Why Pool Leagues Should Embrace “ALL BALL FOULS”

mikepage said:
No, they'd I believe be pretty close in one pocket and Skyler a clear favorite in 9b
Click to expand...
...So then why aren't there subscores? It sounds like an opportunity for improvement in line with the exact goal of FargoRate. A relative new person to the pool scene might look at Tony's 777 and Skyler's 812 and conclude Skyler has an advantage in a 1p matchup. Your answer also contradicts what appears to be a big selling point of Fargo, which is its indifference to game or table size, etc. Have we just been misunderstanding you the entire time?
 
poolscholar said:
If you want the answer for pool in general then you need to talk to a bunch of experienced tournament directors. It might work for your league and maybe you just haven't experienced problems in your pool life that others have
Click to expand...

I have been in a variety of leagues, and I know many people in many other leagues, and I have spoken to many people (players, refs, league operators, organization leaders, etc.). I still think “All Ball Fouls” is better in long run, even if it might result in some “growing pains” in the near term. Again, all the reasons are in the video.
 
mikepage said:
This makes sense, right? It is easier for you to beat a pro on a 7-foot table
Click to expand...
You said table size makes no difference. But now you say it does?


It's very simple. If I play a 780 I will win more often on a bar table playing 8 ball than playing them big table 9 ball.

Math does not equal reality and data is not perfect
 
dr_dave said:
I have been in a variety of leagues, and I know many people in many other leagues, and I have spoken to many people (players, refs, league operators, organization leaders, etc.). I still think “All Ball Fouls” is better in long run, even if it might result in some “growing pains” in the near term. Again, all the reasons are in the video.
Click to expand...
Id suggest listening to people on this thread. Time will tell but nobody is going to jump on the all ball fouls wagon easily
 
I would seriously look at adopting the rules(or a modified version) that Ultimate Pool USA uses. Would be fairly easy on the inexperienced players & would very rarely impact the higher ranked players.
 
mikepage said:
My point is when most people compare "easy" to "hard" tables (the 1.0 foot wide raised walkway to the 1.5 foot wide raised walkway), they are just thinking of PLAYER and TABLE. But there is a triangle here, PLAYER, TABLE, and OPPONENT. And when the TABLE gets easier, the OPPONENT gets better.

Let's say you're playing poolscholar. Yes it is harder to run out on a 9-foot table. But if you miss, you have a decent chance of getting back to the table. Missing on the barbox against him is a sellout. Poolscholar effectively becomes a stronger opponent on an easier table, complicating calling the table "easier." That is the longer dropoff with the wider walkway.

Mistakes are more likely forgiven on harder equipment
Click to expand...
A very succinct but highly apropos explanation that I happen to wholeheartedly agree with.
 
Bob Jewett said:
If the players go at the game with the attitude of, "Screw him before he screws me," that's true. Maybe a change of attitude is needed.

The International Open is played with the strict rules and mostly no ref at the table, and somehow the players manage. Maybe they have the right attitude towards the game.
Click to expand...
Maybe they're PROFESSIONALS
 
Most of the people we know are dishonest and will do anything to gain an advantage. Who gives a shit if a shirt or somebody's hair touches a ball, you want them to stand at attention to when they're not shooting.

We're not curing cancer they're playing a game that they enjoy
 
Bob Jewett said:
Nah. I think anyone interested enough in the game to play in league can learn to play by all the rules. It might take more sportsmanship, though. If they are told what the rule is going to be, I think they would go along.
Click to expand...
How many league players play at a 6 level or a 550 fargo or above? Not many and the 6s are just happy they ran out. They aren't trying to be pro players, they’re just trying to have fun and maybe talk a little crap if they get out. 5s rarely run out, maybe a few times per hundred games, 4s once in 100 + games and...
 
poolscholar said:
You said table size makes no difference. But now you say it does?


It's very simple. If I play a 780 I will win more often on a bar table playing 8 ball than playing them big table 9 ball.

Math does not equal reality and data is not perfect
Click to expand...
I don’t see a contradiction. If you think there is one, please flesh it out a bit.

Yes, you will beat a 780 in a straight up race more often on a bar table. Have you seen me contradict this?
 
Rocket354 said:
...So then why aren't there subscores?
Click to expand...

You are welcome to do sub scores. You should use APA ratings or ELO ratings or some other approach to do it though. Fargo ratings basically work because the data is combined. If FargoRate was an airplane, separating the data would be like cutting off half the wings.
Rocket354 said:
Have we just been misunderstanding you the entire time?
Click to expand...
There are a lot of things people misunderstand because although they know how to interpret Fargo ratings just fine, they don’t understand WHY the approach works. If your mental model is a car works like a Fred flintstone car (legs running) you may be content to suggest getting rid of a few wheels to make it lighter or prettier. That’s what happens day in and day out. FargoRate is a great car, except they need to get rid of the wheels or make them square instead of round.
 
mikepage said:
I don’t see a contradiction. If you think there is one, please flesh it out a bit.

Yes, you will beat a 780 in a straight up race more often on a bar table. Have you seen me contradict this?
Click to expand...
You have implied many times for years the difference between table size, and 8 and 9 ball is neglegable. Obviously the system doesn't separate any of this because we have one rating number. I kinda doubt all of your data points have table size and game. But I could be wrong.

Im sure you're aware in science you need reproduction of results. You're smart and I think Fargo rate is a good system but no model is perfect. I understand you have a business to run and have motive to present a certain viewpoint
 
mikepage said:
You are welcome to do sub scores. You should use APA ratings or ELO ratings or some other approach to do it though. Fargo ratings basically work because the data is combined. If FargoRate was an airplane, separating the data would be like cutting off half the wings.

There are a lot of things people misunderstand because although they know how to interpret Fargo ratings just fine, they don’t understand WHY the approach works. If your mental model is a car works like a Fred flintstone car (legs running) you may be content to suggest getting rid of a few wheels to make it lighter or prettier. That’s what happens day in and day out. FargoRate is a great car, except they need to get rid of the wheels or make them square instead of round.
Click to expand...
Back to convoluted non-answers.

If Tony's 777 and Sky's 812 are inaccurate for 1p because they are about even, and also inaccurate for 9b because Sky has a distinct advantage, then in what sense does Fargo "work"? It appears to be a (very) good assessment of relative average skill, but fails to differentiate relative skill levels at different games, an is also, apparently, an inaccurate handicapping tool based on table size.

Perhaps selling Fargo as an all-in-one solution is easy and preferred from a business perspective, but is disingenuous intellectually and statistically.
 
In my area there's APA, CSI/BCA, UPL, Napa, 3strikes, pokerchips, scotchdoubles, and various 8,9,10 ball tournaments everyday of the week. The rules are all over the place, but it hasn't been all that difficult to let my opponent know I'm new to the tournament and to help me understand the ruleset. All ball fouls would be simple to understand, and if it were the same in every game, I'd be okay with that. What I wouldn't like is losing because I fouled by touching another ball and gave my opponent BIH, or worse making the 8/9/10 ball and committing the foul. This is something I've paid little mind to, as I primarily play APA, and since this topic has come up I paid more attention to how many times I, my teammates, and opponents have touched object balls. It was a lot! No doubt it would have change the outcomes of matches. So I'm committing to do better and act like every game I play is an all ball foul regardless of the rules, that way I'll be ready when Dr.Dave changes the world.
 
Imagine suggesting in major sports the opposing team could call fouls on each other. 🤣 There's already cheaters in pro sports and overly competitive youth sport dads

There's a reason you need refs, especially for certain rules such as all ball fouls

Finding people that don't cheat is not a solution. What if you travel?
 
Rocket354 said:
Back to convoluted non-answers.

If Tony's 777 and Sky's 812 are inaccurate for 1p because they are about even, and also inaccurate for 9b because Sky has a distinct advantage, then in what sense does Fargo "work"? It appears to be a (very) good assessment of relative average skill, but fails to differentiate relative skill levels at different games, an is also, apparently, an inaccurate handicapping tool based on table size.

Perhaps selling Fargo as an all-in-one solution is easy and preferred from a business perspective, but is disingenuous intellectually and statistically.
Click to expand...
What do you mean a rally car driver won a rally race against a nascar driver? Oh... the nascar driver has never turned right, driven on gravel, cobblestones or snow? But but but racing is racing! ;) 🤣 🤣 🤣

1P has only recently been added as a discipline in Fargo IIRC. I think of Fargo as a general skill level. There are still moves and strategy and such that take time to learn. Tony might have a deeper understanding of strategy on 1P but a good player doesn't take too long to get the hang of the game. I mean, it may be years before they have the knowledge of certain specialty shots/situations but they are still going to play strong as hell even starting out.

If SVB had never played 1P and showed up at the Sunday 1P league at the pool hall, I'm betting on him.

I have a buddy who is magnitudes better than I am. He had never played 1P when I introduced it to him. I think I beat him about 5 games that day while he was figuring strategy out. After those 5 games now I might beat him 1 out of 5 on average. I damn well make him earn it but I sure don't win very often. :p

Most pros are fairly fast learners.
 
Rocket354 said:
Perhaps selling Fargo as an all-in-one solution is easy and preferred from a business perspective
Click to expand...
That’s the second time in one thread I’ve been accused of having “business perspective” or motivated by some kind of pecuniary interest. That is just f-ing gross to me. Tell me I’m stupid. Tell me you disagree with my analysis. Tell me I’m a poor communicator. But if you are going to question my integrity or my devotion to doing the best job I can rating pool pkayers, Just f-you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top