The high-bowlin' Manatees
The ICBMs had a strong showing tonight, and for the first time the scores counted. Since we're a mixed team, we report our top two mens' scores and top two ladies' scores for the evening. The ladies put in a particularly strong showing, with scores approaching the 150 mark in the second game. Both Conscientious Objector and Private Injury achieved personal bests. Comandant Nugatory En Fuego and Private Injury both bowled turkeys tonight. Major Ho also came within a pin of a turkey. Conscientious Objector was our clutch frame-closer, and she often followed up her spares with strikes. But the amazing feat of the night - a phantom strike - was pulled off by PFC LCD. A well thrown ball knocked out nine pins, and nudged the tenth just enough out of allignment to fool the computerized scoring system into calling it a strike.
Here were toinght's scores (those we reported are highlighted):
Comandant Nugatory En Fuego: 137, 85, 133
Conscientious Objector: 92, 146, 128
Major Ho: 107, 120, 128
PFC LCD: 93, 94
Private Injury: 92, 147, 110
So it was an excellent start to the scoring portion of the law school bowling league. Hopefully we'll be able to build on this. Let's see if next week the men can step it up a bit.
5 comments:
Sgt. A-Bomb and I were discussing this scoring system. We have to report our top 2 men's and top 2 ladies' scores. This is presumably because the SBA bowling gurus assume a marked difference between mens' and ladies' bowling abilities. (And we're guessing they assume men are better bowlers.) Is there any reason we couldn't report 3 ladies' and 1 man's score? Perhaps we should ask SBA about that.
-Private Injury
I was actually wondering the same thing last night, especially after reading Brendan's bowling post.
I was simply going by the SBA email which stated: "For mixed teams, its the top 2 mens scores and the top 2 womens scores that need to be submitted." [sic]
Personally, I think it should be the top four scores, period.
Well, perhaps we should ask. I guess if there is the assumption that men are better than women, you shouldn't be able to submit more than 2 men's scores for the co-ed bowling league. But if women are supposedly weaker bowlers, then logically, I see no problem with using more women's scores. I'll have to read Brendan's post.
I agree with everyone's comments here. We are actually signed up as a "men's" team, on the assumption that our top 4 scores are always, or almost always, going to be men. This isn't a sexist assumption, it's just the reality of our particular team, and having to play in the mixed league just because we have two female bowlers -- who, if one of them doesn't show up (like next week, when Becky and I are en route to St. Louis), would leave our team totally screwed and unable to report four scores. So we're a "men's" team, but I don't see anything wrong with reporting Becky's or Meg's score if they happen to be in the top 4, since, as you guys say, the assumption seems to be that men are going to bowl better than women.
Anyway, I e-mailed the SBA about this, so we'll see what happens. I know that Chris, Nick & co. definitely want to compete against the top competition in the men's league, and being a "mixed" team is impractical for the reason mentioned above, so hopefully Nick will agree with me on this... it would seem rather unfair to hamstring us and force us to compete in the "mixed" league considering that we didn't even know the teams would be segregated by gender when we signed up.
(The biggest problem, I would think, would be a team that is mostly women but has 1 or 2 guys who are also good bowlers... what are they supposed to do? Bah. The SBA has made things way more complicated than they need to be, as usuak.)
P.S. What's a "usuak"? That should say "as usual," obviously. Heh.
Also, there's a sentence fragment in my first paragraph. Let's try...
This isn't a sexist assumption, it's just the reality of our particular team. Having to play in the mixed league just because we have two female bowlers seems silly, and totally impractical to boot, since if one of them doesn't show up (like next week, when Becky and I are en route to St. Louis), it would leave our team totally screwed and unable to report four scores.
There, that's better. Stupid not being able to edit my comments, like I can on my own blog... :)
Post a Comment