HuddWeb is the website for the Huddersfield Winter League and the unofficial website for the Veterans League as well as being for news from all Huddersfield crown green bowling clubs.
Being “ a numbers man” I’ve had a further look at the list of top bowlers.
This shows that if the criteria was firstly on games won and , secondly, then on averages where the number of games won were equal, then almost half would move up the Top Bowlers table.
Interesting comment from Jeff saying that Leagues are split about 50/50 based on either games won or on averages. Perhaps unlikely all Leagues would agree to the same criteria.
Look forward to discussion at the end of the season.
I've just done a quick comparison with other local leagues and the split between 'Games Won' and 'Averages' as the main criteria for selecting the top bowlers is a fairly even split.
Those leagues that determine their top bowlers by 'Games Won' as we do at present include the Saturday League, Dearne & Don, Mirfield and Ladies Works League. It is also worth noting that not all these leagues then use the 'Average' as the second criteria as suggested by Philip Walker.
Whereas those taking the 'Average' as the first criteria for separating bowlers include the Works League, Liberal League, Ladies League, Ladies Afternoon League and all the Heavy Woollen Leagues.
These comparisons all use the Bowlsnet tables for 2019…
It’s me again about the averages !!I have to say that using the number of games won and then applying the total points scored to decide the order even where some bowlers have the same number of wins and a better average, in my opinion, produces an unfairness to bowlers who have won every game and have a better average.
Eg look at eg no 3 Malcolm Gilbert, no. 4 Ian parr, no. 7 Tim poultry, no.8 Gordon Walker, no15 Gary senior, no 23 david frost and a couple of others. Despite winning the same number of games than bowlers above them and having a superior average that are all lower in the top bowler table.
Being “ a numbers man” I’ve had a further look at the list of top bowlers.
This shows that if the criteria was firstly on games won and , secondly, then on averages where the number of games won were equal, then almost half would move up the Top Bowlers table.
Interesting comment from Jeff saying that Leagues are split about 50/50 based on either games won or on averages. Perhaps unlikely all Leagues would agree to the same criteria.
Look forward to discussion at the end of the season.
Philip of Lindley
I've just done a quick comparison with other local leagues and the split between 'Games Won' and 'Averages' as the main criteria for selecting the top bowlers is a fairly even split.
Those leagues that determine their top bowlers by 'Games Won' as we do at present include the Saturday League, Dearne & Don, Mirfield and Ladies Works League. It is also worth noting that not all these leagues then use the 'Average' as the second criteria as suggested by Philip Walker.
Whereas those taking the 'Average' as the first criteria for separating bowlers include the Works League, Liberal League, Ladies League, Ladies Afternoon League and all the Heavy Woollen Leagues.
These comparisons all use the Bowlsnet tables for 2019…
It’s me again about the averages !! I have to say that using the number of games won and then applying the total points scored to decide the order even where some bowlers have the same number of wins and a better average, in my opinion, produces an unfairness to bowlers who have won every game and have a better average.
Eg look at eg no 3 Malcolm Gilbert, no. 4 Ian parr, no. 7 Tim poultry, no.8 Gordon Walker, no15 Gary senior, no 23 david frost and a couple of others. Despite winning the same number of games than bowlers above them and having a superior average that are all lower in the top bowler table.
Taking it to an…