Go Back   AzBilliards.com > Main Category > Main Forum
Reload this Page The unestablished fargo player
Reply
Page 1 of 7 1 23 Last »
 
Share Thread Tools Rate Thread
The unestablished fargo player
Old
  (#1)
JC
The Thread Stops Here
JC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 12,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: PNW
   
The unestablished fargo player - 03-17-2019, 06:17 PM

Has pulled it off again this year just like last year against all odds and won 4 of the 6 singles divisions at the Western BCA 8 ball championships.

Sandbaggers are as resilient as cockroaches it seems.

JC
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#2)
evergruven
AzB Silver Member

evergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond reputeevergruven has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,132
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Dec 2017
   
03-17-2019, 08:28 PM

established players are sandbagging, too...


A billiard table is that richest of metaphors,
by turns a theatre, an altar, touchstone, gauntlet,
ritual ground, a gunfighter's high noon, a refuge,
a verdant landscape for balls to scatter and rest in meaningful synchronicity,
a classroom, a karma dance, mirror of moods, a guide and trusted friend...

-- from grissim's "billiards"
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3)
garczar
AzB Silver Member
garczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 11,693
vCash: 500
iTrader: 13 / 93%
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Murica
   
03-18-2019, 12:35 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by evergruven View Post
established players are sandbagging, too...
Got that right. I know a couple players that keep their FR around 530 even though they both are probably 600 maybe a tad higher. I don't see how this can ever be stopped. Some will always cheat the system.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#4)
mikepage
AzB Silver Member
mikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond repute
 
mikepage's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 4,184
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fargo, ND
   
03-18-2019, 04:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC View Post
Has pulled it off again this year just like last year against all odds and won 4 of the 6 singles divisions at the Western BCA 8 ball championships.

Sandbaggers are as resilient as cockroaches it seems.

JC
I think you should be a little more circumspect here.

Let's take a look. Here are the divisions

Bronze2: 270-388
Bronze 1 389-441
Silver 2 442-482
Silver 1 483-518
Gold 519-563
Platinum 564 - 620
Elite - over 620

Distributed amongst these divisions are 930 players, of which 641 have established Fargo Rating and 289 don't. So let's say for those who don't have an established rating you do your best guess. In some cases you'll be high and in other cases you'll be low but you hope to get it about right on average.

Let's say you DO --get it about right on average, that is. What would you expect?

You would expect that if you looked at ALL the matches across the board where one player was established and the other wasn't, you'd see about half--close to 50%--won by the established player and about half won by the unestablished player.

Here there were 724 established/unestablished matches, and 354 (49%) were won by the established player. Exactly half would be 362, just a few more. This is a result you might expect if you flipped a coin 724 times. So the big picture is things are good. Things are about right on average.

30% of the players are unestablished. At first glance you might think this means 30% of the division winners might come from the unestablished group. Here that would be 2 out of the 7 divisions, when this year it was actually 4 out of the 7 divisions won by an unestablished player. This is pretty small numbers for identifying a statistical problem. This is what your "against all odds" comment references.

But let's think this situation through a bit more. Let's say you have a division that goes from 475 to 525. Your established players in this group average 500. Your unestablished players in this group--those with guessed ratings-- average 500 in actual skill as well. That's what the 50/50 match win statistic tells us. But wait! There is more slop --more variance-- in the guessed ratings than there is in the actual ratings. As a result, there is BOTH more likely to be an unestablished player with skill notably below the range and notably above the range. For this reason you might actually expect more than a statistically proportional number to be division winners.

This is all true even if there is no hanky panky/funny business.

What about sandbagging?

Detecting this before the fact is sometimes easy and sometimes not easy. After the fact is a different story. Now that these division winners are known, we can simply look at their game history. Did they just finish a league season where their performance was notably below prior tournament performance? Do they have suspiciously poor match scores in some small weekly tournament?

We see nothing--no evidence of funny business. One unestablished division winner had a preliminary rating based just on 130 tournament games played in Western BCA 7-8 years ago. Sure it would be good if he had recent league games in (don't know why his division is not using LMS). But there is nothing suspicious.

Another unestablished division winner had a 425 starter rating and 8 weeks or so of recent league data. And week after week those league games were bringing his rating up. This not what you expect to see for someone trying to protect a low starter rating for the purpose of entering a tournament.

There may be some things WBCA could do to protect the field a little. Move unestablished players who fall in the top third of a division up a division is one example. But there really is nothing broken here. Chicken Little can settle down...


********
mike page
http://www.fargorate.com
player ratings for the world
********
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#5)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 4,081
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
03-18-2019, 05:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by garczar View Post
Got that right. I know a couple players that keep their FR around 530 even though they both are probably 600 maybe a tad higher. I don't see how this can ever be stopped. Some will always cheat the system.
You are so right! Meanwhile my team is unable to compete in some BCA tournaments because the cap for Fargo ratings is 2900 for the team, which prevents a 5-man team of players rated around 600 from competing. So, doing the math, we'd have to sub in a player rated around 500 or less in order to play as a team. But it's not common to have a 490 or 510 player playing on a team with 600+ rated players.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#6)
nine_ball6970
585 speed drunk
nine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,718
vCash: 500
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Join Date: Jan 2012
   
03-18-2019, 05:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
You are so right! Meanwhile my team is unable to compete in some BCA tournaments because the cap for Fargo ratings is 2900 for the team, which prevents a 5-man team of players rated around 600 from competing. So, doing the math, we'd have to sub in a player rated around 500 or less in order to play as a team. But it's not common to have a 490 or 510 player playing on a team with 600+ rated players.
In BCA events here you can recruit players. Two players from the same league team must play every round. The others don't even have to play in the same league.

The cap for our team event is 3,200. There will be some very strong teams. I think the cap is too high but that is just my opinion. My team is around 3,000.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#7)
decent dennis
AzB Silver Member
decent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond reputedecent dennis has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,445
vCash: 1700
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis,Mo
   
03-18-2019, 05:50 AM

Ha,Ha, chicken little,thats some funny shit.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#8)
mikepage
AzB Silver Member
mikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond repute
 
mikepage's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 4,184
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fargo, ND
   
03-18-2019, 06:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BC21 View Post
You are so right! Meanwhile my team is unable to compete in some BCA tournaments because the cap for Fargo ratings is 2900 for the team, which prevents a 5-man team of players rated around 600 from competing. So, doing the math, we'd have to sub in a player rated around 500 or less in order to play as a team. But it's not common to have a 490 or 510 player playing on a team with 600+ rated players.
I think that is getting more and more common as people realize there are different ways to create a strong league team.

Here are three competitive 4-player teams in my league division. Mixing in one or more lower-rated players with team caps gives an opportunity to mentor an emerging player or play with a good friend without sacrificing the competitiveness of the team
Attached Images
 


********
mike page
http://www.fargorate.com
player ratings for the world
********
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#9)
JC
The Thread Stops Here
JC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond reputeJC has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 12,613
vCash: 500
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: PNW
   
03-18-2019, 06:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikepage View Post
I think you should be a little more circumspect here.

Let's take a look. Here are the divisions

Bronze2: 270-388
Bronze 1 389-441
Silver 2 442-482
Silver 1 483-518
Gold 519-563
Platinum 564 - 620
Elite - over 620

Distributed amongst these divisions are 930 players, of which 641 have established Fargo Rating and 289 don't. So let's say for those who don't have an established rating you do your best guess. In some cases you'll be high and in other cases you'll be low but you hope to get it about right on average.

Let's say you DO --get it about right on average, that is. What would you expect?

You would expect that if you looked at ALL the matches across the board where one player was established and the other wasn't, you'd see about half--close to 50%--won by the established player and about half won by the unestablished player.

Here there were 724 established/unestablished matches, and 354 (49%) were won by the established player. Exactly half would be 362, just a few more. This is a result you might expect if you flipped a coin 724 times. So the big picture is things are good. Things are about right on average.

30% of the players are unestablished. At first glance you might think this means 30% of the division winners might come from the unestablished group. Here that would be 2 out of the 7 divisions, when this year it was actually 4 out of the 7 divisions won by an unestablished player. This is pretty small numbers for identifying a statistical problem. This is what your "against all odds" comment references.

But let's think this situation through a bit more. Let's say you have a division that goes from 475 to 525. Your established players in this group average 500. Your unestablished players in this group--those with guessed ratings-- average 500 in actual skill as well. That's what the 50/50 match win statistic tells us. But wait! There is more slop --more variance-- in the guessed ratings than there is in the actual ratings. As a result, there is BOTH more likely to be an unestablished player with skill notably below the range and notably above the range. For this reason you might actually expect more than a statistically proportional number to be division winners.

This is all true even if there is no hanky panky/funny business.

What about sandbagging?

Detecting this before the fact is sometimes easy and sometimes not easy. After the fact is a different story. Now that these division winners are known, we can simply look at their game history. Did they just finish a league season where their performance was notably below prior tournament performance? Do they have suspiciously poor match scores in some small weekly tournament?

We see nothing--no evidence of funny business. One unestablished division winner had a preliminary rating based just on 130 tournament games played in Western BCA 7-8 years ago. Sure it would be good if he had recent league games in (don't know why his division is not using LMS). But there is nothing suspicious.

Another unestablished division winner had a 425 starter rating and 8 weeks or so of recent league data. And week after week those league games were bringing his rating up. This not what you expect to see for someone trying to protect a low starter rating for the purpose of entering a tournament.

There may be some things WBCA could do to protect the field a little. Move unestablished players who fall in the top third of a division up a division is one example. But there really is nothing broken here. Chicken Little can settle down...
You have access to all this data Mike, all I have is my lying eyes. As a field things are probably pretty good as you say but somehow there seems to be that one who slips through the cracks somehow and dominates the field where some human thought they belonged. There will be a new batch of them along next time, count on it.

It only takes one bad apple to spoil the barrel you know.

I am not criticizing Fargo. I'm a huge believer. What I mentioned had little to do with the rating system and more to do with human behavior. I only mentioned 6 divisions because the Elite division the players are all well known.

BTW the stats in LMS have a small issue where they aren't adding up correctly. I mentioned it to Gary a while back but as of this morning it's still a glitch. Go to Statistics/Teams and click on a team. The individual players winning percentage is correct but the team's winning percentage appears to have an incorrect formula.

JC

Last edited by JC; 03-18-2019 at 06:17 AM.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#10)
nine_ball6970
585 speed drunk
nine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond reputenine_ball6970 has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,718
vCash: 500
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Join Date: Jan 2012
   
03-18-2019, 06:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC View Post
You have access to all this data Mike, all I have is my lying eyes. As a field things are probably pretty good as you say but somehow there seems to be that one who slips through the cracks somehow and dominates the field where some human thought they belonged. There will be a new batch of them along next time, count on it.

It only takes one bad apple to spoil the barrel you know.

I am not criticizing Fargo. I'm a huge believer. What I mentioned had little to do with the rating system and more to do with human behavior. I only mentioned 6 divisions because the Elite division the players are all well known.

BTW the stats in LMS have a small issue where they aren't adding up correctly. I mentioned it to Gary a while back but as of this morning it's still a glitch. Go to Statistics/Teams and click on a team. The individual players winning percentage is correct but the team's winning percentage appears to have an incorrect formula.

JC
I am not sure why these tournaments allow unestablished players to play in tournaments using Fargo. Minimum 200 games and that will solve most of the problems.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#11)
BC21
Poolology

BC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond reputeBC21 has a reputation beyond repute
 
BC21's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 4,081
vCash: 500
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: West Virginia
   
03-18-2019, 06:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikepage View Post
I think that is getting more and more common as people realize there are different ways to create a strong league team.

Here are three competitive 4-player teams in my league division. Mixing in one or more lower-rated players with team caps gives an opportunity to mentor an emerging player or play with a good friend without sacrificing the competitiveness of the team
I like the idea of providing opportunity for lower-rated players with potential. And league play should be enjoyable too, not all about fargo ratings.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#12)
garczar
AzB Silver Member
garczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond reputegarczar has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 11,693
vCash: 500
iTrader: 13 / 93%
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Murica
   
03-18-2019, 06:41 AM

I don't do leagues. What i'm talking about is tournament play. Here in my area there's a lot of Fargo events that are usually 600/under, 575/under etc. Not naming players or places but more than a couple keep their FR artificially low to get into certain events. Its not a lot of people i know but it still looks bad.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#13)
Ralph Kramden
BOOM!.. ZOOM!.. MOON!
Ralph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond reputeRalph Kramden has a reputation beyond repute
 
Ralph Kramden's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 2,061
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Land of the free.. Only because of the brave
   
03-18-2019, 07:03 AM

.
Playing on the lemon... or stalling.... Happens all the time, at all levels.

From sfbilliards web site... Stall:
As in "Joe get off the stall, I know you're a better player than this." The person is
playing below his ability in order to obtain a more favorable match at a later time.
Hiding your true skill.

.


GAMES... http://sites.google.com/site/poolandbilliard

Recognize a 1/2 ball 30 degree cut, and the 1/8 ball angles.
Paralysis by aiming analysis happens by thinking too much.

To play at top speed.. You must own the stop shot line.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#14)
Dan_B
AzB Gold Member
Dan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond reputeDan_B has a reputation beyond repute
 
Dan_B's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 1,908
vCash: 455
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Conway, Arkansas
   
03-18-2019, 07:05 AM

if someone is intentionally losing games in league play to intentionally try to lower their FR score, are they not now established, by your scoring?
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#15)
mikepage
AzB Silver Member
mikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond reputemikepage has a reputation beyond repute
 
mikepage's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 4,184
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fargo, ND
   
03-18-2019, 07:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by garczar View Post
I don't do leagues. What i'm talking about is tournament play. Here in my area there's a lot of Fargo events that are usually 600/under, 575/under etc. Not naming players or places but more than a couple keep their FR artificially low to get into certain events. Its not a lot of people i know but it still looks bad.
There are tons of claims like that. When we DO get names (there are a lot of rating-detectives out there) and we look into it, the story is almost always not what the reporter thinks it is.

There are some awkward realities with attempts to "manage" a rating.

$10 tournaments are usually races to 2 or 3
$10 league nights are usually 5 or 6 games

Let's take someone pays that $$ and dumps.

First week: lose 3-1 and 2-0 . --now you've logged 6 games
Second week: lose 3-1 and 2-1 --you've logged another 7 games, 13 total

It'll look really bad if you go two and out three weeks in a row, so now you win a match or two but still donate your $10

Do this for 6 weeks or 10 weeks and hope FargoRate doesn't catch it as a statistical anomaly and suspect data and nobody puts it all together on facebook generating all the picture of people eating popcorn. Damn it sure would be good if all these tournament brackets weren't public!

Then you enter a $50 xxx&under tournament hoping you found a tournament for which xxx is a little under where you really play and above your sculpted rating---That part's not so easy because is's not a very big window.

So you enter the 520 & under tournament when you really would have been 528 had you not done your craft. It's a race to 7 because it is a bigger tournament. You win the first two, lose the 3rd, and then win 3 of 4 matches on the B side to finish 5/6 and get paid $200. But damn, you've logged 84 games at full speed in the process. These games on this day have as much influence as half a league season or 10-weeks of the weekly tournament.


********
mike page
http://www.fargorate.com
player ratings for the world
********
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 1 of 7 1 23 Last »

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.