Sandbagger Prevention League Results and Thoughts

I’m not gonna lie: managing the Sandbagger Prevention League was a lot more time consuming than I anticipated. I was basically managing seven leagues all at the same time and these silly things called work and life kept getting in the way. But I finally have results for our 27 week season. Thanks again to all that participated.

The final scratch averages were as follows, with Sam as our simulated sandbagger:

Matt 1	219
Matt 2	213
Matt 3	205
Zach	200
EBH	174
Sam	173
Doc	157
Lauren	112

The goal of the SPL was to identify a league in which good bowlers were rewarded, sandbagging was not beneficial, and not so good bowlers were kept in competition so they would be driven to get better.  As a baseline our eight bowlers participated in a scratch league with predictable results as follows:

Matt 1	105
Matt 2	102
Matt 3	96
Zach	84
Sam	61
EBH	57
Doc	32
Lauren	3

The scratch league results are nearly identical to the list of averages. Sam and EBH swapped spots, but their averages are only a pin off so I think that is negligible. While sandbagging is clearly not beneficial in a scratch league, we also see that poor bowlers are kept well out of competition with everyone else. Scratch leagues are great for advanced bowlers or groups at a similar skill level, but they are not for an all-inclusive league.

Using the same scratch scores I broke our bowlers down into two divisions based on average. Sam and EBH dominated their division and Matt 1 and Matt 2 ran away with theirs. Two rounds of divisional brackets were used to determine the division champions. The winner of each division then bowled head to head to crown a league champion, with the championship match being 100% handicap based on the higher average of the two bowlers. EBH defeated Matt 1 for the league title.

Another scratch divisional league awarded 1-4 points based on how the bowler’s series ranked within their division in addition to one point being awarded for each game won in head to head play. I didn’t use the brackets to determine the division champions this time and so the bowler with the most points in each division squared off for the league title: Sam and Matt 1. This time the better bowler prevailed and Matt 1 was the league champion.

Competition was pretty good within the divisions, especially the top tier division with the three Matts and me. Only 19 pins separated the best and worst averages and most matches were pretty close. The lower division had a greater disparity between the best and worst averages and the standings were not as close as a result.

Next I tested the traditional 100% handicap league with the following results:

Matt 1	90
Matt 2	88
Lauren	75
Matt 3	71
Sam	68
Zach	65.5
EBH	54
Doc	32.5

The best bowlers came in first and second, but the worst bowler finished third. A skilled sandbagger could also take advantage of this league to climb the standings. These results are not overly shocking because the better bowlers averaged so much higher than the worse ones and so the large skill difference negated the benefit of the handicap. I am also not a skilled sandbagger and had a difficult time plotting Sam’s results to cheat the system.

Another 100% handicap league assigned one point per game won in head to head competition, but then also awarded 1-8 points based on how the bowler’s series ranked that week. Using the same games with this small scoring change resulted in the following standings:

Matt 1	210
Matt 2	207
Zach	174.5
Sam	174
Matt 3	168
Lauren	149
EBH	125
Doc	103.5

The mid-level bowlers were particularly punished here because they lacked the benefit of a high skill level and a high handicap; though, competition between bowlers of comparable skill was much better. A combination of awarding points based on how a series ranks each week and the division format could render a pretty competitive league.

The same two league styles were also used in an 80% handicap based system to see if a lower handicap would alter the results. The regular league results were as follows:

Matt 1	96.5
Matt 2	95
Matt 3	75
Sam	70
Zach	67
Lauren	50
EBH	49.5
Doc	39

And the league that awarded 1-8 points based on series resulted in the following:

Matt 1	225.5
Matt 2	223
Zach	185
Matt 3	181
Sam	165
EBH	129.5
Doc	100
Lauren	93

The straight 80% and 100% handicap league kept the closest competition with 57.5 points separating the first and last place bowlers. While the scratch league results came the closest to reflecting the bowlers’ skill levels, the 80% handicap league that awarded series points also came pretty close.

The Takeaway

There is really no way for a bowling league to fairly compensate for a 100+ pin difference in average between bowlers.  As a scratch league the lower average bowlers are more likely to feel that they can never catch up to the high average bowlers, probably resulting in them quitting instead of using it as motivation to get better.  In a handicap league the better bowlers are essentially punished for their skill and mid-level bowlers become fodder for those with high averages and high handicaps. When you factor in prizes for winning the league, most improved average, etc., the temptation for sandbagging is pretty strong. I know, no groundbreaking results here.

The divisions within a scratch league idea did work out pretty well, though. When bowlers averaged within 20 pins of each other their point totals stayed close while still reflecting the bowlers’ skill levels. The ability to advance to a higher division could serve the motivator role without being too overwhelming. If payouts are kept within divisions they will be a bit smaller which in turn could further discourage sandbagging. This could be tweaked to work at the individual and team levels.

Now there seems to be a growing divide among bowlers, at least if you can trust those on Facebook groups as a representative sample. I’ve seen many conversations where good bowlers belittle the accomplishments of others in house leagues, essentially stating that it isn’t real bowling since the ball does most of the work. I disagree to an extent, the ball doesn’t throw itself down the lane, but there is most definitely a difference between accomplishments on a THP and sport patterns.

I think there is a great desire for bowlers to try out the sport patterns, but the USBC and local centers do not make them easy to come by (at least not in Pittsburgh). A drive needs to be made to make USBC sanctioned sport leagues the norm in league bowling. This gives good bowlers the motivation they need to get even better and provides practical experience for tournaments. House leagues still have their place at the junior level and in beginner leagues since they are a great way to learn bowling basics. Much like junior bowling, I think the introduction of coaches at beginner leagues for those that wish to utilize them would also help push new bowlers to improve. The scheduling of coaches could be the responsibility of the local USBC chapters and could also help promote the various coach certifications.

As it stands there is no set milestone in place, other than honor scores, to entice the majority of bowlers to improve. If they do not set personal goals then they are perfectly content showing up every week to go through the motions. If the USBC can include minor ways to reward good bowling, like becoming eligible to move into a higher tier league (i.e. graduating from a THP beginner league to a sport league) then perhaps the talent pool will improve so that handicaps are no longer required to “level the playing field,” effectively eliminating the sandbagger to a dark place in bowling’s history.