era where other sports anoint or nickname kings despite not winning anything or having a disgraceful post-career private/public life (see LeBron James, Jim Leyritz, and...sadly for me, Henrik Lundqvist), Walter Ray's monarchical nickname suits him and the sport of bowling well.

Or does it? Taking nothing away from Williams' accomplishments at all, he certainly continues to astound and amaze (some would replace those words with bore and meddle) fans with his relentless pursuit of winning titles, making cash, acquiring milestones, etc...you begin to wonder if Walter Ray is more symbolic of another nickname, "Il Principe", or "The Prince". Namely, Italian public servant Niccolo Machiavelli's version of "The Prince".

Before Walter Ray supporters start mailing me sharp objects giving me instructions to "gargle and rinse thoroughly", take this as a compliment toward his tremendous career that we are comparing his bowling career to one of the great political treatise ever written. This is one of the parts of why I have been blogging about bowling in general: to see if I could legitimately merge bowling and philosophy together to make sense of it all. Not surprisingly, when you talk about bowling, most conversations involve Walter Ray and where is career ranks truly in the annals of bowling history. Not just PBA history (firmly entrenched: 2nd best bowler in PBA history-for now-and greatest right handed bowler...PERIOD), but bowling history. What better way for me to try and make sense of it all then discuss him in a "Machiavellian" way. Let's jump in.

First of all, Machiavelli's "The Prince" centers around mostly political tones as to how a prince should rule their land. Those methods should be by means of pragmatic ends, not teleological-or purposes designed to reach a goal. Simply put: the old saying "the ends justify the means" fits well with Walter Ray's career very well. In brief, we date back to 1986, the first of Walter Ray's record 7 Player of the Year awards. Walter Ray was an aspiring prince at this point, then in '86, winning 3 titles and capturing POY honors, acquiring the ends by any means necessary. Not sold??? Let's narrow it down further.

Defense and Military

The Prince, according to Machiavelli, states that a self-sufficient prince is one who can meet any foe on the field of battle. He goes on further to say that a prince that relies on the help of others or on foundations is not self-sufficient. As most bowling fans know, Williams has been extremely self-sufficient over his near 30 year career that Williams can conquer any lane condition the PBA has laid out in the past. Williams has not relied solely on the modern enhancement of bowling balls or lane surfaces, but rather on his own unique skills. The successful Prince must also hunt on a frequent basis to keep his body fit and lean. With this, he can learn to protect his territory and take claim of others that are similar. We all know of Walter Ray's tremendous ability of play the outside/gutter part of the lane as well as Williams' tremendous ability to keep on bowling and stay in shape at age 50 against bowlers half his age. That combination has also helped him alter the course of how other players play the lanes...

Self-Reliance

If The Prince comes to power through either luck or hereditary means, he can rise to power quickly but struggle to retain it (see Weber, Peter). If The Prince rises by overcoming the existing or incumbent order, he will struggle to power, yet rule with ease afterward. The Prince can also erase his enemies, forge on his own terms, and also earn the utmost respect. Williams overcame the incumbent order in the 80's (Weber and Mike Aulby), forged through the early 90's stars (Parker Bohn, Norm Duke, and Jason Couch), then the late-90's (Chris Barnes), and now the 2000s (the younger, high rev players, international stars, resurgent Hall of Fame bowlers. Williams has certainly earned the utmost respect from his peers. He has also forged his own alliances with pretty much everyone that bowls on tour. Most player's strategy today is to start by playing straighter and wait to move in until the lanes open up. This symbiotic relationship has further helped Williams in that he now gets all his foes to play his A game and hence, Williams can match up better seeing what looks best playing straight. All he simply does is out repeat everyone. Machiavellian to say the very least from Dead-Eye.

Reform and Revolution

The Prince must have the means of force to keep his people satisfied during reform when the people being to have second thoughts. Travel back to 2000 for a moment...Walter Ray had a dismal first half of the PBA Tour season and most began to felt that Williams, then age 40, has lost a step. Come the fall swing of 2000 and Williams wins back-to-back events, reforming his game, and making a last gasp at Player of the Year. Travel back to the 2003-04 season as well...Walter Ray had not made a telecast the first half of the season, 32nd in points, looking lost. Many felt this was the beginning of the end. During the winter break, Williams worked with former touring player Mark Baker on his hand position and he wins two of the first 4 events of the second half of the year, including winning his first Masters title.

Gaining Honors

The Prince must complete great feats. Machiavelli uses King Ferdinand of Spain as example of a leader who gained tremendous territories in the name of religion, while keeping his subjects from rebellion. For Walter Ray, great feats are majors (8), Player of the Year awards (7-record), and titles (48-record). He has kept his detractors (the subjects) from rebelling against his power as the ruler of the PBA empire.

So far...so good, you are thinking to yourself. Now this is where Walter Ray lovers and I being to dissent.

Reputation

"Men have imagined republics and principalities that never really existed at all. Yet the way men live is so far removed from the way they ought to live that anyone who abandons what is for what should be pursues his downfall rather than his preservation; for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good."

Walter Ray's reputation varies from whoever you speak with. Some will see Williams as humble, modest, and a great role model for people of all ages to emulate in their profession. Others will see Williams as surly, moody, cantankerous, and aloof. This is usually the price that most great individual athletes deal with when it comes to reputation. This however, should not be a slight to Williams. There are many possible qualities The Prince must possess, they must not be overly concerned with having all of the good ones, seeing as he might have to act against them. The only ethic for The Prince to have are the ones beneficial to have to maintain his estate. For Williams, the only thing that should matter is whatever it takes to maintain his status as the ruler. Qualities be damned...

Generosity vs. Parsimony

The Prince must not be overly generous to the subjects (think fans) for fear of losing all his resources. However, cannot be too tight or be called a miser. Williams is not one for autograph sessions, clinics, or special appearances during the off-season. He would rather pitch horseshoes, play golf, and watch Fox New or CNN. Now that he's 50, he can add whuppin' senior bowlers during the summer. Again, anything to maintain the status of his estate. The Prince should be reputed as a miser more so than being considered too generous to his people.

Cruelty vs. Mercy

Machiavelli writes that on the subject of being feared or loved, "The answer is one would like to be both the one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is safer to be feared than loved if you cannot be both". It is highly unlikely that Walter Ray is feared. This is not like if the PBA would shudder in fear of Williams if Seattle called up Williams and said, "Look Walter...we are going to alter our patterns this season. We are thinking about making the conditions favor a fallback or deep inside line to score well. We don't need your input or anything, but just letting you know, we're going to shut out the gutter. Hope you have a good day!" Again, highly unlikely that Williams would make the PBA urinate on themselves if he were to say, "I won't bowl so shove it up your rectum". That is the grave tragedy of the athlete, in particular one that is now 50 and in a sport where mainstream attention is lacking: Walter Ray is not bigger than the game. Therefore, fearing Walter Ray is not a likely proposition.

But what about being loved? Is Walter Ray loved? I know Dick Weber was/is loved. I know Earl Anthony was/is loved. These past 12 months have shown us how much fans admired and reallllllly loved Mark Roth. I know that Duke is loved for his friendliness and competitive fire as well as short stature. I know Bohn is loved for his generosity and family man qualities. I know Pete Weber is loved for his bravado and his human flaws. There are not many people that hate the men I just mentioned, but for Walter Ray, I don't know. I know he has respect from his peers and fans and not unjustifiably so. He has earned everything he has and will have from the sport of bowling. He has earned money, fame, respect, and legendary status. But love? I am not sure. I'm not even sure I see Walter Ray as loved. I respect the hell out of him, but I feel as if Walter will not be loved. What is weird about the whole situation is that Anthony and Williams are pretty much the same person. Both were kinda square, dorky, humble characters in bowling. However, Anthony is loved for being that way, hell he was even nicknamed "Square Earl". Walter Ray is not loved for being that, if anything, he is antagonized for it. Does this not make him The Prince? Hardly. The Prince is meant to rule by fear and respect more than being loved. The love, according to Machiavelli, can make people soften for you and not have their total respect out of you based on fear in battle. Machiavelli would rather have a prince in the mold of Hannibal, a man who had various races in his army, yet was in command of his troops and they feared failing him. Machiavelli would rather not have an Scipio Africanus, a leader whose troops often dissident and were known for their mutiny. For Walter Ray of course, he does not have an army behind him bowling, but he has fans that respect him without question. Love...we might know until long after his career ends. It's the sad irony for the great Walter Ray Williams Jr.: he is The Prince indeed. The perfect Prince in fact, but love may have to wait.

Bowling Philosophy-May 2010

2010-05-14T15:18:00.000-07:00

A "Grand" Time
by Thomas Scherrer

Kulick "Slams" Door on History

History beckoned Kelly Kulick pretty much all season long. Teased her. Dared her. Challenged her. Called out to her. In some respects, forced her. Kulick responded with one more major moment by running down top seed Liz Johnson in the 2010 US Open title match, 233-203 to not only affirm that Kulick, not Johnson is the world's best female kegler, but signed off on what can arguably be considered the greatest season in women's bowling history.

Sorry.

I meant to say bowling's history.

Sorry, allow me to try that again. If you read my blogs, you understand how much I value winning major championships over any other accomplishment in individual sports. Sports is, after all, about winning on the grandest stage to be remembered as a legend. Kelly Kulick has now allowed us to fully embrace her 2009-10 season with such words as "dream season" and "magical" and "unparalleled". I have one more word: transcendent (another word I enjoy using on my blogs).

Kulick's body of work in 2009-10 will go down as pretty much unbeatable in bowling history-past or present. As we fully try to define Kelly Kulick's legacy (as most recently are defining that of LeBron James' recent events), we must not lose sight of what is vitally important. We were witnesses to something never seen before. The only question remains: what did we see, exactly? There are four situations that Kulick's season can be defined as:

Situation 1: Kulick became the first female to ever win both the Queens and US Open in a season. No need to discuss this. She made history in this situation. Easy to define.

Situation 2: Kulick became the first bowler to win a Triple Crown in a season. Most fans forgot that Kulick won the inaugural Women's World Championship to start off 2009 during the World Series of Bowling. Can't really argue that, however people would dispute the nature of how the format was set up and that any event during the WSOB was entering the "scam" format. Make that argument all you want, but a major win is a major win is a major freakin' win. Of course, that win allowed Kulick to bowl in the Tournament of Champions and we all know how that turned out...

Situation 3: Kulick won bowling's Grand Slam. Right? Right?? Right??? She did win all 3 of her gender's major titles, plus the one event that has no female equivalency in the TOC. This was a Grand Slam!!! Of course, people will also argue that point as well. Some of the real nit-pickers will concede the Triple Crown but a Grand Slam they cannot. As of right now, David Whitley is probably denouncing Kulick's last two wins because they came against imaginary people in an recreational activity. Of course Whitley the Witless probably didn't know that Kulick won the ladies two most prestigious events in the matter of 15 days.

Situation 4: Kulick had the greatest season in women's bowling history. Hard to define by some because there is no ladies tour today and some would go further as to say that if there was a women's tour, Kulick would most likely not have been able to win a World Championship and by extension, a Tournament of Champions. We also cannot forget to mention that the fields for certain women's events are more limited today. These are intangible facts worthy of mentioning. We also have 3 comparable seasons in women's bowling history to try and put it next to Kulick's 2009-10 season. This is where my argument begins.

Season 1: Lisa Wagner (1988)...5 wins, first female bowler to earn $100,000 in a single season, US Open champion, BWAA Bowler of the Year (3rd of 4). Historic for wins, money, and overall significance. This was 22 years ago, during an era where few men were earning 6 figures in bowling.

Season 2: Wendy MacPherson (1997)...4 wins, sets the all-time record for earnings by a woman ($165,425), BWAA Bowler of the Year (back-to back with 1996, 2nd of 4, first of her two back-to-back POY awards), no majors. Worth nothing that the '97 US Open was not contested. Historic for money.

Season 3: Carolyn Dorin-Ballard (2001)...record 7 wins, Queens champion and World Open champion for major wins, first of 2 BWAA POY awards, $135,045 in earnings, 2001 WIBC Team Tournament champion, broke 8 tour records in that season. When women's bowling and the PWBA in particular, was taking a dive in events, CDB's historical season was considered to be the standard for which all seasons would be measured by in women's bowling.

Season 4: Kulick ('09-'10)...5 wins including the Malaysian Open in mid-summer 2009, 3 ladies majors, 1 men's major, first female to win a men's PBA event, 5 television appearances, 10-0 this season, $110,000 in those 5 events alone, in her 10 events this season Kulick's lowest finish was seventh. Seventh??? Are you kidding me?!? Historic on so many fronts in terms of gender breaking, financial, media attention (not as sensational as we probably all assumed but still very solid). Plus, similar to Bill O'Neill's hijacked 2009-10 Player of the Year season, changed the nature of the sport as to who the game's elite players are. No longer is women's bowling a Dorin-Ballard/Barnes/MacPherson/Terrell/Barrette-Hulsenberg-led game. It is a Kulick/Johnson/Pluhowsky/Nation-led game with collegiate standouts in Perez/Leuthold/Earnest/Peloquin/Baker/Miller-type players coming up shortly, looking to quickly test the newly incumbent era of women's bowling. This is truly a great time to be a professional female bowler and the lady at the top of the heap is Kelly Kulick today and for years to come.

Or is it?

As Kulick made history, there has been discussion that this 2010 US Open might be the last Open championship for the lassies. Financial woes and lack of participation have turned one of bowling's great events into a virtual and literal money pit for the United States Bowling Congress. Ideas of folding up shop and focusing solely on the PBA Women's Series and the Queens doesn't sound like such a terrible venture, despite how great this 2009-10 season went. Business is business and in some odd way, it might make more sense if the Women's US Open were not to be contested if it lead to more events and a possible tour schedule. Again, I said if...majors are majors and as we have just seen this past season from Kelly Kulick, you make history in the big time events. Because of that, Kelly Kulick has slammed her way into bowling history.

Bowling Philosophy-April 2010

2010-04-26T15:00:00.000-07:00

Chris Barnes-The 40-Year-Old "Version"

by Thomas Scherrer

One of these days, people will truly see themselves laughing at what they say or feel in regard to Chris Barnes when his career accomplishments and active participation as a professional bowler comes to its nadir. However, much like most great players in the sport's history, they are often spoken about in polarizing terms. Two camps litter the bowling world when it relates to Barnes: one is the camp that highly supports Barnes for his tremendous physical gifts. The other camp wants to dump all over Barnes for being unable to live up to those lofty standards by not winning enough. There is always that dangerous double-edged sword with most talents who are labeled "can't miss" or "top prospect" in any sport for a few simple reasons:

1) They are supposed to win...
2) They are supposed to dominate...
3) They are supposed to run over the competition and...
4) They are to never let us down when it matters the most.

Those criteria almost make winning a given and anything less a shock to people...how could a guy with all that talent lose??? When a person of Barnes' bowling caliber doesn't win, it makes fans or defenders of him suffer several emotions. They range to disappointment to justification to sudden hatred. It was never more evident when in the PBA Tour's final national event in Baltimore, Md., Barnes chided opponent Brad Angelo after a Brooklyn strike courtesy of ESPN's Inside Angle segments during live telecasts. Angelo would take this "shot" and deliver a flurry of "real strikes" to end the match and defeat Barnes, and with that, the fans of the PBA took over. Some calling Barnes classless, a prisoner of the moment (a suggested swipe at Barnes winning his second Roll 2 Riches event with a Brooklyn strike), and some words that rhyme with "glassbowl". Well for viewers who try to defend Chris Barnes, he did in fact act like a "glassbowl", in fact a major "glassbowl".

All snide remarks aside, this has sadly become the norm for PBA Universe: Barnes will never, ever be the bowler we thought he'd be. Regardless of how the next stage of Barnes' life goes, fans have already invested too much in a player who is not, in their minds, the game's heir apparent. Sounds strange to say, but we have been waiting for the successor to Walter Ray's throne for a long, long, looooonnnng time and we might still be waiting. While some of that distinction belongs to how great Walter Ray has been in his late 40's, some of this has to be directed at Barnes. However, we must not forget that Barnes is now 40 years old: still physically a tremendous talent, a wonderful in-game strategist, durable beyond belief, and always learning a few new tricks to add to his already stuffed toolbox. Barnes still has another possible 10-15 good years in him to pad stats that many thought he would have already acquired, and we don't seem to knock Norm Duke or Mike Scroggins for having a late career resurgence: in fact, we have applauded them (Scroggins for his unwavering ability to outwork his fellow players, despite being limited; Duke for his focus-driven persona in major championship events).

With that being mentioned, a few questions pop up as to Barnes legacy currently as he now enters his 40's:

Question #1: Is Chris Barnes a Hall of Fame bowler?
Stupid to ask, stupider to even respond...he is a Hall of Fame bowler. But...

Question #2: Is Chris Barnes a first ballot Hall of Famer?
This is not quite as rock solid as you or I think it should be. Let's observe some facts about this generation of bowling: the PBA is an exempt tour now, with only 64 bowlers making the main draw of the tournament. Your odds of winning events are slightly greater than they once were. They just are. Factor in Barnes' television history, which has been spotty at best, horrific at worst, and Barnes should be roughly in the 20 title range at this stage of his career, or similar to where Duke was when he turned 40. He is currently in the mix with players such as Steve Hoskins, Dave Husted, Patrick Allen, and Randy Pedersen to name a few (10-15 title range). Personally, I would be a harder grader for who should be a Hall of Fame bowler (that is, if I had a vote). In my personal opinion, there are 5 requirements to being a first ballot Hall of Famer bowler:

1) Win at least 15 titles and not 10 titles (that gets a player such as Jason Couch in, but it will make more sense soon).
2) Win at least 3 major championships. A little harder to win in professional bowling, however now with exempt fields, more demanding lane conditions, and longer formats, the better players should easily contend for more majors now than ever before (this makes Doug Kent a Hall of Famer).
3) Be a Player of the Year (this makes Kent a shoo-in along with validating David Ozio and Dave Ferarro HOF careers).
4) Have at least two transcendent seasons as a player (win two majors in a year, or 4+ titles in a season, or set a record for earnings, average, television appearances, ect.).
5) Revolutionize the game in some way that changes how we look at bowling (Roth's power game, Pete Weber's backswing/power stroke, Ozio's risk/reward gutter play, Husted's dominance playing the deep inside angle a generation before it was commonplace, or Jason Belmonte's two handed delivery).

It is feasible to be a Hall of Famer with one of these requirements, a given (in time) with two, but with 3, you should be a no doubter Hall of Famer. With 4 or all 5 of those requirements, you go into legendary/iconic status. We have to give some wiggle room to Weber because he has never won Player of the Year (a topic for later day in time) or Brian Voss (not enough majors) or Parker Bohn III (ditto) to reach all 5 requirements, but let's get back to Barnes' Hall of Fame status for just a moment and for whether or not he meets the Scherrer Hall of Fame Meter.

Criteria 1: 15+ titles, Barnes has 12. You'll imagine he'll get to the 15 title mark in the next few years, but this is Chris Barnes: you probably pegged him for 18-20 titles at this point in his career. As for now, not HOF worthy for me.
Criteria 2: 3+ majors, Barnes has 2. Again, you can guesstimate that Barnes will win several more majors soon. Then again, he did lose the 2008 T of C to Michael Haugen Jr. when he has a 50+ pin lead on him, he did lose the 2010 T of C to Kelly Kulick-no disrespect to Kulick but if you are Barnes facing a non-winner in the championship match of a major, you should win if we are to take you seriously as being an all-time great. He also let Walter Ray walk all over him in the 2010 Masters title match (don't worry Barnes supporters, he let Walter Ray do the same thing to him 6 years ago too). And for those who look at the last two instances and say that for Barnes to beat 265 and 290 in title matches is hard to beat, you're right, but no excuses. Barnes wouldn't want any, nor take any. In any event, currently he falls short on #2.
Criteria 3: Player of the Year, check (2007-08). Barnes won it off the points leaders award, and not by a vote. If you were to vote on the '07-08 POY, Barnes would have 3rd easily. Duke would have won (two majors/Triple Crown/Grand Slam historic season), followed by Walter Ray (two wins at 48 years old, 9 telecasts, best WRW post-2003 season), then Barnes (two wins, no majors, one gigantic collapse to Haugen, 9 telecasts), and only slightly over Haugen for 4th (two wins, one major, one historic rally to beat Barnes). Yeah, I know I'm picking on Chris Barnes but it is kinda easy to do so when there are other factors helping you argument. So he passes for #3 but if this were 1998 and not 2008, Barnes is not the POY.
Criteria 4: Transcendent season...? Barnes has carved out solid season after solid season but nothing of historical value, with the exception of the 2000 season, where he made 12 shows and 2008-09 where he put on the best 6 week run in bowling history during the first ever Extreme Swing. In 2000 however, Barnes won exactly as many title as I did in 2000: zero. Can't transcend when you don't win, period...thanks for asking. '08-'09 was a tremendous season for Barnes, showcasing his overall talents. He appeared to transcend bowling for two months and had the 8 pin fell during the US Open to beat Scroggins and then defeat Duke, he has arguably his defining season in his back pocket. However, we can concede this to him. He was THAT good despite all the zany formats and lane conditions and format changes that he deserves this one. A format designed to show how good Barnes was proved just that.
The best example of transcendent, dominant "I own the PBA Tour" seasons came most recently by Tommy Jones, who submitted back-to-back 4 title seasons. Jones got on television and left a trail of carcasses behind him and was the 2005-06 POY in a landslide. If Patrick Allen's equally transcendent 2004-05 season doesn't exist, Jones has back-to-back POY awards and is more of a lock Hall of Famer than Barnes is. He might still be as he just added his 3rd Japan Cup title a few days ago. The ceiling on Jones to be an all-time great is much, much, MUCH higher than Barnes' is. Don't believe it? Jones has already proved he can go to new heights...twice.
Criteria 5: Revolutionize the game. Barnes has taken our game to newer heights and for the better (and you thought I was going to bury Chris Barnes the entire time??? Give me some credit, please). His ability to be versatile on all conditions, keep up with this technological revolution of bowling balls, oil patterns, oiling machines, and lane surfaces, as well as having a great work ethic and a fitness regime that has further advanced his game (as well as others trying to keep up) makes this criteria a no doubter. The days of bowlers slinging two balls across their shoulders, bowling 3 separate 5 game qualifying blocks, then hopping to the bar, eating less than healthy food, and girl chasing are over. It is replaced by more dedicated, sophisticated bowlers who know how to take care of their bodies, adapt quicker to lane conditions, and are overall far more talented than their predecessors can be attributed mostly to the younger crop of players in the mid to late 1990's (Barnes, Healey, Smith, Haugen, and others) forcing the older generation to keep up and follow suit or follow their fellow competitors to an early retirement. Huge Advantage: Barnes.

Under the given requirements, Barnes certainly nails one of them, and borders on two others and he still has plenty of time left in his career to check off most everything off this list to become an iconic figure in the sport of bowling. However, we are still to wonder in question as to the legacy of Chris Barnes in bowling's history. As fans, no matter what we might feel or say about him, you want Chris Barnes to be one of the greatest players to ever bowl. You want this because you can someday tell your children or grandchildren that take an interest in bowling that you saw arguably, the game's most proficient tactician and in-game strategist. Also, a big time, clutch performer who sealed the deal in major events and became a player that truly progressed our sport to newer and higher levels. For now, Chris Barnes is just like most of us: human.

Bowling Philosophy-April 2010

2010-04-13T14:50:00.000-07:00

Un-a"dore"ing
by Thomas Scherrer

It is sometimes sad to see Rome fall, in particular when the rise to power never fully reached its potential. As a curator of bowling from a participatory and philosophical standpoint, it is important to see things as objectively as possible, despite what your head and heart tells you. This tell tale heart version surrounds the end to the Vanderbilt Commodores 2009-10 Women's Bowling season: a season that resulted in 67 wins against arguably, the nation's toughest schedule. The season ended with a rather distraught 5th place finish, losing to eventual national runner-up Nebraska in the double-elimination bracket system. It also ended the stellar and somewhat on-the-fence career of Josie Earnest, who has virtually been the face of this program for 3 underachieving years. This, however should not be about Earnest (at least not at this time because there are many who felt that Earnest needed to validate her collegiate career with another national championship) or anyone participating on the team during this transitional year. The truth is, Vanderbilt has all the talent and ability that you need in college bowling to win, however something has always been missing since the 2007 season.

I always kind of weep with some sense of nostalgia about the 2006-07 team that won the school's first and still only national championship. I watched a young group of gals embrace team first fundamentals, a strong sense of character for such young ladies, as well as a dominant Baker bowling team, which is the backbone for all of college bowling. Not just because my girlfriend of almost 4 years, Michelle Peloquin was on the team, but it was a greater sense of things that went beyond bowling. That team transcended statistics, or who led a tournament (3 people won at least one All-Events title that season) in average, or who bowled where. I saw them as the definition of a team: mostly 7 girls coming together for a perfect storm to make school history. What was so great about this was that they had the blueprint plus another two years together to possibly make history. It never happened...in fact, the team that resembled the 2006-07 team slipped further and further into oblivion. Some blamed it solely on the growing egos of Tara Kane and Karen Grygiel, who were not talented enough to assume trying to assume leadership roles, thus creating a team divide. Some would go on record as saying that there was some hyper-jealousy concerning Earnest's media attention, which did border on nauseating but can you blame Vanderbilt for trying to put the machine behind Earnest? You had a marketable, young star on the rise. You needed an engaging face to help build the program and brand for the future and her individual accomplishments certainly lived up to the requirements. However the team aspect always seemed to fall short. This is not an indictment of the bowler or the person Josie Kaye Earnest, but as the face of Vanderbilt's bowling team, Earnest never got the team back to the promised land.

Then some would look at the coach...

When Head Coach John Williamson was asked about this current 2009-10 team in comparison to the 2006-07 team, Williamson was very pleased about his current squad's togetherness, despite not winning a second championship:

“I’ve told this team several times over the past couple of weeks that this is the first group of individuals that I would call a team. They bought into what we were doing and the direction we were going, and they all bought in. Over the last couple of years, I couldn’t say that we were 100 percent bought in. Last year when we were eliminated by Central Missouri, we just sort of fell apart. We didn’t end on a strong note today against Nebraska, but we certainly didn’t fall apart. We struggled, but we threw good shots and sometimes pins just didn’t fall. This year we bought in as a team..."

But Williamson had one final statement in regards to the 2007 championship team:

"...In 2007, it was pretty much an aberration. We caught lightning in a bottle and ran with it.”

Yes folks, you heard it correctly: the head coach of the school's only national championship just buried its history by calling that championship season an aberration. I will be the first to admit that I did not see the 2009-10 team bowl at all this season and by no means, do I feel that what Williamson said about this current team is not anything but honest and sincere. However, as someone who did watch the 2006-07 team and saw it actually win (which, if we are being blunt, is the idea, right? To win??), I am surprised by this statement as well as upset by it. Surprised that Williamson publicly said this because he basically denounced the 2007 team as lucky or not buying into the team concept, despite winning the national championship. I feel as if you can feel that way about a previous team, but to say it publicly? For all that it is worth, Williamson figuratively just took the 2007 trophy, snuck it out of the athletic center, laid it down on the school's 50-yard line, doused it in kerosene, and lit it on fire. Is that too harsh of a statement to make? Let's delve into the statement further (the upsetting part): to call the 2007 title season an aberration is to say that the effort put forth by the players to embrace the team concept was less than adequate, but let's not stop there. Williamson's aberration statement should be upsetting to not just the players who put the work in to win it, but also the parents, grandparents, siblings, relatives, friends, boyfriends that sacrificed their weekends to travel, to cheer, and to support their daughters, granddaughters, nieces, sisters, and girlfriends on.

Ultimately, this is what should scare you about Williamson's statement: he still fails to grasp what bowling is at its essence, which is a mom and pop type sport. Bowling at its most intricate, organic state is game that takes an entire village to raise a bowling child, which is not that foreign to that of a hockey child growing up: it takes everyone to make it work. Bowling and hockey share some strange parallels for parents as it does for kids: a sport that has a majority of its events in the fall and winter. Regionally speaking, the weather for these sports are more cold-weather. Parents of both sports will wake up at 5am to warm up the car or minivan with the weather below freezing, get the kids ready with their equipment, drive sometimes 4 or 5 hours so their kids can bowl or skate in a weekend tournament, giving up maybe a day of work or two, standing and cheering their kids on and then driving them back home after one or two days of competition so they can get home, finish their homework, and get ready to do it all again the next weekend. These sports are devoid of AAU or sleep-away camps. There are no scouts watching and recruiting young boys or girls in 9th grade to come to their university, nor is it being televised on ESPN. Nothing is comped or paid for by sponsors: you pay your own entry fees and hotel rooms and for food and gas. Then, all that dedication by the parents for their children pays off with NCAA taking care of their kids, yet they still pay their way to attend via hotel rooms, dinners, gas, and tolls just to see that the sacrifice was all worth it. In these sports, winning takes a concerted team effort, no matter what the circumstances are. So, for Williamson to call the 2007 season an aberration is a slap in the face to anyone that was a part of it. Anyone who had any investment in that 2007 championship season and felt like they helped contribute to it and with one afterthought statement by the team's head coach, it urinated on everyone's investment.

Funnily enough, I don't see Williamson giving the trophy to Maryland-Eastern Shore-the team they defeated-because it was "an aberration" or donating part of his salary back to Vanderbilt for "catching lightning in a bottle". I don't see those things happening by a very nice guy. In speaking with Coach Williamson, he is a nice, engaging, sneaky funny person. When I went down to Vanderbilt a few times to visit Michelle, he would let me join in their practices to help out in some doubles matches. He is not a bad guy at all, but to be fair, I have never felt that he was a good fit for a bowling coach. A simple reason is that John Williamson has never bowled competitively in a league or a tournament before. He has made the strides to understand the game, being a USBC Silver Level Coach however, Williamson knows little as to what goes into the psyche of being a bowler or understanding what they are seeing in a sport where the main opponents (lane conditioner and pins) are both invisible and indifferent sometimes. The comments about calling the 2007 season an aberration are unfair to both his program's past as well as its future. Taken at face value, that 2007 season is a byproduct of the players he has now. These new recruits have come to Vanderbilt not only to gain a very solid education (which should never be overlooked) but to be a part of the legacy that players like Peloquin, Earnest, Kane, Grygiel, Ashley Belden, Kaitlin Reynolds, and Mandy Keily helped formulate prior to them should not be overlooked. I do hope for Vanderbilt's sake that the run is not over: NCAA bowling needs them to be a powerhouse program as a means to help promote women's college bowling to the big conferences as maybe a sport they can take up, giving bowling a much needed boost for the next generation of aspiring young bowlers that are still driving in the backseat of their parent's minivan at 6am to go bowl because it is all about the love of the game. And I hope for Coach Williamson, he remembers the past of his program and embraces it for the future.

Fill Ball: I found (as referred to by Michelle) Williamson's statement on the New Jersey City University athletic page, as they were presenting coverage of the 2010 NCAA championships. Ira Thor, the Director of Sports Information at NJCU, did a tremendous job presenting up to the minute stats and scores of the tournament as well as question and answer features each day with some of the teams. However...I did not find Williamson's statement on Vanderbilt's athletic page during coverage of the tournament. In fact, if you didn't know any better, the comments Williamson made didn't event exist!

That omission should not go unnoticed. If you are an elite program, you owe it to your fans and player's friends and family as much coverage and access to the team as possible, as well as presenting all the relevant information. In fairness to Vanderbilt, they had a link to NJCU's website on each article during the 2010 NCAA Championship so perhaps, they can be given a little slack. If anyone clicked on the link and did enough investigative reporting, you could find the comment. With that being said however, a statement such as what Williamson said should be brought into the proper context. It could not nor should not go unnoticed by people who access the vucommodores.com website to get their info on the women's bowling team. This might be more nit picking or some might go as far to say, "piling on" Vanderbilt, but it is worth bringing up as a means of objective writing, for which in this instance, was very difficult.

Thomas Scherrer is back working in a bowling alley, as well as a USBC Level One Certified Coach. Bowling Philosophy is my blog dedicated to understanding the nature of the sport of bowling and what we all can do to improve the game we love.

Bowling Philosophy-April 2010

2010-04-06T11:09:00.000-07:00

2009-10 PBA Tour: The Season of WOW

by Thomas Scherrer

As the official book closes on the PBA's 52nd full season of touring national events, I feel like a card player in Las Vegas as the clock approaches 4AM during a marathon of blackjack: alternately giddy and deflated, drunken and dazed, confused and even more confused, and ultimately highlights of being up 2 grand, then having a Mo Rivera-like closer coming in disheartening me. This season can be easily summed up as being "WOW...did that just happen?!?" on audio replay for months on end. First time champions, major champions out of nowhere, Player of the Year storylines, Cinderella stories, pros turned amateurs winning, amateurs turned pros winning, PTQ bowlers winning, hell, women winning for goodness sake!!! WOW...it all happened this year. This 2009-10 season was a season that lived on and off of every conceivable brink you can imagine and we all came out remembering something about what bowling fans just witnessed.

For instance:

The World Series of Bowling that happened, roughly 12 years ago it feels, gave the PBA a home base for a few months. Were the fields in Detroit lower than expected? Yes. Was the scoring pace anemic for television execs? True. Did the bowling curtail players seasons? Possibly. Was it worth doing again? Absolutely.
The Cheetah Championship was a 90 minute program that described what it takes to win a PBA event over the course of a week of bowling. Features such as multiple matches, interviews, player profiles, and the story of upstart Ryan Ciminelli, for which his story was only beginning in the 09-10 season.
Tom Smallwood's journey from everyman auto worker to laid-off auto worker, to PBA exempt player, to PBA World Champion over the incumbent Wes Malott. The American Dream, Part One.
Walter Ray at age 50 winning the Motor City Open over names such as Barnes, Weber, O'Neill, and Jones.
Then Walter Ray striking again at the Masters over Barnes...again.
Anthony LaCaze nailing down a clutch double to win his first title.
Rolloff, Part One: Jurek vs. Fagan. Jack Jurek finding a way to finally win a tournament, some 15 years after he won his last (and only) title.
Rolloff, Part Two: Belmonte vs. Ziesig. Save some space for this moment.
Brian Kretzer at long last, securing victory over Patrick Allen in the Match Play Championship. He deserved it just as much as any of the first time winners this season.
The Real Deal's Appeal: Billy O'Neill's 2008-09 season was the beginning, 2009-10 was The Leap, 2010-11 could be the true beginning of bowling's next all-time great (just wish it happened this year).
Brian Ziesig...need we say more? Relaxed, calm, cool, unassuming, funny, humorous...etcetera. How about these words? Talented, successful, champion. Grande Cabeza gave us the American Dream, Part Two.
The American Dream, Part Three: Kelly Kulick. What else can you say? Greatest performance in our sport's history given the circumstances.
The Un-American Dream: Chris Barnes. A lost season to say the very least.
The Party at Scroggys: what a fun ride it was for Mike Scroggins in his quest for the most unlikely POY in PBA history. He came up one game (and one virtuoso Pete Weber game) away from stunning the bowling world.
The Greatest One? Walter Ray, age 50, seventh POY award. I don't have to like it, I don't have to believe it, but I have to respect it. And please....PBA: let's work out a way to see if we cannot find an easier, more exciting way to find out the real story of the PBA season and the Player of the Year. We can all work on it people, this is an intelligent group of people in bowling.
And to the fans as always, the real MVP's of the PBA. For all the signs, the yells, the screams, the Hambone signs, and of course, the sacrifice. You, the fans of the PBA deserve your own WOW.

This was a good year to be a fan of bowling...here is to the summer and to the historic 2010-11 PBA season. As always, we'll try to do better the next time around. Namaste.

Bowling Philosophy-March 2010

2010-03-31T05:42:00.000-07:00

Time Stands Still
by Thomas Scherrer

By all accounts, the PBA Tour's 2009-10 season has been marked by the "WOW!" factor in terms of storylines and drama-filled events. In a season where we have seen laid-off auto workers (Thomas Smallwood) to can't miss talents (Bill O'Neill) to PTQ qualifiers (Anthony LaCaze) to ladies (Kelly Kulick) winning PBA titles, the WOW! factor appeared to be run dry of new stories in this crazy and curious PBA season.

Now...you can add amateurs to this list as well. On Sunday afternoon, Brian Ziesig of Levittown, NY lived a bowler's dream by winning his first professional title in the GEICO Mark Roth Plastic Ball Championship. The win for Ziesig, the first ever by a non-member in a standard PBA event, was made even sweeter, with the tournament emanating from AMF Babylon Lanes in Long Island. A proverbial home field advantage, Ziesig beat the iconic Walter Ray Williams Jr. and then two-handed phenom Jason Belmonte, with the latter coming in an electrifying title match where both players struck out late to force a 247-247 tie and then to sport's ultimate sudden death: a one-ball roll off. Belmonte's first and only offering left an absolutely devastating solid 7 pin. Ziesig stepped up needing a strike to claim victory and did just that, getting a friendly lean on the 10 pin to claim victory and literally tear the roof off of AMF Babylon Lanes (which some people in bowling wouldn't actually mind if all the roofs of AMF centers blew off).

Some might see the tomahawked 10 pin over Belmonte and rolling the 2-8 to beat Williams as signs of destiny from Ziesig, or perhaps some pure luck. However, Ziesig's bowling need no apology or excuses. One of the finest players Long Island has to offer, he earned this victory by putting on a tremendous performance all week long. In a week where technology went back to the future, so to speak by having each player use only two plastic bowling balls, Ziesig took on the game's best with about as much equity as you can get in bowling. Talent and skill won this tournament, as well as a solid 238.12 average, and the ability by Ziesig on television to easily be the most comfortable a person has been on TV all year by anybody bowling. Jokes with Rob Stone and Randy Pedersen, not taking himself too seriously, stepping up in the title match against Belmonte needing all 3 strikes to force a roll off and then doing so like it was nothing more than a Thursday night at South Levittown Lanes. For all you knew, Ziesig could have been drinking a Coors Light (or 4) off the approach area: he looked that damn relaxed, it was eerie.

Personally, I can say I don't know Brian Ziesig well enough to call him a friend or a buddy, but I do know this about him: his bowling was never in question. This tournament win by no means validated who he was as a bowler or even as a person. That part of his legacy was always intact, however what Ziesig did for most of us who have watched him these past several years locally validated our dream. It was a win not just for him, but we all felt like we won Sunday. Of course, we cannot say that actually happened: Ziesig won, we cheered, we screamed, hell, part of a NEBA tournament in East Haven, CT where I was bowling, time stood still. Ziesig was the main attraction even though he was not in the bowling alley. He wasn't even in the same state!!! He was living out a dream most of us dare to dream when we are younger, but no longer can dream due to the real world. There are bills to pay, jobs to endure, kids to raise, and other to-do's in the world. But for Brian Ziesig, he made us forget about that: in an event where bowling went back in time, technologically speaking, time stood still figuratively. So what if we couldn't actually see Ziesig's winning shot (that's because everyone stood up in the building!!!), the crowd let us know; Randy and Rob let us know; and even our collective amateur hearts let us know. Brian Ziesig was a winner with or without this title, but this makes it all the more sweeter that for one week, Big Head was Big Man on bowling's campus for one week.

Other Tidbits on Bowling

The 2009-10 season now has a serious dilemma on their hands. There is a good possibility that the Player of the Year race might actually be tied at season's end. As of right now, both Williams and O'Neill are tied with 56 points with one event left, the Marathon Open in Baltimore. While it makes for great drama to see if both The Real Deal and DeadEye make the televised finals, if neither make it, it does open up the reality that there could be a share of the POY...kinda, sorta.

The tiebreaker for the POY race will be determined by the Harry Smith Point Leader list for which Williams leads right now. While it would be a fair and simple way to determine who should be the 09-10 POY, it once again presents a question as to who fans think is this season's best player. Yes, I've got a literal marathon blog coming up about this later on in the week.

Has the Kulick Factor worn off? It seems as if Kelly Kulick's historic Tournament of Champions victory has passed through the media with scant attention. Yes, it got local media outlets, some TV interviews, and a brilliant Rick Reilly article on espn.com. It also got some heat from fanhouse.com's David Whitley that it cannot be seen as a legitimate sporting event because "if the best female in the world can beat the best male in the world, it doesn't qualify".

Glad to see David Whitley has a job in sports. He has also railed all over NCAA women's bowling, for which he basically denounced it as being legit as well, figuring that while Whitley was looking for Vanderbilt's 2007 national championship, he "should have looked for a plate of golden nachos atop a silver pitcher of beer". No truth to the rumor that this clueless (I had another vulgar word in place of clueless) writer has actually attended one of Vanderbilt's two hour practice sessions or any of their workout's in the gym, but yeah, he's qualified to write about bowling just like I am qualified to write about health care reform.

As for Vandy, they walk into the 2010 NCAA championships, once again as the prohibitive favorite to win the title. The last two seasons, things have not gone according to plan. Makes you wonder if a program that has thrived primarily on recruiting the best talent in high school and not actually developing players and creating roles for them has fallen behind the curve on teaching players to be better instead of trying to build a fantasy team. Sounds harsh? The results the past few have shown that talent alone doesn't win in a team sport. Yes, there will be more on this next week as well for April's Bowling Philosophy.

Speaking of plastics, the Brockton County Bowling Association is having their second Hall of Fame Classic as Boston Bowl in Hanover, MA April 11th. The tournament consists of 3 games, 90% handicap of 230 average, with two separate blocks at 11am and 1pm. The format is eliminator style, half the field advances and so on until there is a winner. Players can only use plastic or rubber bowling balls for competition. This is more of a personal wish, but I wish there was more events like this where technology was not the sole factor in who wins tournaments but more on talent. The only way to make the game more equitable is to have flatter gutter-to-gutter patterns or make a rule enforcing not merely a rule on restricting technology but limiting it.

To take this one step further, college bowling Tier One events in college only allow players the use of 5 bowling balls. I used to hate this rule when I bowled but now I understand the financial and logistical reasoning behind why Karl Nikolai instituted this rule. It also gives the game more of a sense that it takes lane play, strategy, ball speed regulation, and hand position changes to be good on top of having good team skills and communication as opposed to Bowler X is carrying all over the place and Bowler Y is not despite having more tools in their bag.

On Mark Roth: we always talk about how great players are, but never how important they are/were. If this past week's GEICO Mark Roth Plastic Ball Championship was a reflection on how loved Roth was, then we should all be so lucky. As for his importance to the game of bowling, try these questions on for size: are there better players in bowling history than Mark Roth? Absolutely. Are there more important players in bowling history than Mark Roth? Who? WHO?

Tommy Scherrer is now back working in the bowling center, as well as a USBC Level One certified coach. He is also on the radio Wednesday nights from 7-8pm. Log onto audiojournal.net and click on the Listen Live link to listen to myself and Adam Durrance broadcast a recap of the Worcester Telegram and Gazette.

Bowling Philosophy-March 2010

2010-03-15T05:43:00.000-07:00

"Retro Diary: 2009 GoRVing Match Play Championship"

by Tommy Scherrer

As the 2009-10 PBA season returns for its last 3 events, I felt it was time to dust off the archives from last year's 2009 GoRVing Match Play Championship, featuring Chris Barnes and Walter Ray Williams Jr. I did for two reasons: 1) after searching for an actual job for 3 months, I finally landed a supervisory position with Wal-Mart and 2) I am attempting to get to this week's tournament to provide more insight into my entries. Currently, I am still waiting on the Worcester Telegram & Gazette for a possible credential to cover the tournament in Norwich, CT. Longshot odds? Sure, but it was worth a shot. Without further ado, let's go to the wayback machine with footnotes!

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Go RVing Match Play Championship

Barnes....Williams...it's the PBA on ESPN (cue the John Tesh music). Wait, what? That was the NBA on NBC? Sorry, folks.

12:55 PM: Quick cutaway from Baseball Tonight to Chris Barnes throwing a practice shot. Looked like he struck, he fist pumped. Nothing like a practice shot and a fist pump.(1)

12:57: Old School PBA clip with Tommy Jones in his Buddy Holly glasses...and he must have stopped at Denny's before the video shoot. Damn, Thomas.

1:00: Dicky V!!! It's Awesome baby...with a capital A!

1:01: Rob Stone giving us the rundown and then Randy Pedersen chimes in with his observation: he feels like Barnes has a huge advantage with the multiple patterns and the fact that he has rolled to 4 straight Extreme Swing telecasts. Quick cut to last night's action between Williams and Chris Loschetter then Barnes and Mike Wolfe. The exhibition those two put on last night was amazing. Barnes shot 824 for 3 games on two different patterns.(2)

1:04: WRW has got a lime green MoRich shirt with what appears to be polka-dots, Barnes is in his usual Lance Armstrong biker shirt.(3) Stone misspeaks by saying that this is the 4th time these two have bowled for a title. This is actually only the second time they have bowled on TV for a title and the 4th time, period.

1:08: I always feel like...somebody's WATCHIN MEEEEE! Geico: so easy, a wad of money and googly eyes can do it.

1:09: The chess match on the lanes...the Chameleon on the left, Cheetah on the right. Both players plan to play up the rail. Walter does just that: RED BALL UP 5!!!(4)

1:11: Barnes with a can opener strike to start, then dribbles, shoots, and scores on the left lane.

1:12: Hey, look. Barnes pulled a shot...what a shocker that was. Big 4 and the first open of the match.

1:14: Walter Ray....HAMBONE.(5) Or an opening 4 bagger (well said, Rob Stone). Then he packs another strike for 5 in a row.

1:16: Barnes strikes on the left lane with the Resurgence. Amazing how many miles that ball still has on it. Arguably the ball that saved Columbia 300. My girlfriend and I are discussing the bowling ball, saying how that ball tore up oil patterns in college (and still does as she bowls for Vanderbilt, as most of you know), but how she never could get a good feel for it.

1:20: Walter Ray with a humbling career review in comparison to Earl Anthony saying that was Earl did was much more impressive as he now has 7 in a row.

1:21: Barnes spares then strikes and flat out cannot hang with Williams if the outside is playing that well.(6) As Williams trips the 4 pin for 8 in a row. Crowd isn't even jacked up.

1:22: Now 9 in a row...you almost had a feeling something like this might happen today with these two and the friction zone to the right.

1:24: Barnes is Noble sign...very creative. Barnes changes balls again, really trying to max out his look on the lanes. Shoots 241. Now it is Walter...with a 7 pin...ouch. Suddenly, we have a match. Just like that. AND HE MISSED A SINGLE PIN SPARE!!! Incredible. The entire match changed. Barnes is only down 26 after one game when it looked like he'd be dead.

1:29: Nice section on youth bowling. One of the major criticisms of bowling in the last 5-10 years has been the death of junior bowling and how it has killed the adult leagues now. Tons of scholarships??? Don't think so...(7)

1:31 Randy talks to Barnes and WRW in between games. A nice evaluation...brain fart says Williams on the whiffed 7 pin.(8)

1:35: Lumber Liquidators...title sponsor of the PBA. Yep, I'm sold.

1:37: Barnes to start Game 2 and strikes. Barnes saw the light and is looking to explode through it. Walter on Cheetah makes a ball change and goes 2-8...something doesn't look right with him.

1:39: uh oh...uh oh...Barnes has found both lanes it would seem. He looks absolutely locked in.

1:40: Ball change for Deadeye...4-9. Misses both pins and then goes big 4 on the Chameleon. This is a fold worthy of the New York Mets bullpen...can't you just see K-Rod blowing out a vocal chord due to his excessive celebrating and being out for two months?(9) But I digress...

1:42: And Barnes is playing the Phillies...shoot me now. Now Barnes has 5 in a row, he looks absolutely locked in. Did I already say that? Sorry, that was a "Memento" moment, except I did not need to tattoo myself with notes.(10)

1:43: Walter Ray with the Flomax weekly update...and again goes high during the quick segment. He is having weak stream issues right now.

1:45: ESPN commercial for fantasy baseball with Alyssa Milano: the only child star that did not have a true falling out in her career in the last 25 years. Think about it very carefully and see if you can't figure out one more who accomplished that goal.

1:48: We return to Barnes now leading in the match suddenly...wow, just opened up the rack for 6 in a row. He is remarkable when he's right, now he has 7 in a row. One is thinking Barnes has started to run away and its only the middle of the match.

1:51: Now Barnes has 9 in a row...sensational. Walter Ray finally doubles in the match. I hate to say this about Williams but he has to try and alter Barnes' look instead of trying to run after him. Could he maybe move left and stay ahead of him?(11)

1:52: Barnes takes a re-rack.(12) Foolish of him but we'll see if it works. And yes, an SPLIT! WE still have a match! Barnes gives away roughly 30 pins back and it is now a 48 pin match after two games. That is easily doable for Deadeye to recover from.

1:56: Michelle: "I want to say this has lived up to the hype...but not entirely in a good way."
Me: "It is the beauty and the curse of these two."
Michelle: "It is."

What we mean by that is that we expect these two players to give us a thrill in good ways but they keep handing each other chances instead of just outbowling each other.

1:59: Walter Ray with Randy: he sounds boring and uncomfortable with what is going on. Barnes with Randy: he sounds relaxed and certain of his next move but yet also doesn't give you this sense of I am going to destroy Walter Ray...he stands no chance, don't miss old guy or you will lose.(13)

2:04: They are going commercial free for the last match. Barnes has a healthy lead but we have seen him gag away healthier leads with fewer frames. Williams promptly starts with a strike. Barnes moves laterally and goes 4 pin. Back to Chameleon...bird dogs the 10 pin! OUCH!!!

2:08: Walter gets over amped and barely leaves the 10 pin. That can be his only miss of the match. Then Barnes on Cheetah goes plack 10. Now what is the move for CB on what is easily the tougher of the two lanes, amazingly, the Cheetah?

2:10: Williams makes a ball change...and strikes. WOW. Then nails on the Chameleon and strikes...look out Chris.(14)

2:13: Barnes hasn't missed on Chameleon all day by the way. The lane he is finishing on. Williams goes 4 pin on the left lane. Where Barnes has created right, he has erased Walter's left.

2:15: Barnes' first non strike on the left lane. Now it is a 39 pin lead for Barnes. Williams still can't strike on the left lane. Barnes starts worrying about his carry. I ask you why that even came up in his mind, but that would make too much sense. It was the Chris Norry moment.(15)

2:17: Barnes again makes a tight shot (spinchter tightening...). Leaves the 2-4-5 and makes it. Still leading...one more mark...BIRD DOGS IT FOR THE WINNA!

2:18: Barnes wins and for the first time in his career wins back-to-back events, capping off one of the greatest runs in bowling history. As for Walter Ray, he fought hard but that missed 7 pin truly was the downfall of his day. He actually won two of the three games but lost total wood by 29. 722-693, a 29 pin win for Barnes and his 12th title.

2:23: Randy and Walter Ray again after the match. Gracious as a champion, he said that Chris bowled better than he did. But his interview was telling: his game is predicated around playing straight and being accurate but the power players really force him to slow his ball speed down and rely on carry as much as his ability to throw it firm and make the pins dance.(16)

2:28: Barnes and Pedersen interview after the last commercial break. You can tell how great his mind is when he just bowls and lets his talent take over.(17) He gambled right on the lanes and he took away WRW's hold left. He is still alive to repeat as Player of the Year but he will need to cap off this amazing run of bowling.

There is also nothing like Barnes striking in a meaningless moment, you know, when it doesn't count as much. Alas.
This wasn't even Barnes' finest performance during last year's swing of extreme bowling. Go back to his performance in the Plastic Ball Championship where Barnes averaged over 257 in match play alone. Astounding.
I did not do my research admittedly, Walter Ray's shirt was comprised of horseshoes and bowling balls. As for Barnes, he was wearing that red/maroon shirt that made you think he was trying to emulate Tiger Woods on Sunday. No truth to the rumor that Barnes emulated Woods' off the course activities as well.
Walter has recently added to his arsenal now: BLUE BALL UP 5!!!
Everyone and their mother seems to outright detest Rob Stone for using the Hambone as a reference for a 4 bagger. I don't, didn't and never will for one simple reason: in the 2007-08 season, two things got over with fans: Rhino Page's awesome rookie season and the Hambone. It elicited more conversation than anything else in bowling that season, fans brought signs, chanted it during shots...you mean like actual fan interaction? Really...who woulda thunk it?
I kind of sort of forgot that Barnes still had 2+ games and the with oil transition and his higher rev rate, he would force WRW to alter his gameplan. When he tripped the 4 pin, it was already beginning. No one noticed it at that point.
For all bowling fans, read Gary Beck's white paper, "20/23 Vision" for a quick synopsis on how junior bowling has declined. This despite what industry insiders have been saying that bowling continues to grow in popularity. It is, but from a recreational standpoint.
Revisionist history is one thing, but Walter Ray sounded defeated after missing the 7 pin. Another note to the end of the first game: when Walter Ray missed the 7 pin, the whole building went completely silent. Almost as if they had seen a ghost or something. It was so shocking that when they went to break, they try to coerce applause out of the crowd but nobody made a sound. Like Norwich had become a mute colony.
K-Rod might have been the only Met in the 2009 season not to get injured. The list: Carlos Delgado (hip), Jose Reyes (calf/hamstring), John Maine (shoulder), JJ Putz (elbow), Luis Castillo (ankle), Ollie Perez (knee/head), Johan Santana (elbow), Carlos Beltran (knee), David Wright (concussion), Ryan Church (legs), Alex Cora (thumbs), Jeff Francouer (thumb). You get the idea...the Mets were a MASH unit in 2009. Now Beltran had knee surgery, Reyes has a thyroid issue, and K-Rod has pinkeye to start Spring Training.
Rent the movie...trust me, you'll love it.
I had a slight moment of clarity after I wrote this. I just questioned the 2nd best bowling in PBA history, the best right hander in PBA history, a man who has won 47 titles and 8 majors and has made 4 million bucks in his career and can still win a record 7th Player of the Year at age fifty?!? Forgive me, I really didn't know what I was on at that time.
I remember what Michelle said to me when he took the re-rack: "he's gunna choke on this shot". Sometimes, you don't question Valedictorians and four time All-Americans who go to Vanderbilt.
Post-editing mistake: I should have probably quoted that last line for Barnes saying that he was going to rip Walter Ray to shreds in the last game. As for Walter Ray...yeah, his speech was so enthusiastic I needed a hose to cool myself down. Like Bizzaro Lou Holtz giving me a pep talk/speech before a big game. It did not inspire confidence.
Randy said "uh-oh...", I said look out, Michelle said, "oh, great". Michelle, for future reference thinks Walter Ray is terrible for bowling.
Lynda Barnes' (Chris' wife) maiden name was Norry. I like to joke often that Chris should have taken Lynda's name because she was the more dominant bowler of the two. Safe to say Chris Barnes will not be inviting me to any JDRF charity events soon, for which I would love to contribute to. I feel that Type I diabetes is no laughing matter for children and they should be allowed to have some semblance of a normal childhood.
Walter Ray also said at the end of the interview he would not be cutting his throat after this telecast. Yes fans, he actually said this. You wonder why I keep saying that Walter Ray, as great as he is, needs to go away? You just cannot say such a remark like that with people listening.
Barnes would go on to finish 3rd in the US Open a few weeks later with what can only be described as only the most infamous solid 8 in bowling history against Mike Scroggins. Yes, much more infamous than Pedersen's solid 8 in the 1995 TPC. In retrospect (after all this is a retro version), this was as good as I've even seen a bowler bowl for 6 weeks maybe EVER. Barnes was just so good at showing off all of his talents, while embracing every format the PBA could throw at him for almost two months and he responded every time. He was a solid 8 away from winning another US Open and back-to-back POY. He was outright sensational at this time last year.

Bowling Philosophy-March 2010

2010-03-10T05:46:00.000-08:00

"R-E-S-P-E-C-T"

Mike Scroggins: respect due, greatness still lacking

by Tommy Scherrer

If you are a frequent follower of Twitter, you may have noticed that former Tonight Show host Conan O'Brien is following the 'tweets' of young 19 year old Sarah Killen. O'Brien joked that interviewing squirrels in his backyard and cutting to a commercial was a call for help and his salvation was to randomly follow a person on Twitter for which Killen was the lucky soul who has seen her life change almost instantaneously. Killen is due to be married in September and was afraid of financing the wedding. O'Brien steps in, follows her, and at the snap of a finger custom made shoes, wedding dress offers, bottles of wine, and limos. What, did Ric Flair's "Custom Made" segment get hijacked for purposes of Killen's wedding? Killen has turned from teenage bride-to-be into a celebrity overnight.

(Note: isn't it strange that in 2010 that an unemployed entertainer can randomly 'follow' a teenage girl over the Internet or social network, give her instant credibility, she in turn, gets all of her wedding dreams to come true, where she might not have been able to finance it on her own. And we're cool with this??? Really....any other situation, Detective Stabler and Benson would be at CoCo's front door asking questions about this but since it's O'Brien, we just think he is bored and needed to make someone's day, or in this case, her wedding day.)

What does Killen have to do with Mike Scroggins? They have both become overnight sensations. Now it is hard to say that a 45 year old balding professional bowler can have the same overnight sensation as Killen but we, the bowling people, have made Scroggins a storyline often this season. How could we not? The 2009 US Open champion did the rare feat of defending his title as the 2010 Open #1 qualifier, yet being unable to successfully defend it, losing to Bill O'Neill in the title match. Scroggins has won two titles this season, the second time in his career he has won multiple titles in a season. Scroggins has now put himself in a position for Player of the Year with 3 events remaining in the PBA season and it would honestly not surprise anyone if Scroggins could find his way onto television once more and possibly win another title and become the man of the 2009-10 season.

In the past few weeks, Scroggins has been bandied about in a few articles (including one of my own) defining his greatness as a player. I am sticking to my guns and saying that Scroggins needs to crack the 10 title plateau in order to be a Hall of Famer, and possibly throw in another major title in there as well. His performance last week in the Etonic Don Johnson Eliminator was simply put, a tremendous performance. Scroggins was the only lefthander to make the 16 person eliminator portion of the tournament. He was all alone on the left and as strange as it may sound, may have helped him. No one crossing his line to the pocket, Scroggins creating his ski slope to the 1-2 for 3 games in each eliminator section. It was tremendous bowling by Scroggins to make the show and he got the added benefit of the eliminator format to create a better ball reaction than his fellow righthanders. All he had to do was not have the lowest score in any match and he was a champion again and that is just what he did, outlasting crowd favorite Brian Kretzer in the title match 206-195 (yes, it was a tough title match to watch but after thinking about it some more, the Chameleon pattern can do that: it can get ugly).

Scroggins has earned his accolades for being a very good bowler but my grades are high. Scroggins is not yet a great player but he keeps teetering me towards the other side of the beam. I do respect him because he has continued to perform at a high level for the last 7-8 years where most players get to this age and start declining in terms of performance. It has been a privilege to see him bowl on a tour where it is rev dominant and Scroggins is more speed/accuracy dominant. I do hope that he finds a few more wins in the last few years of his career, then I can write my Mike Scroggins Hall of Fame article on BP. But he is not getting any custom made shoes or wine or anything like that. Remember, I don't have CoCo's compensation pay.

Thomas Scherrer is a USBC Certified Level One coach and now is on the radio!!! Look him up on http://audiojournal.net/ by clicking on the "Listen Live" link. The show is every Wednesday from 7-8pm EST as I broadcast the Worcester Telegram and Gazette to inform and empower people who are blind, disabled, or are unable to read print or visual material.

Bowling Philosophy-March 2010

2010-03-04T12:22:00.000-08:00

"In 'Layman's' Terms"
by Tommy Scherrer

Did it ever occur to anyone who attempts to write about bowling how they come up with their ideas for a report or a blog? I was peddling away on my apartment's stationary bike this afternoon and felt compelled to write something of significance for this week's BP edition. On the bike...nothing...while doing squats...nothing...hamstring curls...nothing....box jumps....nothing. So I was in the middle of my second set of squats and encountered a 45 pound weight falling off the bar and literally breaking into two pieces!!! I have never done such a thing before. There is was: cracked in half, clean as a whistle. How did this happen? Was the plate not set? Did I lean too much to one side? The answer was the bar where the plate goes on actually dipped and ostensibly, the plate fell off and to the ground. Luckily, no one (myself included) was hurt as the plate sustained a private funeral.

With my workout over, I had my answer to the BP Report (it needs a catchy name, doesn't it?): answer some questions on bowling. Where would I find questions to answer?...one might ask. Thankfully, Andy Morton's report on pba.com usually has open questions, entitled "The Big Four". However, Mr. Morton was out of service so Donnie Layman substituted and opened up five questions, or what he dubbed "The Greek Church". Thank you, Mr. Layman...let's answer these questions. Remember, this is just personal belief on my part and not what is fact or otherwise.

Q1: Does Mike Scroggins ever get enough credit for how great he really is?

A: Scroggins gets credit for these things: great person, very good bowler, and vastly underrated major performer. What he won't get credit for (by fans) is being a great personality, plus his style of game is not very exciting. Again, not his fault, but his steady performances over the last 7 years has been a reflection of his hard work as a bowler. Personally, I feel he needs another major title to establish himself as a Hall of Fame bowler or 3-5 more PBA titles. For the past decade though, tremendously consistent...really good...not great.

Q2: Can Bill O'Neill hold off Walter Ray and company for the Chris Schenkel Player of the Year?

A: Let's hope so as fans for the future of bowling. Yes, from an historical standpoint, having Walter Ray Williams Jr. try and win a record 7th POY would be a special moment in bowling history. Nobody 25 years ago would have possibly imagined that anyone could come along and rival Earl Anthony's bowling records and in some cases, go flying right past them. However, it is not in the best interest of a sport or an organization that is trying to promote younger talent AND is viewed as being a little too old to begin with, to have the POY be a 50-year-old.

Suppose we use golf as an analogy and say that Tom Watson wins the British Open and on top of that, were to beat a then morally sound Tiger Woods for Golfer of the Year at 58 years old in 2009. You loved the sentimental moment of Major Tom winning another Open championship, but Golfer of the Year??? That is insane, right? Imagine how foolish golfers half Watson's age would feel if that were to happen. Walter Ray winning the Masters? Great. Excellent performance by the game's greatest right handed bowler in PBA history. Winning Player of the Year at 50? It is not great for the sport, no matter how anyone spins it. As for the others? Try if they can, but for bowling to move into another generation, Bill O'Neill needs to finish off the 2009-10 season with the game's highest seasonal honor.

Q3: Will Jason Belmonte's hamstring stop him from making a run at POY?

A: It will and it has. Already not bowling in Columbus, Ohio this week, Belmonte might not even try bowling for a few weeks. Look, there is no need for Belmo to run out there and try and play hurt, not at his age, not when the PBA needs him to be a crowd favorite and not damaged goods. Belmonte has had a very strong season for his first full-time run on the PBA. He absolutely tore up the US Open pattern this week when he was healthy, so be on the lookout for that in the future. Medical advice: rest, ice, compress, and elevate Belmo.

Q4: Can PDW (Pete Weber) make it to 2nd on the all-time titles list before his illustrious career ends?

A: Weber's 2007 US Open was his 34th title. He has just tied Mark Roth on the titles list and arguably became the great power bowler of all time. Since then he has made 9 telecasts and hasn't won since. Remember, Weber had won his 34 titles in his first 116 shows, which would average to about one title for every 3.5 telecasts. If you were to prorate that in the last 3 years, Weber would have had at least 2 or 3 more wins and perhaps snuck in a major in there for good measure. You would now have 36-37 titles and now 9 majors, 4 titles and one major shy of Anthony and one major better than Williams. To me, the ultimate gauge on a player's professional career is whether or not he can win major titles. Just look at how we now observe Norm Duke's career in the last few years because of his recent major title run. Duke went from great player to an iconic, historical player in the course of 3 major events. That to me, that is what should matter.

So, to rephrase Layman's question into Question 4a: can he win two more majors to tie Anthony? To me, that would certainly re-open what many feel is a dead debate about comparing Weber and Williams and their careers against each other. Give me the guy who has more majors than anyone else and who gave the PBA more mainstream attention than anyone in the past decade than anyone else. Glad we had this discussion, let's move on.

Q5: Who else thinks Tommy Jones is on the brink of returning to his previous dominance?

A: Such an open-ended question, it should be on the list of Questions That Have An Obvious Answer However Do Not Because Of The Sport. Let's get some facts straight about winning in the PBA: it is whether you dominate on Sunday. Not on Saturday. Not Thursday. Not any day but Sunday. Yes, you have to actually get to Sunday (so being good during the week is important) but if you were to say bowling could stick to its single-elimination matchplay and say, have only two bowlers bowl on television in a best 3 out of 5 format to determine the week's winner, we could use the 'who dominated?' card during the whole week. In Jones' case, he could run over everyone when every event was single-elimination. Of his 12 titles, 8 of them were of single-elimination matchplay. Jones knew how to sprint in bowling terms like a 100 meter runner, and now he is being forced to run more 10K's and half-marathons on top of his sprinting. Not that Jones cannot be good with all of this, but it does take away a dynamic part of his game which made him a force. However, Barnes adapted, Duke adapted, Walter Ray adapted, even Scroggins adapted both ways in stepladder and matchplay formats. Weber, Jason Couch and Bohn have been more successful in long distance/stepladder format tournaments than matchplay and their winning has taken some decline. Jones will have to adapt better or have his Hall of Fame career suffer a Ballard-like string of zeros. Those are just facts in the last few years.

This is not to say Jones will not return to dominance. His numbers this year are consistent across the board. He even stole some of my argument's thunder last week by making the US Open televised finals. However, do I think Jones could benefit from the PBA going back to more single-elimination matchplay format...yes I do. And when I mean 'more' I mean pretty much all of the standard events.

Could I be wrong about all of these questions? Sure, but I will go back to what I mentioned about O'Neill Monday and say that the PBA could really, really, really, reeeeeallllly benefit from him winning Player of the Year. Scroggins is a potential Hall of Fame player but for the moment will not be a great player. Belmonte...seriously, mate: rest up. Weber's goal should be to tie the major record, which to me is a far greater accomplishment in this generation of bowling. As for Jones, dominance is relevant to what you define dominance is? Is seven shows and no wins as good as 3 shows and two wins? Not even close...you want wins over consistency because that is what people remember. And you will remember how this article got started: with a 45 pound plate snapping into two.

Tommy Scherrer is a USBC Level One certified coach and a fan of bowling since age 9. Bowling Philosophy is written to offer insight and provide thought to the world of bowling.

Sports in General

2010-03-02T13:50:00.001-08:00

"Oh, Whoa...Canada"

by Tommy Scherrer

Q: Thomas, can we, as Americans relate to what was going on with the Canadian hockey team having to win a gold medal?

A: Take a trip back to June 22, 1938. It is Joe Louis-Max Schmeling II, with the heavyweight championship of boxing on the line. But more than just a bout between the "Brown Bomber" and "Black Uhlan of the Rhine", it was America against Germany...Nazi Germany, no less. The venue is Yankee Stadium, the crowd is over 70,000 fans, the political tensions riding very, very, very high, and just in case you didn't know, boxing mattered about a million times more than it does in 2010. Imagine Louis leading after 10 rounds, he's got Schmeling on points, he has scored one early knockdown but Schmeling (a former world champion) recovers to take the bout to the 11th round, needing just one punch to even the bout. Suddenly, Schmeling catches Louis dropping his left after a jab with a vicious shot similar to their first bout in 1936, which shelved Louis for his first professional loss. Same scenario, Louis is knocked down but he responds to the count to continue fighting. All of a sudden, Schmeling is back in the fight and all he needs is one more shot like that to pull of a national tragedy. Imagine in the 13th round, Schmeling does so: blisters Louis with a flurry to where referee Arthur Donovan steps in and stops the fight. Schmeling wins the world title, Louis caves under all the pressure, America mourns its inferiority to the Aryan Race of Nazi German and Hitler and the sport for which they have held as their own sees the face of their country fall to the forces of evil.

If Zack Parisi's goal with 24 seconds left in regulation to tie Sunday's Gold Medal hockey game was the 11th round right cross, then the 13th round flurry would have been an overtime goal from the likes of a Patrick Kane, a Phil Kessel, or God forbid Canada, a Chris Drury, who would have gone back to New York City, captain of the New York Rangers, a conquering hero in this country...again. There would be Drury banging home a low stuff-in attempt in front of goaltender Roberto Luongo, silence in the building, a nation in both symbolic and literal tears.

However, reality was that Louis destroyed Schmeling in two minutes and 4 seconds. Reality was, Sidney Crosby awoke from his coma and scored seven minutes and forty seconds into overtime to give Canada a 3-2 win over the United States to give a nation of 33 million souls a celebration worth the moment. Here is Crosby, 22, already a Stanley Cup champion, the heir to hockey's throne, as well as Canada's throne, firing one past Ryan Miller to set the city of Vancouver on fire and the country of Canada into joy, excitement, and in some cases, relief.

That scenario is probably as close as Americans can relate to what Canadians were feeling for roughly two weeks enduring the 2010 Winter Olympic hockey tournament. Truth is, we will never know what those players, coaches, management, and administration of Canada were going through trying to answer their early round struggles, the benching of the iconic Martin Brodeur, the sleepwalking job Joe Thornton and Crosby were doing...you name it, Americans could not relate on any level whatsoever. Most importantly, the fans and citizens of Canada were probably more on edge than the players were. You see, fans invest in everything. They buy tickets to see athletes perform feats that they only dreamed about in dirt fields, driveways with basketball hoops boarded up on the garage, and homemade ice rinks made out of cold winter nights and the sprinkler machine running. They cheer their heroes on, almost blindly, hoping that they can give us one moment that we can tell our unborn kids, our grandkids, our nephews or nieces, or even someone who is unable to see. Sunday night, Sidney Crosby gave everyone in one nation a moment to remember. He also gave one nation a big sigh of relief since this is their game.

Americans can counter and say that they created baseball, basketball, and football...stockcar racing, modern tenpin bowling, and extreme sports. That, however is just the problem: our athletic attention is splintered into so many factions that no single sport can define our nation. We like to think a sport such as football does the way hockey grips Canada, but that is doing Canadians a major disservice to their past as well as to the present. Only one team in this tournament could actually fail with anything other than a gold medal and that was Canada.

Russia...? Maybe upset but they would not have lost sleep over not winning gold.

Sweden...? The reigning gold medalists would have liked to have defended it, but probably knew they were a younger Peter Foresburg away and an even hotter Henrik Lundqvist away from repeating.

USA...? Please. Most "experts" did not think that this "team" would be good enough to get a medal game.

Canada have everything to lose and absolutely nothing to gain. Win the gold medal and they'll say it was your mission accomplished. Lose to the US on Sunday and be labeled as underachievers, chokers, losers, men who lacked national pride, or any other negative label. Sidney Crosby changed that notion for at least 4 years.

Arguably, the most important hockey game played since June 14, 1994 and easily, the most important Olympic hockey game since Lake Placid, 1980 had two nations sitting on the edge of their collective seats. However, only one nation had everything riding on it. The other had scouting combines, spring training, NASCAR, a US Open, and TigerWatch on their minds.

Canada...your game, your time, your moment.

Bowling Philosophy-U.S. Open Recap

2010-03-01T06:42:00.000-08:00

A look into the future...we hope.

"The Dawning of a New Era?"

by Tommy Scherrer

Back in 2005, Bill O'Neill burst onto the professional bowling scene by narrowly missing the televised finals of the U.S. Open and as an amateur no less. He was immediately labeled the next "can't miss" product, and the resume would suffice that he was a "can't miss" talent. A 4-time First Team All-American at Saginaw Valley State, a 3-time Collegiate Bowler of the Year, numerous junior title wins, local tournament wins, collegiate all-event wins, what didn't Bill O'Neill win from the ages of 12 to 22?

Bowling has had its share of Next Ones, some living up to the hype (Marshall Holman/Parker Bohn III), some not living up to the hype based on injury (Rick Steelsmith/Robert Smith), and some possibly overhyped yet it was totally justified when they came out (Chris Barnes/Patrick Healey Jr.). All of these players had plenty of success and major titles, but some fell short of what our expectations are. Naturally, it is almost impossible to live up to hype: it blows our conceptual minds to think My God...look at this guy's talent. Steelsmith's got Holman's physical gifts with the professionalism of Mike Aulby. He can win 30 titles in today's game. Sadly, injuries and some unfortunate luck on television relegated Steelsmith to only two titles as a pro (and the 1987 Masters as an amateur). You cannot predict what can happen in a player's professional career when it comes to health or circumstances on television; rather it is something you have to hope works out. O'Neill's first 4 seasons, however was not just "can't miss" but "can't win". He finally eradicated the winless demons by winning the Chameleon championship in 2009, proving his tremendous talent had paid off. The next question was could he take the steps to being the Next One?

If Bill O'Neill was to take step one to being the Next One in professional bowling, he had to win yesterday's 67th U.S. Open. He did not disappoint, firing a tremendous 267 game in the championship match over reigning and defending champion Mike Scroggins for O'Neill's first career major title, $60,000, and a fresh 3-year exemption on the PBA Tour. The situation was perfectly set up for O'Neill to make the leap to superstardom...beat two former U.S. Open champions in Scroggins and Tommy Jones, dominate the way he did, make it two horse race for Player of the Year, and set up at long last, the passing of the torch situation to the next generation.

Wait, you say? Didn't we have the torch passed with Barnes? We all thought we did but sadly, our reflections go back to Sundays and Barnes has not lived up to "hype" of Sundays. For that matter, O'Neill has not up until this season, winning twice. But look at circumstances for the future: Barnes is now 40 years old. His shelf life may only have another 8-10 years, which is still plenty of time for Barnes to be one of the faces of the PBA, but he cannot be the Alpha Dog of bowling anymore. His time has come and gone, some would joke never arrived, but that is disingenuous of people to say: the guy is too Damn good...except on Sunday. O'Neill is 28, to be wed in May, a major champion bowler, the best of the young guns of bowling, and on the verge of becoming one of the youngest Players of the Year in PBA history. This makes more sense than Barnes constantly teasing us with his virutoso performances on Friday and Saturday then looking like he is afraid of the moment on Sunday.

The actual passing of the torch, however, started in almost perfect fashion. Step one: beat the incumbent. Scroggins was the defending Open champion and the top seed for the televised finals, with a chance at making history. O'Neill looked in trouble early, then rattled off ten consecutive strikes to crush the party at Scroggys. He marinated, grilled, and virtually ate Scroggins on national TV. If you are going to win a major, it better be against someone who has been there before to make this work. Step two: go get Walter Ray Williams, Jr. Find him, bowl him, beat him, destroy him. Obviously, you cannot script those moments like Ric Flair-Sting in pro wrestling but these guys are good enough to make a show together in the final 4 tournaments that it almost makes tremendous sense, doesn't it? If the game is ever going to fully bypass what has been a 24 year run of greatness by Walter Ray with no legitimate successor to the throne, doesn't this has to happen? Doesn't Bill O'Neill have to cripple Walter Ray? If so, when?

The opportune time would be this season. Williams and O'Neill are currently 1-2 in the POY race, Williams is 50, O'Neill is 28. Williams has more titles than anyone else in PBA history, O'Neill has two. Williams has won Player of the Year a record tying 6 times, O'Neill has never sniffed it. This season would be the perfect time. To clear up any confusion, the torch still belongs to Dead-Eye Williams. Has been that way for roughly 17 years, no one can even attempt to argue this. It isn't as if the fate of the bowling world depends on it happening this year, but you figure both players will find another themselves on Sunday at some point to end the year, they are just that good. You hope as a fan that you see them together and with a title at stake. More than just a title at stake, however...it would be the possible future of professional bowling at stake.

This has nothing to do with Walter Ray as much as it does with O'Neill. The game needs a new focal point, a new superstar, a new Alpha Dog to carry the PBA and bowling for the next 10-15 years. Walter Ray has been arguably the best player to ever lace up bowling shoes, but nobody has rivaled his dominance consistently enought to take over the game's mantle. Is that too much for Billy O to handle? We don't know but if this is going to work out in the most ideal way, O'Neill beats Walter Ray for something super significant to take his place as bowling's top dog. Doing it this year to beat him for Player of the Year would be the beginning of a brand new era in the sport of bowling. It's about time we start looking to see if this can happen. It's about time we see a new era of bowling truly be ushered in.

It's about time...isn't it?

The author: Tommy Scherrer is a USBC Level I instructor and former collegiate bowler at William Paterson University. He is currently writing Bowling Philosophy to provide conversation and insight into the world of bowling, the business, and the profession.

Bowling Philosophy-U.S. Open

2010-02-28T07:01:00.000-08:00

"The Final Four"
by Tommy Scherrer

After 5 days and 51 games, bowling's greatest championship has been dwindled down to 4 finalists on Sunday afternoon. What every professional bowlers lives for is a chance to survive the truest test of bowling: the United States Open. Let's quickly sum up today's final four and who could walk away with the $60,000 check and a coveted 3-year exemption.

Mike Scroggins-last year's champion and this year's top seed overall stand to personally gain the most from a victory today. He will continue his late blooming career with a possible 3rd major and start the Hall of Fame talks for the left handed Texan. Scroggins also stands to make some history as well today: with a win, he will join the ranks of multiple Open championship winners and be only the second player in the modern era to win back-to-back Open titles (Dave Husted in 1995-96). Scroggins could aslo benefit just to silence some critics of last year (myself included) that he had lucked out on beating Chris Barnes en route to beating Norm Duke to win the title. Say what you want about Scroggins, but he continues to show off his great skill for the game and with a win, he can silence any doubters.

Bill O'Neill- "The Real Deal" makes his second TV appearance in a major this season. He finished tied for 3rd in the 2009 World Championship and is the only player in the final four without a major title on the ledger. The game's best young player has flicked one monkey off his back this season by winning his first career title in the 2009 Chameleon Championship. He is the game's future, no question about it. A possible title win for O'Neill could give him a late charge for the 2009-10 Player of the Year and possibly start bowling's next generation: a symbolic passing of the torch from the Walter Ray-Weber-Duke-Bohn days to the Fagan-Rash-Belmonte-Page future days. Time will only tell if that comes true, but an O'Neill victory would certainly help the cause.

Tommy Jones-former U.S. Open champion, former Player of the Year, former future, still possible future, still good enough to win, still good enough to flat out dominate today's show. But that's the main question: will he? In a 4 year span, Jones claimed 12 PBA titles and two major championships and appeared he would only take his game to new heights. Last year was a quiet year: no wins, only one top overall seed. This year: he came out of the blocks making the Motor City Open final five, however no shows since then. This is not to say that Jones has had a bad year at all, sitting 12th in points and 8th in average. However, bowling is a game where you are defined by Sundays and we as viewers have short term memory. Jones has not been on TV as much as he was 3 or 4 years ago but he also stands to further his legacy with a win today. He too would have multiple Open titles and would have his 3rd career major title on his resume.

Jason Couch-if you are Walter Ray Williams, Jr. this morning...you are sick to your stomach. Absolutely sick to your stomach. You had to chance to accomplish just some unthinkable history just by making the telecast Saturday night. He had the position round match again Norm Duke won, over, done, handed on a pike. Williams needed two strikes and count to beat Duke, leapfrog a wounded Jason Belmonte to the 4th seed, and give yourself a death grip on a record 7th Player of the Year award. After Jones beat Belmonte, it was widely assumed that the Duke-Deadeye winner was going to make the TV show. Go to pba.com this morning and view the position round matches: Belmonte is limping around on a bad hamstring, Duke is leaving a 5-7-10, Walter Ray is leaving the 3-6-9-10, but then it appears Walter Ray is gunna sneak his way in with his clutch 10th frame double. Seven on the fill and he is in.

Note: give Duke tremendous credit: he had zero ball reaction in the last game, strikes out after his 5-7-10, washout episode to shoot 201. He forces a double out of Walter. Meanwhile Jason Couch doubles to beat Pete Weber to go past Belmonte and force Walter Ray to win his match or else be a spectator. A retro diary finish courtesy of Xtra Frame:

24:05-Williams strikes on the first ball, crowd is totally behind him.

24:59-BAM!!! Walter Ray flushes the second strike, crowd thinks it is over. Mike Jakubowski thinks its a done deal. Bowling Doctor said it was enough...then, "6 is a tie, 7 is a win..."

25:37-Three-six-nine-ten...Walter Ray shoots 201, which was a tie against Duke meaning they split the 30 bonus pins, and Couch's clutch finish ended up giving him enough pins to beat Williams by two pins...two pins!!!!

For Jason Couch, this is a free roll for of the dice for him. After knee struggles and lack of consistent bowling this season, this is a chance for Couch to re-establish his Hall of Fame career. We seem to forget that Couch has 15 titles and 4 majors, as well as back-to-back Dick Weber Open titles. Again, our minds don't have as much long term memory retention as they used to...this guy was one the sport's elite for many years up until recently. A chance at major number 5 could be the jumper cables he needed to get his bowling career in the 40's on the right track.

Now it's time to break this down concentrically and find out what the four finalists have to gain from all this:

Player with most to gain: historically, it is Scroggins. Personally, it might be O'Neill. Professionally, it is Couch. I will take the historical take on this: Scroggins can officially be a Hall of Famer in the Scherrer Book of Bowling with a win today, no question about it. Hard to keep a man who has won two U.S. Open titles off any Hall of Fame roll call.

Most to lose: Couch. This could be one of his last gasps as a professional bowler. Even if Couch were to never win again, his career is still Hall of Fame caliber. However, the other side of his career has been one of remembering his younger, more powerful, animated days where he was an absolute force in major tournaments. From the professional angle, you want Jason Couch as an integral part of the PBA: talented still, opinionated, and vocal.

PBA can gain the most if...O'Neill wins. This is a lay-up drill for the PBA. You are considered a generational sport, and with that, maybe a little too old to make it relevant to a younger audience of viewers. O'Neill winning would give this generational shift a little balance. What if Jones wins, you ask? It doesn't hurt but the PBA needs a stand alone face of the next generation: one that stands above all the young guns. O'Neill can be that man with a win.

PBA gains the least if...Scroggins wins. No knock on Scroggins, but the previous statement is why it is a bad thing for Scroggins to repeat, despite what it can do for his career.

Player that can dominate? Tommy Jones. We forget this man has the highest TV winning percentage in the tour's history. He can own this telecast bowling in the first match against Couch and just run away with the field if the lanes play to his strength.

Player that can struggle? O'Neill. When O'Neill made the '09 World Championship, he tried his own strategy to play the oil pattern and it failed. In this case, he'll have one game to see what is going on and dictate his strategy that way. When it's a major, you just have to play what it out there and survive and not try to contemplate oil patterns. This comes down to straight talent and we all know O'Neill has got plenty of it.

Prediction: The seriousness of this tournament cannot be devalued. A United States Open champion is a benchmark to a season, a bowler's season, and their career. Win this event and you go down with names like Day, 'Papa, Dick Weber, Carter, Holman, Roth, McMahon, Lillard, Welu, Pete Weber, Ballard, Husted, Williams, and Duke. The winner of this championship will have history. Scroggins and Jones have been to this mountain before and have chopped it down with the edge of the their hand. Couch came close in 1999, losing to Bob Learn, Jr. in the title match. O'Neill may have more chances in his future, but you cannot predict that. What you can predict is that arguably the best player in the world right now is from Southampton, Pennsylvania. Bowling needs Bill O'Neill to usher in a new generation of superstar bowlers. Yes, it is not just enough to win a pattern named after an animal...it is time for the torch to be passed.

Please, Bill...grab the torch.

Bowling Philosophy-U.S. Open

2010-02-22T12:04:00.000-08:00

Put simply...this IS bowling.

Every sport is defined truly by one seminal place or event that, when the annals of its sport are written, people remember the time and place. For the four major sports, that event is their world championships. For sports such as tennis, it is the green grass and ominous summer skies of Wimbledon that transcends the game: white shirts and skirts, strawberries and cream, Henman Hill/Murray Mound, and the Royal Box. Golf's marquee place is Augusta National and the Masters. Azaleas, Ray's Creek, Amen Corner, the Green Jacket, and the Par 3 contest. College football has the Rose Bowl, college basketball has the Final Four, and auto driving has their major sport sites with NASCAR's Daytona and IRL's Indy 500.

For bowling, the PBA will look to the prestigious Tournament of Champions as the game's greatest event. Only winners allowed, Hall of Famers invited, RPI champions get their opportunity, even now the Women's and Senior's world championship winners get an invite. However, the T of C has had a limited shelf life in regards to other major championships and has always been a field of players that were maybe past their prime or were one-hit wonders garnering a exemption to the PBA's marquee event.

But this IS bowling...give ME bowling...give me THE United States Open.

Give me the game's most grueling lane condition: 40 feet of oil and each board having the same amount of oil on each board, offering no area one way or the other. Give me 51 games over 5 days, as well as 33 in the last two days. Give me 24 meaningful round-robin match play games, where 180 might win you a game for goodness sakes! Give me the tradition of Woodland Bowl, of Fountain Bowl, of Carolier Lanes. Give me the "other" Green Jacket of sports. Give me the names who have won the US Open (formerly known as BPAA All-Star): Ned Day, Varipapa, Welu, Limongello, Petraglia, Johnson, Roth, Barnes, Jones, and Duke. Give me the men who have conquered the game's greatest test twice: names like Connie Schwoegler, Ballard, McMahon, Holman and Walter Ray. Give me Dave Husted; the only man to win it in back to back years in the modern era. Give me Varipapa's 1st-1st-2nd finish from 1946-1948, while only being 55, 56 and 57 years old AND bowling 100 games to boot! Give me Don Carter; who back-to-backed twice in 53-54 as well as 57-58. Give me Duke's bucket, Mika's destruction of Patrick Healey, Bohn versus Hromek (and young foul line judge Jason Couch), Voss versus Pete Weber, Barnes' solid 8, Ballard's $100,000 payday in Tacoma and the very, very, very deep inside angle in Cheektowaga for Open title #2.

And you can always give me the first family of bowling: Dick and Pete Weber. Both legends, both Hall of Fame bowlers, both 4 time US Open champions. Give PDW rolling over Thayer and Mr. Weber's class in his victories and in his son's defeat in '87. Give me the DW patches that started at the US Open on Valentine's Day after his sudden passing in 2005. Give me Pete's point to the heavens for his dad after winning his fourth in 2007. Give me all of that and another memory for 2010.

In fact, let's hope this year's US Open gives all another moment in history.

Bowling Philosophy-February 2010

2010-02-16T10:38:00.000-08:00

Walter Ray wasn't the only winner this week...

PBA, USBC: A 'Master'ful Job

by Tommy Scherrer

In certain circumstances, you can understand why the sport of bowling is not at tip of everyone's collective social tongues. It is almost akin to the old story of the tree falling in the woods but nobody was around to see it. Loosely translated: did that mean it actually happened? The USBC Masters did happen this past week and it happened not just in Reno, Nevada or on ESPN Sunday afternoon (while NASCAR was looking around for some glue and spray paint that was a deplorable exhibition of its marquee event, the Daytona 500)...it happened the entire week on PBA.com's Xtra Frame. If you were one of the near 30,000 people who clicked on to its free preview week, you saw an entire event unfold right in front of you. If you were a bowling fan and had some free time this past week, then you should have viewed Xtra Frame as well as tip your cap to professional bowling's major governing bodies for allowing this to happen. They struck a figurative oil well worth of tremendous action for 5 full days, leading up to Sunday's telecast.

For one of the few times in your bowling lifetime, you were there to see it actually happen from start to finish.

It was, pardon the usage of words...'Master'ful.

And to think, it almost crashed out Monday night with an odd server issue, killing the PBA's free preview of the event. Fans got to see all the qualifying blocks, including a one game roll-off between George Lambert IV and Danny Miyamoto to decide who was the last man into the casher's round block (pressure defined at its absolute highest for bowlers: win or go home without a dime for your efforts); they also got the Masters great and unique double elimination brackets, with 3 game total pinfall determining the winners of each match. They also witnessed the beauty that was Chris Barnes, rallying from 52 pins down against reigning Player of the Year Wes Malott, and cementing it with a perfect 300 game in the final game. You also saw Barnes tear up Walter Ray Williams Jr. in the final match Friday night to give Barnes the top seed for Sunday's stepladder finals. All the matches in the end, meant something to all the players: win and make the show; lose and be a spectator to a major championship final.

Fans also got to hear some sensational feedback from Mike Jakubowski and Jeff Mark, as well as drop-ins from PBA stars such as Sean Rash, Timmy Mack, Parker Bohn III, and Mike Fagan throughout the telecast of Xtra Frame. After all, who better to get a temperature of what is going on in the tournament than the best bowlers on the planet who were bowling in it? Plus, Laneside and Bowling Doctor (Jakubowski and Mark's nicknames) answering fans questions on their Facebook page about the tournament format, the lane conditions, ball selection of the pros, layouts, ect. You name it...they talked about it. They practically gushed over Barnes' remarkable rally against Malott (and rightfully so-this was a major championship tournament and a 300 game to win your match, that says how good Barnes actually is) and how Barnes is truly the best player on the planet when he does not have to bowl just one game. We all know it, but Sundays do not give us at home or those that watch sparingly, an honest reflection of the player Christopher Barnes is but Friday night, he showed us why he is the game's alpha dog.

As for Barnes not winning the tournament, there is no great shame in losing to only the best right handed bowler of this generation and arguably all generations in Mr. Deadeye Williams, and when he pours a 290 at you in the title match, what can you say or do? Very little...'Master'ful job Walter Ray all throughout match play and the TV finals to win major number 8.

Full marks all around PBA and USBC...let's hope that in two weeks time the BPAA, who runs the US Open in conjunction with the PBA, will talk this over and come to some sort of deal where we can see this type of action again, free of charge. Yes, it might be greedy and part selfish of fans to ask for another free preview but this is bowling's most prestigious major championship. Wouldn't it be great once again to witness every game in some capacity? Time for people to start seeing some trees fall.

Bowling Philosophy-January 2010

2010-01-25T10:36:00.001-08:00

PBA Tournament of Champions

"It's bigger than us"

Sometimes, the story writes itself...

So many times, you watch sporting events or go to sporting events and you view them hoping that the moment goes beyond your wildest expectations and you watch expecting something that you have never seen before. It is why fans shell out thousands of dollars on season tickets and personal set licenses, jerseys, auctions, rare collectibles, TV packages, and so on. You want to be an owner to a piece of history, no matter the price. You will refinance your house, cars, RV's...anything to be a part of it. Even if you don't attain that moment, you knew that you were close to seeing it which only makes the hunger to see a moment like that grow only stronger, so strong that you continue your idolatry with the sport or sports. We live for sports to suspend reality, to escape the 9 to 5 grind, the hassle of freeways, cars, and trucks, and to dream that maybe someday, our children can achieve that possible dream of being a professional athlete to give fans similar feelings for generations to come. What that feeling is escapes most.

On Sunday, January 24th, 2010...you got your payoff of something you have never seen before. No, it did not involve Peyton Manning's virtuoso performance against my Jets, or the Saints marching into Miami to their first ever Super Bowl over the Minnesota Fumblers...er, Vikings. It did involve round objects, collisions, and major sports championships. January 24th, 2010 will be forever known in sports history as the day Kelly Kulick became the first woman to win a PBA national tournament, and it just happened to be the PBA's marquee event: the Tournament of Champions.

For those who saw the moment happen live in Las Vegas' beautiful Red Rock bowling center, to those who watched her sensational run on Xtra Frame (an absolute must-have for a bowling fan), to those who watched her seal the deal on TV Sunday afternoon by defeating Mika Koviuniemi and Chris Barnes, you saw something that quite possibly, was the finest performance put forth by a bowler given the circumstances in not just the PBA's 51 year history, but in the sport's entire history. This was such an indescribable moment in time that not even Kulick, 32 of Union, New Jersey, could get a firm grasp on. If you watched, you cared about bowling at its highest level producing another tremendous story in a season that keeps giving the common bowler a sense of "anything's possible". If you smiled, you were appreciative of Kulick's sensational fifty game performance during the entire week just to get to this point. If you cried, you were human to see such a moment that replaces words. If you did all of the above, then you were observing a moment that does have a word.

Organic...

It was an organic moment in sports history, something we all wish to see. Virtually free of overexposure or criticisms or any cynicism. Organic...that's the word maybe to all of this. We might never see such a unique moment in sports ever again. Did it matter to me that Kulick's victory came over Chris Barnes, a man whom I have openly said, needs to take bowling to another level? Nope...this isn't about Barnes' total lack of the moment (don't worry, another blog in the near future might be about that). Did it matter to me that Kulick's victory came with little media attention, getting a few highlights on ESPN programming? Not at all, in fact, it makes the moment even better for me and for anyone who watched it. I saw history on TV with my girlfriend (a HUGE Kulick fan), a fellow bowler, a fellow All-American bowler, a fellow National Champion in college, and a fellow female. When it was all said and done, she smiled proudly and I knew she felt proud that she watched this. Even if you were not a woman, you should have been proud. Anyone who dared to make a joke of this or dared to bring this moment down just doesn't get it. In fact, even us who saw Kulick take down the big boys of bowling, don't get it. We will never get it or truly understand it, while those who dare to demean it, think they get it but are totally lost about the moment. In the end, Kelly Kulick's victory has no meaning: it is bigger than us.

It will always be bigger than us, and quite honestly, that is the way it should be. The moment should always transcend our limits of thinking for it to mean so much. We often make too much of what we call great sport moments and therefore, turn it into something that has meaning. Why should moments like this have a meaning when the best thing to do is just let it happen-again, being organic? We were true witnesses to something that might never happen again in sports and in turn, we now have a lifetime moment to remember. Bowling might not matter to the American public like it used to when Dick Weber, Chris Schenkel, and Earl Anthony were the game's elite names and players, but it doesn't have to be anymore. We (and by 'we' I mean bowlers) try to envision ourselves and the sport we love growing to global heights rivaling golf and soccer, as well as trumping football in this country as Sunday's athletic religion, but we know that is not likely possible. Instead, it is best to search for moments that other sports cannot duplicate and if you do in fact find that moment, you hold onto it, you celebrate it, and you rejoice in it. Most importantly, you try not to re-create it. It just happens...Kelly Kulick happened.

Will it happen again? It might happen again, in fact, could you put it past Kulick, now with her win in the T of C getting a two-year exemption, doing this again? She has the most ideal game to play with the men out on tour. If you remember, Kulick earned an exemption once before by way of her great 2006 Tour Trials so her being on tour is not going to be shock to the central nervous system of bowling. She is the Evolutionary Wendy MacPherson for women's bowling: get in with the rev rate out on tour, yet be smooth enough to play straight and tough enough to grind it out on demanding conditions. Her 50-game average this past week at the T of C was 226.44, which outaveraged Rhino Page by .11 pins. She won 16 games in match play, including her two wins on Sunday's telecast against a) all men and b) all PBA champions. She beat Barnes and Koivuniemi, two former PBA Player of the Year winners and former major champions to boot. In closing, she earned this championship in every conceivable way possible. It cannot be easily defined how great her performance was.

Well...maybe it can be. The telling point of the telecast Sunday was the image at the top of this article: 10th frame, match over, the only person in the world right now that bowling is watching. How does she celebrate? Hands raised, almost defiantly, almost telling anyone who tried to push her away because she didn't have the right looks or the right words or the right game or anything else to promote women's bowling...Kelly Kulick was the moment. What it means we will never truly know and to me, that's cool. Kelly Kulick took us to a place where nobody ever thought we would go. We went to a place that is bigger than us...we went organic.

2010-01-23T13:05:00.000-08:00

PBA Tournament of Champions
Revisiting History

Fans...meet Kelly Kulick.

Kelly...meet the fans.

You remember each other, right? It wasn't that long ago that the PBA Universe and KK were quite familiar with each other. It just took awhile to get to another seminal moment in time. Of course, fans remember Kulick for her historical 2006 Tour Trials, where she finished 6th overall and clinched a full-time PBA exemption for the 2006-07 season. She was unable to attain that exemption after that season and to some extent, was cast aside like a dried up lemon.

Hey, Kell...thanks for all you did and we're sorry you didn't retain your exemption. Thanks for the mainstream media attention, thanks for the comic book sketches and all that jazz, but could you step aside while we take a photo shot of Diandra Asbaty showing off her eyelashes...?

This is not an indicment on Asbaty-well OK, maybe not a total indictment on Asbaty. I mean when USBC is trying to sell their sport, why not promote someone who has won pretty much nothing in this country and has made a living off winning tournaments in Singapore? Have you seen this woman?? Anyway, let's get back on topic...we did forget about Kulick and yet, for some strange reason, we don't have a real good excuse for forgetting about her and what she did. Did Liz Johnson's historical run in the 2005 Banquet Classic dull our senses about a woman ballin' with the boys? Did Asbaty's sense of self-promotion for the game make us have memory loss? Did Kim Terrell and Trish Reid's US Open title match, which broke racial barriers, make us prisioners of the moment and not of the past? Exactly, what happened to Kelly Kulick of Union, New Jersey.

Sounds rather blunt but basic: we forgot about Kulick because we were looking for something bigger, bolder, sexier, and maybe even scandalous from bowling to push it to another level. She is the greatest generational victim of women's bowling in that she did not have enough time to garner success on the defunct PWBA Tour because she was too young while stars from the past, such as Carolyn Dorin-Ballard, Terrell, and Johnson had established themselves as elite. She also suffered from going through many physical changes in her game when the Women's Series started, making her late to the prom when Asbaty, Missy Bellinder, and Stefanie Nation were win, place, and show at the end. She also suffered from what every other female pebble pitcher has suffered from: lack of actual things to bowl in.

We just had a case of forgetfulness, that's all. Now let's come back to the present moment, the thing that matters the most to all of us. We now have Kelly Kulick back in the brightest spotlight in bowling. She is seeded second for tomorrow's Tournament of Champions stepladder final after firing a sterling 267 game in the position round portion of matchplay (the 48th and final game of 3 grueling days of bowling, in Las Vegas, AND a PBA Major no less). With one match win, she can join Johnson as the only female to compete in a PBA championship match (her opponent with a win...? Mr. Chris Barnes, who really cannot win no matter what the situation is), make infinite PBA, bowling, sports, and gender history but most importantly to fans, Kelly Kulick will matter once again to us.

Arguably, the PBA's marquee event could arguably have the association's biggest storyline in their 51 year history tomorrow morning/afternoon and how about no other major sports on TV, along with a tremendous lead-in (Sunday NFL Countdown-championship week)??? No football games until 3pm, no major college basketball games, no big hockey games-really, who watches hockey anymore on NBC, or the National Backstabbing of Conan as they are more commonly referred to as of this moment. If fans thought Thomas Smallwood's rags to riches story winning the PBA World Champions was going to garner some mainstream attention, wait until this possible historic moment occurs. We are witnesses to history...that is, until the next big moment for bowling fans comes along to provide meaning for our sport.