In Support of Trial Ends at Lawn Bowls

 In Toronto Canada, at the clubs where I am a member, no trial ends (as in The Laws of Bowls Section 5.1) are allowed before either a social game or an intra-club tournament match. Similarly, in local open inter-club tournaments, I have not encountered trial ends. In the provincial playdowns, on the other hand, there are trial ends.

In Canada, for domestic play, ‘the Controlling Body can limit the number of trial ends to be played (no trial ends or one trial end in one direction). It can also decide whether the trial ends are played immediately before or immediately after the scheduled start time for the game.’

The most common reason for denying trial ends is that it unnecessarily extends the duration of play. This is incorrect. There is no requirement that any player to participate in the trial ends, there are only some rules governing the management of practice when everyone is participating. Since the regular rules of play are not enforced during trial ends, things like playing out of turn or foot faulting have no real meaning. Furthermore, the local organizers are empowered to require that trial ends be completed before the official start time for the games. So quite the opposite, encouraging trial ends would result in fewer players arriving at the last minute for their game! 

What is more, having trial ends will, I think, encourage more beginning bowlers to participate in competitions. Thinking back, what worried me most when I was a new bowler, was looking ridiculous when delivering my opening bowls in a match. Trial ends would reduce this fear. (Before a match, practice at right angles to the direction of match play, which is permitted, already allows one to get an idea of proper weight.) 

The most substantive problems where no trial ends are allowed are:

1. Not having trial ends can give an advantage to teams with members from the club hosting the event. 

2. Because there is no opportunity for the lead to discover the more playable hand during trial ends, it introduces a greater element of luck rather than skill into the first few ends.

3. Not having trial ends removes the opportunity for any player to try out, in a limited way, different sets of bowls before the match play begins.

4. Not having trial ends removes the opportunity to assess your opponent’s strengths and weaknesses before the matchplay begins.

5. It provides an unfair advantage to the team bowling second in the first two ends.

There is no good reason to disallow trial ends and a few good reasons to promote them.