Center refused...

[Derrick]

week 3, 8 teams, 4 men per team, lanes 1-8 of 12

Lanes 7&8 only had 3 from each team, 6 total bowlers. This pair finished well ahead of the other teams, so one bowler, knowing he wouldn't be able to make it week 5, decieded it would be a good time to pre-bowl for that week. League rules allow unopposed individual pre-bowling. Anything else related is governed by USBC.

This bowler was told by the front desk that he was not allowed to pre-bowl on a pair of lanes that he just bowled on. As sec., my services were called upon. I pulled out my handy dandy rule book and saw no mention of such a rule. USBC does allow for a pre-powl on any pair of certified lanes. Even after bringing this to the attention of the front desk, they still would not alow him to do so. The bowler did not insist on bowling on the same lanes, and had no problem with bowling on 9+10. But, had the other lanes not been available, it might have been a problem. What gets me is that the desk in not in any way involved with the league other then it is their lanes that are certified.

If there is no USBC rule and no league rule that prohibits it, and the league sec. saying it is OK, why would the center still say no?

Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Frank Goebel]

The center, or the desk operator, may have taken this action so as to relieve himself of future questions, such as, "Why did you allow a pre-bowl like that?", especially if the bowler had an unusually high score in the pre-bowl.

There's no specific Commonly Asked Question (CAQ) on this, but CAQ #17 comes close...that one deals with practice before league play. It goes along with the notion of proprietor's rights. The league may want to do such a restriction, but would have to consult with the proprietor, as it could be an infringement on his business.

As for a pre-bowl for the next week: The center does have the right to say no. The bowler, of course, would have the right not to accept that and pre-bowl at another time. But, the only rule that USBC would have would be if the lanes were certified. In fact, a pre-bowl doesn't have to be done on lanes normally used by the league, just a certified pair.

I would suppose that a center taking such a policy would be expected to enforce it uniformly; that is, to always prohibit a pre-bowl on a pair just bowled in league. But again, there's no USBC requirement for that. USBC does believe in good proprietor relations but again, cannot impose something on the proprietor.

I'm curious if it was a proprietor's policy, or just the person who happened to be working the desk that night.

[Derrick]

As for a pre-bowl for the next week: The center does have the right to say no. The bowler, of course, would have the right not to accept that and pre-bowl at another time.

I assume that you mean that if there are no available lanes the center could say no, since there are no lanes available, or simply just refusing to serve a customer.

I am hoping that you didn't mean the center could say no to pre-bowls in general.

Thank you for confirming my interpitation of the rules.

[Lance Rasmussen]

Derrick,

when I worked in a center, I would not let a person practice on a set of lanes they were going to be bowling on for that night. I.E. If they came in at 6pm an hour before league started and wanted to throw a practice game.

Is that in the rules or against the rules... no. But I wanted to protect the bowler and our center for sake of giving this bowler preferencial treatment or saying "no fair... he's had time to see what that pair is going to do and get the right equipment when we couldn't".

In terms of prebowl / makeup on the pair the person just got done with. Its essentially the same thing. I would rather make this bowler upset that he has to move his equipment and use a different pair of lanes than listen to 30-40 league bowlers bitch and moan because this person got special treatment.

It comes down to dollars too. I would rather loose 1 bowler for the season being mad at our center policy and bowling somewhere else, then a 40-60 person team pulling up stakes and bowling somewhere else.

But in no uncertain terms is there ANYTHING in black and white that says a center HAS to let a person bowl where the league tells them (other than being on the certified lanes). This includes if a team was scheduled to bowl on 3-4 and they were making up / prebowling for that week they were on 3-4.... The center DOES NOT have to put them there. They must only put them on a certified pair of lanes (which is pretty much anywhere in the house).

A center COULD say.... NO PREBOWLS MAKEUPS ALLOWED. PERIOD. Now is this a SMART thing for the center do to?? No. But in a busy house or a small house.... sometimes you have to do that. But I've have only talked to maybee 3 or 4 centers around the country that say they never let prebowls or makeups happen and that if a person or team can't bowl when their scheduled, thats tough turkey. There is no agreement anywhere that I have seen or signed when a center agrees to certify their lanes that they agree to allow prebowls or makeups.

Now if the center had a contract between the league and the center, there is certainly opportunity to insert into the contract no prebowls/makeups allowed or something that says otherwise. Thats a different matter and essentially a legal contract that both must adhere to.

I got into a fun arguement on that case with a team and out of spite, called ABC at the time and they told me the same thing. Is the pair you put them on certified? yep... thats all we care. I had a tournament going on and there were 2 pairs open. One one each end of the house. The team didn't want to bowl on either end and felt we needed to move the tournament to accomodate them.... I simply told them... Bowl... Or forfeit.

I could also have said no. A center is NOT REQUIRED to let leagues make up games. When a league sets up a schedule with the center, they are essentially making reservations for the lanes for several weeks. When a pre-bowl or makeup happens, you are cutting into the opportunity for the bowling center to make money with open play or other activities schedule for the lanes. That is simply not fair to the bowling proprietor.

If a makeup / prebowl situation happens, the propeitor should be ASKED when a time is available or see if a time that works for the team/individual is available for the proprietor. If the center will reserve an exact pair or A pair, then great. If a center says.... hey... In January, I have a waiting list an hour long each day of the week for open play..... guess what.... Your team / individual should either help out the proprietor by trying to work out a time when its not so busy..... or wait and shut up.

[Frank Goebel]

Actually, if the center didn't want to allow pre-bowls at all, I suppose that's an option it would have...but, the center would be shooting itself in the foot for that, as some league bowlers would need access to that option--that, or not bowl at all. The issue of pre-bowling is an agreement between a league and the center.

I've had bowlers come in (I've worked the desk in the past) saying they'd called earlier and were told that pre-bowl lanes were available, and they were available at the time of the call....stopped by a half hour before leagues were to start for that night and were upset that no lanes were available when they arrived....five hours after the call. Others had come in after leagues and wanted freshly oiled lanes (all oiled lanes had been bowled on by league) when it was only open bowling time and there wasn't staff available to do that. Or, when the house is filled with league and they stop in at 8:00 and the earliest league would finish at 9:15 and were irate at the notion of having to wait (couldn't they at least call ahead?)

I have had bowler pay the open rate for what was intended to be pre-bowl games...oil had broken down beyond what was scorable. The only problem I would ever have if one member of a group that was pre-bowling together wanted his scores tossed, but the others kept (fortunately, never came to pass)...though, if a group of friends wanted to bowl and two of them were pre-bowling and the others, just open (and pay normally)... I didn't have a problem with that. It's business.

[Lance Rasmussen]

We refused to oil the lanes specially for prebowl/makeups. We had one time where a team was willing to pay us $50 to pay for the time, effort and materials to do that for them. And this was above the lineage they would normally be paying during league night.

I've had the same problem, Frank, with calling when every lane was open on a Sunday morning in January and at 1pm, when they showed up, there was a 2 hour waiting list. They were very upset, but hey... your on MY time, not YOUR time.

Most of my makeup/prebowl teams were smart enough to call ahead and ask when I was scheduled to condition the lanes. So they would show up after that. If I hadn't gotten to that, they would just wait patiently until I was able to get it done. Nor barks or bites.

I never did think about making them pay open play on top of the normal dues they did. Should have... Again. on MY time, not THEIRS.

[Derrick]

I agree that it is up to the bowler to do the pre-bowl during a time that lanes are available, not the center to make time for the bowler.

However, how can a center say NO to ANY prebowl? What would stop the bowler from paying his own linage, bowl three games, and submit those scores to the sec., provided of course the league allowed unopposed indivdual pre-bowls. In that case I would deduct that lineage from what I'd pay the center for the night. Our league pays the center lineage for all bowlers weather they are there or not. Why, I have no idea. Other then it makes financials easier and there could be an implied contract that there will be X amount of bowlers bowling 3 games each week, and that is what we will be charged for making that reservation for the block of lanes for that day.

Lance, you were worried that the league would think a bowler had an unfair advantage because he bowled prior to the league on the set of lanes he would be bowling on later?

Let me see if I can change your way of thinking.

Assume that all lanes are oiled equally. With the equipment available today, each lane should be striped, oiled in the same manner leaving them almost identical. In other words, each pair of lanes will have the same shot.

2 memeber of team A come in and bowl on lanes 1-2 before league. They are scheduled to bowl on 3-4. They each bowl 2 games. They now know how lane 3-4 will play for the first 4 cumulative games. That is more of an advantage, I think, then having bowled on the same set which will break down sooner during league play. While lanes 5up are still learning the read of the lanes, bowlers A and B already know their ball reaction. Poor 1-2 have lanes that are partially broken down already.

And why stop at thinking the bowler only has an advantage becuase of the lanes bowled on? Why not complain that the bowler has the advantage because he is already warmed up and lose? Quote from Lance "no fair... he's had time to see what that pair is going to do and get the right equipment when we couldn't". Why can't the other bowlers? The lanes weren't available? Then league assigned lanes are the only choicefor the person coming early. Maybe the other bowlers don't get off work early enough to come practice. Should everyone not be allowed to practice because not everyone has the opportunity?

There is absolutly no advantage to practicing on the pair of lanes you'll bowl on for league. At least no more than if you practiced on any pair of lanes. Except they won't have to move their equipment.

Personally, I'd rather bowl on the pair next to where I am slated to bowl.


Imagine the "unfair" cries if a bowler were to pre-bowl or post-bowl from 2000 miles away.....

:)
Derrick

[Lance Rasmussen]

Derrik,
what you are mentioning is what is called a guaranteed league. It is very common practice for a center and league to have a contract that states that the league will pay for X spots a week for y number of weeks. Especially for busy centers.

Many centers will also have a provision for guaranteed leagues that will state that the first xx number of weeks (usually 2 or 3), the league will only pay for the spots they have bowlers. This allows the league to fill up the league and not be penalized if they are still hunting for a few players or a team to fill the league.

That is actually why BLS has the rule regarding vacancies counting towards the legal lineup. Many guaranteed leagues will, because of the financial penalty of not filling the league and having to pay for "dead spots", will penalize a team for not filling their team.

I don't see any reason why a center wont charge a person(s) for pre/post bowling outside of their normal league night at open play (or league bowler) rates.

I don't agree with your outlook of withholding lineage for a team/person that would pay to pre/post bowl and pay open play rates, unless that was agreed on ahead of time. That kind of attitude is what would help my decision each year at what to set the lineage rate to in if I raise a nickel or a dime. Remember... the league is paying lineage for a reserved block of lanes at a reserve block of time.

That being said, its one of those things you look at when you are either "shopping" around for a bowling center to host your league. There's more to it than simply which center will give you the best lineage rate. If you/your league insist that pre/post bowls are part of the lineage paid by that person, then as long as the center agrees... great. Same thing with guaranteed lineage. If you don't want to play that route, insist that the center only charge you for the positions filled. If the center refuses, then either take it or see if another center will offer the deal you want.

You may be in a place that pretty much is a captive market (small towns). But in larger markets, I've seen leagues jump around centers all the time. I remember a couple leagues jumping ship from a center I dealt with because they dropped their lineage to entice them to come over... of course the following year, they raised the rates to cover the loss the previous season and it ended up not saving the league a nickel when looking at the big/long picture.

A lot of things, such as guaranteed leagues, came from the "heyday" of bowling, when waiting lists were common and open play during the week was lucky to be available until 11pm.

Now adays, the lane availability isn't so much an issue in a lot of areas and so many centers have had to relax some of these contracts to keep their customers happy.

In terms of coming in to practice early.... I normally don't even put them on the lanes used for league, if I have them available. Depending on the league, I may not even let them practice before had.

By not letting them practice or on a pair use by the league, I may get gripes from those bowlers. But at least I don't have to listen to a bunch of others complain about it.

As long as a center is consistant, then thats what matters.

[Derrick]

Lance,

You are right about me being from a small market. Aside from tounraments I have no idea what it's like in the big city centers. Put it this way, a couple of weeks ago I too a couple of balls to a center that is the only one in what is, compared to the town I live in, a big city. There was a league(s) going on all 40 something lanes on a Wednesday, which really surprised me. I knoew there'd be league bowling, but didn't imagine a full house. With bowling not being the most popular sport around here. Anyway, by the time the balls were drilled league was over and I decieded to shoot some games. I asked the guy at the desk how much, and after asking someone else (really, was it such a hard question? but I'll give him the benifit of the doubt and say it was his first day). It was $2. Not bad. I was expecting $3+ or an hourly rate. It was after 9pm, so it was the $2 rate. OK, I say, I'll bowl. $2 please. Huh? You just want one game? I don't know. The concept of prepaying for bowling is new to me. I'm used to bowling and paying afterwards. Like today, practicing at the house I bowl league. I bowled 8 games. paid $8 when I left. Back to the other alley, I gave him $4 for 2 games, bowled those, and figured I could just bowl a few more and pay when I left, uh, no, once you bowl what you pay for, the lanes shut off.

But I can see that it would be nearly impossible to keep track of 40+ lanes and who's bowled what and trying to get people to pay for them, or saying I didn't bowl that many games. Well, just becuase you weren't keeping score, doesn't mean the frame counter isn't running.

But not even letting bowlers practive before league at all? That like golfing without hitting the driving range, baseball with out hitting balls in the batting cage, no sideline passes to your wide reciever.

But I guess if the center says no, for whatever reason, what can you do? However, if I went in an hour early to bowl a couple games and was told no, and then a group of kids came in and the center put them on a pair of lane, or worse, our league lanes, on, gasp, my pair of lanes, and told then they had until xx:xx time to finish up, I'd feel I had a legitimate complaint.

Almost 1am, I'm off to dream of bowling.
Ok, I'm not that addicted.

Derrick

[Frank Goebel]

The notion of pre-paid bowling is really, for just a few circumstances.

Any hourly rental of lanes, where it's paid on a clock basis, is typically pre-paid. This would also apply to those nighttime sessions where loud music, flashing dance lights, and an otherwise dark but noisy environment is present.

But pre-paid game bowling is good when, due to neighborhood circumstances (and the last thing I want to do is to get into a discussion on what is a "good" versus "bad" neighborhood, but that's the word that comes to mind right now): Pre-paying prevents walkouts...more so than does having bowlers leave "inferior" shoes in exchange for the house shoes, but has the "good" shoes all along, when they decide to pack up and leave without paying, leaving the house shoes at the lanes where bowled. Where there's a propensity for walkouts, pre-paying can be imposed.

This could turn into a different discussion altogether (perhaps a new thread) but I will end what I introduced: Any pre-pay policy must be done uniformly. If it's posted that pre-paying is in effect, it must be for all customers, even league bowlers coming in for open play, as well as those who might be (not rightly) pre-judged as being likely to walk out, or others not recognized by center management. In short, it has to be fair, not prejudicial, although a center could designate times when the pre-pay is in effect, or have it in effect at all times.