What's higher than a perfect 300 ...if 300 is a "perfect" game?

[Chase]

Recently, I had a conversation with a VERY knowledgeable, and great bowler who said that he thought that there should never be a score allowed that is higher than 300 in league or in a tournament. And, after giving it some thought myself... well, you know - it does seem a little unfair.

He closed the conversation asking, "Chase, HOW can anyone beat a 317 score?... and WHY is anything over 300 ever allowed...if 300 is a PERFECT game..(?)

I welcome all comments and thoughts...:)

[Isom]

You're right Ken. I gather from how Chase was asking the question that he is trying to figure out what a competitive scratch bowler is. I assumed that he knew the literal definiton of scratch. meaning no handicap. I was trying to explain to him what a serious or competitive scratch bowler is. It's basically someone that proves themselves, over time, or in many events that they can rise to the top. It really has nothing to do with average

[Don Hemanes (Rhinoman)]

Ken surely has the actual definition for "Scratch Bowler". However; a good scratch bowler is one who has the ability to to adapt to bowling conditions in any format and still remain competitive and above 200. Technically, Jack did that. (Nice bowling by the way Jack). But what do I know, I just shot a 150 on a walled up shot last night... lol

[glenda atwater]

PERFECT 300 WITH CAP,IN A HANDICAP LEAGUE.THAT'S WHY THEY CALL IT A HANDICAP LEAGUE.

[Don Hemanes (Rhinoman)]

Barry, you hit the nail on the head with that response. I am one of those bowlers who spent countless hours perfecting my game the best I could. I bowled in a house that did not create such a wall every bowler. (that was back in 1987-93). By the time the year 2000 comes along I had grown a bit weary of the game and it was not fun anymore when the challenge was not longer to bowl a perfect game, but to find a house that did not wall the shot up. Impossible. I quit the game in 2000 and returned just last year only to post a 211 ave. So i was one of those bowlers quit after determining I could never win high game.

Marilyn, this question is no strike against handicap bowlers, and should not be taken as one. Isom has a legitimate point and voices the thoughts of probably 75% of scratch bowler in the Atlanta area. if not the entire country. And if I may add, your speculation is not fair. His reason just like all of our reasons for entering a tournament is simply to have a fair opportunity at the top prize. But how fair is it when my perfect game cant beat another person's imperfect game?
And lets face it. Nothing should go past past what is called a perfect game. For anyone.
I'm just saying.....

[glenda atwater]

Sounds like they should not get in handicap anything,oh then there would be no league or tournments.I'm just saying......

[Quantrelle]

Well, I run the All Night Doubles on Sunday and have been doing so for the last two years. And yes, Isom did come to me about this, but I feel that if I were to do that I should just change it to a scratch doubles pot. It is an All Night Handicap Doubles, therefore, if you get handicap then thats what it is. On the same night that Isom is referring to there was a 300 and 298 shot as well. The person who bowled 298 won money and he was a scratch bowler the other person was not in at all. I understand that the handicap is a disadvantage with the shot being as hitable as it is. But again you have the choice of getting in the pot. How many handicap bowlers will get in the scratch brackets or scratch side pots, if they know they have to face Greg or Isom? They have that choice. I'm not taking it personal but you could have mentioned my name since most people know who take the pot up on Sunday night. All who are in this league have the same choice to get in or not.

[Chase]

I am glad to see many of you expressing how you feel about this...as I am still learning a LOT about how the leagues work, etc.

I had a conversation with my Pops about this, and we could never agree. I told him if it's a handicap league, a bowler SHOULD definitely get all the pins they "need" to make the game more fair...even if it's 80-100 pins a game. Ok, that's fine. BUT, I kinda think it should END at where the "perfect game" or "perfect series" ends...300, and 900.

If you don't stop at 300, then it seems to make things unattainable to the rest of the handicap bowlers (who just happen to have less handicap pins) ...and of course the scratch bowlers too.

[Isom]

Hey Quan, I started to write another post on here, because I wanted you to know that I in NO WAY meant for this to be offensive to you at all. You are a dear friend to me and I'm merely addressing the situation, but in no means am I trying to degrade you or talk about you. You take the time out every Sunday to give us a chance to make money and I appreciate you for that.

My concern when I asked you to consider capping the handicap at 300 wasn't so much that you said you wouldn't do it, but the reason WHY you said you wouldn't do it. The reason you gave me was because you thought the bowlers wouldn't accept it and stop getting in. Even though I don't agree with that (I think the bowlers would still get in), I'm more concerned with that you feel that if they arn't allowed to 'cheat' they would stop getting in your pot. It's a sad day that a bowler would stop getting in a pot if they aren't allowed to cheat. I consider bowling 301 and up as cheating. Any score above 300 simply doesn't exist.

I NEVER EVER said that I wanted the handicap to be gotten rid of. Never said it nor will I ever say that. I think it's a VERY important part of the game to even the playing field so that everyone feels they have a chance to win. But EVEN is the key word here. It's not meant to give the advantage. The bowlers would still have their pins, it would just cap off at a 300 game. The way it was meant to be. So I'm a little confused at why you would make the comparison between capping the score at 300 and making the doubles scratch. They are in no way the same thing. Not even close

[Isom]

Hey Quan, I started to write another post on here, because I wanted you to know that I in NO WAY meant for this to be offensive to you at all. You are a dear friend to me and I'm merely addressing the situation, but in no means am I trying to degrade you or talk about you. You take the time out every Sunday to give us a chance to make money and I appreciate you for that.

My concern when I asked you to consider capping the handicap at 300 wasn't so much that you said you wouldn't do it, but the reason WHY you said you wouldn't do it. The reason you gave me was because you thought the bowlers wouldn't accept it and stop getting in. Even though I don't agree with that (I think the bowlers would still get in), I'm more concerned with that you feel that if they arn't allowed to 'cheat' they would stop getting in your pot. It's a sad day that a bowler would stop getting in a pot if they aren't allowed to cheat. I consider bowling 301 and up as cheating. Any score above 300 simply doesn't exist.

I NEVER EVER said that I wanted the handicap to be gotten rid of. Never said it nor will I ever say that. I think it's a VERY important part of the game to even the playing field so that everyone feels they have a chance to win. But EVEN is the key word here. It's not meant to give the advantage. The bowlers would still have their pins, it would just cap off at a 300 game. The way it was meant to be. So I'm a little confused at why you would make the comparison between capping the score at 300 and making the doubles scratch. They are in no way the same thing. Not even close

[Quantrelle]

Isom, I consider a friend as well, so I'm going to leave it at this. You have your opinion and that fine. Again, you and whoever else have the same choice to get in or not.

[Isom]

Ok Quan, I think its great that we can be friends and at the same time disagree. If everybody agreed with the same thing the world would be a very boring place.

[Tesa Dyson]

As a scratch bowler I could care less about whether or not a person shoots 290 and gets sticks. I am a scratch bowler that still has a scratch mentality. I understand that side action is not capped and that is to make it fair to ALL individuals playing. I bowl in that same Sunday league that Isom mentioned and to be frank you need to shoot scores to win. If a person's highest game in the league thus far is only 269 they shouldn't be expecting to win any money regardless if the pot is capped or uncapped. The real problem that I have is that the league shots are given handicap bowlers a second advantage. In the good ole days you couldn't throw it everywhere and strike. Five years ago, having "area" meant that you had 2-4 boards of miss room. Now a days bowlers have 10 boards of miss room so ability, talent, and skill aren't always a factor.