This is why Fargorate Fails...

Let's assume that there is a perfect handicapping system. Everyone is rated right where they are supposed to be. Then trying to get better is mute as the tournament would be basically a coin flip. Why put in the time to get better when it won't help you win? That is one of the reasons that our competitive side of the game is stagnant. I've seen players say they don't wont to get better or take lessons because it will affect their handicap. I understand the world we live in today and handicapped tournaments are here to stay but the day that tournaments become solely handicap is the day that I quit playing in them.
 
Woodshaft said:
I totally agree. But Mike's fargorate is supposedly the holy grail of handicapping.
It isn't though, has some MAJOR formula flaws.
Click to expand...
You posit that analytics and data are NOT the "holy grail"?

What is your alternative? I expect a comprehensive solution we can't shoot full of holes, or for you to just shut up about it at this point.

If any of your suggestions start with anecdotal data based on loser railbirds, please save yourself the embarrassment
 
BasementDweller said:
How do you judge someone's speed?

I think it largely depends on your own game. Let's say you play in the 500s, then you are quite impressed with players firing balls into the pockets. If they run out like this,, you'll think they're a sandbagging pro. If you either -- play above 600 (or maybe 650) or are just very knowledgeable about the game, you can gauge someone's speed just by their shot selection. You could cover the pockets and I could still get a good feel for how well someone plays. There's a specific way players approaching 700 play the game. This is especially true on a bar table. A 700 level player on a bar table will mostly take the same shots that an 800 level player would. They just don't execute them as well. If you're not seeing that sort of shot selection, your not seeing a 700 level player. Of course I'm talking for the most part. There will be pet shots that lesser players like more than the orthodox shot, or those they struggle with that they avoid.
Click to expand...
I really don't think you're personal spd has a ton to do applying an 'eye test' on someone else. Of course it certainly helps, but professional rail birds can spot the signs/tendencies just as well, if not better. Really all it takes is time watching players of various spd and noting what they tend to do. I make it sound easy, but it's not. Really need to be a student of the game.

I don't think 700 is the bar in which player tendencies tend to converge. You could be dead punch potting machine with near zero CB and reach 700. I can think of a few local examples of that very thing. However you're going to have a hard go getting much stronger until you adopt higher % plays, which is tell tale for budding pros and career gamers.
 
In my opinion Fargorate is currently the best national rating system pool has. I also believe it will get only better with time. In order to make it the best that it can be all results across the country need to be reported. I find it interesting that most of the people against Fargorate cherry-pick examples where someone outperforms their assigned rating, what about the week before where they well underplayed? I think some fail to realize that the rating is based on results overtime and is NOT a be all indicator on how that individual is going to shoot on specific day. I believe it was referenced in a podcast once @Tin Man, that Fargorate best represents a range that people will play in. It should be expected that a 650 Fargorate will have days that they shoot like a 610 and the next may shoot like a 690.
 
Jaden said:
You don't have to sandbag. All you have to do is only play lesser players than your ability in handicapped tourneys. No one will ever get above 700 speed only playing handicapped lower level tourneys. No sand bagging required.
Click to expand...
wrong
 
The_JV said:
I really don't think you're personal spd has a ton to do applying an 'eye test' on someone else. Of course it certainly helps, but professional rail birds can spot the signs/tendencies just as well, if not better. Really all it takes is time watching players of various spd and noting what they tend to do. I make it sound easy, but it's not. Really need to be a student of the game.

I don't think 700 is the bar in which player tendencies tend to converge. You could be dead punch potting machine with near zero CB and reach 700. I can think of a few local examples of that very thing. However you're going to have a hard go getting much stronger until you adopt higher % plays, which is tell tale for budding pros and career gamers.
Click to expand...
It may be possible to see these things if you don't play above a certain level, but you have to be a real student of the game or professional railbird as you mentioned. (I did mention that as a possibility).

I tend to reject the legend of the potting machine. I can't really think of anyone near the 700 level that doesn't have their potting to position ratio balanced out. Yes, maybe at the lower levels you see this from time to time but you can only get so far without understanding the proper positional routes.

When I see a player have 3 balls on the table -- 8, 9, & 10, and they are positioned with the 8 near a corner, the 9 up table from the 8 on the same side rail, and the 10 on the opposite side rail and they quickly pot the 8 leaving themselves straight in on the 9 with no way to get over for the 10 -- I know they don't play 700 speed.

Yes -- there are more nuanced pattern play decisions that lesser players get wrong (myself included) that pros don't, but I stand by my view that for the most part, you can judge a book by its pattern play.
 
While I understand that everyone is in search of the perfect rating system in pool, I tire of threads like this one, which suggest that a single outlier means a rating system is ready for the garbage heap. Even a good rating system will have many outliers, but all rating systems are works in progress that improve over time.

Fargo isn't perfect, but most of us have come to understand how much value is added by having a rating system like Fargo that does a creditable job of rating players in most cases.
 
Dead Money said:
I have a Fargo rating of zero. That may or may not be accurate.
Click to expand...

Is it 0 or none, because you can actually have a 0 or even a negative Fargo. One of the players in an inhouse league I'm in had a negative rating after a few weeks of playing as a new player. We manually adjusted them a bit LOL
 
BasementDweller said:
It may be possible to see these things if you don't play above a certain level, but you have to be a real student of the game or professional railbird as you mentioned. (I did mention that as a possibility).
Click to expand...
Of course, and we agree that you need to be a student, player or not.
BasementDweller said:
I tend to reject the legend of the potting machine. I can't really think of anyone near the 700 level that doesn't have their potting to position ratio balanced out. Yes, maybe at the lower levels you see this from time to time but you can only get so far without understanding the proper positional routes.
Click to expand...
I can yank a few low 700 players from the local list that live or die on their potting. Some even refuse to play in fargo reporting 8 ball events because they know they don't have the CB to avoid the additional traffic. Sad but true... I'm sure you local talent pool just doesn't have an obvious example.
BasementDweller said:
Yes -- there are more nuanced pattern play decisions that lesser players get wrong (myself included) that pros don't, but I stand by my view that for the most part, you can judge a book by its pattern play.
Click to expand...
I agree to a point and "most part" is a great disclaimer so there's nothing to be gained by providing examples where pattern play analysis fails as the benchmark for fargo spd.
 
The_JV said:
I agree to a point and "most part" is a great disclaimer so there's nothing to be gained by providing examples where pattern play analysis fails as the benchmark for fargo spd.
Click to expand...
I mean only at the higher end. If it's not too much trouble I'd love to see a 700 level player that lives on their potting. I know there's a lot of players out there, but I've just never seen the potting geniuses that so many legends are made of.
 
sjm said:
While I understand that everyone is in search of the perfect rating system in pool, I tire of threads like this one, which suggest that a single outlier means a rating system is ready for the garbage heap. Even a good rating system will have many outliers, but all rating systems are works in progress that improve over time.

Fargo isn't perfect, but most of us have come to understand how much value is added by having a rating system like Fargo that does a creditable job of rating players in most cases.
Click to expand...
And to add, Fargo gives an international rating system. There is a problem when you try to overlap rating systems such as when players are rated as B, B+, A, AA, AAA...ETC... then try to convert them to another system.

FargoRate is the best out there at the moment.
 
hang-the-9 said:
Is it 0 or none, because you can actually have a 0 or even a negative Fargo. One of the players in an inhouse league I'm in had a negative rating after a few weeks of playing as a new player. We manually adjusted them a bit LOL
Click to expand...
It can also go the other way. A guy in a tournament I played a few months ago was rated a 980. He was an APA 5 iirc.
 
couldnthinkof01 said:
Watch early Shaw or Filler🤣
Click to expand...
I'm talking about players who don't understand proper positional shots or routes, so they get by on JUST their pocketing ability. That doesn't apply to early Shaw or Filler. Yes their decision making matured, but they both knew what they were doing.

I don't know. Maybe it's just hard to explain, but like the SCOTUS Justice once said when referring to pornography, I know it when I see it.
 
BasementDweller said:
I mean only at the higher end. If it's not too much trouble I'd love to see a 700 level player that lives on their potting. I know there's a lot of players out there, but I've just never seen the potting geniuses that so many legends are made of.
Click to expand...
lol... potting genius is definitely not what I'd call it. ...and they generally burn out so never make legend status.
 
BasementDweller said:
I'm talking about players who don't understand proper positional shots or routes, so they get by on JUST their pocketing ability. That doesn't apply to early Shaw or Filler. Yes their decision making matured, but they both knew what they were doing.

I don't know. Maybe it's just hard to explain, but like the SCOTUS Justice once said when referring to pornography, I know it when I see it.
Click to expand...
They just popped into my head, man could they fire a ball, position be damned, safe? what's that.

This guy too. He also is too good, but man will this fkn guy get out from everywhere. Fun to watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top