Jun 15, 2008 By On The Lanes For The 6 min read

By Gary George The USBC idea of limiting 300 game and 800 series awards to only one a lifetime has gotten an overwhelming amount of coverage. Most everyone is complaining about it. I personally think the issue solves itself if the USBC acknowledges every 300, 299, 298, and 800 series just like it has in the past – with no limitations as to how many can be thrown – and it allows the player to purchase the ring if he or she wishes.

The current rule allows the player to get one free 300 ring or 800 ring per year. If he or she throws another one during the same season, they, for the most part, receive nothing. So, if the USBC wants to get into the middle of this, they could actually benefit financially if they sanction multiple 300s and 800s per season and then designate a ring company to be the “Official Ring Company of the USBC” and then share in the profits.

Some fellows don’t care if they get more than one ring, but others do. I have been fortunate enough to have thrown multiple 300 games. Had I been limited to only one ring as a lifetime event, I would have been disappointed. I had it set in my mind that if I ever threw a perfect game, I would give my ring to my father, which I did. Then, if I would happen to throw another one, I would give it to my son, which I did. Any other rings I earned, I would keep for myself, which I have.

Being limited by the USBC to getting only one ring really seems unfair, and there are many bowlers who agree with me 100 percent. Allowing us to purchase one if we so desire, could solve the whole problem.

SPEAKING OF 300 GAMES AND 800 SERIES: As I have followed the discussions on the limitation of awards, I ran across the names of Joe Jimenez, of Saginaw, Mich., and John Chacko Jr., of Larksville, Pa. These two fellows have pretty much single-handedly made the argument for only one USBC award per lifetime. Why? Because, the 41-year-old Jimenez has 88 sanctioned 300 games! And, no, you did not misread that, and I did not make a mistake.

If you check the USBC website, there is good old Joe at the top of the 300 list with the number 88 beside his name.

And, how about Chacko? Well he has 99 800 series!

It is almost funny, isn’t it?

I think if I was bowling at Manor Lanes and I had Don Lindsey standing back behind the pin deck with a stick knocking pins down, I still couldn’t throw 88 sanctioned 300 games, much less 99 800 series. And remember now, Jimenez is only 41.

I guess we should say they are phenomenally talented fellows. Their feats are Herculean. Their names and pictures should be on magnets attached to the fronts of our refrigerators. I should be proud of these two fellows.

Yet, when I think of the thousands of times in the last 20 years that I have seen guys and gals get to that 10th frame with all strikes and yet still not achieve the perfect score, or the multitude of times that bowlers have crushed the pocket and still never come close to an 800 series, these two guys give me pause.

But, my solution to the “lifetime” award problem is still sound. Think about it. If these fellows had to buy their rings at say $125 a piece and they bought one each time they achieved the award, and if the USBC got $50 from each purchase, that would be almost $10,000 placed in the company bank account. That is not bad for just certifying the award and telling the fellow congratulations each time he achieved one.

OOPS: In last week’s column, I proposed the idea of having an area “House Championship” with a similar format to what the PBA is doing. The proprietor at each of the houses in the county would be designated as a “captain” and they could either choose six players for the competition or, as has been suggested, they could have some sort of “in-house” roll-off to determine what players would represent the house in the countywide, home-and-home, round-robin tournaments.

It seems funny looking back on it now, but as I was writing the concept, I kept asking myself where Alan Scabis would bowl. Obviously, anyone who knows anything about area bowlers has to know that Alan absolutely needs to bowl for someone. But, the problem is, he has bowled, at one time or another, in every house in the county.

So, the question in my mind was: Who would lay claim to him?

Well, honestly, I didn’t have to stew about it for long, because down deep inside, Alan is a Fairbank fellow, tried and true.

It wasn’t until after the bowling column was in last Sunday’s paper that I realized when I listed the six main bowling houses in the area that would most likely participate, I actually only had the names of five. I somehow left Fairbank out altogether. Imagine that?

Poor Jimmy Matis must have wondered what in the world I was thinking. But, honestly, it was just a mistake. I hadn’t really lost my mind.

Fairbank was obviously in the article to begin with. That is why I said six houses. But then, as I started making corrections and getting things ready to be sent to the paper for publication, something happened, no Fairbank.

Jimmy Matis and I have been friends for over 10 years, and he is an exceptional proprietor with a very loyal group of bowlers. My mistake was accidental. But now, I guess I am going to have to volunteer to go out some Wednesday evening and set pins manually so that Jimmy, Alan, Steve Grezsiak, Mike Miller, Jim McIntosh, Bobby Lovis and everyone else can take turns throwing the ball down the lane at me.

Oh well, if I live through it, it will make for an interesting column.

Uniontown resident Gary George writes a weekly bowling column for the Herald-Standard. If you have any bowling news, contact George, a member of the Professional Bowlers Association since 1997, via email at begin probowler48@aol.com probowler48@aol.com end

or fax at 724-438-7290. Information is welcome from all area bowling establishments. Leagues that submit their scores directly to the Herald-Standard may continue to do so.