Fargo Match.... 679 vs 851

jasonlaus said:
679 is 679, #'s tell the truth. No amount of anybodys feeling are gonna change that.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure about that. I think it's possible that an up-and-coming 679 might fall apart playing a much better player. Maybe nervousness, maybe intimidation.

Contrast that with a 679 on his way down that's seen it all and was once the best in the world. That 679 may play better under pressure and playing a better player.

Does Fargo have filters to look for patterns like that? I would bet they exist.

I have a buddy that's low to mid 700s. When he's the favorite, he fearlessly plays flawless. When he's playing the top guys, his game falls apart.
 
Last edited:
you also have to change how you play drastically against a much better player playing without a spot, or you are doomed to lose every single set.
that is part of the reason the top players get so far or win all the money every time. you can increase your chances by using your head and not playing your normal game.
most wont agree or understand this.
 
fjk said:
I'm not so sure about that. I think it's possible that an up-and-coming 679 might fall apart playing a much better player. Maybe nervousness, maybe intimidation.

Contrast that with a 679 on his way down that's seen it all and was once the best in the world. That 679 may play better under pressure and playing a better player.

Does Fargo have filters to look for patterns like that? I would bet they exist.

I have a buddy that's low to mid 700s. When he's the favorite, he fearlessly plays flawless. When he's playing the top guys, his game falls apart.
Click to expand...
Nope, a 679 is a 679, if they played better than 679 they wouldn't be a 679.

Once again, #'s don't lie
 
So if old Fargo input #'s are not the same as recent data where is that 679 of Mike's in the scheme of things?
Was it a 714 and shrunk?
Some say Fargo #'s are inflating so was it 650?
 
jasonlaus said:
Nope, a 679 is a 679, if they played better than 679 they wouldn't be a 679.

Once again, #'s don't lie
Click to expand...
It's not that simplistic. Fargo is average performance. There absolutely can be other patterns within that average. Some 679s could consistently fall apart playing 800s (perform below what their rating predicts). Some 679s could consistently perform better than their rating would predict playing 800s. If Fargo had filters to stratify that it would be interesting to play with. Again, Fargo is based on average performance. A lot could be hidden looking at averages.
 
fjk said:
It's not that simplistic. Fargo is average performance. There absolutely can be other patterns within that average. Some 679s could consistently fall apart playing 800s (perform below what their rating predicts). Some 679s could consistently perform better than their rating would predict playing 800s. If Fargo had filters to stratify that it would be interesting to play with. Again, Fargo is based on average performance. A lot could be hidden looking at averages.
Click to expand...
🤦‍♂️
 
very good players dont fall apart when playing better players. occasionally someone will choke under pressure or have an off day and commentators will jump on it.
the very vast majority of players play to their speed. they dont get in zones and become supermen or dog it to death because of who they are playing. sometimes it looks that way because of they way the games went down.
 
maha said:
very good players dont fall apart when playing better players. occasionally someone will choke under pressure or have an off day and commentators will jump on it.
the very vast majority of players play to their speed. they dont get in zones and become supermen or dog it to death because of who they are playing. sometimes it looks that way because of they way the games went down.
Click to expand...
Some players were famous for playing their best pool on the biggest stage.
 
maha said:
very good players dont fall apart when playing better players. occasionally someone will choke under pressure or have an off day and commentators will jump on it.
the very vast majority of players play to their speed. they dont get in zones and become supermen or dog it to death because of who they are playing. sometimes it looks that way because of they way the games went down.
Click to expand...
Well... Let me say this about Mike Sigel, given I have personal experience of having the opportunity to go in with a local shortstop Josh Degler in Florida against Mike in a gambling match. (Unfortunately, I didn't have the stones, and thought Mike had the advantage...) This was something like 18 years ago. Josh is "currently" about 673 Fargorate, and he beat Mike pretty soundly.

I also took, a 4 hour lesson with Mike on a visit back to Florida. His execution when demonstrating shots was not nearly what knew would expect. That being completely apart from him just not being a very good teacher... It was easy to tell Mike was a guy with great physical talent when he was younger, who was coasting on his name to get students. Jeremy Jones on the other hand, is a deeply intellectual player, who has a lot to teach, even if he cannot execute like he did in his 20s.

Pool is a game of execution, and once the execution begins to fail, then it is what it is. Mike is simply not gonna see either the edge of the ball, or the aiming line as clearly as he used to. And muscle memory starts to go in one's 50s. And nerves as well. It is a simple truth. Some players are able to maintain a very high level of play as they age, but they also tend to keep higher Fargorates when doing so.
 
fjk said:
I'm not so sure about that. I think it's possible that an up-and-coming 679 might fall apart playing a much better player. Maybe nervousness, maybe intimidation.

Contrast that with a 679 on his way down that's seen it all and was once the best in the world. That 679 may play better under pressure and playing a better player.

Does Fargo have filters to look for patterns like that? I would bet they exist.

I have a buddy that's low to mid 700s. When he's the favorite, he fearlessly plays flawless. When he's playing the top guys, his game falls apart.
Click to expand...
That’s a great point. I’m in the ladder column, I’ve played everyone and I’m not intimated by anyone, but I can’t play like I did.

Experience isn’t in the numbers IMO.
 
yea i see now. say a700 player plays way under that if he is playing a better player. and if not has to play over that 700 by as much to bring himself back up to a 700.
how is your reasoning? both of your sentences say something different from what i said. 3rd one draws your conclusion.
 
maha said:
yea i see now. say a700 player plays way under that if he is playing a better player. and if not has to play over that 700 by as much to bring himself back up to a 700.
how is your reasoning? both of your sentences say something different from what i said. 3rd one draws your conclusion.
Click to expand...
Either I'm tired or you make no sense at all. I'm thinking both.
 
alphadog said:
So if old Fargo input #'s are not the same as recent data where is that 679 of Mike's in the scheme of things?
Was it a 714 and shrunk?
Some say Fargo #'s are inflating so was it 650?
Click to expand...

the improved player may well have a big backlog of low level play. pia filler was grinding along at 600-650 for years and years. she's at 715 now but we all know she isn't a 715.
 
skogstokig said:
the improved player may well have a big backlog of low level play. pia filler was grinding along at 600-650 for years and years. she's at 715 now but we all know she isn't a 715.
Click to expand...
We do? I watched some of her recent play, and the one thing that stood out is that she is hitting certain shots exactly like Joshua Filler does, It is obvious that he has been working with her. She went from being a middle of the road female player, to going deep in the DCC 9 ball, and winning a women's Eurotour event. She won some scotch doubles tournament, and contributed quite a bit to the Filler's 2024 yearly income. I have no doubts She is a legitimate 700+ player.
 
fjk said:
It's not that simplistic. Fargo is average performance. There absolutely can be other patterns within that average. Some 679s could consistently fall apart playing 800s (perform below what their rating predicts). Some 679s could consistently perform better than their rating would predict playing 800s. If Fargo had filters to stratify that it would be interesting to play with. Again, Fargo is based on average performance. A lot could be hidden looking at averages.
Click to expand...
Agree there COULD be hidden "structure" in a player's performance. A player with a Fargo Rating of XXX could perform at XXX+50 against strong opponents and XXX-50 against weak opponents. We just find no evidence for it. It really requires a lot of data to nail things like this down.
I just took the player with the most games in FargoRate, Ken J from Oklahoma, and divided his games into 6 4000+ game chunks, separated by the rating of his opponent. On one end hee has 4000+ games against opponents who average 663. On the other end he has 4000+ games against opponents averaging 405. We can compute a "performance rating" for each chunk (and the ones in between. None differ by more than 5 points from his 657 Fargo Rating.

This is just one player. But we've yet to find surprises for things like this.
1738502546408.png
 
ShortBusRuss said:
We do? I watched some of her recent play, and the one thing that stood out is that she is hitting certain shots exactly like Joshua Filler does, It is obvious that he has been working with her. She went from being a middle of the road female player, to going deep in the DCC 9 ball, and winning a women's Eurotour event. She won some scotch doubles tournament, and contributed quite a bit to the Filler's 2024 yearly income. I have no doubts She is a legitimate 700+ player.
Click to expand...
I think he means it in the other direction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top