This video introduces and explains some ideas and terms that have to do with handicapping tournaments using Fargo Ratings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCO5-IBCKWE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCO5-IBCKWE
Handicapping tournaments with Fargo Ratings
- Thread starter mikepage
- Start date
Mixed Gold teams from nationals went in the other day. Other divisions coming.
Nationals singles has always been unhandicapped, and I have no reason to think that will change
Fargo ratings
I know this would be very far in the future but I think it would be nice if Fargo ratings became the national standard that would be used across the nation for tournament play. I dont see anything that would be wrong with entering data into this system for players that played Pool Leagues so they could obtain a accurate rating that would give them a standing and a reason to play higher level events. Pool is a bunch of Mom and Pop businesses but it would be nice if something would unite more of us under one umbrella and make more tournament play possible.
So do you think it could happen?
I know this would be very far in the future but I think it would be nice if Fargo ratings became the national standard that would be used across the nation for tournament play. I dont see anything that would be wrong with entering data into this system for players that played Pool Leagues so they could obtain a accurate rating that would give them a standing and a reason to play higher level events. Pool is a bunch of Mom and Pop businesses but it would be nice if something would unite more of us under one umbrella and make more tournament play possible.
So do you think it could happen?
There is only one major proprietary handicapping system out there that can potentially stop Fargo from being a National Standard. The APA's Equalizer® system.
APA Equalizer System
I agree. What I wonder is if the win/loss data from those matches since the rules are different would apply? In this way the equalizer system is theirs and the players would have to come over rated by "fargo." This might put them at a temporary disadvantage which might discourage some people from playing but I would hope that this wouldnt get in way.
I dont see the APA losing any marketshare so I would think Equalizer stays where it is but unlikely affects Fargo.
I agree. What I wonder is if the win/loss data from those matches since the rules are different would apply? In this way the equalizer system is theirs and the players would have to come over rated by "fargo." This might put them at a temporary disadvantage which might discourage some people from playing but I would hope that this wouldnt get in way.
I dont see the APA losing any marketshare so I would think Equalizer stays where it is but unlikely affects Fargo.
The win loss data shouldn't be an issue. If you beat someone in 5-2 in APA 8 ball that should have the same bearing on a Fargo rating as a 5-2 victory in a BCA league even though rules differ. It's not like there is a separate Fargo score for BCA rules 8 ball and take what you make. Now 9 ball since it is done by points would have to have some kinda conversion rate (I.e. If I beat someone 46-15 that would equal a 5-2 victory). The biggest issue is that APA is a competitor and not going to input their data or allow its members to convert their data for a correlating fargo score. I would be interested to see what my Fargo rating would be as I have close to 150 matches in 8 +9 in the APA.
If the gold teams were entered....then why has my robustness number not changed ? It is the same as is was after the singles scores were entered over 2months ago.
Thanks for the video. I like the idea of giving TDs a hot, medium and mild choice so you can consistently deal with how far to go to balance the scales.
My one question (which I guess tournament directors and players can comment on), is whether the time it takes should be a factor when the only issue is that it may be too quick (as opposed to taking too long)? In your example, if the race that best fits the desired handicapping is 5-3, why make the race 6-4 (and therefore be "off" on the handicap) just to make sure the 5-3 race isn't finished first? This is a different issue than saying a race is too short or that in a normal race to 5 you never want anyone (no matter how bad) to only have to win one game etc.
My one question (which I guess tournament directors and players can comment on), is whether the time it takes should be a factor when the only issue is that it may be too quick (as opposed to taking too long)? In your example, if the race that best fits the desired handicapping is 5-3, why make the race 6-4 (and therefore be "off" on the handicap) just to make sure the 5-3 race isn't finished first? This is a different issue than saying a race is too short or that in a normal race to 5 you never want anyone (no matter how bad) to only have to win one game etc.
Looks great, I hadn't seen the hot-medium-mild thing or the R-series charts yet.
The problem is that right now most of the people I play with seem to have 0 or close to 0 games in the system, because they only play in local leagues and tournaments. Until that changes FargoRate is fun for looking up pros, but completely unusable for this purpose of handicapping tournaments. There's got to be some easy and accurate way to get people's scores in, and it's not here yet.
I feel like I've bought into the concept enough at this point, but now the practical logistics have to catch up to the concept.
The problem is that right now most of the people I play with seem to have 0 or close to 0 games in the system, because they only play in local leagues and tournaments. Until that changes FargoRate is fun for looking up pros, but completely unusable for this purpose of handicapping tournaments. There's got to be some easy and accurate way to get people's scores in, and it's not here yet.
I feel like I've bought into the concept enough at this point, but now the practical logistics have to catch up to the concept.
As usual, more concern is placed on how to make all pool players even in tournaments rather than creating "Pros Only" events in order to gain some kind of corporate sponsorships to Pro events. Who in the hell would ever put up sponsored money for any event with a bunch of no buddies being handicapped against the real Pros just so they have a chance to win some prize money....in which without a handicapping system....wouldn't stand a chance in hell of even coming near winning any prize money.
Well like my x wife there was going to be a time if I waited long enough we could see eye to eye ,,
Not only that does anyone realy think any player who spends time to be a better player wants to play in a field that brings players closer to them by handicap ,, what's the purpose of practicing to be a better player then when I can get a spot to bring me on par and make it more of a coin flip ,, ya I can see all the pro's running to that
1
I get your point, but there's no reason this couldn't work strictly at the amateur level.
In a pro only event, yes everyone should play even.
FargoRate could add a bracket generator (like Challonge) to the site. It would incorporate the search feature that's already on the site.
So if a weekly handicap tournament decides to use FargoRate. The TD would simply log in, and enter people's names as they sign up. If they are in the system, their rating will automatically populate. If not, they start at the default rating of 525 (??).
As matches are completed, the TD enters the scores, and ratings would adjust in real time.
Sounds super easy on the surface if you're good with that stuff, but I'm sure Mike can point out whatever difficulties may exist.
I've yet to see many handicap tourneys endure long time success being handicapped
The best ones Iv seen is short race turneys that bring what ole corvette would say the variances of short races into play because a short race gives a better chance of a lesser player winning and really any real competitor would much rather win a straight up race than anyone with a spot , infact I don't even count any win I ever had with a spot as a accomplishment
1
Has anyone ever suggested using Fargo to handicap pro events? I think you're fighting a battle that doesn't exist. I agree that pro events should be no handicap.
This offering presumably is for amateur events or, at most, mixed events with amateurs and pros.
And why would pros enter such events? At least in Toronto there are only two real pros here full-time (Morra and Hjorleifson), and Alex when he's in town. What are they going to do - have two or three man tournaments? Instead they play in handicapped open events. The handicaps (not Fargo) give the lesser players at least a chance to win, but the pros usually take the cash. The handicap doesn't actually make it even - and none of Mike's proposed races make it even (only a bit less uneven).
They last here as long as the pool hall doesn't shut down.