Siming Chen vs Donny Mills

BasementDweller said:
My critique of where we are at with Fargo has been pretty much ignored which is telling.

The men's data consists of 8, 9, and 10 ball played with different racking rules and on all different tables giving the men a more "accurate" presentation of their "overall" skill level. Meanwhile, the women get their data coupled to the men by just playing one specific game. Therefore my contention is that their Fargo Rate is more of a 9 Ball rating than it is an overall rating. This is where I think the the slight elevation in rating is coming from.

Some of you need to think about this before commenting that this has been disproven multiple times because it has not!
Click to expand...


It seems what you are arguing is that men don't realize the rating you think they should have against women because men aren't good enough at 9-Ball or lack 9-Ball-specific skills.
 
9BallKY said:
I think this a good point. How can her rating change 8 points in a week? Look how Sky has played over the last several months and his rating has went up 3 or 4 points.

When she played Donny they said she was a 88% favorite to win. In the WPBA, the second rated player was rated at 756. This means she would have been at least a 90-95% favorite over the field. So how if your 95% favorite to win can the rating change that much in such a short time? I know it has to do with the amount of games won.
Click to expand...

I don't know whether Siming was a favorite against the field at all. Probably not. Certainly not 95%
 
9BallKY said:
I think this a good point. How can her rating change 8 points in a week? Look how Sky has played over the last several months and his rating has went up 3 or 4 points.
Click to expand...

I think Sky's rating would have went up quite a bit if Derby complete match results were entered instead of just 1-0 for each match won. He beat the daylights out of everybody until the finals. Most match scores seemed to be between 11-4 and 11-7 vs top tier pros.
 
Mike Page said:
"It seems what you are arguing is that men don't realize the rating you think they should have against women because men aren't good enough at 9-Ball or lack 9-Ball-specific skills."

I think you are being disingenuous here because you know that's not what I'm saying.


Template rack 9 Ball with the one on the spot is a game that can be mastered as Corey Duel showed for the men almost 20 years ago. If there just so happened to be a group of male pros who still only played that version of the game, and they then had their data coupled to everyone else's by playing only that game then their ratings would really not be accurate for all games.

So until there's more crossover between the games for the top women I don't think their Fargo Rates will be an accurate overall rating.

Now of course you have the data to prove me wrong but I haven't seen it yet.
 
mikepage said:
I don't know whether Siming was a favorite against the field at all. Probably not. Certainly not 95%
Click to expand...

If she was a 88% favorite in a set with a 750 player I’m sure the percentage would increase against a 738 player such as Wei. Straight up against the field she may not have been the favorite but in each set she would have to have 90% or above.
 
mikepage said:
It turns out that does not skew things.

Think about it like this.

Imagine we start by deleting ALL games played between men and women. And we first do our optimization for just the men. What would we see?

The men would look like they do now. We always can shift the ratings up or down without affecting things. We could make SVB 900 if we want. Then everyone else would just go up 78 points. But let's leave it the way it is--just the men with SVB at 822.

Now, we optimize just the women. They would look about the way they do now. But we'd have to decide how to shift them up or down. Perhaps we decide to make Siming the same as SVB, 822. Then all the other women would be about 40 points above what you see now and there would be no reason to think a man's rating and a woman's rating can be compared. We just wouldn't know.

So we have Siming at 822, Karen Corr at 760 or so, Kristina Tkatch at 740 or so, and so on.

Now we start adding in the coupling games. And this is where people's intuition about what to expect may not be very good. Suppose the first match we add (and the only match) is Wilkie 12 Siming 4. For this match Siming is performing 167 points below Wilkie and there are no other forces between the groups. So Siming goes to 584, Karen to 520, and Kristina to 500. In other words this one match completely decided how the women are shifted compared to the men. It doesn't matter that Kristina has all her games against women or most of her games against much weaker women. Now add in another 141 Siming/men games and the 122 Chezka/men games and 43 Fu/men games i mentioned. Now there are about 300 games rather than 16 determining the big shift. At this point there is about a two thirds chance the shifting is right within 15 points. Siming could be at 770 or at 800. But she's pretty unlikely to be at 745 or 815.

Now we add in Karen Corr's couple thousand games against men. Now there is a pretty good chance the shift is right within maybe 6 points.

Now we add in many more thousands of games from top-100 women played against men. Melissa Herndon alone has played many hundreds of games against men on the Mezz West State tour. Oscar and Vilmos are both rated 773. Just against Oscar and Vilmos Melissa has played 73 games (23 wins 50 losses). that's performing 113 points below them, 660. Her rating is 663. And of course she's also played Rodney and Edgie Geronimo and Ellerman and Ernesto and and Butera and on and on. And Melissa has played a lot of 600 and 550 male players. And if she didn't beat them the way she is supposed to, that would affect the shift.

There are several more Melissa's. And then the bulk of 550 and 600-level women that play top women's events in the USA also go back and play in weekly and regional tournaments and league and so forth against the men.

There is a lot of coupling.
Click to expand...

Excellent response Mike, clear and concise!

I was wondering how you handle the ratings between different games. (i.e. one pocket, straight pool, 3 cushion, 9-ball, etc.) Also, how do you hand the unique situation where someone has a major setback that negatively affects their skill level (i.e. John Morra shooting lefty, Larry Nevel losing his leg, etc.)

Thanks for all of your responses Mike. It's not easy staying calm and answering questions when people are constantly questioning your work. Good job sir!
 
one stroke said:
The fact does remain however that she beat inferior players and her rate went up ,


1
Click to expand...

This was my point about Sky. He is playing in much stronger overall fields and over the last couple years he has only went up from 770ish to 787. Siming on the other hand went up 8 points in a week after playing a much weaker field. This is what I don’t understand.
 
FeelDaShot said:
Excellent response Mike, clear and concise!

I was wondering how you handle the ratings between different games. (i.e. one pocket, straight pool, 3 cushion, 9-ball, etc.) Also, how do you hand the unique situation where someone has a major setback that negatively affects their skill level (i.e. John Morra shooting lefty, Larry Nevel losing his leg, etc.)

Thanks for all of your responses Mike. It's not easy staying calm and answering questions when people are constantly questioning your work. Good job sir!
Click to expand...

Mike posted about Morra on FB. His rating hasn't went down much at all playing left handed. he had a graph showing plots of 500 games and you really couldn't determine when the switch happened.
 
9BallKY said:
This was my point about Sky. He is playing in much stronger overall fields and over the last couple years he has only went up from 770ish to 787. Siming on the other hand went up 8 points in a week after playing a much weaker field. This is what I don’t understand.
Click to expand...

She didn't just win, she destroyed almost everyone. Lots of scores were 9-0 and 9-1. In the finals, she beat Kelly Fisher 11-2. How severely you beat people has an impact on rating.

With no other information, if you beat someone 9-2 and I beat them 9-7, then you are clearly better than I am. We are both better than the other player. As more information gets added, then that may always be true.
 
9BallKY said:
If she was a 88% favorite in a set with a 750 player I’m sure the percentage would increase against a 738 player such as Wei. Straight up against the field she may not have been the favorite but in each set she would have to have 90% or above.
Click to expand...

No, that's not right. You can look up the match percentages. The Mills one was a best of 3 longer races. That's a big difference.
 
BasementDweller said:
Mike Page said:
"It seems what you are arguing is that men don't realize the rating you think they should have against women because men aren't good enough at 9-Ball or lack 9-Ball-specific skills."

I think you are being disingenuous here because you know that's not what I'm saying.


Template rack 9 Ball with the one on the spot is a game that can be mastered as Corey Duel showed for the men almost 20 years ago. If there just so happened to be a group of male pros who still only played that version of the game, and they then had their data coupled to everyone else's by playing only that game then their ratings would really not be accurate for all games.

So until there's more crossover between the games for the top women I don't think their Fargo Rates will be an accurate overall rating.

Now of course you have the data to prove me wrong but I haven't seen it yet.
Click to expand...

Forget the other games for a minute. You are in effect arguing that the men are underperforming relative to the women playing one-on-the-spot 9-Ball. If they were NOT underperforming, then the ratings would be fine, right?

You are in effect saying that the male 760 who is losing to the female 780 really is just as good. But the conditions (one-on-the-spot 9-ball) hide that.
But the only way the game conditions could hide that is if the males don't have that game down. They don't know how to rack or break. Do you think the top males are unfamiliar with 9-Ball?
 
9BallKY said:
This was my point about Sky. He is playing in much stronger overall fields and over the last couple years he has only went up from 770ish to 787. Siming on the other hand went up 8 points in a week after playing a much weaker field. This is what I don’t understand.
Click to expand...

It could happen if she crushed the people she played, which I think she did. If she's 100 points better than her opponents, she is expected to beat them 9-5, but if she beat them 9-1, her rating would go up.
 
I could easily see Corey Duel being 20 points higher if the only game he played was template rack 9 Ball. I realize the system treats all the games the same and it works as advertised as long as players play all the games but if they don't, I think there's a chance that a game that tests a narrower skill set could exaggerate a player's standing amongst those that play all games.

So it's not more coupling between men and women that some of us are waiting but more game diverse coupling.
 
BasementDweller said:
I could easily see Corey Duel being 20 points higher if the only game he played was template rack 9 Ball. I realize the system treats all the games the same and it works as advertised as long as players play all the games but if they don't, I think there's a chance that a game that tests a narrower skill set could exaggerate a player's standing amongst those that play all games.

So it's not more coupling between men and women that some of us are waiting but more game diverse coupling.
Click to expand...
Keep on moving those goal posts!
 
Have Shane play Siming some ryo template rack 10 ball to 100 and see what would happen to her rating. He would probably beat her by 50. Then have them play nine on the spot 9 Ball and it would be much closer. I understand the system treats all games the same but they aren't. How much it matters you probably already know.
 
BasementDweller said:
I could easily see Corey Duel being 20 points higher if the only game he played was template rack 9 Ball. I realize the system treats all the games the same and it works as advertised as long as players play all the games but if they don't, I think there's a chance that a game that tests a narrower skill set could exaggerate a player's standing amongst those that play all games.

So it's not more coupling between men and women that some of us are waiting but more game diverse coupling.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are looking at this the right way. In essence player's ratings are measured by what they do best. If Albin Ouschan underperforms at bar-table 8-Ball, that's just a familiarity issue. His real 800ish rating is determined under the conditions he is most accustomed to.

Fortunately what players play most also contribute the most to their rating (because they have many more of those games.) People who have diverse portfolios also perform at their rating in a wider variety of situations.
 
Oh and I could be totally wrong. I have no problem with that AND Siming is now one of my new favorite players. I love her technique and demeanor. Regardless of her FR she's a phenomenal player.
 
Mr FargoRate said:
"I don't think you are looking at this the right way. In essence player's ratings are measured by what they do best. If Albin Ouschan underperforms at bar-table 8-Ball, that's just a familiarity issue. His real 800ish rating is determined under the conditions he is most accustomed to.

Fortunately what players play most also contribute the most to their rating (because they have many more of those games.) People who have diverse portfolios also perform at their rating in a wider variety of situations."

That's a good point that I have been overlooking even though I've explained this very thing to fellow players who say people can just as easily sandbag using Fargo. Of course they can't unless they are severely math challenged.

You say the game being played doesn't matter. Well, I guess I'll just wait until I see some sort of breakdown by game until I make up my mind.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to us enthusiasts. I love Fargo and it actually gives me a goal to shoot for if I ever have enough time to get out and compete. I may not get there but 700 is my number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top