This installment of The One Board originally appeared in Bowlers Journal International, July, 2023
During the semifinal match of the PBA Super Slam Cup in May, EJ Tackett bowled a perfect game. It was the 40th time a 300 game was bowled on a PBA telecast, but it would’ve counted as the 35th… except it didn’t count. The count was off on counting a feat that didn’t count. Yes, Tackett bowled 300 but no, it doesn’t count on the historical list of televised perfect games because it wasn’t done in a title event.
What? For any casual fans of bowling or math reading this, the numbers above make absolutely no sense and have turned you off to both bowling and math.
The solution: let’s stop numbering 300s. “EJ Tackett bowled 300” sounds a lot more impressive than “EJ Tackett bowled the 35th televised 300” and not just because the latter comes with built-in asterisks as is bowling’s way.
It no longer matters how many have been bowled. Let fans enjoy the memories of what they’ve seen and the excitement of what they will see.
We’ve Seen Enough
When Jack Biondolillo was the first to achieve perfection, it made sense to bask in the rarity. Johnny Guenther two years later was worth noting as the second and Jim Stefanich five years after that was arguably worth noting as the third.
But even as early as the fourth—Pete McCordic in 1987—numbering the games didn’t mean as much. McCordic’s 300 was more impressive because it had been 13 years since the last one and because of McCordic himself than because it was the fourth ever rolled. What do you remember about Bob Benoit’s 300? Bob Learn Jr.’s? Probably not where they fell numerically. By the time Jason Queen bowled 300 in 1997 (and wasn’t given credit until 2008, making him the 19th to be credited with a perfect game but slotted chronologically as 11th), we were way past needing to number these things.
Consider again a casual fan, whose mind exploded reading that Jason Queen parenthetical, and this distinction of a perfect game “on television.” Of course it’s on television. That’s where bowling happens. Casual fans—the vast majority of the television audience—don’t know professional bowling happens anywhere other than on TV. These fans certainly don’t care whether it was a title event or not and if they are impressed watching someone bowl 300 and are then told it doesn’t count, what are they to think? Probably, “What else is on?”
That—distinguishing between a title event and an exhibition—brings us to the other reason we all benefit by stopping the count:
The Other Perfect Games Were Real
Tackett rolled 12 strikes in a row in one game. That happened. There’s video evidence. It also happened for Wes Malott twice. And for Ryan Shafer. And the Dallas Strikers. And Dom Barrett, although for clarity and to add an asterisk while trying to remove asterisks, Barrett only had to roll 10 strikes under the auspices of the World Bowling scoring system, but he still scored 300.
These games have long been relegated to yeah-they-happened-but-they-don’t-count status. But if we stop numbering the 300 games that do count, we can welcome these six back into the all-inclusive group of perfect games bowled on television, righting an ancient wrong. Everything counts if we stop counting.
We should do it soon, because by the time this issue hits mailboxes, it’s likely we’ll have seen the “actual” 35th perfect game at the PBA Tour Finals, an event that’s given us at least one 300 each of the past three years.
If we stop numbering perfect games, each successive performance will mean more in the moment, adding prestige by simply letting a 300 game be the achievement it is rather than some item on (or not on) a list. All previous pseudo-acknowledged performances can be seamlessly recognized as having happened without upsetting the chronology. And not to worry: accepting the existence of Tackett’s 300 will not in the least tarnish Tommy Jones bowling 300 to win his 20th title a day after being inducted into the Hall of Fame. Legendary performances will always stand out for what they are, not for where they land numerically.
Sure, we can keep the lists for historical reference. These were bowled in title events, these were bowled in other events, this one only required 10 strikes, but it’s time to stop focusing on all the caveats. Did someone bowl 300? That’s all that, yes, counts.