Aero Bowls has proposed a different scoring regime for playing lawn bowls. A different scoring system immediately revolutionizes strategy and tactics.
In the Phoenix System which is designed for pairs play the lead bowler is provided ways to make points for the team that cannot be changed by the skip’s subsequent bowls. The second difference is that when an end is complete the scoring is similar to the game 4-3-2-1; 10 points are awarded for the closet bowl, 5 for the second closest, and 3 for the third closest irrespective of which team had the closest bowl.
This Phoenix scoring system has the effect in essence of breaking each match into two parts. In effect, the leads play with one set of rules and then the skips play starting with the disposition of bowls from the leads’ play but their performance has a different set of rules.
In the portion of play between the leads there are two ways to score. When a bowl in its original course hits the jack it scores 3 points for that side. Since each lead delivers 4 bowls this provides a possibility of scoring up to 12 points each. Finally, the closest bowl to the jack after the lead bowls are completed scores 3 points. The leads’ part of the game is more strategic and less tactical. That is to say, what can be described as a good bowl has consistent, unequivocal characteristics. Good bowls are narrow, close, and behind the jack.
Strategically it is useful for the lead bowls to finish close to the jack both to win the 3 points awarded for their closest bowl and to provide their skipper with the most advantageous starting position. However, it is even more important that lead bowls should finish behind the jack since jack movement is more likely with this scoring method. Both lead bowlers will favor bowling a bit narrow because that provides the opportunity to trail the jack for an extra 3 points. The rules reward bowls that cross the center line and finish behind the jack!
When the skips' turn arrives, play is more tactical. That is to say, choosing an objective depends critically upon the particular disposition of bowls. If your lead has bowled anything short those bowls are essentially useless for scoring and maybe even more seriously damaging by blocking skip options. Even if your side holds shot, another close but short bowl may just provide the wicking assist that moves the jack backward. Even at the completion of the end scoring the shot bowl is less important with the Phoenix system. The 15 points scored having the shot bowl are easily matched or bettered if the other side can win the 2nd and 3rd best (8 points) along with some touchers (3 points each).
Unlike in the classic game, one does not need to worry about giving away shot when competing bowls are close to the jack because having shot bowl does not guarantee to outscore your opponent in the end. Instead trying for another toucher that will at least finish as another close bowl is likely the best tactic. In any case, the end is unlikely to lead to a large swing in the score.
Strategically, Phoenix scoring seems to discourage short ends. Because the game is played with no dead ends, a jack that is driven out of bounds will be respotted centered 2 meters from the forward ditch, and since the leads are encouraged to play their bowls somewhat longer and because the bowl that has displaced the jack will either finish long or often alive in the ditch and because the bowl that has displaced the jack may have scored 3 points as a toucher, more heavy shots can be expected from skips in this format. Having last bowl will be more important and consequently, the side with the mat (and bowling first) will not want to give their opponent a short end that can more easily be attacked.
