The inevitable result of "excessive skill" in a handicapped league

[APA Operator]

For the beginning of this discussion, see this thread:

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=216302

Let's get to the meat of the issue now.

So let's try something a little different. Since my answers to your questions doesn't put the matter to rest, let's try this. You answer your own questions (substituting in APA). So here you go.

Sure, I'll answer my questions.

1) Why does the APA have a (team) handicap limit?
Because if we didn't, the strongest players would form super teams and dominate the league until everyone else decided to quit.

2) Why penalize teams for exceeding that limit (usually preventing all 5 players from being able to play)?
That's not really the question, but instead of complaining that you're twisting the words I'll just answer it. We penalize teams for exceeding the limit because if we didn't, it would be pointless to have a limit in the first place.

3) If a team can endure an "excessive skill" penalty and still be competitive, what does that say about the APA team?
It says their skill levels could be higher. If they can be competitive with a handicap AND a penalty, they can be competitive with a bigger handicap.

Just in case you or anyone else reading this thread didn't notice, the answers I gave don't have to be APA-specific. The same answers apply to any handicapped league that strives to provide as level a playing field as they can. If you want to claim your answers would be different, fine, demonstrate by giving me your answers and we'll go from there.

Now, here's the part I was trying to get to. If a team can be competitive with a bigger handicap, then they should have a bigger handicap. If they have a bigger handicap, they exceed the handicap limit by a greater amount and are penalized again. Now ask the same question - can they be competitive with the new higher handicap AND the new penalty? If so, apply the logic again (you have to). Eventually they will no longer be competitive. I believe you said that yourself in your initial reply. You just left out the part about the handicaps being wrong if they can endure a penalty and still be competitive (this is also why you decided you needed to switch to tournament play, because in a tournament a team actually COULD get to the end of the tournament before they become non-competitive - we call those teams sandbaggers).

It's not rocket science. If you have to penalize a team for excessive skill, logic dictates that you MUST penalize them such that they are no longer competitive. That's the only way the turing machine of the previous paragraph stops.

But we're not done yet. So you have a team that's not competitive, they can still play, right? Sure. But so can the five APA players who exceed 23. Nobody ever says they can't play. USAPL's five players can play but can't be competitive. APA's five players can play but can't be competitive. That doesn't sound like such a HUGE BONUS to me.

Oh, and I focused on National Tournament because that's where the official rules are defined... Trying to have this discussion based on league play could be even more convoluted because local bylaws can override some official rules. You'd be able to say whatever you want, and could be right. I'd be able to say whatever I wanted, and could be right. And we could both be saying the exact opposite things. Thus, it would bring forth no real conclusions, making this whole banter back and forth even more fruitless.

To me, this looks like mumbo-jumbo. I haven't mentioned bylaws at all. In fact, the only rule I've mentioned is the 23 rule. For the sake of clarity, it's General Rule number 29 in the APA's Official Team Manual for League Years 2010/2011 & 2011/2012. How much more official do you want it to be? It comes from a book with the word "Official" in the title!

I've already mentioned the reason I want to keep this discussion focused on league play. In a tournament, it's possible that a team could come in so low that the cycle of penalize->raise->penalize->raise... won't catch up to them until they're very deep in the tournament. These teams typically are the sandbaggers, and I have no problem at all making them non-competitive as soon as possible. By the way, how low do you think they can be if they don't have to win anything to get into the national tournament? Good luck with that.

One other thing - how on Earth can anything be "more fruitless"?

 

[abie10]

I don't like all the APA bashing. I play in an APA league and enjoy it. Yes, there is sandbagging. Yes, there is complaining but really it's all just stupid.

People complain that the APA is changing rules to make the game profitable for them. So what? Many leagues change rules to make the game better for them and their target market. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

People complain that pool in the APA isn't "real pool." That's fine. You probably won't get much arguments from a lot of people on that point.

Whats worse is that these complaints come from people THAT PLAY IN THE APA! For thousands and thousands of pool players in the United States, APA pool is "real pool." For those same thousands of people, the handicapping system works and makes them happy. It's the people that come in and try to abuse the system that cause all the ruckus.

I have a player that I really look up to in my local APA league. He's a big money player and one of the higher rated players in the league. One week before the playoffs he totally threw a match so his handicap wouldn't be affected as much. We aren't talking missing a couple shots here and there, he threw the match plain and simple. I lost a lot of respect for that guy that day, but it's something that happens all the time.

Simple fact is, if your going to play in a league, have some respect for the other players in it. Just because you are a better player and can exploit the "handicap" doesn't mean you should. This league absolutely is REAL POOL for a ton of pool players in this country and have some respect for that. There are plenty of other opportunities for you out there if you despise a league that much.

 

[btoneill]

All I can say is, if you don't like it, don't play in it. The APA has succesfully built their league to the point where there are over 300k players in it. If it was really that bad, do you think they would have that many players?

Also, I'd like to point out that most of the APA 7's I know HATE playing lower ranks like 2's and 3's. There are a lot of APA teams out there where the high player on the team is a 4. Gee, how much fun would your team of 5 7's have playing against a bunch of 2's and 3's? Who gets to be the "lucky" one that gets to play the 4?

If you really want to play with all your short stop buddies, then play in a non-handicapped league.

Brian

 

[LeagueGuy]

"I have a player that I really look up to in my local APA league. He's a big money player and one of the higher rated players in the league. One week before the playoffs he totally threw a match so his handicap wouldn't be affected as much. We aren't talking missing a couple shots here and there, he threw the match plain and simple. I lost a lot of respect for that guy that day, but it's something that happens all the time."


For the betterment of the league you should be reporting this guy (in writing) to the L.O. No one who is a known "big money" player shuld be competing at less than a 7 or a 9 in 9-ball.

For the system to work properly, sandbaggers cannot win. Otherwise everyone will see it and then think that they have to do it as well. If your L.O. can ensure that the sandbaggers never win anything, your league will be much more enjoyable and more competitive as well.

By reporting him, you become part of the solution, if you don't you are part of the problem.

Just my opinion.

Leagueguy

 

[btoneill]

I will say, I have seen 7's play around with 5's and 6's before in 8-Ball. Of course, this 7 was a 7 in Vegas so he's locked into his handicap for life. But, what he does is, when he knows a player is under ranked, he sort of goads them into beating him, and "beating" him at their full speed. It's not posssible for it to affect his handicap, but it helps get the sandbaggers up to where they should be. And, as for players on his team being affected? Everyone on it knows he does it, and knows he never does it if it will affect the team negatively. He's also the bar owner, so, he has a bit of leway with his team mates anyways, they know what they are getting into when they join his team. They still go to the City tournament just about every session.

 

[NewStroke]

Bill Yard loves the APA. It makes him feel normal.

 

[btoneill]

Bill Yard loves the APA. It makes him feel normal.

It may make him "feel" normal... But by no means does it make him normal!

 

[abie10]

"I have a player that I really look up to in my local APA league. He's a big money player and one of the higher rated players in the league. One week before the playoffs he totally threw a match so his handicap wouldn't be affected as much. We aren't talking missing a couple shots here and there, he threw the match plain and simple. I lost a lot of respect for that guy that day, but it's something that happens all the time."


For the betterment of the league you should be reporting this guy (in writing) to the L.O. No one who is a known "big money" player shuld be competing at less than a 7 or a 9 in 9-ball.

For the system to work properly, sandbaggers cannot win. Otherwise everyone will see it and then think that they have to do it as well. If your L.O. can ensure that the sandbaggers never win anything, your league will be much more enjoyable and more competitive as well.

By reporting him, you become part of the solution, if you don't you are part of the problem.

Just my opinion.

Leagueguy

"Big Money" player may have been a bit of a stretch, simply meant he plays for money on a regular basis. everything you have suggested was also done, reporting is a must in situations like that.

 

[BryanBpool]

I played in the APA for about 8 years. I enjoyed it, for a while.

Once you start hitting the handicap ceilings, its less fun and more BS. Particularly in the 9 Ball (I used that term loosely, as its a game with 9 balls, but it is not 9 ball.) The rules are so skewed against the better player. Couple that with having to run 2x as many balls as most players you will encounter, it can get pretty brutal.

It is a social league. Take it for what it is: A fun night out w/ friends.

IMO, if you are looking to become an 'A' player, I would suggest moving on.

 

[ctyhntr]

Its my impression that the handicap APA 8-ball league is geared towards beginners-intermediate. Higher skilled players should look into APA 9-ball, or leagues geared towards higher skilled player.

FWIW, I met a few APA 8-ball league players in my in-house team 9-ball league. Out of a small sampling of 4 APA 8-ball SL7s, 2 girls ranked as as C+, B, and a B+ in 9-ball.

 

[btoneill]

It is a social league. Take it for what it is: A fun night out w/ friends.

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! And better yet, it's a social league that involves our favorite sport!

 

[skeptic]

1) Why does the APA have a (team) handicap limit?
Because if we didn't, the strongest players would form super teams and dominate the league until everyone else decided to quit.

I play BCA, not APA (I'd consider going back to APA if there were a local league). However, at least in our BCA league there are not handicap limits. There are 2 "super" teams in our league, I believe both have 3 9s and 1 strong 8 (4 man teams). Guess what happens when they play teams like the one I play on which has 1 9, 1 8, and 2 6s. Yup, we get slaughtered. This session we have played both teams once, I managed to eek out 3 wins out of 4 both times, but when our 6s are getting creamed it doesn't matter.

Take a guess which teams always finish the season 1 and 2...

Handicaps are a good equalizer to a point. Once you get a large enough difference in skill levels there is no longer a fair way to handicap the game to make it even.

 

[btoneill]

Handicaps are a good equalizer to a point. Once you get a large enough difference in skill levels there is no longer a fair way to handicap the game to make it even.

The exact point of the 23 rule... Yeah, sometimes it's really freaking annoying, especially when you have several players go up in a session and have trouble meeting it towards the end. But, I'll take that issue over the one you spoke of any day of the week.

Brian

 

[JolietJames]

True but it is our league operator's mission to raise everyone high enough that they can no longer play on teams with their friends. This is done in hopes that those players will now get more people involved in pool and create their own teams thus generating more income for the LOs. The people who go through player's handicaps like a review board are all terrible players who think everyone who has ever beaten them should be a 7. If we still had a BCA league in town I would not go anywhere near the APA.

 

[FLICKit]

1) Why does the APA have a (team) handicap limit?
Because if we didn't, the strongest players would form super teams and dominate the league until everyone else decided to quit.

2) Why penalize teams for exceeding that limit (usually preventing all 5 players from being able to play)?
That's not really the question, but instead of complaining that you're twisting the words I'll just answer it. We penalize teams for exceeding the limit because if we didn't, it would be pointless to have a limit in the first place.

3) If a team can endure an "excessive skill" penalty and still be competitive, what does that say about the APA team?
It says their skill levels could be higher. If they can be competitive with a handicap AND a penalty, they can be competitive with a bigger handicap.

Now, I'll provide comparable answers replacing APA with USAPL.

1) There are many non-handicapped leagues out there and they do well already. Whether that be some BCA Pool Leagues or even local pool leagues or heck even the APA has one. They focus on allowing players to play their best pool always or draw in better and better players so that their teams can win the big prize.

The USAPL has team handicaps to encourage certain levels of competitive play. They even have Advanced Level classification or Open Level classification, which allows the ability to appeal to broader ranges of players. Open Level classification might be fairly close to the APA. Whereas, the Advanced Level classification would appeal to stronger players.

2) Both the APA and USAPL and others have methods of penalizing teams that exceed the team handicap limit.
The USAPL has a very different method of handling this from the APA. What I've been stressing is the benefits of the way that the USAPL handles it. From my experience, it's a very nice solution to some common issues or complaints.
I'll clarify the difference.
In the APA with the following 5 player roster of skill level and players
1. 7 Jim
2. 6 Joe
3. 4 Betty
4. 4 Billy
5. 2 Eva
23 total s/l (right at the team skill level cap)

Up until this point, Jim and Joe win mostly all of their matches, while Eva loses mostly all matches, so it's up to either Betty or Billy, average players, to win 1 of their 2 matches (50%).

Next match, Joe increases from a 6 to a 7, so now their total s/l increases to 24 which is above the APA team skill level cap. At this point, those 5 players can not all play. At least 1 of their players will have to sit out, forfeiting 1 of the 5 possible points (1/5 or 20%). In addition, the player that sits out will not be one of their weaker players, but will definitely have to be at least 1 of their 2 best shooters on the team (Jim or Joe who are both 7's now can no longer both shoot).

That team has been counting on Jim and Joe to both win (for 2 points), but now only 1 of them can play (1 point max). They have to forfeit that 1 match. Also Eva is still losing as normal. Putting them down 0-2.
So with that, their remaining players have to win ALL 100% of their matches which would be highly unlikely.

So this competitive team has 1 player go up a skill level, and now they can't ALL 5 play any longer, and with their remaining 4 they're no longer very competitive.

Now, I'll point out what I've been stressing. This is the benefit of how the USAPL handles a similar situation.
In the USAPL with the following 5 player roster of skill level and players
1. 85 Jimmy
2. 73 Joey
3. 46 Betsy
4. 55 Bill
5. 40 Eve
299 (almost right at the similar open team limit of 300).

If Jimmy and Joey similarly win almost all of their matches.
Now, if Joey goes up 3 points, putting them at 302, which is more than the 300, then...
First and foremost, all 5 of these USA Pool League players can continue to shoot! I see that as a BIG, positive of the USAPL system. Nobody is forced to sit out. They can all 5 shoot and play pool, which is exactly what they traveled there to do. Even if their whole team, went up 3 points, they can still all 5 continue to shoot! This is EXCELLENT!

The players will still have to race to their now higher skill level, which will make it more challenging. And, the opposing teams will have a little added advantage due to the bonus points awarded. So, it's positive for the team, and it's also very good for the opposing team. At this point, neither team will win by cheap forfeits. Instead, all 5 players will have to step to the table and play well to win! This is the kind of competition that I encourage!!!

3) This question has already been answered in the previous paragraph.
In the USAPL it simply says that it's a better competitive solution!

Note: I just picked one scenario above. There are many other scenarios which will also demonstrate the advantages of the USAPL system that I've been pointing to.

Just in case you or anyone else reading this thread didn't notice, the answers I gave don't have to be APA-specific. The same answers apply to any handicapped league that strives to provide as level a playing field as they can. If you want to claim your answers would be different, fine, demonstrate by giving me your answers and we'll go from there.

In contrast, I gave very specific answers. This was done by choice to better demonstrate the positive differences that I've been stressing.

Now, here's the part I was trying to get to. If a team can be competitive with a bigger handicap, then they should have a bigger handicap. If they have a bigger handicap, they exceed the handicap limit by a greater amount and are penalized again. Now ask the same question - can they be competitive with the new higher handicap AND the new penalty? If so, apply the logic again (you have to). Eventually they will no longer be competitive. I believe you said that yourself in your initial reply. You just left out the part about the handicaps being wrong if they can endure a penalty and still be competitive (this is also why you decided you needed to switch to tournament play, because in a tournament a team actually COULD get to the end of the tournament before they become non-competitive - we call those teams sandbaggers).

It's not rocket science. If you have to penalize a team for excessive skill, logic dictates that you MUST penalize them such that they are no longer competitive. That's the only way the turing machine of the previous paragraph stops.

Your logic is quite convoluted and even erroneous at points here.
Coming from your APA point of view, what you are saying may make sense to you, but is definitely not absolute and right...
If you really want to continue down that line of thought, then I can say more about it in the future...
This post is already quite long as it is...

But we're not done yet. So you have a team that's not competitive, they can still play, right? Sure. But so can the five APA players who exceed 23. Nobody ever says they can't play. USAPL's five players can play but can't be competitive. APA's five players can play but can't be competitive. That doesn't sound like such a HUGE BONUS to me.

That's because you keep consistently missing the point. Parts of your statements could be construed as flat out WRONG. As has been stated, the OP of the other thread grasped the concept immediately. Not only do you not, but you keep distorting it. Maybe it's just personal but obvious bias at this point.

Restated very simply... When exceeding the team handicap limit
In APA the same 5 players can't ALL play!
In the USA Pool League the same 5 players can ALL play!

Not to mention that if the APA team can't field 4 players under the 19 team limit, then only 3 of their players can play and must be under 15. Now 2 of their 5 players (2/5) can not play and must forfeit. In the APA, if any of the 3 remaining players lose their match, then the whole thing is over. In this case, if your first player loses, then you're done.
Whereas, in the USA Pool League the same 5 players can ALL 5 play!

A team's competitiveness does not get thrown out the window in the USAPL, simply because they slightly exceed the team limit!!!
That's just a good part of the HUGE BONUS that I am pointing out!
I'm not just talking theoretically or hypothetically about it... I'm talking from personal experiences!
As more and more players test out the USA Pool Leagues for themselves, then they will better understand its advantages.

Until then, they might be susceptible to your APA mindset.

To me, this looks like mumbo-jumbo. I haven't mentioned bylaws at all. In fact, the only rule I've mentioned is the 23 rule. For the sake of clarity, it's General Rule number 29 in the APA's Official Team Manual for League Years 2010/2011 & 2011/2012. How much more official do you want it to be? It comes from a book with the word "Official" in the title!

Yet, your application of the rule keeps getting distorted and even flat out wrong, as exemplified by the previous quoted statement above.

I've already mentioned the reason I want to keep this discussion focused on league play.

I can respect your opinion on that. My point has been as long as it maintains the official rules, and doesn't open the door to confusion by bringing in subrules.

In a tournament, it's possible that a team could come in so low that the cycle of penalize->raise->penalize->raise... won't catch up to them until they're very deep in the tournament. These teams typically are the sandbaggers, and I have no problem at all making them non-competitive as soon as possible. By the way, how low do you think they can be if they don't have to win anything to get into the national tournament? Good luck with that.

The USAPL system has measures to address that. Just like the APA has measures to address sandbagging in their APA National tournament as well.

 

[btoneill]

True but it is our league operator's mission to raise everyone high enough that they can no longer play on teams with their friends. This is done in hopes that those players will now get more people involved in pool and create their own teams thus generating more income for the LOs. The people who go through player's handicaps like a review board are all terrible players who think everyone who has ever beaten them should be a 7. If we still had a BCA league in town I would not go anywhere near the APA.

The handicaps should be just about completely computer generated. The only time a person should ever be involved with it is if there are issues with people complaining about someone being under ranked or if you're hoping to get lowered due to a disability.

If the LO is manually changing handicaps routinely, and you know this for sure, you might want to contact the APA national office.

Brian

 

[the420trooper]

I play BCA, not APA (I'd consider going back to APA if there were a local league). However, at least in our BCA league there are not handicap limits. There are 2 "super" teams in our league, I believe both have 3 9s and 1 strong 8 (4 man teams). Guess what happens when they play teams like the one I play on which has 1 9, 1 8, and 2 6s. Yup, we get slaughtered. This session we have played both teams once, I managed to eek out 3 wins out of 4 both times, but when our 6s are getting creamed it doesn't matter.

Take a guess which teams always finish the season 1 and 2...

Handicaps are a good equalizer to a point. Once you get a large enough difference in skill levels there is no longer a fair way to handicap the game to make it even.

My one session of league pool was in a BCA league, and I was on a pretty stacked "super team". My guys could play because they put in the time to learn to play. When we played teams composed of a bunch of 5's and 6's, we won every time. Why should guys who have less talent, coordination, discipline, and desire have a chance to win? Life isn't 3rd grade where everyone gets a trophy....so why should pool be?

I've never played in an APA league, but I have played a fair amount of pool with all different levels of opponents.

When someone kicked my ass every time, all that meant to me was that I needed to practice more.

I know some APA players who will be lifelong 4's because at their current level of play they have a reasonable chance to beat the 7's...so there's no incentive to improve. If you aren't trying to play your absolute best game, you're wasting your time playing pool, because to me and most serious players, pool is more about striving for perfection than winning. (If you play perfect pool, winning happens automatically.)

 

[LeagueGuy]

True but it is our league operator's mission to raise everyone high enough that they can no longer play on teams with their friends. This is done in hopes that those players will now get more people involved in pool and create their own teams thus generating more income for the LOs. The people who go through player's handicaps like a review board are all terrible players who think everyone who has ever beaten them should be a 7. If we still had a BCA league in town I would not go anywhere near the APA.

A couple of comments on the above.

1) If a L.O. is actually raising players for the SOLE purpose of breaking up teams to get new players in, then they are shooting themsleves in the foot. I know a few L.O. around my area and i do not think they do that. In fact, in our own league, when a player goes up, no one is usually surprised. I think if a L.O. does do that your area, then now is the perfect time to start a competitive league as the majoroty of players would swicth over if that indeed was going on. Keep in mind that someone would have to do the work to get the league off the ground.

2) If you have an APA league and no BCAPL or ACS league, then the APA L.O. must not be doing a bad job. A BCAPL league is easy to sanction (as far as I remember) . It is simply a phone call and then grab 12 or more players to get 4 teams of 3 players off the ground to get it started. If the APA LO was doing a bad job as you suggest, then you would think that someone would have strated some competititon a long time ago.

I do have to say that I am lucky that I play for a great L.O. No one in our area seens to have any trust issues with the handicaps or the payback.

Just my thoughts.

Leagueguy

 

[Williebetmore]

One other thing - how on Earth can anything be "more fruitless"?

APA-O,
You are correct. As long as you are trying to make the results even for all skill levels, then you DON'T have a "real" pool league. You might as well have a coin flipping contest to distribute the money if you don't want skill to be rewarded.

Why on earth would anyone want to play a "game" or "sport" where skill was not rewarded???? Answer: people want to have the illusion of skill without doing the work to develop it. Too bad that so many leagues and tourneys reward such "players."

 

[alphadog]

To be "handicapped" point of non~competitive is not handicapping!
Honestly maybe most are overrated!(the 2,3,4)