Tenpin / Tennis / and Television.

[Mistagear]

John,
Thanks for being interested enough to contribute on this.
I seem to remember a bowler, Jo Velo, any connection ?.
I'm rained in this weekend so will not waste much more time on subject of no interest to majority.
Tennis has enjoyed a large spectator following for a long time, yet I dont see the physical vision of two players hitting the ball back and forth as very entertaining or spectator worthy.
Bowling is probably no less visually worthy yet has zero spectator appeal.
I think if you want to "fix" bowling you need to look at the differences between the two. Both visually similar so what makes tennis infinitely more watchable ? What keeps people's interest interest in watching tennis ?
I think its the way the theatre is created by the scoring. Every 30 or 40 seconds you get a result, the watchability of tennis due directly to the fact that scoring concentrates on these individual mini results not having to wait for an end total. Each and every point is important, unlike bowling which focuses on the total at the end.
Whatever happens in bowling, it will never be able to create a theatrical exciting atmosphere whilst the scoring remains that you must wait until the end to know who is winning. Bowling will always have high dropout rates because the natural competitiveness that humans seek is dumbed down through the scoring system and handicaps. Almost every other sport is built around satisfying this human trait.
Bowling is the only sport where you could phone your score in. Even at graded championships you are competing against a person or team who may have bowled in a squad days different to when you bowl. How unsatisfying is that ?
I see most of the way bowling is conducted as detrimental to increasing competition numbers and the advancement of the sport. Even at an elite level tournament, you bowl for hours in a squad, usually having no clue what total you need to score, you have no idea who you are competing against for the position you are holding. That makes it impossible to get excited about the event until its over and then it's too late to get interested. Everything seems counter intuitive to the human desire that sport is designed to satisfy. All other sport except bowling it appears.

Seems I think differently to everyone else. Dont change anything and you will get more of the same decline.
Bowing centres have been converting casual players into league players for 50 years, the shrinkage rate of leagues is the Bowling's problem, especially that "ex" league players are the only group in the equation that is growing, bowling has painted itself into a corner and only a major re-think has any chance of reversing bowling's eventual demise.
I've probably said everything I had worthwhile on this.
Cheers, M

 

[Roysa]

John,

I think its the way the theatre is created by the scoring. Every 30 or 40 seconds you get a result, the watchability of tennis due directly to the fact that scoring concentrates on these individual mini results not having to wait for an end total. Each and every point is important, unlike bowling which focuses on the total at the end.
Whatever happens in bowling, it will never be able to create a theatrical exciting atmosphere whilst the scoring remains that you must wait until the end to know who is winning. Bowling will always have high dropout rates because the natural competitiveness that humans seek is dumbed down through the scoring system and handicaps. Almost every other sport is built around satisfying this human trait.\

Mysterygear i completely disagree with the bolded part above. Every shot in bowling is crucial to the final result. To get up in the 6th frame and double when your opponent already has a double and you are currently leading by 9 pins means that next shot is more important than the first and the last of the game. To say bowling only focuses on the end score is ridiculous as every frame prior to the 12th ball is what makes that end result.

Lots of what you have said has made sense to me and i dont disagree with most of it but you lost me with this final comment.

As for the competitivness being dumbed down, that works the opposite for me. Recently i had to make up 94 pins hdc on an opponent, had that league been a scratch league i would have had to bowl a score of 80 to win. ON the flip side i bowl in a scratch league too where it is really competitive and that is exciting putting yourself up against the best bowlers in the centre. You cant have experienced bowlers playing new bowlers and always have a level playing field. Golf hdc works the same, its how it has to be to create an environment where new bowlers can start somewhere.

 

[Roysa]

Further to that, how exciting is womens tennis sometimes... 6-0 6-1. I saw that result coming from the time they put the net up. Hardly exciting.

 

[Mistagear]

Roysa,
Thanks for all your comments, I'd rather have constructive criticism of everything I say, its much better than people contributing nothing by their silence.

Re, handicap.
I suggest players be graded as in other sports, if singles then play within your grading. I would find it more satisfying to win a match against a similarly skilled opponent, or even if I lost the match, with the scoring I suggest a losing player will likely have won a number of points or games, that could be much more positive than thinking I had lost to a player who scores double what I was capable of scoring. In your example, the player who lost has very little incentive to turn up week after week. If he does have win, it wasnt really his skill, it was the handicap which won the match. Handicap may allow him to move up from the bottom of the standings sheet but probably does nothing for self esteem.(btw, ever noticed how few people look at the standings sheet, speaks volumes about not satisfying that human desire to compete and win something)

Re 6-0 6-1 tennis match.. I bet it was more enjoyable to watch than most bowling matches and probably more satisfying for the player who lost, to have won a few points against a far better player. Probably gives more incentive t improve for the next time they play.

Re golf, as far as I am aware, handicap golf has the same amount of spectator interest as bowling and same TV time..zero.
Ever noticed how with scratch golf, they only talk about under or over the card, thats so they can say exactly who is winning despite one guy already on the 18th green and the other guy on the 5th tee.. the way it's scored helps build the interest.
PS. the "Mystery gear " dig is clever and funny. I know who i am, even if you dont lol

 

[Roysa]

It was clever wasn't it. As for silence on the subject you are right. Many here probably agree with points we both make. But in true tenpin bowling style .... No one cares.

 

[John_Velo]

Hey Gents,

Good points made on the over and under. As a kid watching events the average was not the focus but the over and under was.

The attitude of bowlers is one of the biggest things i have seen a change in. How many events we bowl in were your opponent is tweeting the whole way through the game, or zoned out to their iPods. That is as interesting as watching the teen aged kids at home on the lounge. Makes for very boring viewing.

Going back to the 70's ( please don't any body shoot me down here) i remember bowling having more registered members than soccer and it had the third highest participation level of all sports in the country.

Tournaments I remember were ones like the Melbourne cup, you had to buy a ticket to get in and watch the event. You had the like of the Steve Lovell running out every shot and really getting every body involved in the game. Vic Bubnew, hope i spelt that correctly, wearing loud clothes knee sliding across lanes on every shot to win. Again, engaging every body around them. It was fun, the ABC was there to televise the event.

That was the same accross the east cost of Australia for the Hawian Open at Rockdale, the Sydney Cup and St leonards from memory.

These days the Australian Masters pulls a crowd, not massive but pulls a crowd with the best bowlers in the world turning up. For the locals we can bowl in it, but lets look at the critea.

1:You must be a TBA member, every body should be any way, it's bloody cheap.
2:you need to bowl in league that runs for 40 + weeks.
3: you need then time to practice.
3:you then need to bowl all of the qualifying events at the Aust championship

the list goes on.

What if you want to be a TBA member but not bowl in a league and instead only practice two or three times a week and concentrate on Tournaments. Well then in an AMF Centre your rollers card wont apply and you are back to social rates.

For me we need to look at the grass roots once again and fix it there.

Then we can change the outcomes, tough road, is it worth travelling, i would like to think so.

As for the question you asked before, i call that old bugger dad.

 

[Mistagear]

Suggestion,
Singles Match
4 frames in a game.... win a point per game, if tied bowl 1 frame decider
4 games in a set .... if tied two games each, bowl a 1 frame decider.
3 sets in a match.
that would be, minimum frames (4 x 4) per set , x 2 = 32 , if 3 sets bowled approx 48 frames plus any tied points/games....thats roughly a 4 game current scoring.
Method of play, bowler A bowls 1 ball on his lane, B then bowls 1 ball. if one strikes, he wins point otherwise then player A bowls his spare, B bowls his. highest score wins . where 9./ beats 8./. if say 9.- against 8.1, re-bowl point.
Next point, alternate lanes then B bowls first ball, A then bowls his. and so on.

Team Match.
Say 4 member.
4 frames in game , 4 games in set , 3 sets in match.
Where each team member bowls one of the frames in a game. team A puts up its line-up for the game, then Team B sets their line-up. This introduces tactics where team B has the option to match their line-up to their advantage. Next game team A has the option.
Players are graded by his/her average pins knocked down over a period of games/matches.
In teams competition, a maximum total average is set to limit stacking of team members beyond the average of other teams. ie, if you have 1 very high average player in your team, you would need to have another average considerably lower to fit under the max limit for the team.

All competition is head to head, at any time, bowlers/spectators can know exactly who is winning and by how many points. Every shot is critical, is directly and immediately related to the outcome of the match.
Tournaments could easily become knockout team/singles events, perhaps double knockout if preferred.


Sure it would be very different and would take large amounts of cooperation between bowlers, centres and governing body.
About 8 or 9 yrs ago, I was in my centre late one evening with a mate, we were mucking around practicing and using this scoring format. Nearby were a couple of league bowlers doing their "phone in" scores for their next weeks league game. Neither my mate or I mentioned what we were doing, yet we were getting into this format so much that it attracted their attention. After they finished their games, they both came over and sat watching for about an hour while my mate George and I battled it out. We manage to attract spectators without having any other reason for them to watch other than it was interesting....I have thought about this ever since and do think it may have potential to change how players and even spectators approach bowling. I have always thought about having it programmed into the automatic scoring system and selling the concept. I went as far to have my scoring programmed into a laptop though not automatic scoring. Eight years on, if it caught on somehow, I'd be happy seeing it work.

 

[Roysa]

Well put your name to it and start it up... What's stopping you?

 

[Mistagear]

Well put your name to it and start it up... What's stopping you?

Waiting for several things,
1. Waiting for Jim Cross to critique the idea. If there is a hole in the concept, JC is certain to see it.
2. Waiting for larger numbers of bowling tragic's to voice an opinion.
3 Waiting to wind up my energy levels, it would take monumental effort for one person to take on such a huge crusade. My experience says majority of bowlers can be quite negative, likely to reject something before they had given it a go.
I no longer have a bowling centre to hatch the plan at a local level as a test market. I do have other things happening which occupy most of my time.

 

[wchester]

Your idea has merit. It looks like competing in this format would be loads of fun and provide more than a few tension filled shots.

There are some intrinsic problems however.
1) individual 'games' could go on and on with both players throwing long strings of strikes..which leads to the next and most apparent problem.
2) proprietors would be hesitant to set a reasonable fee for the matches. ..32 or 48 frames could very easily balloon out to 70-80 frames.

 

[John_Velo]

G'Day,

That doesn't sound to bad. Could work for pot nights to get it going?

What if that was modified to a four frame game but the fourth is still three ball scored the same way as bowling is currently. My figuring is that the computer scoring could be easily modified to four frames. But add a bonus for frames won?

Could be novel, lets face it kids get bored by frame six, make it shorter could get the kids wanting to play?

All fun.

 

[Roysa]

Sounds like 20/20 to me.

 

[John_Velo]

I can see the merit in a shorter format with more games and result. Especially in match play. Instead of pin fall it could be wins and loses or over and under. Three game matches with best of three getting points.

It just needs to be simple and easy to manage.

But still for me have some tradition in the sports scoring.


Four frame would add pressure to a poor shot.

 

[Roysa]

To be blunt and to the point a change in format like this would lose me to another sport. I have no doubt others would feel the same. Everyone is entitled to their own view and mine is that this wouldn't work for existing serious bowlers and would add only novelty value to the sport.

 

[Mistagear]

Wchester

Your idea has merit. It looks like competing in this format would be loads of fun and provide more than a few tension filled shots.

There are some intrinsic problems however.
1) individual 'games' could go on and on with both players throwing long strings of strikes..which leads to the next and most apparent problem.
2) proprietors would be hesitant to set a reasonable fee for the matches. ..32 or 48 frames could very easily balloon out to 70-80 frames.

1 true to an extent at an elite level, perhaps not to the extent you might imagine. Even in the 220 score type encounter, the placement of strikes is often not aligned between the two players and remembering also that a 9./ beats an 8./ so a conventional score would be very similar but with my scoring the point was won.

2 This aspect is particularly important and am glad you brought it up.
Firstly looking at the downside for a proprietor. Yes matches would possibly average a greater number of frames. An owner could quickly establish an average for this type of scoring and do costings similar to renting a lane on a per hour basis. Extra frames are negligible in actual cost to a centre, where it becomes a consideration is where lanes can be rented again by other customers. Many leagues are currently followed by empty lanes, in this case it should be no problem. It's slightly reverse to what happens now, if you rent a lane to an elite player for say three games, time on the lane will be say 35mins, renting a lane for 3 games to a novice will take about 45 mins. This new scoring may reverse that where better players sometimes will take more time to complete than novice players.

Upside. This scoring gives a proprietor a completely new product that they have never had before, potential additional sales. They would not convert current leagues, rather introduce a new comp at a different time.
Players such as ROYSA would not be lost to the sport and would continue in their current league format) Additionally, it would have a natural tendency increase desire to improve a players grading, that would increase practice rates and perhaps lead to instruction sessions being conducted. Existing league players would have an incentive to improve as well as beginners. A Resident Pro position may result eventually, similar to other sports like golf etc.
Every proprietor would have a huge database of past players lost to the sport, it would present an exceptional opportunity to invite past players back to see an exhibition match, with a chance to bring them back as a regular customer once more.
Social play would improve if I am correct in saying the current scoring lacks some competitive elements. More practice is likely to result amongst team members. Currently a team has only 4 opportunities in an evenings bowling to share the feeling of a " win" (each game total and the overall) whereas in a 3 set match the team members share 45 "win" opportunities.
By focussing the scoring on the individual point, I think it would vastly improve team loyalty and attention to what other team members are bowling. That attention on an individuals performance by other bowlers, the feel good aspect, is the essence of what the current scoring lacks and eliminates many player's desire to improve at their chosen sport.

As well as the scoring I have been talking about already, I have an idea for family and beginner type social play where a current 10 frame game be turned into 10 games where scoring creates a winner on each current frame. This would change the situation where children and least skilled players lose interest half way through a standard game. At least if you lose this game(frame) you have an opportunity to be a winner in the next game (frame). Esentially, instead of a group leaving after their game with 1 winner and everyone else having lost, they would likely leave with every player having at least some positive winning feelings. I am certain if someone leaves with a win or two, it would vastly increase the chance they would want to come back next time the group thinks about going bowling.
Software graphics would emphasize "Winner" "1st Runner-up" "2nd Runner-up" with starbursts etc at the end of all 10 games (frames) and not focus on who won the most number of games (frames)
Bowing should be sold in 10 game blocks, not 10 frame games. This would improve marketability to better suit how the current modern society think.

To summarise, I see downside as minimal with upside opportunity to bolt on a whole new aspect to a business owner, to sell more product to existing loyal customers as well as customers, a chance to bring back past regular customers where you had realistically no chance to bring them back previously. I think benefits would vastly outweigh costs

 

[nomore4s]

The big problems Tenpin bowling has with competing with other sports is:

• Perception that it is more a game then a sport, probably better off comparing it to darts then any of the major sports like Tennis and Golf. As darts and tenpin bowling are classed in the same boat by most people - more of a social game then a sport. Maybe Bowling should look at the way darts is marketed more so then the major sports.
• People can relate to tennis, golf and other major sports and how good the athletes are that play at the highest level. While many people have bowled in a social environment not many can relate to what skill is required at the top level of our sport. They cannot relate to the power and accuracy the top level players create. They cannot relate to the different lane patterns, conditions and the fact the lanes will transition over a number of games or even 1 game. They cannot relate to the need for different balls to combat the lanes and lane transition.

If people cannot relate to any of the above how can they possibly enjoy watching high level bowling no matter what the scoring system is?
Has anyone tried explaining bowling to friends when asked about it? Explaining different oil patterns, the need for so many different balls, how you can lay the same ball out in different ways to react differently on the lane? Then getting the response that they didn't realise it was so technical?
This is the real issue why bowling is not accepted or understood as a sport.

And the big problem is the majority of league bowlers also don't understand the above. So if people who bowl once a week in league don't understand or appreciate the intricacies of bowling how will someone who bowls under disco lights once a year? They won't, hence they will take no interest in bowling when it is on TV.

I believe even in the US bowling is struggling compared to what it used to get in regards to TV ratings and participation levels. If a country with such a strong history in the sport of bowling and traditionally a greater understanding of the skills of bowling is struggling it is no wonder Aust struggles to support bowling on TV. You have to remember there is plenty more sports to compete with then the days when bowling drew good ratings on TV. Consider things like X games and the fact TV is so much more commercial then it used to be.

The other issues bowling has which is a bit unique to the sport is it relies on bowling centre owners who are independent of the governing body and who gain the majority of their income from means that the governing body has no control or influence over. In other words you can run a successful bowling centre without having anything to do with TBA. This causes some unique problems to the sport of bowling imo.

My thoughts are forget trying to compete with major sports and worrying about getting on TV. The powers that be should trying to educate league bowlers, creating higher participation in tournaments, working with bowling centres to create stronger leagues and more regular tournaments and participation from league bowlers. I believe TBA is actually headed in the right direction by improving relationships with companies like AMF and trying to get league bowlers signed up to TBA memberships. Also tournaments are getting good participation rates, things like the QLD open booked out and waiting lists to bowl in it, the Twin tour in QLD, the World Cup format event in QLD etc etc. IMO we need more sports pattern type events to give people more of an appreciation of how difficult the harder patterns are to play on as it is a big step from events like the twin tour to a tournament with a WTBA pattern laid down.

 

[Mistagear]

IMHO
Public perception is correct for the bowling that they see.
Handicap leagues in their local centre is the only example of "skilled" bowling they are likely to encounter.
What do they see if they look ?
Vastly mixed skilled players in the same competition, players abound that are scoring only marginally better scores that they can bowl just by walking in off the street and throwing it down the middle...
If they do actually look at the scores (which is more than many league players are bothering to do ) they will see the handicap system favouring someone consistently throwing lower scores.
Why would the public think any differently, why should league players either, for that matter ?
The handicap system numerically favours bowlers to have a lower average and therefore discourages a bowler to become better.
Tournaments, If graded league competition were the normal, eventually you would create opportunity to have more tournaments at lower grade levels, create a reason to improve into the next higher grade and that would filter through to even bigger top level events.
Currently at centre or district level championships, bowlers who have been developed to need handicap assisted play are suddenly asked to play without handicap to prop them up. No wonder the conversion from league to the next level is so pathetic.
Like I said earlier ..if there is a way to do something negative psychologically, Bowling has already done it. Even the incentive to bowl a spare or a strike is dampened down because as your handicap reduces, your disadvantage increases against lower average competitors.

 

[amagill]

IMHO
Public perception is correct for the bowling that they see.
Handicap leagues in their local centre is the only example of "skilled" bowling they are likely to encounter.
What do they see if they look ?
Vastly mixed skilled players in the same competition, players abound that are scoring only marginally better scores that they can bowl just by walking in off the street and throwing it down the middle...
If they do actually look at the scores (which is more than many league players are bothering to do ) they will see the handicap system favouring someone consistently throwing lower scores.
Why would the public think any differently, why should league players either, for that matter ?
The handicap system numerically favours bowlers to have a lower average and therefore discourages a bowler to become better.
Tournaments, If graded league competition were the normal, eventually you would create opportunity to have more tournaments at lower grade levels, create a reason to improve into the next higher grade and that would filter through to even bigger top level events.
Currently at centre or district level championships, bowlers who have been developed to need handicap assisted play are suddenly asked to play without handicap to prop them up. No wonder the conversion from league to the next level is so pathetic.
Like I said earlier ..if there is a way to do something negative psychologically, Bowling has already done it. Even the incentive to bowl a spare or a strike is dampened down because as your handicap reduces, your disadvantage increases against lower average competitors.

I like the idea of tiers, as you've vaguely touched on above.

Great Wall of China = beginner level.
Something like a 5:1 ratio = intermediate.
3:1 flat patterns = advanced level.

How would you get something like that going for leagues though? It would require centers to oil their lanes with several different patterns, that's not that hard to do I know, but would centers really do it week in, week out?

Would you need to have the masking units a different colour for each different level, thus identifying the skill level of people on the lanes?

 

[jimcross]

Yes, will comment again on some specifics in due course. Meantime, watching this interesting discussion, makes me think that those in a position to initiate policy, and even action, would benifit from participating, or starting their own. A free discussion where all ideas are welcome, be they perceived as good or bad ( there may even be some good in something universally thought to be silly ), or indeed if they support the 'status quo'.

Who knows? Something may grow out of it - something straight out of left field. ( you've always got to keep an eye on those lefties.)

Discuss - agree - disagree. What harm can it do? After all, if we ever did really live in caves, we'd still be in them if we didn't.

By the way, I hope most of you actually read the attachment I started this with ? A broad brush, a far horizon, not navel gazing.

 

[nomore4s]

IMHO
Public perception is correct for the bowling that they see.
Handicap leagues in their local centre is the only example of "skilled" bowling they are likely to encounter.
What do they see if they look ?
Vastly mixed skilled players in the same competition, players abound that are scoring only marginally better scores that they can bowl just by walking in off the street and throwing it down the middle...
If they do actually look at the scores (which is more than many league players are bothering to do ) they will see the handicap system favouring someone consistently throwing lower scores.
Why would the public think any differently, why should league players either, for that matter ?
The handicap system numerically favours bowlers to have a lower average and therefore discourages a bowler to become better.
Tournaments, If graded league competition were the normal, eventually you would create opportunity to have more tournaments at lower grade levels, create a reason to improve into the next higher grade and that would filter through to even bigger top level events.
Currently at centre or district level championships, bowlers who have been developed to need handicap assisted play are suddenly asked to play without handicap to prop them up. No wonder the conversion from league to the next level is so pathetic.
Like I said earlier ..if there is a way to do something negative psychologically, Bowling has already done it. Even the incentive to bowl a spare or a strike is dampened down because as your handicap reduces, your disadvantage increases against lower average competitors.

I actually disagree to an extent in that most handicap leagues actually favour the higher average bowlers. To take it further most handicap systems favour the most consistent bowlers, which in most cases tends to be the better bowlers especially on house patterns.

The reason most league bowlers won't bowl tournaments is because they don't think they are good enough to compete with "scratch" bowlers and are intimidated by the better bowlers. Changing the scoring system will not change this, as this is not uncommon in other sports as well. This is why tournaments such as the Twin Tour are so good, handicap tournaments in the same 10 game format as other scratch type formats give bowlers wanting to step up a chance to compete with other bowlers from outside their leagues and centres with the safety net of handicap. It becomes a good stepping stone to competing in tougher events.

I understand what you are getting at with the scoring system but imo your idea would be no more then great for a tournament or skins format that would probably work great on a televised event. But it doesn't really address the issues that effect the sport side of bowling and it's perception in the eyes of the general public. All it is doing is shifting the focus a little bit but there will still the issues in my first post.
Maybe put your scoring system to the PBA and they could use it in one of their end of year brand team things they do, can't be any worse then the format they used last year.

BUT I think changing the scoring system to such a drastic extent especially for walk in social bowlers isn't the way to go as it would make the jump to traditional scoring leagues and tournaments an even bigger leap. If you ask most people about bowling (with it's current scoring system) they will tell you it is great fun especially with a few mates and drinks, so the scoring system isn't really the issue imo.
The problem the sport faces is getting credibility in the eyes of the public as a sport and not a fun social activity on a Friday or Sat night. This perception has been created and promoted by the fact I touched on earlier - that a bowling centre business model is based on this perception more then the sport side of bowling, and remember without profitable bowling centres the sport doesn't exist.
The challenge facing the sport side of bowling is not the scoring system but the general perception of bowling and the understanding of the sports side of bowling by the general population.

I have played a lot of sports at varying levels across a number of years and I can tell you that the sport side of bowling is one of the most challenging and enjoyable sports I've played in regards to the constant challenge and competitive opportunities available but this will probably never be understood and more importantly not want to be understood by the general public while the perception of bowling is the way it is.

I would also probably find league play a lot more enjoyable if the house patterns most league play on were tougher but with the amount of whinging that goes on in league when either the weather changes how a pattern plays or a different pattern is laid down I understand why most centres refuse to do it but that is a rant for another day/thread.