Stars & Strikes Interview

ROGER TO THE RESCUE — Part One

With Sport Bowling on the horizon, American Bowling Congress Executive Director Roger Dalkin, 50, is leading the charge toward a better tomorrow for the soiled sport of bowling.

Regular readers of Stars & Strikes are aware that we don't always see eye-to-eye with the ABC. In February 2000, an editorial written by Jim Goodwin in opposition to the ABC/WIBC dues increase created a firestorm of controversy that echoed through the halls of Bowling Headquarters and provided fuel for Internet quibble.

Dalkin, pressured by ABC loyalists, sent a letter to Goodwin, publisher of Stars & Strikes, threatening a libel lawsuit unless an apology and retraction was printed. Goodwin responded by printing Dalkin's letter in its entirety and an explanation of the intent of the controversial editorial, along with a copy of the Texas Libel Statutes.

Here is Part One:

After working here at the ABC for three years, you decided to leave in 1981 to join your father's insurance business. Why did you do that, and why did you return to the ABC in 1985?

Because ABC is not a high-powered commercial entity. You can make reasonable wages, but you're not going to make a lot of money. I had three kids to support, and my dad said, "Why don't you come into the family business?" So I went to North Carolina.

It was probably one of the most difficult decisions of my life for a number of reasons. When I was down there, I grew the business from one agency to three and a finance company. That's what I was doing with my business time.

I also became a volunteer employee of ABC. I served on the Greensboro board of directors, I served in YABA, I coached kids, I saw the industry from the perspective of a volunteer employee in the field.

In 1985, I told my father I wanted to go back to work for ABC/WIBC, and I applied for a position up here—group executive technical. I got the job and left the insurance business.

The four years down there gave me a different perspective. It taught me what the volunteer goes through and the issues they have to deal with. I ran a bowling center and worked my way through college as a lane resurfacer and served as a volunteer association official. So, I semi-identify with the proprietor, although I only ran a college facility.

Were you doing any schoolwork there while you were running that center?

No, I was just running the center. I graduated with a mechanical engineering degree. I took some business courses at the University of Indiana. I'm also a certified Brunswick pinsetter mechanic, so if things ever fall through, I can become a mechanic!

I hear that job pays pretty well in some markets.

It's probably not too bad. So, my background is kind of an eclectic mix, but it's all been in the bowling field, and even on the insurance side, I dealt with the public on a one-on-one basis offering a service—kind of the same thing we are doing at ABC/WIBC. We don't sell a hard-core product, we sell a service, and we have an agency system; although it's associations, but it's an agency system. There are a lot of parallels. Everything I did then gave me different perspectives, so I can see the issues from all sides. One thing I haven't done is be a bowling writer, so I can't give you that perspective.

Are you elected to your position or hired by the board of directors? You are really hired, aren't you?

Well, yes and no. It's a three-year term, and it is an elected position. When Darold passed away, there were two ways they could have gone. The nominating committee is required to provide a list of nominees for the board to consider.

Did you have to campaign for the job?

It's not so much campaign, as it is interviews. What they decided to do rather than elevate me to the position was to declare the position open and ask for people who were interested; so I applied, Jack Mordini applied. There were probably eight or 10 others who applied. They hired an outside company to go through the applications and cull it down to some finalists, and they got down to Jack and myself as the two finalists. We went through a battery of tests and another interview process, and when that was completed, the nominating committee decided to nominate me for executive director and Jack for the assistant executive director. I went through the process and they put my name up. There is, when you get to that point, a 99.99 percent chance the board will go with the nominating committee, so you can say it's a hired position, but technically, it's a three-year elected term.

Does it have to be confirmed by the delegates?

No. It used to be a delegate election. In 1995, it was changed from the delegates to the board of directors. That had to be done with a constitutional amendment. The reason was the board deals with the E.D. far more than the delegates. It's difficult for the delegates to judge if you are doing a good job. The board evaluates the position on an annual basis and determines what raises you get and if you are doing a good or bad job.

Now that you are 50, will you be bowling in any senior events with your 232 book average?

That 230 is not a real average, but I'm sure there are a few pros who would like to see me out there donating. I plan to bowl in the Senior Masters this year, and in the new FIQ Senior event. I think it will be fun. I don't have any expectations of winning. I bowl for fun. I bowl in two leagues. I bowl in a sport league and in the ABC office league. I bowl some tournaments. It's more a show of support and unity for me. I want my constituency to know I am a bowler. It's my first love and it's what I like to do. I can learn more sitting in a settee area talking to people than I ever could sitting in a Bowling Inc. meeting or anything of that nature. I'll bowl in the festival later this month. The team I bowl with is Betty Morris, Larry Laub, myself, and a friend of mine. [Editor's note: Dalkin's average was posted at Classic Lanes in Milwaukee, the same center where Tony Roventini rolled ABC's second sanctioned 900 series in 1998.]

OK, let's clear the air on the disagreement we have over my dues increase editorial. I want people to know that we are not enemies, and that I do not support anyone who says we don't need the ABC or sanctioned bowling.

Your article came out and the allusion to the Clinton/Lewinsky and the corruption thing hit a trigger with me. I thought I was going to deal with it at the convention. Everybody made an issue of it. I had a lot of people come to me about it....

How did you find out about my article?

The bowling publications from around the country come in here. We monitor all of them.

Mine doesn't.

Then I guess some people read it and sent it to me. I looked at it and I was a little upset with how it opened. I was more concerned with information that was not totally correct or incomplete. One of the problems we've always had is people reading something and drawing a conclusion. So, I got that in Albuquerque, and it was a huge issue with some people. Not the article itself, but the innuendo of corruption. A lot of people said, "Aren't you going to talk to him?" and I said I've got bigger issues during the convention, and that is not a major issue with me. I got back here (ABC in Greendale), and a lot of people were putting a lot of pressure on me. You deal with advisors when you are in a position like this; a lot of people have different opinions. They said you need to write something and you need to defend yourself, a la the letter you got.

Who were these people? Were they bowling writers?

I had board of directors of ABC come to me, I had bowling writers, I had others. People were saying it says you are corrupt. I think the word corrupt means an immoral or illegal act and I know we are not corrupt. The Lewinsky/Clinton thing caught me off guard, and that's a moral issue, but it irritated a lot of people and it upset me. I'll tell you my normal style—and [Bowlers Journal International Editor Jim] Dressel can confirm it. If I have an issue with Jim or with you, I'll pick up the phone and say, "Let's get this resolved." I listened to a number of people on this who said you've got to write a letter, so I sent the letter. I constructed most of it, not all of it. The attorneys did some if it; and you got it and you put the response in your paper. When that happened, I said, "This is getting out of hand." The issue is I know Jim likes bowling, I like bowling. I deal with a lot of proprietors who like bowling, and I don't always agree with them. We agree to disagree. So I told the attorneys I'm just going to call Jim, resolve the issue, and put this behind us. He can then sit down with me and ask me any questions he wants about the article or anything else, and I'll try to answer. That's how I wanted to do it. I wanted to do it privately, not as a public issue. It shouldn't be a public issue.

Did you see the article written in the June 1 California Bowling News criticizing the ABC and calling on the BPAA to stop sanctioning their bowlers?

Yes, I did.

What was your reaction to that one? Did you write a letter or threaten to sue them?

No, I didn't. I thought that this was another article written where I wish they had picked up the phone and if he wants to take shots at the ABC, please list our side of the issue. You may not agree with our side, but it just bothers me that sometimes people shoot off ... what I rather you do, you don't have to make fun or you don't have to take cheap shots. Your arguments should support what you are saying. To make innuendoes or try to put cute spins on it means that your argument is not as strong as you think. The thing that concerned me the most with your article was the innuendo of equating what we are doing here to what goes on in the White House and the word "corrupt." I understand your definition of the word, but everybody had their own perception. Perception is sometimes reality, and I probably overreacted. That's why I called you and said let's put this behind us and deal with bowling. Let's sit down in my office and talk. I'll answer any questions you want to ask. It's not personal, and it's not an issue with me anymore.

Good. Don't take any of the questions I'm about to ask personally.

OK.

Give me your definition of the primary role and duty of the American Bowling Congress.

The primary duty and role of ABC is—and we've kind of lost our focus—but to me it's dealing with the credibility of the game, the regulations of the game, and servicing its members. We've gone off on a number of tangents, focused on various other activities, and sometimes we lose focus. What I've tried to do with the Strategic Plan that ABC has for the sport level is re-focus. It's our job, along with WIBC, to regulate—the rules and regulations of the game and provide services to our members. Sitting on that computer screen over there [he points to his desk computer] is a little piece of paper. I was in Akron, Ohio at the Senior Masters, and Jim Dressel was in the same restaurant I was, and he tore off a piece of paper and wrote on it, The ABC's mission is to give ABC back to the bowler. He said, "Here, Roger. Here is what you need to do." That piece of paper has been taped there ever since. My goal is to try to return ABC into looking into that settee area. The focus of the last 20 years, and I'm not saying anybody did anything wrong because I've been a part of the issue, is we have been internally focused on the survival of ABC and how we operate and not externally focused on that settee area. I've told that to associations, I've told our board, and I'll tell the world that we need to focus on the settee area. The person in the settee area doesn't care what goes on in Greendale or Arlington [Texas, home of the Bowling Proprietors Association of America]. They want fun and they want service. It's our responsibility to find out what goes on there.

How long do you expect to keep this job?

As long as they elect me [laughs]! No, really, it's three-year terms ... I was assistant executive director from 1989-97, and Darold and I had this conversation several times. The difficulty with this job is the longer you are in it, the less effective you are. The presidency of the United States is limited to eight years because it becomes ineffective. I would hope, I would like to hold this job until I'm 60, which is three more terms. I'd like to get out when I'm 59 or 60 and let the next generation come in. If you look at the generation at ABC now, Mordini is about three years older than me, Ed Baur, and others are all the same generation. When I worked under Roger Tessman, Darold and Jack and myself were all 30-something and they were all in their 50s, and they passed it on to the next generation when they retired, and we stepped in. Now, we need to start getting ready for the next generation. I don't know if that's the ABC, WIBC, or a single membership organization, but I don't want to overstay my welcome. I've got certain things I want to accomplish. I want to clear Dodge when I'm 60. I'll help the sport in every way I can after that, but I don't want to hang around too long and lose my effectiveness. An ineffective leader is a waste of time, effort, and money.

Maybe you'll be good enough by then to join the PBA Tour as a super senior?

[Laughs] If we go back to the old sport of bowling with a[n AMF] Three Dot Classic, I'm ready!

What are your personal goals in this job and will there be any measurable results from which you will be held accountable in the future? And is that what happened in the past?

That's a number of different questions. I'll try to answer. My personal goals are very close to ABC's. My life, if you look around this office, is obviously bowling. I take it passionately. I take it personally, and I want to do everything I can to help it grow. From an organizational standpoint, we have a very specific Strategic Plan. There are five priority issues, and under each priority issue are eight goals for which Jack Mordini and I are held accountable. It's the primary measure by which they make their evaluation on an annual basis. The five priority issues are:

(1) To develop new products and services for the membership. One size doesn't fit all is an absolute truism for the ABC and WIBC.

(2) Improve technology. Previously we were a processing and paperwork organization, and that's ludicrous. With the technology today, it should be instant. It should be electronic. We trained an entire generation of associations to be processors, not service oriented. Our goals were to process the awards on time, to process the leagues on time, everything was process centered. By the end of next year, 50 percent of all the transactions between local and national must be electronic, and we are well ahead of that schedule. Sixty percent of our membership is processed electronically now, 60-70 percent of our awards are done electronically. So that's a major issue.

(3) Open communication. When we did the tiered membership test around the country, a lot of people labeled it a total failure. I said it was only a failure if you don't learn from it. Rolling it out without testing it - that would have been failure. Trying it and finding out what worked and what didn't, I think, was a success. We found out that "trinkets and trash" was not the way to sell membership. We found out the members don't really understand our organization; they don't understand what we are all about. They just want value for what they pay—for membership. They didn't want hard value—a little present here and a little present there. One funny anecdote that came out was we found out the number one complaint people had with ABC was, "To be a member of ABC, we have to bowl 30 weeks." The perception was that was an ABC rule! Another concern expressed was, "If we are not here to bowl, we still have to pay." So it became very evident that communication was a huge problem. If people don't have the information, they either fill it in or make it up.

(4) A good delivery system. Our delivery is very inconsistent—the volunteer network. The volunteers are not sure what they are supposed to do. Some associations are excellent. Some are poor. We are in the process of re-training our volunteer network to focus on the settee area and not focus on Greendale. The focus should be on what the members want, and the local associations should demand that the national organizations comply with what the members want. So, the delivery system is critical. It's not rocket science. It's simply figuring out what the bowlers want and delivering it.

(5) Our fifth priority is to have a single membership organization. Eventually, that makes all the sense in the world. It might be blasphemy for me as ABC director to say that, but the reality is that if you step outside the industry and look at it honestly, you have to ask why do we have a men's organization, a women's organization and a kids' organization? Jane and John Smith and their kids in that settee area do not understand why there are different dues, different memberships, etc., etc. So the fifth part of our Strategic Plan is to study the feasibility of creating a single membership organization. From a performance and review standpoint, Jack and I are held accountable for all these priority issues. Those are the primary things by which we are evaluated. The other evaluation mechanisms are a random survey of the associations as to how the service comes from this headquarters, a 360 review by the board of directors of how we handle our business, and a 360 review where they contact other industry leaders and see how well we work with them and if we conduct ourselves professionally. So there are a number of different criteria, but the primary charge is the Strategic Plan—figure out what the bowler wants and give it to him.

All that seems to be a very complex plan. How do you maintain any clarity?

It's really fairly simple. There are only five clear priorities, and eight goals under each. Some have already been met and have changed. I'll give you an example: One of the goals under new products and services was to develop a recognition program for the bowlers under 180 average. We did a test two years ago, and it was very successful, and this year we rolled it out. So that was done on a three-year cycle. Most of the goals have a three- to five-year window. Develop electronic processing of memberships. That's been completed with the addition of the WinLABS system. So 44 initiatives sound like a lot, but various departments are responsible, and some are shared with WIBC like Sport Bowling. So it sounds complicated, but it's not rocket science. It's just figuring out what the customer wants and give it to him, and use technology to save money. That's the bottom line.

Why isn't "stopping the decline in membership" a priority issue in your Strategic Plan?

If we address the priority issues of products and services, delivery system, technology and communication, the results will be an increase in members. Thus, the solution is in the relevancy and value of the services provided which is what the plan addresses. A side issue is the continued decline in league competition while open play is increasing. This is an issue that ABC can try to be of assistance, but is a grass roots problem to be addressed at the center level. In reality, many centers are comfortable with the shift as the open play lineage is usually at a high price. However, for the long term, league bowling should not be neglected, and I think the proprietors realize that.

Do you view the bowling media as friend or foe?

I look at them as a friend. I may not always agree with them, but what I've always asked them to do is to get my side of the story before expressing their opinion. I think the intent of the media is positive - they want to promote the sport. It's normal for people to have different opinions—all I ask is that they listen to my side before you take a shot, and most have done that. I'm not shy about talking to the media, and for the most part the media is passionate about bowling, just like I am. We don't see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, but we have to do what's best for bowling. I think their motives are almost always honorable.

Do you ever hesitate to do anything because it might not play well politically within the industry?

Sure. In 1991, the System of Bowling was introduced. Probably at that time with the technology available, the correct number of units for uniform friction across the lane surface was 6-7 units. We may or may not have had the scoring dilemma, we have had we done that, but it would have taken longer to get there. We compromised with the 3-unit rule, because it made more sense to help bring the industry together than drawing a line in the sand. I was the assistant executive director then, but had I been in charge, I would have made the same decision because it was for the greater good. But it certainly was a compromise position; it was a logical compromise to satisfy the industry.

How would you characterize ABC's current relationship with BPAA?

I believe ABC has a good relationship with BPAA. As with any organization, there are different factions. But the general level of cooperation at the national level is high.

Your position at ABC is equivalent to the CEO of a $20 million corporation. How does the salary and benefits compare to similar jobs in other industries?

Well, I get all the free bowling I want [laughs]. In reality, what the performance and compensation committee has done is they have looked at the compensation studies for non-profit organizations. Commercial entities are a whole different ball game.

So, where do you stack up?

Uh, the average salary for the CEO of a million member plus organization with a budget in excess of $15 million is $250,000 annually. I'm well below the average. If you pull my 1099, you'll find my current salary is $150,000 a year. Does that mean I'm underpaid? Some might say yes, some say no. I'm very pleased. I make a decent living doing something I love to do. I appreciate the salary I get. Could I get another job elsewhere making more? Probably, but I enjoy it. That's why I left the insurance industry. I was making very good money in insurance, but I didn't like doing it.

How does Bowling Inc. arrive at your salary compared to other top positions in our industry? I know Frank DeSocio makes $225,000 as head of Strike Ten, Steve Ryan made $350,000 plus incentives, and I'm sure Jack Kelly at BPAA makes much more than you. Some would say you have the most responsibility and hold the most important position in the industry. Does it bother you that these other jobs in this industry are paid so much more than you?

No it doesn't. To be brutally honest, I wouldn't swap what I'm doing for $50,000 or $100,000 more to do one of the other jobs in the industry. I love where I'm at. I'm very satisfied. Does everybody want more money? Eventually, yeah, but the fact that Frank or Jack make more is not an issue with me. If that were an issue, I would be doing another job and volunteering at ABC.

So, if you are able to keep this job until you are 60, you'll have a comfortable retirement package?

Well, there is no profit sharing because we are non-profit. Everybody is on the same pension plan. Am I going to retire at 60 and be comfortable? I sure hope so—if my kids ever get out of college [laughs]! One of them is on the seven-year plan to get a bachelor's degree.

What are the chances Bowling Inc., etc. will ever move to Florida, or anywhere else?

Based on the current situation that there is no active discussion with Florida, the chance is slim and none. I would never say never, but there are no active discussions on moving BI anywhere. The current location in Greendale, Wisconsin appears to be home for the future.

All the rest of my questions are broken down into categories. Let's start with:

THE ABC TOURNAMENT

1989 was a crossroads year for this event. It was, correct me if I'm wrong, the first year you were in charge of the event as ABC assistant executive director, and it was the year in Wichita, Kansas when scoring escalated dramatically. Is there any connection?

I took the job in November of 1989—Burt Kellerman was in charge of the Wichita event. I was involved as a group executive technical. Wichita sent up a major flag and we started an investigation to find out what happened. The investigation told us several things. First, the installation by AMF was different. They bolted all the lanes together for the first time where before it had been what's called a floating installation. Wichita was also the first year we used a vacuum stripper. Prior to that we used towels and a Key Machine, so for the first time, the lanes were absolutely clean, which created huge back-ends. All those factors—tight lanes, vacuum stripper, new lane machines, etc.—led to very high scoring. In 1990 in Reno, the first event I ran, Brunswick did the installation. We used the vacuum stripper and Brunswick bolted the lanes because they thought AMF had discovered something. If you look at that event, it was the highest scoring ever—except for Wichita. It paled in comparison to Wichita. What you've seen in the 90s is a combination of technology and the fact that we've learned a lot about the installations. Was Wichita good or bad? I think it showed us that as we learned more about technology we could do a better installation. That's one of those dilemmas we run into: When is it technology and when is it good maintenance? There probably is no clear demarcation.

After Wichita, was there any discussion to make an attempt to curtail scoring in 1990 and beyond, or was it just full speed ahead? Did a scoring contest begin between AMF and Brunswick?

There was extensive discussion regarding the scoring level in Wichita. The final decision was to install the best installation possible, condition the lanes fairly and consistently and let the talents of the bowlers determine the scores. So, in a nutshell, there was no specific effort to reduce scores after Wichita; only to assure that the fairness and challenge of the event was maintained.

I'm not aware of any scoring contest between the two manufacturers. The decision to no longer alternate manufacturers was strictly a financial one. Costs were escalating very rapidly, and we went to a bid process. Thus any manufacturer that can fulfill the requirements can bid on the ABC Championship Tournament installation. ABC owns its own pinsetters and manufacturers bid the cost of installation and removal of the equipment including their lanes, settee area, and ball returns. It is up to the manufacturers as to how much they charge versus the value of their equipment being used. No manufacturer has ever donated the labor costs for the installation, but virtually all the bids, figure in the use of equipment as gratis.

Is inconsistent scoring from day-to-day and squad-to-squad a major concern, and why hasn't that problem been improved?

I don't know if it's a concern because it's a result of different bowlers from different parts of the country with different skill levels....

Isn't there a huge difference in scores from the early team squad to the late?

Yes, and I'll get into that. We're actually looking at possibly addressing that. The lane maintenance procedure is possibly the most tightly controlled of any tournament you run into. There are eleven lane maintenance people, the lanes are stripped three times a day, they tape every third lane to make sure the machine is still operating properly - so, it's very tightly controlled. What we have found in the team event is that the first squad more or less blows out the track, and a lot of the top average teams bowl second squad with a blown out track. Is there disparity between 7:00 and 10:30? Definitely. Does it concern us? Definitely. We actually had a meeting last week of the tournament committee to discuss a possible change in the schedule for Reno. We would have a team squad in the afternoon and one in the evening. You would run three singles and doubles squads, re-dress the lanes and run a team squad. Then run two more singles and doubles squads in the evening, re-dress the lanes, and run your second team squad. Every team would bowl on a fresh condition. There will be some surveys done in Reno about this, we will look at our maintenance procedures to make sure we can keep the timing the same, and depending on the surveys and depending on our maintenance schedule, we may try to address that disparity to make sure team events always bowl on fresh dressing, because there are disparities. Maybe it's time to change it. Just because we've done it since 1901 doesn't mean it's right.

Knowing that bowlers are much slower than they were in the past due to several factors, why doesn't the ABC schedule its squads farther apart to prevent teams for getting on the lanes well past their starting times, even if it means adding extra days to the event?

Actually, the squad times have been extended in the last five to 10 years. The singles and doubles as well as the team event were lengthened. We are currently studying the possibility of identifying the slow bowlers and scheduling them on different squads in the future so as to reduce the impact on the majority of bowlers.

Over 50,000 ABC bowlers bowl in this event every year. What is the turnover percentage?

We have about 8,000-8,500 teams that hold their spots every year. That has grown over the past decade from about 6,000-6,500 prior to that. The reservation system is such that if you get your spot, you can hold it forever or as long as you send in your money on time. The other 1,500 are probably turnover teams. That means about 85 percent return, maybe 15 percent turnover. With those teams, the captain may stay the same and some of the players change. We don't have those figures, but we might be able to track them down based on the participation.

Are more divisions needed, similar to the WIBC structure?

We actually created the classified division for the 180 and under shooter in 1998 legislation. Teams under 900, doubles under 360 and individuals under 180 now compete in a separate division than those above that average. So, we have divisionalized it. The percentage of bowlers who fall into that is about 14-15 percent. Is there a thought of additional divisions? No. Is it right for the 181 average to go against the 230-plus? If he didn't think it was fair or didn't think it is worth the $100 entry fee, then he wouldn't pay it. He understands he's up against the 220s or 230s, and he's out there for the experience and the camaraderie and the participation record.

So as long as they keep coming, that won't change?

I don't think so. The entries are increasing on an annual basis. The top bowlers are going trying to win that eagle, not the money. There is another group who just want to cash, and another who just want to have fun. The divisionalization in '98 was the first time we've changed since the inception in 1901. That was a delegate change. If the 180 were to change to 190 for example, the delegates would have to do it. That rule is a delegate rule, but the divisions have been well received so far.

What does the host city have to pay ABC to host this event?

That's a good question. Most people don't realize the economic impact of the ABC. It's in the neighborhood of $50-$60 million if it's a non-gambling city. The requirement to host the tournament is about 100,000 square foot of convention space free of charge for six months, which is a huge item in itself. It's not a cash item, but by giving it to us, they lose substantial income. In addition, they are required to provide a cash subsidy. The minimum required right now is, I believe, $350,000. The reason we get this is to cover the cost of installing the lanes, and virtually all of it is put back into the local community by hiring local labor to build the lanes. The winning cities recently have been providing $450[000]-500,000. In Reno it's different, because we pay lineage to the National Bowling Stadium. Every game bowled, we pay. When we negotiated the contract in the early 90s, we started with a subsidy of $500,000, which is a high subsidy. We started with a lineage rate of $2. Both of those are adjusted based on the consumer price index each year. This year, the subsidy is, I think, $560,000, and lineage is adjusted to $2.22 or whatever the CPI has made it.

Are you surprised that the people in Reno don't seem to understand or appreciate the economic impact the stadium has for the city?

I'm very surprised. There are really two schools of thought on that in Reno. I think the people in the know realize the impact, but being shrewd business people, they don't want to tip their hand because we are about to renegotiate the contract. I think the general public misunderstands the stadium. They perceive that tax dollars built it, and it was only room tax that built it. They also see it's not used all the time, and that bothers them. I say there is a place right down the street called Miller Park. It cost $300 million to build, and it's used 81 days a year. The National Bowling Stadium is used as much, but they are happy about the park and upset about the stadium. Reno does an economic impact study every year, and the company doing the study doesn't know what events are scheduled. Their estimate the first year was nearly $100 million economic and another $100 million in gambling. That is a huge impact! I think the public doesn't understand it, but the business people do and they are playing it close to the vest.

You mentioned the contract with Reno for the NBS will be re-negotiated soon. What will be the length of the new deal, and how will the Florida deal falling apart affect it?

There have been no concrete discussions on the length of an extension with Reno. There are currently no discussions with Florida about any such program since the legislation did not pass the bill last year. Thus, the arrangement with Reno is unrelated to a Florida deal. Finally, the ABC delegates would have to vote on any such extension.

When were brackets added to the ABC, and how was that decision made?

I think they were tested in '96 and rolled out in '97. That's another area where we are looking at making some changes....

Before you answer, I've got several issues I want you to respond to: Is the take 12-1/2 percent, what does the ABC get, who operates the brackets, what happens to the unclaimed winnings, and what would happen if they were stopped?

OK. ABC is similar to others. From an $80 bracket, we keep $10. From $40 brackets we keep $5 (12-1/2 percent). One dollar goes to the BVL fund, and we provide about $50,000 per year to BVL from that....

Which means you sell 50,000 brackets per year.

Right. ABC operates them. If funds are unclaimed, we have the mailing addresses and we mail it to them....

The rumor is that there is over $20,000 per year in unclaimed bracket money that is not mailed—it's just forfeited.

Uh, I have not heard that rumor. I'll make a commitment to talk to Jack Mordini about that, but I can't imagine it. There may be a couple of hundred dollars we can't account for, but not $20,000. My understanding is that unclaimed money is held for one day and then it goes in the safe and checks are cut, but I'll confirm that for you. We also send out 1099's if winnings exceed $600. The brackets are run by the ABC full-time employees. In the ABC Team Challenge we contract the brackets with Buddy DeLuca, but we run the ABC brackets. What was the next question?

What would happen if they were stopped?

Well, bowlers wouldn't have brackets, and we would lose a considerable source of income, and we would not need as many employees. Would it affect the participation in the ABC Tournament? I doubt it. It's just a nice side event. We are looking at making some changes in the brackets because there are some people who come in and say, "I want to enter all the brackets," and some teams pool their money. That's not the intent, it's supposed to be a side activity, and we are looking at initiating a limit on the number of brackets people can enter. So if there are 150 brackets, and I know that the high-powered Jim Goodwin is only in half, then I'll get in. I don't know what the number will be, but will it increase or reduce participation? We are not really concerned about that. We just want as many people as possible to win and not have high-powered teams pool their money.

Is there any concern that brackets have taken some of the prestige away from the main event?

I don't think it's taken away from the ABC. It's just added another option like the Challenge side tournament where 13,000 bowlers decided to bowl in that. Nobody forces anyone to get in brackets. It's just another offer. If it wasn't wanted, there wouldn't be 50,000 brackets sold.

Why was the satellite event added to the ABC in 1999 and was it a success?

The reason it was added is actually one of our strategic initiatives to provide new products and new services; to provide new and different events for tournament bowlers. We also added the Festival, and we are looking into the possibility of a new league champions tournament where teams winning their leagues could go to state and national finals. Because of the amount of square footage provided in Albuquerque, we had the option to put in a side event. We did it for a number of reasons: (1) To test the sport conditions and bowlers reactions; (2) To see if bowlers were interested in a side event with a $40 entry fee in a location adjacent to the ABC lanes. It was very successful. We had 13,000 entries. It exceeded our budgetary expectations. The difficulty now is we are the victim of our own success because in Reno, there is no place to have it. We use 66 lanes in the team event, and we fill the house for doubles and singles.

So it won't be in Reno?

We are now discussing the feasibility of maybe having it in the evenings next to the team events; perhaps partitioning off 10 lanes since we only use 66 for the team event. The success in Albuquerque we believe was because it was right there. We could go to a local center such as the 40-frame game or the BJ [Bowlers Journal Tournament], but that would change everything.

Did it hurt the BJ entries?

They said the entries were down a little, but I don't know if that was due to the activities available in Albuquerque or our side event. One of the main sponsors of our tournament was the BJ, so our bowlers were very aware of the BJ, and flyers wee passed out at our site. It was not designed to hurt the BJ. It was designed to offer another event. Maybe in Reno if we don't have it, we'll see the BJ go back up.

WORLD TEAM CHALLENGE

What was the original purpose of starting this event?

To promote the concept of team bowling. In talking to a lot of the young bowlers and the young pros, they felt they had missed out on team bowling. Clearly the success of collegiate bowling is the team event. People coming out of college liked it. As Darold used to say, "The best bowlers in the world are in Milwaukee," and some say they are in Detroit, and somebody from Texas will say they are in Texas. So this event gives us a venue to find out. So it was started for a couple of reasons: (1) To promote team bowling, which is the heart of ABC competition; (2) Because we had a television contract to get exposure for ABC.

Why did you discontinue that TV coverage?

That's hard to answer. I don't know if it was the marketplace or what. It got to the point where they just stopped showing bowling. I guess the event didn't get ratings. We were actually buying some time at one point, and we just couldn't afford that, and it either wasn't good TV, or we didn't get ratings, or they didn't like bowling. I can't give you an answer. We struggled, and four or five years ago, TV dried up. I don't know the financial where-with-alls to buy prime time, but we couldn't afford it, and so we continued without television.

Why were brackets added to the WTC and why were the brackets allowed to overshadow the main event?

Because the people who bowl in the event wanted them. Brackets were just coming into their own, and people were doing it on the side, so we said it made more sense for us to try to control that activity, and it might help offset the cost of running the event.

This is different from the ABC, where you operate the brackets. Don't you contract the brackets at the WTC?

Yes. Buddy DeLuca runs them on a contractual basis. We get proceeds from each bracket. He has to provide financials and the information for 1099s. We did the brackets because the action was happening anyway and we felt we had to control it at our event. We had problems when we said if you win a Team Challenge you can't bowl it anymore....

Let's get to that in a minute. Right now, tell me why brackets were allowed to overshadow the main event.

I guess that's an opinion. I don't know that the brackets overshadowed the main event. I was down in Kenner....

I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about when the problems occurred before you put restrictions on them. Would you at least agree that they got out of control for a while?

Yeah. Definitely. OK. They definitely got out of control, and brackets became the issue rather than the team competition. When something like that happens, you make an adjustment, and we made an adjustment. We limited brackets and limited re-bowling. Actually we added another aspect, the Second Chance, because a lot of teams come and don't make the cut, and we felt the Second Chance Tournament gave them an opportunity to have another competition, and it was well received. So, anytime you have something successful that has something happen you don't plan for, you have to make adjustments. If you don't make adjustments, you will be in real trouble. Had we not made those adjustments in brackets and eligibility rules, we wouldn't be as successful as it is now.

Was the Baker Format designed for television, and without TV, is it still necessary to have it?

The Baker format really tests team bowling. It was very good for TV. You could get a lot of players on and click it through. Collegiate bowling used it long before the WTC events came along. The fact that two or three top bowlers ... let's say some early guys in the WTC—Chris Barnes and Pat Healey—they could shoot 279 and carry a team even if a guy shot 170 on the other end. Put them in the Baker, and one or two guys can't carry the team. It's a real team effort that takes all five guys to win. For you and I to double, it requires both of us to strike. You can't cover an open with only one ball. Early on, some were foreign to it and didn't like it until they understood you had to work together as a team to find success. I think it would dramatically hurt the Team Challenge if you went back to strictly a five-players total wood situation. The most activity and fun I see at the Team Challenge is during the Baker.

I can see you are a fan of the Baker, and a mutual friend—Dick Weber—told me he also likes it very much.

One of the strangest things I ever watched was in one of the early WTC television finals. It was a St. Louis team, and I think Lenny [Leroy] Bornhop was the anchor. A few of the guys were former pros. Anyway, Bornhop got up in the tenth, and his knees were literally shaking. I'm sure he's had a lot of 300s, but this was for the first Baker 300 and he had four guys behind him, it was a whole different kind of pressure. That convinced me that it was true team bowling and not just five guys adding up their scores. I love it. I saw it for the first time when I was coaching the Illinois State women's team in Dayton, Ohio, and I've loved it ever since.

What is Brunswick's involvement and what are they currently doing for the WTC?

I don't know. We just finished the current season, and the new season starts in about a month, so with the changes in the corporate office at Brunswick, I'm not sure where we are.

They previously paid TV production costs. Is that correct, and what else?

Actually, the agreement with ABC was that Brunswick would pay 50 percent of any shortfall in the cost of running the event. So if we broke even, Brunswick could be a title sponsor at no cost. That didn't happen but....

So, to get their money, you had to fail?

Yeah. It was kind of a weird thing. The purpose was early on Brunswick said they were going to try to bring some other sponsors to the table, so their cost would be less. The contract is up for renewal, and with the changeover with Fred Florjanic and Jim Otterstrom leaving, I do not know if they are in for next year or not. The fellow handling it now for Brunswick is Andy Shipman, and Ed Baur is having discussions with him now about next year.

With so many brackets sold, how can this event possibly lose money?

Well, out of the $500 entry fee, only $40 is taken out for expenses. That covers all the lineage and staff costs. We take very little out to keep the prize fund as high as possible.

So, you don't subsidize the expense and prize fund with bracket profits?

No. We use the bracket profits and the $40 expense fee to cover the travel, staffing, registration and lineage fees, and the trip to the Grand Finals. We pay all the expenses for the teams who qualify for the Grand Finals. If you look at the financial report, you'll see it loses money. Our finance committee has asked us on many occasions 'why should we keep doing it if it loses money?' I tell them that it promotes team bowling, it promotes ABC and the competitive nature of the game to the top bowlers in the country, and they promote and talk about he benefits of ABC membership to other bowlers. It's almost a promotional effort, no different than the ABC Masters, which also loses money. Could we cut down the prize fund and charge more expense fee? Yes, but these events provide exposure for ABC and bowling. It's a balancing act where we ask if the cost of the event is worth the exposure and the positive press and the feeling of the bowlers who participate? At this point, we feel yes. If we increase the expense fee and break even, we'll have less concern from the budget committee, but we think the expense of running the WTC is worth the positive promotion, the positive press and the positive image it provides. You cover it in Stars & Strikes, the BJ covers it, other publications cover it....

Actually, I quit covering it in Stars & Strikes after the mess in Columbus. I decided I didn't want to promote an event that in many peoples' minds has very little credibility or integrity.

Well maybe you don't; but other people cover it.

Let's talk about that episode. When those two teams were suspended for sandbagging in Columbus, were you surprised? Angry? What was your reaction to it?

Actually, I'm going by memory, but I think one team was [suspended] and one was not. They were two separate cases....

My recollection is that one team was called "Evil Hoooks" (Chris Barnes' and John Gaines' team) and the other was "Turbo 2-N-1 Grips" captained by Steve Fehr.

Charges were filed against both teams, and they were handled separately. My recollection is that the charges were upheld against one team, they were suspended from the activity, and the other team was held out one event and reinstated. Was I upset with what happened? Clearly, I had a major concern in the fact that there appeared to be some type of manipulation going on. I'm not trying to apply guilt or say whose fault it was, but there were some people trying to ... I'll call it beat the system. As long as there is a system around, somebody's going to try to beat it. I felt it was a slam to the Team Challenge that people were trying to use it for their own advantage. If the motives are to help bowling, I can deal with differences, but I don't think that was an effort to help bowling. It was a very personal thing, and it bothered me. I think it sent a message that we want to hold bowlers to higher standards.

When I interviewed you for that story I did for Bowlers Journal, I asked you why no 1099s had been sent to the bracket winners for three years. Were you aware at that time that 1099s were not being sent out?

I would say I wasn't aware, and I hope I answered that way, and we've since corrected that....

Actually, I recall that you went silent for about 30 seconds on the phone that day, which made me think I had dropped a little bombshell in your lap.

And I wasn't. When you run an organization like this, a not-for-profit organization, you are under tremendous scrutiny from the IRS. No question about it. If you hold a not-for-profit status, you have to comply with it. We are a rules-making body, so we should comply with other peoples' rules, including the U.S. Government. If we weren't doing the 1099s, that was unacceptable. As soon as we were made aware of it, people in charge of the Team Challenge were made aware of it, and they said somebody else was doing it. That was not the answer I was looking for. It's the ABC Team Challenge, and I don't care if we had a contract with somebody else, one of the requirements is you have to send 1099ss. It's no different than a state tournament or any other event....

When I talked to Ed Baur, he said, "Talk to Buddy DeLuca." DeLuca said, "Talk to Tom Boedecker." I finally realized that the buck was being passed around and no one was doing it.

Yeah. That was a screw up. Once I got into it....

Did you pick up the phone to discuss it with someone right after our conversation?

I would bet that I walked around this building right after that. I'm a hands-on person, and I'll go in to their office. If Eddie said, DeLuca said ... I said let's all get on the phone, and if we are not doing it, let's get it done. That was a problem, and we appreciate anybody pointing out things we don't do right.

To your credit, you said you would take care of it, and a few months later, 1099s were sent out to several WTC bowlers.

Sure; we're not perfect, but we try.

Are you satisfied that enough changes have taken place in the WTC to restore its integrity and credibility?

Yes, and there are more changes and adjustments coming next year to uphold the credibility of the WTC. I'm happy with the current configuration of it. I think we continually need to improve it. I'd still like to get TV back, so there is still a lot to do. One of the things with ABC taking the WTC back from Shared Services as a direct operation, is to try to focus it more on team bowling and try to tie it into Sport Bowling. I think it's got high credibility, the bowlers respect the event, and we are constantly making changes. Can it be better? Of course it can. We can get more sponsors, we can make it profitable, we can get TV back, a lot of things I'd like to see. But is the credibility compromised at this point? No.

I'm glad to hear that. Maybe I'll start covering it again.

[Laughs] You may want to revisit it. I think there were some loose controls on it early on, and we got stung by it, but we corrected that.

COMING IN PART TWO:

Tiered Membership, Strike Ten Entertainment, the System of Bowling, the Festival of Bowling, the Awards Program, and Roger's thoughts about the new PBA.

To comment on this interview, E-mail Jim Goodwin.

Jim Goodwin, a BWAA director and LPBT's regional program director, is the award-winning publisher/editor 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).

Jim Goodwin's editorial on ABC/WIBC dues increase

Response of ABC Executive Director Roger Dalkin to Jim Goodwin

Response of Jim Goodwin to Roger Dalkin

Texas Libel Statutes

ROGER TO THE RESCUE (Interview of ABC Executive Director Roger Dalkin, Part Two)