The 1998 U.S. Open, presented by Strike Ten Entertainment for the first time, was, as sponsoring AMF CEO Doug Stanard said with a grin, "a heck of a lot better than last year."
Stanard was, of course, alluding to the fact that there was no 1997 U.S. Open. With the formation of Strike Ten Entertainment, BPAA officials decided to postpone the event until a team of experts could be hired to run it and a new sponsor could be found.
The sponsor came from within the industry when AMF stepped forward to sign a three-year deal. The team designated to conduct the event, along with the BPAA tournament committee, was Strike Ten Entertainment CEO Steve Ryan, STE Marketing Director John Sohigian, TV Producer Dr. Ralph Mellenby, and a cast of dozens more at Strike Ten, BPAA, PBA, PWBA, and AMF.
Mellenby, an Emmy award-winning producer involved in 13 Olympic telecasts, was the producer of the arena television finals. It was his first venture into bowling.
Strike Ten also hired Gary Beck to participate in the planning and to prepare the arena for the show. Beck's credentials include two very successful Dick Weber Classic arena shows, as well as several PBA Senior Tour events. His "Killer 'B' Promotions" owns and conducts the American Scholarship Tournament for youth bowlers.
Strike Ten even brought in Nelson "Bo" Burton to join PWBA analyst Jan Schmidt for the television announce team. It was a pretty impressive group, but it also was one with no experience working together, and there were a few problems.
Was it a titanic disaster? No, but there was a lot of room for improvement. The average fan in the bowling center or arena, or even on television, probably noticed very few problems, but for those of us who follow the sport and conduct events, the list is fairly long.
I'm sure that if BPAA CEO Don Harris could only change one thing about the ESPN-taped television finals, it would be the length of the show.
"There is no way it should take almost four hours to tape a 1½-hour show," he told me.
The reasons for the marathon finals? Several. No. 1: a crew with very little experience working together. Burton told me the day before the show that there would be problems.
"These are all very good people," he said, "but none of us have worked together before, and that adds time."
Towards the end of the day, I could sense that Bo may have been more appreciative of the years he spent with Chris Schenkel, Carol Lehti, and the great crew at ABC Sports.
Another reason for the length was the decision to hold the semifinal matches separate instead of having the men and women bowl simultaneously. If these were held together, it would be more exciting for the fans, and you could even put five players on the show instead of four.
Burton and Schmidt are both good announcers, but neither seems comfortable in the play-by-play role. Both are players, and their strength is analyzing players and shots. During the women's finals, Schmidt did play-by-play and Burton was the analyst. During the men's finals, they reversed roles. Several times during the show, the one doing play-by-play slipped into the analyst role. It was understandable because of their backgrounds, but it would have been better to have a solid play-by-play announcer with both Schmidt and Burton as expert analysts. A three-person announce team for a major event--what a concept!
There were several other problems with the show that all contributed to the excessive length. There was a pinsetter breakdown on the very first shot that took too long to repair. A large screen showing the score and replays was located directly above the pinsetters, sending a glare onto the lanes. A couple of the players told me it was difficult to concentrate with the changing lights on the lanes.
At one point, someone in the TV truck made the decision to put Dick Weber on the giant screen, prompting a loud cheer from the knowledgeable crowd. The problem was they did it in the middle of Aleta Sill's approach, causing her to back off and start over. On the show, they showed an embarrassed Weber frowning and putting his hands on his face, but no one explained his reaction to the TV audience.
At the end of the women's final, they cut away to a commercial after the eighth frame because the match was a blowout and Sill mathematically had eliminated Tammy Turner. What the audience missed was the emotional moment when Sill realized she had won the event and completed her second Triple Crown. When they came back from commercial, there sat a calm Sill, and they simply said she was the winner and went directly into the men's match.
A little over three hours into the taping, just when we thought What else can go wrong?, the arena lights went out. It was the beginning of the fourth frame of the final match, and we waited for about 20 minutes for lights to be restored. It seems that a power generator had overheated. Like most of the audience, it just got tired and gave up. The TV lights never did come back on, but again, the TV audience probably didn't notice because the production staff tinted the film to look as if nothing had gone wrong. If they can do that, why do they spend all that money on special lights for taped shows?
Dave Soloman, a sportswriter for the New Haven Register, wrote a very critical column regarding the blackout. He thought Steve Ryan and Ralph Mellenby made a big mistake in trying to cover up the mistake by tinting the film and not mentioning it on the show. His contention was that it had a significant impact on the match, and he thought it was "bad judgement" to leave it out.
Soloman had a good point, especially when you consider that Walter Ray Williams Jr. mentioned "after the lights went out" in an interview.
I also was puzzled why they didn't review the tape for several other errors, like the time Burton mentioned Tammy Turner went to school at "Texas A&M University in Amarillo" (instead of West Texas A&M in Canyon) or when Schmidt said Sill had just completed her second "Tripper Crown."
Controversy and problems developed long before the TV show, however. It started with the facility chosen for this event. Two years ago, the Open was held in Indianapolis, where Don Mitchell's 80-lane Woodland Bowl was a great facility. Sixty-lane AMF Milford Lanes also is a great bowling center, but it simply was not large enough to accommodate an event of this magnitude.
To accommodate 350 players, a huge circus-style tent was set up outside the center, housing several thousand balls, bags, shoes, refinishing equipment, and other various items. It also contained a hospitality room (into which many members of the media were denied access at times because they had "the wrong badge.")
The concourse at AMF Milford Lanes was narrow, not really big enough for grandstands, and there was no separation between the fans and players, making it very difficult for both to move from one end to the other during crowded times. Ball carts used by many PWBA players also contributed to the space problem. Parking was inadequate, compounded by the space needed to accommodate players' motor homes and the paddock tent. Cold, rainy weather caused additional problems with parking and players' equipment.
Early in the week, some people were upset because Strike Ten gave special U.S. Open jackets to some people. It was said that these were for the PWBA touring players only, but later in the week, many AMF staffers, VIPs, and even spouses were seen wearing these jackets. Wouldn't it have been much smarter to give these to all contestants, both PWBA and PBA and amateurs?
From the players' viewpoint, the new format generated more conversation than anything else. In an effort to make it more exciting for the fans, Strike Ten decided to change the traditional format for a new "bracket round" format. Instead of cutting to the top 60 after qualifying as had been done in the past, they cut to only the top 45. Several players also said the prize fund was top-heavy.
After these 45 bowled another eight games, they cut to the top 24 for round-robin match play. After match play, they cut again to the top 14 for bracket play. The first- and second-place bowlers received first round byes, then the other 12 players were matched up for five-game matches. The top two joined in for the second round of bracket play.
The end result of this change was that five of the 10 bowlers who held top five positions after 56 games of play did not earn a spot on the show. On the men's side, the fourth and fifth highest qualifiers, Jeff Lizzi and David Ozio, were knocked out in the bracket round.
For the women, only one of the top five after qualifying advanced to the show. Defending U.S. Open champion Liz Johnson, the No. 2 qualifier, was eliminated, as was No. 3 Leanne Barrette, amateur TEAM USA player Kelly Kulick, and Jackie Mitskavich.
Benefiting from the format were Marty Letscher, who came from the No. 12 spot to the show, and Kim Adler, Tammy Turner, and Aleta Sill for the women, who qualified sixth, tenth, and twelfth, respectively.
For those who enjoy the traditional format, this probably seemed very unfair, especially if your favorite players were eliminated during the bracket rounds. The upside was that it made it a little more exciting for the fans in the bowling center.
For example, during the last round of match play, players only had to get to the 14th spot instead of the usual fifth. The brackets also provided fans in the center with the excitement of sudden elimination that they usually only get on the show.
One obvious mistake, acknowledged by several event officials, was they had too many bracket matches at the same time. Twelve matches were held simultaneously, making it impossible for the fans to see them all. Six or even four would have been a much better number.
Gary Beck told me his idea was simply to eliminate the 24-game match play and start the bracket rounds with the top 24 or 32 players. That sounds like something BPAA should consider for future events.
Walter Ray Williams Jr. was perhaps the most critical of the format, contending that it added a greater luck factor which could result in the best players being eliminated early. His best argument, in my opinion, was when he said, "Tournament officials should have a greater obligation to get the best players on the TV show rather than worry about making it more exciting for the people in the bowling center."
I agree. If you create a little excitement for 500 people that results in disappointment for over a million (the show got a .7 rating, meaning over a million people watched), then it's a mistake.
In the midst of the problems and confusion, I also observed some very good stuff. The AMF center staff and officials bent over backwards to accommodate everyone. They had a smile on their face and were helpful in every aspect of the event.
To me, this is a reflection of leadership, starting with Doug Stanard. I continue to be very impressed with his actions. He strikes me as a man who is dedicated to his family, his employees, the industry, and his company. At the arena finals, he didn't wear a suit and tie and didn't sit in the VIP section with all the other industry big shots. Instead, he chose a spot in the grandstands with the fans. It was a nice touch.
I also learned that to get his AMF employees home to spend Easter with their families, he chartered a special flight back to Richmond Saturday night. Not many bosses would do that.
Another bright spot was the equal prize funds for men and women. In this event, equal prize funds and equal entry fees are the right way to go. I hope it stays that way in the future.
The media coverage of this event also was very impressive, helped by its taking place in a huge media market. It even attracted a little attention from publications like USA Today and Sports Illustrated, which usually choose to ignore bowling. Much of the credit for this coverage should go to Lydia Rypcinski, the former international editor for Bowlers Journal International. She was brought in by AMF, and she was on the phone and faxing people well in advance and during the event.
The crowds at the center were very good, especially in the evening. There also was a good crowd at the arena at Sacred Heart University for the show, estimated at around 1,200. I've been to five or six arena shows, and this was the best facility I've seen.
Because I know most of them personally, I know the people at BPAA and Strike Ten truly want to produce top quality tournaments. However, it should be painfully obvious that bringing in all new people and changing formats is not the way to do it. In a prestigious event such as the U.S. Open, producing an event that is well run and fair to the players should have a higher priority than "fan excitement." Sure, this is entertainment, but at this level it's a sport first.
Doug Stanard said to the players at breakfast the morning of the show, "It starts and ends with you." Steve Ryan and Don Harris agreed with his words. So, if the U.S. Open is an event with a purpose of producing the best champions, then my suggestion would be to return to basics—simplify. Forget trying to add gimmicks and concentrate on quality.
Our industry has two organizations, PBA and PWBA, that are in the business of running major tournaments on weekly basis year round. Instead of making these groups consultants to BPAA, make BPAA a consultant to them, and let them run the event from start to finish.
That does not mean that a few new twists cannot be added. It simply means that a prestigious event such as the U.S. Open deserves the best staff, and they have it. Put PBA in the lead role. They have nearly 40 years of experience running major bowling events. I don’t think we should have to wait that long for Strike Ten and BPAA to catch up.
Jim Goodwin, a BWAA director and LPBT's regional program director, is the award-winning editor/publisher of Stars & Strikes, in which the preceding originally appeared. Subscription rates are $20 per year (Pin Point Publishing, 2850 Red Valley Run, Rockwall, Texas 75087 .. voice/fax: 972/771-0069).