APA Needs to re-examine the handicap system!
- Thread starter Brozif
- Start date
If thats the case then the handicap system is flawed IMHO. The players handicap and winning % should be calculated into the formula as well.
I mean a decent 4 should be a weaker 2 in 9-ball 95% of the time. sometimes 21-8 sometimes 18-2. A weaker 2 will not be able to play effective safeties or get out on one played against them, plus make the more difficult shots without help. This should result in ball in hand for the 4 multiple time throughout the game. A decent four should be able to run a few balls on an open table with bih.
That same decent 4 probably cant shoot as a 5. In my league the s/l 5 seems to be the tipping point where the other team will throw better players up against. What i mean is that 5's can get the occasionally break and run on a open table or can run out 4-6 balls on an open rack of 9, taking most of the point from that rack and getting the break. SO to counter that most teams match up with other 5's or 6's that can do the same. So that decent four that goes up to a 5 because he/she beat up on a few weaker 2's is now at a huge disadvantage against a true 5/6.
theycallmerock
Registered
Just curious, how exactly does someone get CAUGHT sandbagging? There would have to be some hard evidence that the person threw a given match or missed shots and ran up innings. So someone with high credibility to the league (LO, division rep) would have to personally witness someone admit to this to really CATCH someone sandbagging in a given match. I see how you could catch someone being underranked if they are an S/L 5 in APA and are cashing in champion level tournaments elsewhere, but to actually catch someone sandbagging in a given night seems quite difficult.
theycallmerock
Registered
Although no officially APA, I have played in a money league that uses APA handicaps, rules, and format but the operator of the league deems certain people at the handicap 8. The league also allows for a limit of 24 rather than 23. Worked pretty good. Still doesnt eliminate any sandbagging, but people will always find their way around any system.
This is a good post and a subject that has been sticking in my craw for some time now. I have always wondered how many players over the years they have "moved up" a level or DQ'ed for shooting a few matches over your skill level at Nationals. Let me tell you, in the past two weeks I have been shooting probably two skill levels over my rating. It happens to us all at one time or another. Keep in mind though that three weeks ago I couldn't hit my d*ck with a Claymore mine
. And in a week from now I may not be able to hit my ass with a hand grenade :sorry:. So if I'm at Nationals and I shoot a match really well, get on the "sandbagger watch" list, get watched shooting my next match and shoot very well again, I could be unfairly raised. Then for the rest of the tourney and 3/4 of the way through the next session (or longer), I get my head handed to me because I'm now at a skill level to which I cannot compete with. Now I fully understand the NEED to make judgement calls on players abilities, but I too am sure that many have probably be wrongly "adjusted" simply for having a few very well played matches in a row, like we ALL do from time to time.IMO, the only way you can accurately judge a persons ability is to have watched them play on many occasions and/or know them personally. A couple of matches here and there will not be a good barometer on how good/bad that person can play.
It has always been my stance that this issue NEEDS to be dealt with at weekly league level/city championships/regionals so the trip to Vegas can be a more enjoyable experience for all. But then......you have the LO's like the one I have
that is a part of the problem rather than the solution.Maniac
For me, it does take first-hand evidence. That usually means someone who played on a team with this person or who I assigned to watch them reporting it and being willing to sign an affidavit. Not "I think" stuff, but "he said", "he told me to do..." stuff. Second-hand ("I heard him") reports from someone who may have an agenda don't count as first-hand evidence, so that kind of stuff results in heavy scrutiny of skill levels, but doesn't qualify as being caught.
This is a good post and a subject that has been sticking in my craw for some time now. I have always wondered how many players over the years they have "moved up" a level or DQ'ed for shooting a few matches over your skill level at Nationals. Let me tell you, in the past two weeks I have been shooting probably two skill levels over my rating. It happens to us all at one time or another. Keep in mind though that three weeks ago I couldn't hit my d*ck with a Claymore mine
IMO, the only way you can accurately judge a persons ability is to have watched them play on many occasions and/or know them personally. A couple of matches here and there will not be a good barometer on how good/bad that person can play.
It has always been my stance that this issue NEEDS to be dealt with at weekly league level/city championships/regionals so the trip to Vegas can be a more enjoyable experience for all. But then......you have the LO's like the one I have
Maniac
It's a really tricky problem, assessing players' abilities and trying to determine who is just having a great run and who deserves to be promoted in the span of a few matches at a national tournament. APA does have a few things to help, though. First, they have the score sheets for every team at the tournament and their opponents from the session they qualified through the end of Spring Session, and they have every player's history of scores in their computer system. That gives them a LOT of information on the team prior to the event, and they spend the time between the Local Team Championships and National Team Championships (about two months) "getting to know" the teams.
The other thing they have is the reputation of the league area represented by each team. This is huge. If the operator has a reputation for not allowing sandbaggers to get out of his/her area, a player who shoots a great match might get the benefit of the doubt. A few years ago I had a 9-Ball player go on the run of his life, a 5 who shot like a 7 or better for three straight rounds. APA wasn't as concerned about him as they might have been had he come from a different area, because they know I police my area pretty well. He did eventually go up on his own.
Still, with all the data they have and the time they spend preparing, it is a very difficult task. Do they get it wrong sometimes? Probably, on the individual player side. But I can guarantee you that by the time they get to the DQ point with a team, it is well deserved. They tend to err on the conservative side with the DQ's.
Im in this boat now and if you didnt know me or my situtaion I would probably be labeled a sandbagger. During regular league i play 1-2 nights a week and when I shoot i'm a ok 4. But come playoff time, the cups, cities me and most of my team put in a ton of table time the week before so I usually shoot better. If you look at my record during the fall session i was sitting on about 25 % as a 4 in 9 ball between to teams. In the playoffs i beat a 6 15-5 and a 4 18-2 then a few weeks later in the money cup I beat a 5 18-2 in the 5th match to advance lost to a 4 15-5 and beat a 4 15-5 in the final round. Again before the 2 playoff weeks i was hitting balls, we play on Sunday afternoons so friday night, saturday and a little sunday morning i put in some decent table time. The week before money cup we practiced 3-4 hours a night for 6 days straight.
I got raised 2 months ago to a 5 because I get written-up due to my play in the money cup by the first team because i beat their 5. They failed to mention the 5 was a 23 year old kid who was so nervous that when he went to brake after winning the lag is hand was shaking so bad me miscued 3 attempts in a row on the brake. I go up but my winning percentage is below 50% as a 4. Like i said if you didnt know me and just saw my scoring pattern you would call me a bagger all day long because i lose a good amount during regular season but the win big a good amount of time during playoffs, and cups because i put the table time in. I'm not sandbaging its just that during regular session I dont have the time to put in the table to to be consistent.
Just because someone shoots good for a match or two I for one don't think that they are a sandbagger. I have seen many players shoot well for short periods of time in our area and I don't think any one of them are sandbaggers. Some practice more, some focus more, some just simply play well under pressure. Just because you happen to shoot better when it matters does not make you a sandbagger.
But that being said, what is your actual true skill level. It seems like you should have 2 skill levels. One for league play and one, a bit higher, for tournament play. If you consistantly (because you practice more as you said) shoot like a 5 when the money or trips are on the line, doesn't that make your true skill level a 5 when playing in those tounrnaments.
In my opinion, if you shoot consistantly better in tournaments then you do in league, you should be playing the tournaments at a higher skill level. Otherwise you have a an advantage over everyone else that is playing at their true skill levels.
Just my opinion - tar and feather me if you want to.
Leagueguy
Last edited:
That is the problem our team is facing now. One player moved up prior to the LTC and two during the LTC. Now myself and another shooter are closing in on becoming SL7's. We simply have outgrown the APA and have to change leagues in the Summer session just to keep our team together.
I like(d) the APA format outside the modified-single elimination tournaments. The modified-single elimination format makes the first round completely meaningless. You might as well flip a coin or lag for a win. We intentionally threw a match at the last LTC just so we wouldn't have to return at 9:00am the following day. Last weekend I went hill/hill in a singles final only to nearly beaten by a player with a loss. I was too impaired by 1:00am and shouldn't have allowed him on the hill, but the point is he should have to win two matches coming from the losers bracket against an undefeated player. If the roles were reversed, I would have no problems trying to win two matches even if we had to return the following day.
Hopefully the APA is the only league playing this format. Before the APA, I never heard of such nonsense.
It shouldn't be possible according to our LO. I had to call ours because two of our players moved up while we where on a bye week. The deal was the APA gods didn't figure in our LTC results until a week or two after the tournament. We lost our last match (or we would have been DQ'ed), but since we where out, they didn't enter our results on the spot.
The above was speculation, see post #95 for the explanation.
Last edited:
The APA modified format was implement for good reasons. The APA Nationals uses this format, therefore most local areas use it as well for consistency so players will be used to it in nationals.
The APA Nationals are TOO big to have full double elimination format. As it is now, matches run almost round the clock for nealy 6 straight days. A full double would take much longer. And since the APA has teams coming from all around the US, Canada & Japan to run a single elimination format would really suck (you get to vegas, lose and done). Therefore, they have this format to guarantee each team at least 2 matches.
As far as intentionally dumping your 1st match. That's your call; but you'll have to win more from the other side of the board to win it.
You dump so you don't have to come back till a certain time. What???
You are there to play pool - that's how tournaments go. How would you like a full double at nationals then? Would you complain about the match times and how often you have to play or would you dump and go home?
Why bother playing then?
s-bagging
When a player wins - that player is happy. The recipient of the loss is unhappy.
In most amateur leagues, when someone doesn’t win (gets crushed), then the opponent is called a sandbagger and they complain; but when it’s the other way around that player never considers themselves a s-bagger.
There’s too much talk about s-baggin in league pool. I think more people like to claim they are a sandbagger than actually being one.
It’s rare when there’s a player that’s 2 skill levels off from where they should be. If they are off one s/l, that’s no biggie; as I’m sure they fluctuate time-to-time (that’s what the APA format allows for).
But players actually bagging that well to be completely intentional all the time……….To that I say – no amateur player is that good.
While I’m not going to deny that it does happen; I’ve seen that it’s more BS talk than actually happening.
JMO from years of observing & playing leagues.
Again, let’s not get into bashing here. Let’s hear suggestions / recommendations to make the change / improvements.
When a player wins - that player is happy. The recipient of the loss is unhappy.
In most amateur leagues, when someone doesn’t win (gets crushed), then the opponent is called a sandbagger and they complain; but when it’s the other way around that player never considers themselves a s-bagger.
There’s too much talk about s-baggin in league pool. I think more people like to claim they are a sandbagger than actually being one.
It’s rare when there’s a player that’s 2 skill levels off from where they should be. If they are off one s/l, that’s no biggie; as I’m sure they fluctuate time-to-time (that’s what the APA format allows for).
But players actually bagging that well to be completely intentional all the time……….To that I say – no amateur player is that good.
While I’m not going to deny that it does happen; I’ve seen that it’s more BS talk than actually happening.
JMO from years of observing & playing leagues.
Again, let’s not get into bashing here. Let’s hear suggestions / recommendations to make the change / improvements.
The first thing you need to understand is that league play and tournament play are scored in two different programs, using two different databases. There is always a lag (could be just a few minutes, or a few days, or a few weeks, but a lag nonetheless) between when you play a match in a tournament and when the results of that match make it into the weekly league software.
It is also possible for you to advance from one tournament to the next, never play at a higher skill level in between, and have to play at a higher skill level in the next tournament. Here's how that works. When you qualify for a singles tournament, your record gets sent to the national office straight from the tournament database. The very last match you shot when you qualified may be the one that put you over the top to a new skill level. However, because of the lag I described above, you may have another match or two in the weekly league database, and those matches might keep your skill level down when combined with the tournament scores. Then you go to the tournament you qualified for, and your record there is based on where you were when you qualified. Guess what? You now have to play at the higher level.
You may think "well, that's stupid, they should include all the matches I played between the tournaments." If they do that, how many matches do you think people will be winning between the tournaments?
It can work that way for team events too. At LTC, we use your best session-ending record from the session the team qualified to the end of Spring. Those session-ending records may have tri-cup scores that make you a skill level higher. In other words, had the tri-cup gone one more round, you would have played at a higher skill level that round. In the mean time, the tri-cup scores get combined with scores you shot at the beginning of the subsequent session (scores not in the tournament database) and you don't go up in weekly play. When LTC rolls around, you have to play at a skill level higher than you've ever played before in your life.
Before anyone starts thinking all the 2's and 3's got raised before a singles regional, consider that it's possible there weren't enough 2's and 3's to make a bracket (gotta have at least 6, I think) at THAT regional, so perhaps the 2's and 3's had to go play somewhere else.
If it is the same as a leaked formula years ago, your SL is based only on your 10 lowest inning wins in your last 20 matches. Others are thrown out and not calculated. There are no head-2-head comparisons.
There is also an adjusted total between skill levels (think tenths) that uses your SL winning percentage (and is used as an innings cap). The only way to drop a SL once you go up is to have a losing winning percentage at that SL.
NOTE: This was an 8-ball formula and may have been fabricated.
Last edited:
I realize doubles would take more time or tables. Bring it on! Tournaments are designed to be played that way IMO. One bad game/match, and see ya without another chance? Na, don't like it.
We dumped round one at our LTC because of a work conflict. We only had 5 eligible players going in and at 9:00am the following day we only would have had four players, a forfeit and a 19 point ceiling. We would have been screwed. At 1:00pm we were full strength.
Last edited:
Thank you for taking the time to explain this.
OK Operator, I can buy that, BUT. There was at least 4 months between my qualifing and the tournament. There was about 2 months from the qualifier to the end of the session. Maybe 6-7 weeks. My memory is a little fuzzy on the time. It should not take 4 months to readjust my SL!!!!! And I will also telly you the bumping of skill levels was a common theme at the Vegas qualifier. I spoke to at least 5 individuals who were bumped similarly. Why were there no 3's or 2's at the qualifier? I feel the Tournament Director had some input so's to make the Qualifier simpler.
Good Lord he needed simple. The TD was the single most inept, stupid moron to ever run a tournament. Hell he didn't even show up on time. He was 45 minuits late. That is another sad story in and of itself.
Mark Shuman
Good Lord he needed simple. The TD was the single most inept, stupid moron to ever run a tournament. Hell he didn't even show up on time. He was 45 minuits late. That is another sad story in and of itself.
Mark Shuman
Banks
Banned
It is my understanding that the LO is required to send in certain amounts per nationally qualified persons. If there may have only been a few low SL players, the LO may have gone the cheapskate way and in essence cheated(both the system and the players) to save on money, not just to make it simpler (cuz what's easier than a 4 person bracket?).
For all of the good LO's out there, there will always been dbags just like in everything else.
Aside from other things.. even though you had lost, you could have knocked off some scores that were worse, and then your more recent losses knocked off some of the better scores out of your last 20.
Still, if a handful of others had also been 3s and went up mysteriously, resulting in no 2/3 bracket, I'd call that blatant LO cheating.
In our area, we receive a full list about a month or so before the tournament of all of the players, their skill levels and the amount of spots open in each bracket to go to Vegas. Is that done in your area?