Time, my friends, is not on our side.
Last June, the American Bowling Congress’ System of Bowling Task Force released its report and general recommendations. It’s not the Starr Report, but in politically correct language, the task force, made up of three ABC, three WIBC, and three BPAA representatives said, "critical components which control scoring in our sport have become unbalanced."
Is that a polite way to say, "This game is broken" like former BWAA President Bob Cosgrove told ABC delegates in his speech a couple of years ago? Bob was vilified by many ABC officials and even a few of the bowling writers after that speech, but we now all know Bob was right, don’t we?
Not only was Bob right, but Bill Taylor was right, George Allen was right, John Jowdy was right, Jim Dressel was right, Sonny Frantz was right, and I could on and on with a list of the people in this industry who have been hitting the ABC over the head with verbal 2x4s in an effort to stop the organization from allowing our sport to be unnecessary weakened.
Those of you who read this column know that even I have made a few attempts to penetrate the extremely stubborn defensive shield worn by ABC officials for far too long.
It’s true that some critics have bashed the ABC without offering productive solutions, but for the most part, those of us who have watched this disaster develop have made suggestions for improvement over and over, only to be shunned by deaf ears and minds in deep denial.
In 1989, when the scoring at the once-prestigious American Bowling Congress National Championships Tournament went ballistic in Wichita Kansas, I wrote a column about it and a three-page letter to then-ABC Assistant Executive Director Roger Dalkin. What I got back was a letter justifying the outrageous scoring. Dalkin called it a "phenomenon." There was no admission that anything had gone wrong and no mention of a plan to correct it.
Long ago, it became very obvious to me that Dalkin and those ABC leaders before him and those with whom they surrounded themselves were involved in serious group denial.
"If we don’t admit that artificial scoring is a problem, then we don’t have to fix it" seemed to be their secret credo. And when BPAA held the proverbial gun to their head and threatened to break ranks in 1990, ABC’s leaders caved in and introduced the biggest joke in industry history: the "System of Bowling."
I was among those who laughed at the ineptitude of their so-called "SOB." My question to them then—which never has been answered to this day—was, How can you have a system of bowling with minimum standards and no maximums?
The backbone of the SOB was (and still is) the "three-unit rule" which required a minimum of three units of oil applied across the full width of the lane surface—a minimum requirement but no maximum. It was, in effect, a blank check for lane blocking.
It didn’t take long for proprietors who wanted high scores to figure out that they could put three units of oil on the outside boards and 30-100 units on the inside to create the high-scoring "wall of China." And after a few did it, almost everyone had to do it to preserve their customer base. When reactive balls hit the market in 1992, more and more oil went on the lanes to protect the lane surface from those sponges.
It’s a vicious and never-ending cycle.
All the while, league bowling continues to decline, and honor scores continue to escalate. In 1979, the peak year of ABC/WIBC membership, there were over nine million sanctioned league bowlers. At that time, there were 8,700 U.S. centers containing 154,000 lanes.
In 1978-79, there were 5,373 ABC-sanctioned perfect games, or one per 889 members. That was an average of 1.6 per center, or one for every 28 lanes in the U.S. for an entire year.
In 1996-97, there were 33,276 perfect games, or an average of 91 every day. Bowling centers now number 6,700, with 133,000 lanes. ABC membership has fallen every year since 1979 to a present level of 2.1 million. The perfect game ratio is now one in 64 members, or 4.98 per center, or one for every four lanes in the U.S.
If this were a contagious disease, there would be widespread panic in the streets!
With numbers like these haunting our industry, the American Bowling Congress could not continue to deny that a problem exists and maintain any credibility—thus, the creation of the SOB Task Force in March of 1996.
To summarize, the task force recommended changes in four areas: (1) Develop different levels of competitive standards; (2) Develop additional ball specs and restrict balls that damage lanes; (3) Establish lane conditions that prevent artificial steering of the ball to the pocket; and (4) Establish accurate and enforceable means of measuring all components.
Obviously, the big questions now are How? and When? Both questions are worrisome.
The task force identified the problems and made general recommendations, but it will be up to the ABC and WIBC to define specific changes and methods of implementation. And based on the snail’s pace we have witnessed in the past, don’t look for anything to happen in the near future.
In charge of the task for ABC and WIBC are the co-chairs of the ABC/WIBC equipment specifications committee, Paul Egbers of Illinois and Nancy Chapman of Wisconsin.
According to a recent article in ABC’s Bowling Magazine, the general consensus is that "different levels of competition" be established whereby the game we see today would remain as a "recreational level."
The challenge, and it’s a big one, is to create a "sport level." How? By restricting balls, requiring heavier pins with lower centers of gravity and by changing standard of lane dressing.
Does that mean that they may establish those maximums that I suggested in 1991? Can you imagine such forward thinking?
What worries me the most is that the leaders in charge now are the same ones who are responsible for allowing these problems to develop over the past 20 years or more.
Bill Taylor put it very simply: "You can’t solve the problem if you are the problem."
I personally don’t know Roger Dalkin, but I do know that he has bowled on the collegiate level, and I believe he has a pretty good understanding of the game. However, I also wonder if he is capable of putting politics aside to do what is right for the sport of bowling.
He sure didn’t step up to the plate in fixing the ABC Tournament, and several things he said in the aforementioned Bowling Magazine article tell me that he still is sitting on the fence, leaning in whichever direction the political winds blow.
In the article, he said, "We need to provide the challenge for those members who want it." But, he added: "The average bowler probably does not enjoy the ABC Tournament because of its challenging lane conditions."
Who is he trying to kid? If ABC Tournament conditions are challenging, why has it taken over 3,300 to win the team event five times since 1989? Why are 2,200s common in all events?
In 1979, a score of 2,097 won all events, while 3,202 won the team event. In doubles, it took 1,388, and the singles winner shot 761. In 1988, the year prior to Wichita, the scores were 2,053, 3,152, 1,450, and 774. In 1998, the scores were 2,151, 3,361, 1,455, and 814.
There never had been an 800 series prior to 1989. Since then, nine have been rolled in singles alone.
But the most obvious difference, just like with league scores, is in perfect games.
Prior to 1989, only 50 perfect games had been rolled in 88 years. Since 1989—in only 10 years—284 additional 300s have been rolled. You decide if challenge is still in place.
Yes, bowlers and equipment are better, but not that much better.
Aside from the ABC Tournament statement, some of Dalkin’s other comments are troubling.
For example, he said, "It’s very important to remember that the System of Bowling was a major leap forward when it was adopted in 1991." Dalkin added: "The other specifications may have allowed too much latitude, so it may be time to make a correction... [italics mine]."
Here is a good one from our ABC leader: "Our sport still has tighter specifications and regulations than any other sport." This one reminds me of the liberal politicians who say, "Everybody does it, so it’s OK."
Dalkin may have been thinking of golf’s worries about the oversized clubs and hyperactive balls. Just like bowling, they (USGA’s leaders) caved in to the whims of the manufacturers and course owners. The obvious difference is that golf has the ability to adjust tee boxes and obstacles to more easily retain reasonable scoring.
Bowling cannot adjust its physical aspects, but we can sure change the environment. We can change the oil patterns (which is 75 percent of scoring), the ball surfaces and drilling techniques, the pin weight and balance, the sideboards, pin deck, and flat gutters.
All of these and other factors affect scoring, so don’t tell me it’s the ball causing the problems. They are only one factor, and the ball a bowler rolls is determined by the other factors I mentioned, number one being the oil pattern. Change those other factors and bowlers will change to whatever ball works best. As long as you don’t take away the bowler’s ability to hit the pocket, most reasonable people will not revolt.
I hate to pick on Dalkin, but here is more: "The rule we came up with in 1991 probably was incorrect in what we hoped it would do," he said. "It probably was too lenient [italics mine]."
And finally: "It’s important that we not make changes until we can prove not only the impact of the change on the game, but whether or not it’s a detrimental impact."
All politicians use the words "probably" and "may" a lot. A strong leader would say, "The System of Bowling is not working. It allows too much latitude by establishing minimum but no maximum standards. It’s time to fix it, and we will do that within two years. We will cooperate with BPAA and other industry integers, but they must respect our duty to make and enforce the rules of this sport."
Just once, I’d like to hear Dalkin say something close to those words because as long as the ABC tries to make everybody happy, we will see no progress. It is not ABC’s responsibility to make everybody happy; it is their responsibility to make and enforce the rules of this sport and let the chips fall where they fall.
We need strong leaders who are not afraid to make bold decisions to fix this flawed sport, and time is running out. We don’t need any more studies or evaluations. What we need is a short-term plan and both short- and long-term goals from strong leadership.
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).