Do you ever get the feeling that the Fargo Rate of a player just does not seem right?

[Frosty]

In my limited experience
It’s usually the person seems to be better than his Fargo rating not the other way around

Exactly, one of my regular opponents in action can run 8 & out in 1pocket in a heartbeat if you make a mistake, and he regularly runs 4 & 5 packs in 9 ball, and is only rated a 600 Fargo score. I’ve played guys in the 700-750 range that aren’t as good as he is.

I asked him how that is, and he said he doesn’t play in many tournaments as he’s always in action, so his score is only a reflection of a small sample of matches for him.

 

[bbb]

Exactly, one of my regular opponents in action can run 8 & out in 1pocket in a heartbeat if you make a mistake, and he regularly runs 4 & 5 packs in 9 ball, and is only rated a 600 Fargo score. I’ve played guys in the 700-750 range that aren’t as good as he is.

I asked him how that is, and he said he doesn’t play in many tournaments as he’s always in action, so his score is only a reflection of a small sample of matches for him.

The other side of that story
Is people sandbag and lose on purpose to keep their Fargo rating low

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

The other side of that story
Is people sandbag and lose on purpose to keep their Fargo rating low

Forever even when we had AZ System in AZ.

 

[Jerry R]

Recently, I drew a guy in a one pocket tournament that was a 475, but I don't think his robustness was all that high. I beat him, but it was MUCH harder than it should be for a 475. If I was to estimate his speed, I would put him at 600-630. Even though I won, and was the last 600-ish player left in the event, my fargo was trashed.

I think Fargo is the best handicapping system by far. However, I also think it has greater inaccuracy when it comes to measuring one-pocket skill level.

kollegedave

Do you think they were tougher because of shot making or because of strategy?

One of the interesting things about pool is that there can be multiple ways to get to the same result. What I mean by that is two guys might both be rated 450, one because he is a lousy shot maker but plays pretty smart, the other seems to have no clue where his cue ball is going and has never played a safety but seems to make balls from anywhere on the table.

These different "skills" may translate differently to different games. I like the shot maker in rotation. I like the smart player in 8-ball.

Sometimes guys who struggle with position become much better at banking than you'd expect for a given rating. That might be an advantage in 1pkt.

 

[kollegedave]

Do you think they were tougher because of shot making or because of strategy?

One of the interesting things about pool is that there can be multiple ways to get to the same result. What I mean by that is two guys might both be rated 450, one because he is a lousy shot maker but plays pretty smart, the other seems to have no clue where his cue ball is going and has never played a safety but seems to make balls from anywhere on the table.

These different "skills" may translate differently to different games. I like the shot maker in rotation. I like the smart player in 8-ball.

Sometimes guys who struggle with position become much better at banking than you'd expect for a given rating. That might be an advantage in 1pkt.

He was a better shot-maker and thinker than any 475 should be, so it was both. He was just better than 475, full stop. However, like I said, I think his robustness was low. He may have been a one-pocket player that got lost and entered a 9-ball event some weekend, and maybe he ended up with his ridiculously low Fargo Rate that way.

kollegedave

 

[paymerick]

I see it every now and then. For example, I was put into the Fargo system at a 380 a few years back after I had been playing maybe a year or so. The guy who put me in is a certified CSI/BCA ref, you've maybe seen them on the TVs here and there reffing. I was playing a fargo-handicapped tournament and he was familiar with how I played, and said that it would be a fair score to go in as. I didn't know. I didn't care. However, in our league play, new players without a Fargo go in at a 525, I believe. Obviously, if they're a player around a 400 caliber, after a season, their average starts to reflect that as it goes down. Then you have a guy like me, who doesn't play but one or two Fargo tournaments ever, entered in as a 380, but is maybe playing well above that by the time they hit league. Then you're seeing a 380 mop the floor with a few 500s.

So it depends on where people are in their own personal games when they start.

For another example, I know two players, one trained the other. The trainer never had a fargo, mainly gambled, but then started playing leagues around the same time as the trainee. This was 15 years ago maybe. Trainer is currently around a 630 fargo, trainee is around a 570 fargo. Trainee has almost entirely caught up to trainer by this point, and they're about even. But when they both started out, though they probably entered into the fargo system around the same score, trainer was already at the peak of his game, whereas trainee was still early on in his development. So trainer climbed quick, trainee took a lot of bumps while improving. I'd argue from what I've seen, both trainer and trainee being at 620s would be about right.

 

[Island Drive]

I quit for 15 yrs and took a look, 646. Then went out, played horrible worked my way downward, and at my age 77 they don't seem to want to lower me much more.
I think they should consider later yrs into ones rating, would enjoy some doubles, using my knowledge/not my skills to help my partner with shot choices.
Since there's not another doing this, it's a good place to get an idea of ones level, but often like many gamblers they work it to their advantage, it is what it is.

 

[Frosty]

The other side of that story
Is people sandbag and lose on purpose to keep their Fargo rating low

I imagine that’s probably true with some. With the guy I spoke of, he truly doesn’t play in tournaments often at all, but he’s in action at least 5 days a week, and there’s no Fargo for that. I speak on that firsthand as I’ve been playing this game for over 50 years and while always in action, I never play in tournaments, and therefore have no Fargo rating

 

[bbb]

I imagine that’s probably true with some. With the guy I spoke of, he truly doesn’t play in tournaments often at all, but he’s in action at least 5 days a week, and there’s no Fargo for that. I speak on that firsthand as I’ve been playing this game for over 50 years and while always in action, I never play in tournaments, and therefore have no Fargo rating

If anybody wants to know
Have them call me
I will assure them that you are a solid 450 Fargo

 

[couldnthinkof01]

Players ability to rate themselves or others accurately never goes well.
More news @11

 

[gregcantrall]

The other side of that story
Is people sandbag and lose on purpose to keep their Fargo rating low

I have encountered some that try to project that just to preserve their ego.

 

[Black-Balled]

The data does show that Fargo holds up well when people from one area (a state) travel to another area to play. There is less jurisdictional bias than we think. Players from all over the country do as expected (no statistically significant difference) when they all convene in Las Vegas for big tournaments. (The exception was players from Puerto Rico that did a little worse than expected).

The data also shows that women's Fargo ratings hold up quite well when playing against men.

The guys at Fargo have heard all of this before, have studied it and made videos to share the evidence.

The data doesn't lie.

 

[gregcantrall]

Motivation and or Dedication are huge. Kinda like the nature and nurture analogy. Put them together in the right way and excellence is possible.

 

[GideonF]

and how does it work? has a 500 player beaten a 700 player in a race to 7 for example?
I doubt that, spotting games won't help a wicker player in 9 ball

I don’t understand the phrasing of the question. Has a 500 player beaten a 700 player in a straight race to 7? It would be extremely rare if it’s ever happened. 500 would have to be playing out of his mind and 700 would have to dog a lot of balls late.

But a medium Fargo race for a 2 point gap is 9-3. Has a 500 beat a 700 in that scenario in 9b. For sure - probably 40% of the time.

By the way, if the lower player is low enough, then IMO 8b favours the weaker player. If I’m playing a sub 400 player in 9b and I hang the 9 I’m gonna lose that game. If I hang the 8 and my opponent has 6 balls I’m getting back to the table.

 

[gregcantrall]

Change the game!
A cheap lesson that I learned thanks to Jim Ward. Well, I was well ahead of his son who was my age playing 9 ball at my home court (The White Spot). Playing for 5 a game, I was up 35. Jim counseled Rodney and then Rodney said we can play 8 ball for 10 or I am done. We switched and he pocketed my allowance at closing time.

 

[gregcantrall]

500 player beaten a 700 player

Well that's a big spread. My paying for the lessons with the father/son did provide groundwork that elevated my 8 ball game eventually to a Victory playing a Grand Master in a significant race at the Lincoln City BCAPL event. Probably a hundred point spread. 200 points would definitely be lottery ticket odds.

 

[DieselPete]

and how does it work? has a 500 player beaten a 700 player in a race to 7 for example?
I doubt that, spotting games won't help a wicker player in 9 ball

The question is how does Fargo get used in BCA leagues.

Generally you are playing a singles match as a race to 5. Handicapped as such:

0-36 point difference, race to 5
35-62 point difference, 5 to 4
63-108, 6 to 4
109-131, 6-3
132-151, 7 to 3
152 point difference and up, 8 to 3

There is one guy in my league that has to play the 8-3 sets (he is around 640 and will be matched against guys around 480). For the last complete league season he won about 60% of his matches (but some were 7-3 or 6-4 sets). He does talk about what a grind it can be to try to hold someone to 0 or 1 win, because once they reach 2 they are on the hill. (I know that is obvious, but when I really think about it, I appreciate how hard that is in 9 ball).

 

[DieselPete]

Recently, I drew a guy in a one pocket tournament that was a 475, but I don't think his robustness was all that high. I beat him, but it was MUCH harder than it should be for a 475. If I was to estimate his speed, I would put him at 600-630. Even though I won, and was the last 600-ish player left in the event, my fargo was trashed.

I think Fargo is the best handicapping system by far. However, I also think it has greater inaccuracy when it comes to measuring one-pocket skill level.

kollegedave

Yeah, my pool hall is full of guys that have Fargo ratings 80 to 120 points lower than me (from their limited number of 8 and 9 ball tournaments and maybe a few sessions in a league) that would DESTROY me in one pocket.

I understand that Fargo now takes one pocket games into the data, but given the limited number of one pocket events that a lot of pool hall regulars play in, I think many of them built their rating on other games, and so for that game I would definitely take the rating with a grain of salt.

 

[fastone371]

Nice thing about being up in years the desire to got to local Bars or Rooms to compete is gone. Figured out even if you win the hours spent v/s money won just dont justify the effort, gas, aggravation, and dealing with BS.

Arizona Rating System was like Fargo, as one guy said the BETTER I GOT, the HIGHER I WAS RATED, the Less Tournaments I could play.

Working hard, getting better, was rewarded with being removed from opportunity to compete, and got to point only OPEN TOURNAMENTS (NO Handicapped) were open to him.

FARGO or AZ RATING System all have faults.

JMHO

Pool is not an investment, its entertainment. If you look at it as anything other than entertainment its probably not the pastime for you.

 

[vintagecollectibles831]

Nice thing about being up in years the desire to got to local Bars or Rooms to compete is gone. Figured out even if you win the hours spent v/s money won just dont justify the effort, gas, aggravation, and dealing with BS.

Arizona Rating System was like Fargo, as one guy said the BETTER I GOT, the HIGHER I WAS RATED, the Less Tournaments I could play.

Working hard, getting better, was rewarded with being removed from opportunity to compete, and got to point only OPEN TOURNAMENTS (NO Handicapped) were open to him.

FARGO or AZ RATING System all have faults.

JMHO

A top player from FL was talking about that awhile back. His Fargo was like 750, and he said that he had to travel really far to find any tournaments where they would allow him to play. Because all of the FL tournaments were Fargo capped, for lower rated players only.