Why is bowling scored like that? And how I would fix it

I like bowling. I haven't been in over a decade, but it's probably my second favorite 3D physics game after Katamari Damacy. I wish I could bowl more often. But as much as I enjoy the physical act of bowling, I think the scoring system has some major problems.

The first time I ever went bowling was a field trip for gym class in Junior High. I'm not an athletically-inclined person because I have EIB¹ that was undiagnosed until I was almost 40. Bowling is the sole positive association I have with gym class, but ironically, I really struggled with the math.

It wasn't just me, I don't think anyone in my class really understood it. It might have been a good idea for the gym teacher to ask a math teacher to help, rather than trying to explain it himself. Nothing against his intelligence, just pedagogically speaking, I think a specialist might've been able to teach it more clearly.

Bowling is basically scored like this: There are 10 pins per frame. You get points for the number of pins you knock down in 2 throws. If you manage to knock down all 10 pins, you get bonus points:

• If you knock them all down in two throws, that's called a "spare" and you get 10 points plus the value of your next throw.

• If you knock them all down in one throw, that's called a "strike". You get ten points plus the value of your next two throws.

It gets complicated when you need to go back and alter your score for previous frames. Say you get a strike in frame 1, a strike in frame 2, and you knock over 7 pins on your first throw during frame 3. You need to go back and calculate your score for the previous two frames: 27 in frame 1 and 17 in frame 2. But then if you "pick up the spare" (knock over the remaining three pins in frame 3) then you have to change your score in frame 2 to 20. Then, since you got another spare, you have to remember to alter your frame 3 score (10) after seeing what your first roll in frame 4 is.

It's not a difficult concept to understand, but trying to juggle the cognitive load of accurate scorekeeping with the part you actually care about—i.e, trying to bowl good—makes the game a lot less fun; especially since trying to do cumulative math in your head in a loud environment with a million distractions sucks even if you're not also thinking about bowling.

This is all moot nowadays, because we have bowling alley computers that keep track of whose turn it is and do the scoring automatically, but competitive players still usually keep their own score, because what if the computer makes a mistake? What if it crashes? What happens when the next generation of bowling alley software is vibe coded and hallucinates players that aren't there? Technology is getting less trustworthy all the time, and I don't see why bowling alley tech would be an exception. Plus, it's just nice to be able to keep track of your own score. It makes you feel more connected to the game. You know exactly how you're doing at all times; there's no element of surprise at the end. But, I don't think splitting players' focus between the game and the abstruse scorekeeping system is the way to go. That's why I've devised:

The Bee Optimized Win/Lose Tally System (BOWLTS)

The rules are so simple I barely need to explain them: it's how bowling already works in our hearts. It took far longer to come up with the name than to solidify the rules. Here they are:

• 1 pin = 1 point
• A spare = 10 bonus points
• A strike = 20 bonus points

That's it! For large segments of the bowling public, this system won't affect their game. There are still three broad tiers of performance: bowlers who get mostly strikes will score in the 200s (and 300 is still a perfect game.²) Players who get mostly spares will land in the 100s. And beginners will still finish in the double digits.

The biggest difference will be for intermediate bowlers whose game isn't yet consistent, and for these players I think the vanilla rules are far too punitive. Imagine you're a beginner who's bowling a decent game: mostly 8s and 9s with a spare or two. Then, in frame 6, you get your first ever strike. That's a big deal! You're becoming a real bowler! You're over the moon!

Then, hyped up from your achievement, you feel pressure to continue doing well. You overthink the next frame and switch to a heavier ball. You think it'll help you improve, but oh no! You're not used to the weight and throw two consecutive gutterballs. Brutal.

You're dismayed to realize that, not only is frame 7 a big goose egg, you also negated the value of your first strike: your big moment is now only worth 10 points! Heartbreaking. Demoralizing. And in my opinion, totally unnecessary. The double gutterball already stings, and it's already going to drag your score down; why rub salt in the wound? This also discourages experimentation: players don't want to try new strategies when they know they'll be punished for failure retroactively.

The vanilla rules also punish big swings and comebacks. Say you get a spare in frame 5. On your first throw of frame 6, you choke and only knock over one pin. But on your second throw, you recover and manage to knock down the remaining 9 pins, picking up another spare. It's a skillful play, but the game doesn't think this is worth celebrating: it punishes you by setting your frame 5 score to a measly 11 points. If you had instead knocked over 9 pins on your first throw and 1 on your second throw, your score for frame 5 would be 19, despite your overall performance being identical.

This sucks! I think a spare should be a spare. Knocking over all 10 pins is the bowler's raison d'être; the only thing that should matter is whether you get there in one throw or two. If anything, the game should reward players for picking up difficult spares. For example, nailing a 7-10 split should be worth almost as much as a strike. But that's a conversation for another time. For keeping the player's head in the game and fixing all the problems with traditional scoring, BOWLTS is the solution.