APA Rules Question - Intentional Forfeit

[lorider]

What insults were you referring to? I don't believe there were any insults in my post. I'd also be happy to continue the conversation, but I think the conversation would suffer greatly if you perceive insults where there aren't any, or confuse observations with insults. Please clarify.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

I am not speaking for apa operator but there were some negative connotations on your post concerning lo's. Insinuating that they are incapable of logic stands out particularly.

I do agree with the gist of your post but I also like to read what apa operator has to say as it gives some perspective from the other side of the fence .

I know for a fact that people in the apa home office visit this forum from time to time. I do wish they would give their input on issues we bring up but I really dont blame them for not posting considering the mob mentality of apa haters on here.

 

[lorider]

Not to be picky, but the above highlighted statement is untrue. The system most definitely takes in to account your opponents strength of hcp. Meaning more weight is given to a win against say a stronger 4 than a weaker 4.

I see kmrunout has already beat me in correcting this assumption by you. Fargo rate does however take your opponents skill level Into consideration.

I have no idea what all goes into determining your skill level in apa but its more or less agreed that innings and safes are 2 major factors. Your opponents handicap is irrelevant. 2 examples here. I once skunked a 3 in 7 innings and 2 of those innings ended in safes. I was raised to a 6. I also skunked a 5 once and was not raised..dont recall exactly the number of innings and safes but I would be close in saying it was around 14-15 I innings and around 3-4 safes. Under your assumption it would seem I would be raised for skunking a 5 before I would be raised skunking a 3. The difference between those 2 skunks was the number of innings and safes and that's why I was raised in one match and not the other....along with the stats of my previous matches.

I am relatively new in the Fargo system but have seen results in my rating based on my opponents skill level. I shut out a 400 4-0 in 8 ball and was raised 5 points. I shut out a 490 4-0 in 8 ball and was raised 15 points . See the difference. ?

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

What insults were you referring to? I don't believe there were any insults in my post. I'd also be happy to continue the conversation, but I think the conversation would suffer greatly if you perceive insults where there aren't any, or confuse observations with insults. Please clarify.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Your final paragraph in your response was fairly condescending.

 

[dogginda9]

Actually, this is 100% false. One's opponent is essentially irrelevant. I can't imagine why you would believe this.

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Kerry.
I'm only going off of what my league operator told me. I was told, for instance, that a win against a poor 7 doesn't carry as much weight as a win against a great 7 like yourself. This also applies for all hcps not just 7's. Again, I could be wrong. Just what I was told by my L.O.

 

[dogginda9]

I see kmrunout has already beat me in correcting this assumption by you. Fargo rate does however take your opponents skill level Into consideration.

I have no idea what all goes into determining your skill level in apa but its more or less agreed that innings and safes are 2 major factors. Your opponents handicap is irrelevant. 2 examples here. I once skunked a 3 in 7 innings and 2 of those innings ended in safes. I was raised to a 6. I also skunked a 5 once and was not raised..dont recall exactly the number of innings and safes but I would be close in saying it was around 14-15 I innings and around 3-4 safes. Under your assumption it would seem I would be raised for skunking a 5 before I would be raised skunking a 3. The difference between those 2 skunks was the number of innings and safes and that's why I was raised in one match and not the other....along with the stats of my previous matches.

I am relatively new in the Fargo system but have seen results in my rating based on my opponents skill level. I shut out a 400 4-0 in 8 ball and was raised 5 points. I shut out a 490 4-0 in 8 ball and was raised 15 points . See the difference. ?

Like I told Kerry, just going off what I was told by my L.O. It seems logical that a win against a strong opponent at their hcp would carry more weight than a win against a weaker opponent at their hcp.

 

[Celophanewrap]

Like I told Kerry, just going off what I was told by my L.O. It seems logical that a win against a strong opponent at their hcp would carry more weight than a win against a weaker opponent at their hcp.

It probably seems like it should, but it doesn't. The system itself is reasonably basic.
When a 6 plays a 6 they will always race to 5 regardless of actual ability or who just
got bumped up or down, they're both 6's, the race is 5

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I am not speaking for apa operator but there were some negative connotations on your post concerning lo's. Insinuating that they are incapable of logic stands out particularly.

I do agree with the gist of your post but I also like to read what apa operator has to say as it gives some perspective from the other side of the fence .

I know for a fact that people in the apa home office visit this forum from time to time. I do wish they would give their input on issues we bring up but I really dont blame them for not posting considering the mob mentality of apa haters on here.

I agree I would like to hear what APA Operator might have to say.

I don't think the conversation will go very well if my observations are taken as insults. Having spoken on many many occasions with APA LO's and other APA staff, I'm sorry to report that logic is not a common experience with them. I sincerely wish it were different. However, I will concede that this may be more aptly a critique of humanity rather than APA staff specifically. I would genuinely LOVE to have the ability to honestly report that I had an experience with an APA LO that was a model of logic and reason. It is astonishingly rare however. Should I lie about my experience or keep it to myself for fear of hurting someones feelings? I can't make someone else be defensive or not defensive. I can only state the truth as I see it, and let them be adult humans to the best of their ability. It genuinely sucks that this should have to be a concern of anyone...that is, some sort of fear of speaking the truth as they see it.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Your final paragraph in your response was fairly condescending.

How would you have worded that idea?

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Kerry.
I'm only going off of what my league operator told me. I was told, for instance, that a win against a poor 7 doesn't carry as much weight as a win against a great 7 like yourself. This also applies for all hcps not just 7's. Again, I could be wrong. Just what I was told by my L.O.

Ok no worries here. I really don't know why your LO would tell you that. Maybe he explained it wrong or you misunderstood. I know there is a very specific situation in which your win % is a factor, but the rank of your opponent is not part of the Equalizer system at all. However, that doesn't mean your LO might not take notice of wins against strong players and manually adjust a player's handicap.

Without going into details, for 8 ball your handicap is essentially your average innings per game, and in 9 ball it is your average balls per inning.

BTW you obviously know who I am but I don't know your screen name. Shoot me a message on facebook if you want!

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

For whatever its worth, APA Operator I apologize if you feel I insulted you. That was not my intention and I wish you recognized that.

I have been in the APA for 23 years +. It has become extremely tiresome to listen to some of the things LO's say. I didn't mean to take that out on you.

I would value further conversation on the topic.

Hope that works for you.

KMRUNOUT

 

[lorider]

For whatever its worth, APA Operator I apologize if you feel I insulted you. That was not my intention and I wish you recognized that.

I have been in the APA for 23 years +. It has become extremely tiresome to listen to some of the things LO's say. I didn't mean to take that out on you.

I would value further conversation on the topic.

Hope that works for you.

KMRUNOUT

Nice post. :thumbup:

I would not say I am bed buddies with my lo.but we are very friendly to each other. Sometimes I may not text him for a couple weeks and sometimes I have texted him 3/4 times a day for a couple days straight and he always gets back to me in a timely manner if he is busy and gets back immediately if he is not.

Although he is friendly and very approachable he is strictly by the book as far as rules go and I respect that. I know he has visited this forum I dont know if he has ever posted on here. I also know that people in the main office read this forum every now and then and would really like their input on issues that have been brought up on here.

But we know that would not turn out well lol.

 

[lorider]

For whatever its worth, APA Operator I apologize if you feel I insulted you. That was not my intention and I wish you recognized that.

I have been in the APA for 23 years +. It has become extremely tiresome to listen to some of the things LO's say. I didn't mean to take that out on you.

I would value further conversation on the topic.

Hope that works for you.

KMRUNOUT

23 years in apa huh ? Got a couple questions if you don't mind . :grin-square:

How many matches do you have in apa ? How many times have you been to nationals ?

 

[KMRUNOUT]

23 years in apa huh ? Got a couple questions if you don't mind . :grin-square:



How many matches do you have in apa ? How many times have you been to nationals ?

Haha yup. Feel free to ask away. I'm not sure how many matches I have, but probably in the 1500-1800 neighborhood haha! Too many. For teams I've been to nationals twice. As many know, bringing an honest team to Vegas is no easy task. Plus I love teaching my players...so I'm pretty much a factory for higher skill levels. For singles I've gone many times, not sure how many. Same for Masters. Almost every year for a while now. Masters is my favorite tourney of any tourney for the whole year. I do like the singles a lot too!

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

 

[lorider]

Haha yup. Feel free to ask away. I'm not sure how many matches I have, but probably in the 1500-1800 neighborhood haha! Too many. For teams I've been to nationals twice. As many know, bringing an honest team to Vegas is no easy task. Plus I love teaching my players...so I'm pretty much a factory for higher skill levels. For singles I've gone many times, not sure how many. Same for Masters. Almost every year for a while now. Masters is my favorite tourney of any tourney for the whole year. I do like the singles a lot too!

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

Thanks for the reply. Well I must have pretty honest teams lol. I have been to team nationals once so far . Been in apa 8 years now and approaching 1400 matches. We owe our trip to having arguably the best player in town on our team at the time. Heck in the cities people were saying he was too good to play apa lol..

Never been in singles although I came close once. I went undefeated al the way to the finals in a regional only to loss hill- hill. I did not even go the last regional although I qualified. I was raised to a 6 the month before the tournament and I felt it would be a waste of time and money to travel and compete when th established 6's. Actually I was raised just before the tournament the other 2 previous times I qualified also lol.

I qualified for the next regional and seriously thinking about going as i feel my chances are better at nationals that way now rather than trying to go the team route. I also play masters but with me being a 5 and holding my team back I seriously doubt that team ever qualifies either lol.

Again thanks for the response. I am always interested in learning about other league players experiences .

 

[dogginda9]

Ok no worries here. I really don't know why your LO would tell you that. Maybe he explained it wrong or you misunderstood. I know there is a very specific situation in which your win % is a factor, but the rank of your opponent is not part of the Equalizer system at all. However, that doesn't mean your LO might not take notice of wins against strong players and manually adjust a player's handicap.

Without going into details, for 8 ball your handicap is essentially your average innings per game, and in 9 ball it is your average balls per inning.

BTW you obviously know who I am but I don't know your screen name. Shoot me a message on facebook if you want!

KMRUNOUT

Hey Kerry. No worries. Not really worth taking the discussion any further since our info is the exact opposite of each others. It does make for entertaining internet discussions though sometimes.:wink: Hope to see you in Vegas again next year.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

Hey Kerry. No worries. Not really worth taking the discussion any further since our info is the exact opposite of each others. It does make for entertaining internet discussions though sometimes.:wink: Hope to see you in Vegas again next year.

Well as long as you are anonymous to me, I will have no way of knowing if I see you in Vegas or anywhere else lol. I'd say perhaps a better excuse to not go further with the conversation is our very different approach to science and obtaining information about things. If our info conflicts, for me that would be the number one reason to continue conversation. Obviously one of us has the wrong info. While I'm pretty certain in this case it isn't me, that would very much compel me to get the right info; or reinvestigate the info I have. I like to know the truth.

But whatever works for you! I'll look forward to having no idea whether I saw you in Vegas or not, but I hope you enjoy your trip!

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums

 

[Shawn Armstrong]

How would you have worded that idea?

KMRUNOUT

“Sorry, but this post I'm replying to is another example of APA league operators showing that logic is an extremely rare commodity in that position.”

Your comments seem very cut and dry. Black and white. If someone doesn’t answer something to your satisfaction, they’re dismissed as illogical. Perhaps their answer doesn’t meet your criteria of a good, logical response. The old expression “seek first to understand, and then to be understood” applies here. If you don’t like his response, ask questions. But insulting someone’s intelligence, and then making a generalization about every LO isn’t constructive.

 

[APA Operator]

How would you have worded that idea?

KMRUNOUT

I'll take a shot at that. How about "As is often the case, I fail to see the logic in a statement made by an APA LO"?

Just because you don't understand the logic, it doesn't necessarily mean there is none, or that the person making the statement is incapable of logical thinking or expression. In other words, your understanding is sufficient, but not necessary, for the statement to be logical.

By saying you don't understand the logic, you open the door to a conversation about why that is so. I have some thoughts on that, as well as some responses the the other parts of your original reply to my post. Unfortunately, right now is a very busy time for most of us, as sessions are ending and we're dealing with playoffs, awards, and other session-ending stuff. So it may be a few days before I can put those thoughts into a suitable form for this forum.

 

[lorider]

I'll take a shot at that. How about "As is often the case, I fail to see the logic in a statement made by an APA LO"?

Just because you don't understand the logic, it doesn't necessarily mean there is none, or that the person making the statement is incapable of logical thinking or expression. In other words, your understanding is sufficient, but not necessary, for the statement to be logical.

By saying you don't understand the logic, you open the door to a conversation about why that is so. I have some thoughts on that, as well as some responses the the other parts of your original reply to my post. Unfortunately, right now is a very busy time for most of us, as sessions are ending and we're dealing with playoffs, awards, and other session-ending stuff. So it may be a few days before I can put those thoughts into a suitable form for this forum.

Your response is full of logic. Just could not resist .:grin-square:

Looking forward to your opinion on this and other topics concerning apa.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

“Sorry, but this post I'm replying to is another example of APA league operators showing that logic is an extremely rare commodity in that position.”



Your comments seem very cut and dry. Black and white. If someone doesn’t answer something to your satisfaction, they’re dismissed as illogical. Perhaps their answer doesn’t meet your criteria of a good, logical response. The old expression “seek first to understand, and then to be understood” applies here. If you don’t like his response, ask questions. But insulting someone’s intelligence, and then making a generalization about every LO isn’t constructive.

Ok Shawn thanks for your perspective. I did however ask how you would word the idea. I would have loved to hear your answer to that. Sometimes asking questions works, sometimes it doesn't.

Take care,

KMRUNOUT


Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums