fargo ratings aren't very good or accurate

S

schon267

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
so here is my question/beef with fargo ratings.
fargo has me ranked 18th on the list below, virtually every guy ranked below me plays pool for a living, the majority of which I wouldn't gamble serious against. I don't even know how I got where I'm at? lol I play a few events a year and did good in reno almost 2 years ago now at the bar table champonships. The only thing I know about fargo is that I guess you have to have 500 matches to be rated. 500 of what matches? league? tournies? I sent a fb message 2 weeks ago to the guy that created or started this system to ask him why I'm at where I'm at, no reply as of yet.
I play ok, but not for a living, and I have a full time construction job. so the problem is when I do decide to go play some regional tournament that uses this system, it is way way out of line with regards to the handicap. all based on some guys opinion or system.
anyway, I could use some enlightment on fargo without having to trudge through some long reading. thanks, steve

Top 100 USA - Male

1.Shane Van Boening USA823
2.Mike Dechaine USA798
3.Justin Bergman USA796
4.Rodney Morris USA781
5.Johnny Archer USA781
6.Earl Strickland USA779
7.Skyler Woodward USA778
8.Shawn Putnam USA776
9.Corey Deuel USA773
10.Johnathan Pinegar USA772
11.Dennis Hatch USA769
12.Oscar Dominguez USA767
13.Larry Nevel USA766
14.Josh Roberts USA765
15.Rodrigo Geronimo USA763
16.Billy Thorpe USA762
17.Amar Kang USA760
18.Steve Knoll USA759
19.Justin Hall USA759
20.Jesse Bowman USA756
21.Jeremy Sossei USA756
22.Scott Frost USA756
23.Shane McMinn USA755
24.Chris Bartram USA754
25.Chip Compton USA753
26.Dave Coles Jr USA753
27.Manny Chau USA751
28.Josh O'Neal USA751
29.Jose Parica USA751
30.Charlie Bryant USA749
31.Zion Zvi USA748
32.Shaun Wilkie USA747
33.Shane Winters USA747
34.Stevie Moore USA746
35.Mitch Ellerman USA745
36.John Schmidt USA745
37.Brandon Shuff USA744
38.Danny Smith USA743
39.Chad Vilmont USA743
40.Tony Chohan USA743
41.Brian Deska USA741
42.Max Eberle USA741
43.Joey Gray USA740
44.Eric Moore USA740
45.John Gabriel USA739
46.Robb Saez USA739
47.Mike Davis Jr USA738
48.Santos Sambajon USA738
49.TJ Steinhaus USA738
50.Alex Olinger USA738
51.Taylor Anderson USA737
52.Demetrius Jelatis USA737
53.Tommy Kennedy USA737
54.Jeremy Jones USA737
55.Jesse Engel USA737
56.Dustin Gunia USA736
57.Johnny Kang USA735
58.Tony Robles USA734
59.Donny Mills USA733
60.Ernesto Dominguez USA733
61.Ike Runnels Jr USA732
62.Danny Olson USA732
63.Tom McCluskey USA732
64.Jaynard Orque USA731
65.Rory Hendrickson USA731
66.Jeff Boucher USA730
67.Adam Martin USA730
68.James Davis Sr USA730
69.John Fields USA729
70.Travis Stamper USA729
71.Jeff Beckley USA729
72.Gabe Owen USA729
73.Robert Frost USA729
74.Nelson Oliveira USA728
75.BJ Ussery Jr USA728
76.Chris Mitchell USA726
77.Lee Heuwagen USA725
78.Tom D'Alfonso USA725
79.Randy Jordan USA723
80.David Henson USA723
81.Chris McDaniel USA723
82.Sergio Rivas USA723
83.Brett Stottlemyer USA722
84.Sal Butera USA722
85.Junior Jueco USA721
86.Hunter Lombardo USA721
87.Gil Hernandez USA720
88.Brandon Hallett USA720
89.Chris Byers USA720
90.Sam Cordova USA720
91.Ruben Silva Jr USA720
92.Tom Bourdeon USA718
93.Mark Haddad USA718
94.Adam Smith USA717
95.Beau Runningen USA717
96.Chris Szuter USA716
97.Eddie Abraham USA716
98.Shayne Morrow USA715
99.Scott Tollefson USA715
100.Mark Hatch USA715
 
schon267 said:
[...] I could use some enlightment on fargo without having to trudge through some long reading. thanks, steve[...]
Click to expand...

You have barely enough games to be established, and so yes you may have had an unusually good weekend. If it is out of line more games will fix it. At this point it will be pretty responsive.

You had some good wins over amateurs (e.g.,
7-3 against Kevin Ross, 649, WA;
9-6 against Jeff Boucher, 731, MT;
7-4 against Jerrod Frideras, 681 IA;
7-1 against Mario Castelan, 635, CA)

You beat Justin Bergman 5 to 1
You beat Shane Van Boening 5 to 4
You went to the hill 4-5 against Corey Deuel
You went to the hill 8-9 against Amar Kang

If you don't get more games pretty soon, you'll fall off that list from inactivity
Again, if this play is anomalous, more games will fix it.
 
Last edited:
lol even the players complain about their positions........ ranking a tourney with fargo is almost criminal! inaccurate here, inaccurate there and players end up in positions they dont deserve or they cant fill (own words)! and when its only one who get screwed by fargo, its one too much! some of them play for a living and none of them should be screwed by a innaccurate system!
good to have it and nice to have a look on it........but unfortunatly not working properly!
 
You beat Justin Bergman 5 to 1
You beat Shane Van Boening 5 to 4
You went to the hill 4-5 against Corey Deuel
You went to the hill 8-9 against Amar Kang



I think you play REAL STRONG
 
Ha, your not making a very good case for bashing a system with alot of work and proof behind it. While it may not be perfect as there is no such thing. Theres really not a whole lot to complain about. Those who dont like hadicap events should not play them.
 
Mark Griffin said:
You beat Justin Bergman 5 to 1
You beat Shane Van Boening 5 to 4
You went to the hill 4-5 against Corey Deuel
You went to the hill 8-9 against Amar Kang



I think you play REAL STRONG
Click to expand...

I think if he added some confidance/ heart. He might be a champeeeen.. the king of all 9 ball, the hi priest of a pocket apiece,
 
Mark Griffin said:
You beat Justin Bergman 5 to 1
You beat Shane Van Boening 5 to 4
You went to the hill 4-5 against Corey Deuel
You went to the hill 8-9 against Amar Kang



I think you play REAL STRONG
Click to expand...

This may well be true Mark. However looking at the list we see...

19.Justin Hall USA759, 21.Jeremy Sossei USA756, 22.Scott Frost USA756

24.Chris Bartram USA754, 27.Manny Chau USA751

32.Shaun Wilkie USA747, 34.Stevie Moore USA746, 35.Mitch Ellerman USA745, 36.John Schmidt USA745, 37.Brandon Shuff USA744

46.Robb Saez USA739


53.Tommy Kennedy USA737, 54.Jeremy Jones USA737

58.Tony Robles USA734, 59.Donny Mills USA733, 60.Ernesto Dominguez USA733

83.Brett Stottlemyer USA722

These are just the names that are familiar too me! Some real monsters here. May be not King Kong or Godzilla, but monsters all the same.

The thing with a system is that it can be got around. I know it's early days, but one of the reasons I don't even come to the USA anymore to play is because there always seems to be a way to handicap or tie the hands of the player who has practiced to get better. This is something I now refuse to live with, which is why I've gone back to playing Snooker.

I have no chance of winning (Snooker), but I can test my skills amongst the best without fear of being handicapped out of the running. It's a game where the player either puts up or shuts up... :thumbup:

I hope, in time Fargo develops into the system that benefits all on the list because I miss coming to the USA, especially your events in Vegas Mark! :thumbup:
 
Back in the 90's I started playing a lot of competitive chess. Just starting out with less than 6 rated tournaments under my belt I somehow managed to get a Masters ELO ranking (just a qwirk in the calculations) by beating a chess Master in a tourney where I just played WAY over my level. The ranking only lasted for a couple months, but I ENJOYED it while I could - one of the highlights of my life. You should enjoy your success too.

P.S. I USED to be able to replay from memory move-by-move my wins over the Master, as black with Alekhines Defense (smirked that I would dare try that). Chess at a higher level is mostly a game of mind memory (and some instinct), pool's a game of muscle memory (and some instinct).
 
Last edited:
Fargo Rate

Mike,

I am remiss for not starting my own thread sooner. I've been meaning to.

Quite simply, Fargo Rate is the greatest clocking innovation that's ever hit the pool world.

There are many thousands of people that read these forums and lord knows it's impossible to unanimous agreement on anything. The fact remains though that while if you searched long and hard you might find a few players rated slightly higher than someone they wouldn't match up with, that is the exception, not the rule, and there are good logical reasons behind that which will be adjusted and smoothed out with further play.

I'm not sure what the future holds. Maybe a better definition of professional. Maybe improved tournament turnouts because the better players can still maintain an edge, and sandbagging is prevented while turnout is encouraged. Maybe people striving to get better so they can see their name in lights. And I'm sure you have other ideas behind it as well. But to me, this is the coolest breakthrough in pool since I've been a player.

One question- how do you input all of this data? Do you have to do this all manually? How much time does it take? It seems like you have put a ton of sweat into this. Well, we appreciate it. It's pretty cool. For the first time ever we can truly quantify some of the differences between the elite versus top amateurs and so much more.

Keep up the great work and thanks again.

PS- if someone knows how to start a thread with a poll about whether they like Fargo Rate, yes or no (not a biased question), I'd be interested to see the results. I'd be voting a resounding 'yes' and think that 80-90%+ would agree. Maybe you should run for president???

Demetrius
 
chess

slach said:
Back in the 90's I started playing a lot of competitive chess. Just starting out with less than 6 rated tournaments under my belt I somehow managed to get a Masters ELO ranking (just a qwirk in the calculations) by beating a chess Master in a tourney where I just played WAY over my level. The ranking only lasted for a couple months, but I ENJOYED it while I could - one of the highlights of my life. You should enjoy your success too.

P.S. I USED to be able to replay from memory move-by-move my wins over the Master, as black with Alekhines Defense (smirked that I would dare try that). Chess at a higher level is mostly a game of mind memory (and some instinct), pool's a game of muscle memory (and some instinct).
Click to expand...

That's cool. I'm teaching my kids chess. They just learned the Alekhine, and we watched a game of Nakamura vs. Schrantz (2011) in which white drew with the four pawns attack. Just had to share. I can't wait to watch the world championship games, they just kicked off so I'll have to look them up. Have fun!
 
pmac666 said:
lol even the players complain about their positions........ ranking a tourney with fargo is almost criminal! inaccurate here, inaccurate there and players end up in positions they dont deserve or they cant fill (own words)! and when its only one who get screwed by fargo, its one too much! some of them play for a living and none of them should be screwed by a innaccurate system!
good to have it and nice to have a look on it........but unfortunatly not working properly!
Click to expand...

So, Mike posts his results and even after that you sit here and say he's getting screwed? What would YOU rate somebody with those results?

Democrat much?
Jason
 
jasonlaus said:
So, Mike posts his results and even after that you sit here and say he's getting screwed? What would YOU rate somebody with those results?

Democrat much?
Jason
Click to expand...

lol i already checked that mike comes up with alot numbers to back up and i dont doubt that, i partly doubt the result of all that math! and as we see, its not only me......
but what im talking to u.......ure last comment was the last confirmation that ure an ignorant idiot!
 
pmac666 said:
lol i already checked that mike comes up with alot numbers to back up and i dont doubt that, i partly doubt the result of all that math! and as we see, its not only me......
but what im talking to u.......ure last comment was the last confirmation that ure an ignorant idiot!
Click to expand...

Funny that you would accuse another of an intelligence deficit. Your post is unintelligible.

But seriously, numbers don't lie. Based on the matches the folks on the list played and their performance therein, that is how that shit shakes out. No debate.

Is it the 100% 'true truth' of those participants' skill levels in relation to each other? Hellfukno.

How the hell can you have guaranteed accurate information, when you only have .0000008333% of data?

Wait, oh...I thought this was another global warming thread.
 
Black-Balled said:
Funny that you would accuse another of an intelligence deficit. Your post is unintelligible.

But seriously, numbers don't lie. Based on the matches the folks on the list played and their performance therein, that is how that shit shakes out. No debate.

Is it the 100% 'true truth' of those participants' skill levels in relation to each other? Hellfukno.

How the hell can you have guaranteed accurate information, when you only have .0000008333% of data?

Wait, oh...I thought this was another global warming thread.
Click to expand...

very correct, numbers dont lie....... but how useful are those numbers when they dont include in what conditions the players are playing? adding to that, its pretty much meaningless if a match ends 9 - 2 or 9 - 7, the win counts, nothing else!
i meantioned it elsewhere and got no answer, how does fargo fit with the betting odds for mosconi? someone here told me fargo shows the best probabilities for a match, so why the odds are so far away from fargo? arent odds probabilities?
and please, no disrespect for the makers, but this is a forum, and isnt a forum about discussing different topics and opinions? and this is only my opinion, i dont wanna build walls........:grin-square:
 
pmac666 said:
very correct, numbers dont lie....... but how useful are those numbers when they dont include in what conditions the players are playing? adding to that, its pretty much meaningless if a match ends 9 - 2 or 9 - 7, the win counts, nothing else!
i meantioned it elsewhere and got no answer, how does fargo fit with the betting odds for mosconi? someone here told me fargo shows the best probabilities for a match, so why the odds are so far away from fargo? arent odds probabilities?
and please, no disrespect for the makers, but this is a forum, and isnt a forum about discussing different topics and opinions? and this is only my opinion, i dont wanna build walls........:grin-square:
Click to expand...

So 2 guys play the same guy, both lose...one 9-8 and one 9-0 ant both losers get the same Fargorate ?

I am not sold on global warming.
 
Black-Balled said:
So 2 guys play the same guy, both lose...one 9-8 and one 9-0 ant both losers get the same Fargorate ?

I am not sold on global warming.
Click to expand...

so, 2 guys playing 2 different tourneys, the one is winning a 2k barable event, the other world 9 ball? should they both get rated the same way?
 
Way off topic, but there's a very old. little known (almost a secret) classic chess book by Aron Nimzowitsch called 'My System' which is simply fantastic. Kind of like a pool lesson with Scott Lee that just transforms the way you play. HIGHLY recommended, if your kids have the motivation to absorb this kind of stuff they'll be way ahead of the pack in their chess conquests. I pretty much owe my meager successes in chess to this book.

Tin Man said:
That's cool. I'm teaching my kids chess. They just learned the Alekhine, and we watched a game of Nakamura vs. Schrantz (2011) in which white drew with the four pawns attack. Just had to share. I can't wait to watch the world championship games, they just kicked off so I'll have to look them up. Have fun!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top