How Does Fargo related to a TPA system, for example I'm a 575 Fargo that plays in my bad day at a 750 TPA SPEED and best days 900 speed, I Think I should be a +600 but I don't play enough tournaments to put more games in Fargo system, but I feel that I play at a 600 speed Fargo, any thoughts about this?
Fargo rated question
- Thread starter JCL
- Start date
It doesn't. Fargorate is nothing more or less than your performance average against other players. It is calculated much the same way as a chess rating, and as such, it is a closed system, and does not really correspond to other external rating systems. You have an expectation as a 575 Fargorated player to get "x" amount of games off Jason Shaw, and pretty much lose 100%, as opposed to expecting to get "x" amount of games off a 450, while winning the vast majority. These expected win percentages are VERY accurate, when playing with people with lots of rated games.
TPA is purely a measurement of performance during a specific match, and oftentimes, a high quality TPA simply means you played well a game or two, and then dry broke, letting the pro run 7 racks and out on you. It is purely a measurement of "errors". You can have an extremely weak break, but shoot like Earl Strickland. Just means your TPA in every match you play will be high, and you lose the vast majority of your matches to anyone rated over 650. Without making a lot of errors. TPA means nothing if you consistently dog it against pros, but beat baby seals to death in your home room.
Fargorate, on the other hand, measures EVERYTHING in one fell swoop. If the weak break allows you to win consistently against 500 Fargorate players, but gets you drilled by superpros, then your Fargorate will be a little north of 500, but WAY below 800. Same with the idea of faltering against strong opponents, but not against weaker ones. Fargorate measures you all-in ability to put pressure on players throughout the rating spectrum.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
In addition to Shortbus's statements, TPA can be problematic because of the table difficulty. You and I may win equal numbers of games but on a table that plays tough, both our TPAs will be lower.
How many games do you have in Fargo?
I’m waaay overrated!
Yup. On my best days I can beat anyone in the world. On most days....
Bob <-- Not in the 800 club.
If you tracked your TPA honestly and for several weeks, a .750 average is pretty good. .900 is world class playing, an 800 Fargo player would shoot a .900 or a bit higher over a match. A pro player having a bad day would shoot .750, that would be about an A level player.
Since we know the TPA of top players and we know the Fargo rating of those players, there is a co-relation between them that can be made even though they track different things. It's impossible to play bad and win against good players, so a high TPA = a high Fargo rating. From seat of the pants thinking, if you subtract roughly 75-125 points from the TPA rating you would be around where the Fargo rating is, with a smaller number going to higher rated players and the 125 points for lower rated players. So someone that shoots a .500 TPA over a match, which is about half misses and mistakes vs balls pocketed, is a 375-400 Fargo, a pro that can play at a .900+ speed would be about an 800-820 Fargo.
Last edited:
Responding the the bolded line. How is that true? Can't you have a 1.000 TPA and lose a match badly? You break and run the first game, then break dry and they run the set out on you? Your fargo would only show it as an 11-1 loss, while TPA shows you played perfectly.
Sure, but that is why Fargo is long term and TPA is per game/match. No rating system is very good over one match, especially with results outside of the norm. Any answer is based on normal results over the lifetime of a player, not looking at a single match or a day of a week. That would be like having someone crash their car the first day they had their license, and then gong from there saying they will be cashing the car every single day in the future also because they drove for one day and had one accident. That won't happen, and neither will having a high TPA with a low Fargo rating over the course of multiple matches.
I guess technically going by exactly what I wrote you can then say "sure it's "possible" to beat a good player playing bad", but it's not a normal everyday thing. I mean you can go play a race to 2 against Filler, have him run 8 balls both times and miss the 9 ball, you make two hanging 9 balls and boom, you have a 1.000 TPA and an 830 Fargo rating over two games. Would anyone on the planet then simply say "wow, that guy is the best on the planet" after seeing two games in which someone made two balls? Not unless they were insane.
Last edited:
I get your point. I just think there is a better way to say there is a correlation than saying "high TPA = a high Fargo rating".
Not directly on topic, but here's a chart Dr. Dave did some time ago comparing different rating systems (TPA isn't included, but FARGO is).
pj
chgo
pj
chgo
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
That's a pretty good correlation. I understand what others are saying about a TPA being potentially misleading but I think as long as one understands that TPA is generally measuring performance at a particular occasion and Fargo is measuring longer trends it's good. For that matter, how many players have played poorly yet still maintained a high TPA? If I have seen a match where the leader wasn't ahead on TPA after 4 racks, I can't recall it. But we've all seen plenty where the score did not reflect the Fargo ratings, because Fargo doesn't work like that. The issue with Fargo is that it only works in the context of another player with a known rating, over a significant number of games. If I stay home for a month in the pool shed and play the ghost I can have an reasonably accurate idea of how much I've improved and how my skill compares to others. If I have a fair number of games in the system, it could take several months before my gainz show up in my Fargo. With TPA, I can also compare how I shoot at home with how I shoot in competition on different tables.
tomatoshooter
Well-known member
It's cool to have a measuring stick to track your progress but I don't really care much about Fargo. People say "Hey we can arrange this on Salotto and our game will go towards Fargo." So? What do I gain from that? Really, the only things I could gain are either boosting my rating so I can't play in B player tournaments (not likely) or have a bunch of games in the system that will drag my rating down when I finally figure this damn game out.Zero
Sorry, I could not take this chart seriously at all after seeing that an APA 7 is a minimum of 600 Fargo rate.
Me to my Fargo has went up to 604 and the ghost always gets 2 or 3 games when we play a race to 7 and he don’t even have a rating.
7 is the highest it goes so
That is pretty close to correct, although I personally think it is a bit lower, towards the high 500s. I jump between a 6 and 7 in TAP which also goes to 7 max, and I am a 550 Fargo. Every place I played in an APA rated tournament has me in as a 7, and I don't mind that rating to be competitive. It also brings out a big flaw with many league ratings, you can have a maxed out 7 as a 500-600 and also a 7 that is a 650-700, which is like handing someone a free 25-100% spot.