Are tournament handicaps similar to welfare?

[lfigueroa]

I don't think anyone has a problem with donating once in awhile to play in an open event, if nothing else just to see where they stand. But donating week after week to an event where you have no shot sure doesn't make sense.

I guess if it were me, I'd try and hold two, perhaps three mini-tournaments concurrently. One for open, for for mid-range, and for beginners, with the proviso that there needs to be some minimum number of players in a division to even bother holding it. Then, in each division you could perhaps have small handicaps to even things out.

IMO, the whole thing is about getting out and competing, with the lesser player feeling they have some kind of shot and the better player not feeling like they're giving away the farm.

Lou Figueroa

 

[VIProfessor]

I see both sides of it, and I more than sympathize with those who have issues with the profusion of handicapped tournaments, but we have to look at the bottom line. At the end of the day, the unavoidable fact is that most players in the various poolrooms and bars of our great land are simply not dedicated enough to donate dead money week in week out for months and years in the hope that they will eventually compete with the best. Furthermore, the population of players with the dedication, talent and time to climb that hill is too small to support the many weekly tournaments that exist. Lastly, it is from the general population of recreational and league players (and their children!) that the few talented and obsessed individuals arise to enter the upper echelons of the sport.

In short, despite the negatives that arise from sandbagging and the "disincentives" to improve, handicapping is probably the best currently available method for keeping a healthy stock of fish in the water. Room owners cannot stay in business by hostling weekly tournaments in which the list of entrants inevitably dwindles down to the area's few best players who battle it out with grim intensity while sipping on water and the occasional Red Bull. And if there's no business, there's no show.

P.S.--If your son gambles, playing lesser players with big spots in tournaments should give him some great experience that should help him when matching up. At the very least, he'll have a fairly precise idea of what he can give up and what he can't. He can also learn and refine the little tricks of table management that are so important when giving up a spot, and he'll learn how to outrun the nuts.

 

[Dockter]

I don't think anyone has a problem with donating once in awhile to play in an open event, if nothing else just to see where they stand. But donating week after week to an event where you have no shot sure doesn't make sense.

I guess if it were me, I'd try and hold two, perhaps three mini-tournaments concurrently. One for open, for for mid-range, and for beginners, with the proviso that there needs to be some minimum number of players in a division to even bother holding it. Then, in each division you could perhaps have small handicaps to even things out.

IMO, the whole thing is about getting out and competing, with the lesser player feeling they have some kind of shot and the better player not feeling like they're giving away the farm.

Lou Figueroa

Couldn't agree more. Everyone likes to say getting beat is how you get better and every good player takes their knocks at the start. The problem is most players on here really love the game. Most aren't the type that just go out and want to play on a league and a couple tournaments a year with friends. It's just another small hobby in most players life. These players aren't going to say "Wow, I got my ass kicked, I better get out and practice" they are going to say " Well that was a waste of money" and not return the following year. As with any sport the lower level players are going to be the biggest majority of the player base. If you want pool to grow you are going to have to be accepting and figure out a way to get them more involved rather then discourage them.

 

[cueman]

Thanks for all the great input. Another thing that I have not mentioned is that most of the handicap tournaments have a limit on how good someone can be and be allowed to play. I think handicap tournaments are here to stay, but I do feel like there should still be some around than are really short race open tournaments. The A+ players that cannot beat the top pros or afford the $500 entries to play Archer or Strickland have no where to play for the most part.

It is like they get booted out of competition because they got too good, but not good enough to be a national champion class of player. I think short races would give everyone a chance. I beat Archer in a short race to 4 and it felt good. It would not have happened in a longer race.