I find it sort of interesting that these two points are made in the article.
"5) a lack of checking lanes for legal oiling conditions" as a reason for higher scores.
"Give out 300 and 800 awards again only on conditions that meet “Award Requirements.” This could be an 8, 9, or 10:1 ration with a minimum of 6, 7, or 8 units of oil on the outside boards to where the machine starts to buff" as a solution.
I like the intent, but if regulation of conditions is already a problem who is going to go around to all these award leagues and check for compliance? I do like how there is wiggle room so different centers could account for different or older surfaces.
However, I also question whether bowlers would really migrate to the award leagues for the awards over their egos. Additionally, his idea of charging bowlers more for bowling in more leagues could backfire. If that were to happen, I'm only going to bowl in an award league because I want my money to go to an award I could earn. There could also be a limitation for those who can only bowl league at certain times or nights and if no award leagues are offered then, someone might not bowl leagues at all if they know their sanction money is going to awards they cannot earn.
Again, I like the idea. However, I think that any idea that relies on a prediction of human behavior and reaction to the change worries me.
Current Average - 225