Fargorate and "Bar Bangers"

JC said:

Mike how about combining all the players in the four in house divisions into one data pool. What percentage of them are over 500? Is it more than the 20% we have in our division?

Click to expand...

It is close to what you see.

Of the 231 players with established ratings who have played in our leagues in the last two years, 68 of them (29%) have ratings of 500 or higher.

If I look at everybody who has at least 100 games in the system, it is 70 out of 270 that are performing over 500 (26%)

Has anybody yet produced a comparison chart of different ranking systems like league and Fargo ratings to see what equals what?

It would be nice to have a simple universal skill test that players without any "formal" ratings could do to estimate how they compare. For instance, a "rotation ghost" rating, as in "I beat the ghost at 5 ball rotation" or "I beat the ghost at 10 ball rotation".

pj
chgo

JC said:

Have you looked at the roster of your league or are you making an estimate due to a lot of unestablished ratings?

The reason I ask is we have a smallish BCA league here and about 20% of the players are 500 or above and we have been using LMS for a couple years so most everyone is established. 8 out of ten are below 500. Many in the high 400s.

I played in a larger league nearby a couple of years with about 400 players and their situation is about the same as here.

JC

Click to expand...

517 is the average rating of players who’ve played at least one week. If you count players with at least 10 weeks the number goes up to 521.

Patrick Johnson said:

Has anybody yet produced a comparison chart of different ranking systems like league and Fargo ratings to see what equals what?

It would be nice to have a simple universal skill test that players without any "formal" ratings could do to estimate how they compare. For instance, a "rotation ghost" rating, as in "I beat the ghost at 5 ball rotation" or "I beat the ghost at 10 ball rotation".

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

I feel like I've seen some things like this making comparisons between Fargo and other rating systems, but since I can't remember where or what exactly it said I can't speak to it's accuracy or subject or objectivity.

Maybe Dr. Dave can have some input on this. I know I've seen rating systems comparisons on his site before, but I haven't looked in a while.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Patrick Johnson said:

Has anybody yet produced a comparison chart of different ranking systems like league and Fargo ratings to see what equals what?

It would be nice to have a simple universal skill test that players without any "formal" ratings could do to estimate how they compare. For instance, a "rotation ghost" rating, as in "I beat the ghost at 5 ball rotation" or "I beat the ghost at 10 ball rotation".

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

The hard part about that is that skills don’t always map to how players fare in competition.

sixpack said:

The hard part about that is that skills don’t always map to how players fare in competition.

Click to expand...

You are exactly right, big time!

Like myself, some players play better when in competition with another player.

It takes WAAAYYYYY more concentration to stay in game with ghost. Especially of you spend much time playing by yourself. Gets boring fast.

However, playing other players never gets boring, as long as, they are up to or above your current speed.

As for me, when I play 10 ghost to 9 I do good to put a 3 or 4 pack together. On the other hand, when facing another player that I know will be me like the ghost........ if I miss, I lose.............. well.......... to me, THAT is when i play my VERY BEST and usually put bigger packages together much more often.

BTW:

I'm sure you know some players are just the opposite by playing better against ghost and worse against another opponent that has game.

Can go either way, just depends on who is holding the cue.

Rake

jrctherake said:

You are exactly right, big time!

Like myself, some players play better when in competition with another player.

It takes WAAAYYYYY more concentration to stay in game with ghost. Especially of you spend much time playing by yourself. Gets boring fast.

However, playing other players never gets boring, as long as, they are up to or above your current speed.

As for me, when I play 10 ghost to 9 I do good to put a 3 or 4 pack together. On the other hand, when facing another player that I know will be me like the ghost........ if I miss, I lose.............. well.......... to me, THAT is when i play my VERY BEST and usually put bigger packages together much more often.

BTW:

I'm sure you know some players are just the opposite by playing better against ghost and worse against another opponent that has game.

Can go either way, just depends on who is holding the cue.

Rake

Click to expand...

I would love to hear Dr. Dave's opinion on how a player that beats 10 ghost 11 - 4 would compare to a farce rating of ????. In general, if even possible.

Where you at Doc.....and thank for your time Sir!

Rake

https://billiards.colostate.edu/threads/ratings.html

Patrick Johnson said:

Has anybody yet produced a comparison chart of different ranking systems like league and Fargo ratings to see what equals what?

It would be nice to have a simple universal skill test that players without any "formal" ratings could do to estimate how they compare. For instance, a "rotation ghost" rating, as in "I beat the ghost at 5 ball rotation" or "I beat the ghost at 10 ball rotation".

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

Patrick Johnson said:

Has anybody yet produced a comparison chart of different ranking systems like league and Fargo ratings to see what equals what?

It would be nice to have a simple universal skill test that players without any "formal" ratings could do to estimate how they compare. For instance, a "rotation ghost" rating, as in "I beat the ghost at 5 ball rotation" or "I beat the ghost at 10 ball rotation".

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

After our mobile APP is out, we will be able, for examples, to ask everybody the same question--best pattern, one rail or two, stripes or solids, etc and get rapid results segregated by rating. Will will also be able to have a drill of the day or a task that we invite everybody to attempt. And once again we will be able to aggregate the results by rating.

jrctherake said:

I would love to hear Dr. Dave's opinion on how a player that beats 10 ghost 11 - 4 would compare to a farce rating of ????. In general, if even possible.

Where you at Doc.....and thank for your time Sir!

Rake

Click to expand...

If you average 11-4 against the 10 ball ghost on a 9 foot table without pattern racking, you are world class. If you only do it 1 time in x tries, you can be anywhere from a solid B on up.

sixpack said:

The hard part about that is that skills don’t always map to how players fare in competition.

Click to expand...

True dat. But what's the alternative for players without "formal" ratings? A rough approximation is better than nothing, especially for a starting rating.

pj
chgo

mikepage said:

After our mobile APP is out, we will be able, for examples, to ask everybody the same question--best pattern, one rail or two, stripes or solids, etc and get rapid results segregated by rating. Will will also be able to have a drill of the day or a task that we invite everybody to attempt. And once again we will be able to aggregate the results by rating.

Click to expand...

Cool. Got an ETA for the app?

pj
chgo

Courtesy of Dr Dave

Masayoshi said:

If you average 11-4 against the 10 ball ghost on a 9 foot table without pattern racking, you are world class. If you only do it 1 time in x tries, you can be anywhere from a solid B on up.

Click to expand...

I've not played much ghost pool lately due to illness but, I've got most of my ghost matches results on spreadsheet with % wins/losses, average score for races to 7, 9, 11, 15 and 25.

I'll look and post it later. I can tell you now though, lol, I don't "average" 11 / 4. I've got plenty of 11 / 3 to 5 scores but I've also got several 11 / 7 to hill / hill matches that bring my average down.

As for pattern racking, I know how and am pretty good at it but, I dont do it unless I let it be known that I'm doing so. Otherwise, I put 1 in front, 10 middle, 2 and 3 on corners and other balls go where they go.....randomly.

Funny how sometimes the 4 and 5, 6 and 7, 8 and 9 seem to gravitate to one another.... I have to "work" at it to make sure they are not...... in a way, "that" is pattern racking "AGAINST MYSELF".....

lol,

I'll post info when I get home,

Rake

Dan Wolfe said:

Courtesy of Dr Dave

View attachment 505946

Click to expand...

Thanks.

The "Traditional Player Level" comes closest to what I'd like to see - an equally common but more precise way to express that.

pj
chgo

I'm around a 535 Fargo and based on how I've self assessed over the years I'd say Dr Dave's chart is pretty accurate at least for me.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

My Fargo rate...apa and bcapl handicaps all fall in line with what dd Dave has listed

I don't play but my Fargo keeps going up?

First I want to state, I like the Fargo system.
Almost two years ago I beat a guy that won the tournament I was in. It was the first round and we both played bad.
I did make it to the top ten in a field of 79.
I have not really competed since then for medical reasons.
My Fargo has gone up over this time because people I beat have gotten better.
I am a 5 in our TAP league, yet many of our 6's are 20-30 points lower. in Fargo ratings.
If some one I beat "back in the day" ends up being a pro, will I be punished forever?
Again, not knocking Fargo, trying to understand.
Also I do not consider "sandbagging" as an issue in this league. I have played and been around it for many years and know most of the players.

poolpro2 said:

First I want to state, I like the Fargo system.
Almost two years ago I beat a guy that won the tournament I was in. It was the first round and we both played bad.
I did make it to the top ten in a field of 79.
I have not really competed since then for medical reasons.
My Fargo has gone up over this time because people I beat have gotten better.
I am a 5 in our TAP league, yet many of our 6's are 20-30 points lower. in Fargo ratings.
If some one I beat "back in the day" ends up being a pro, will I be punished forever?
Again, not knocking Fargo, trying to understand.
Also I do not consider "sandbagging" as an issue in this league. I have played and been around it for many years and know most of the players.

Click to expand...

It is actually a misconception that a player's rating goes up because former opponents improve. Sure you can concoct hypothetical scenarios where this is a thing. But in reality it isn't.

Imagine a situation like yours, where you played, say, 8 matches in a tournament a few years ago and got a preliminary rating of, say 550. And now, two years later, without you playing, your preliminary rating is 600. Does this mean my opponents got better? No, it doesn't. It means FargoRate understands better how they play.

Let's dig in

Say you played 8 matches and had the following scores

6 - 3 against a 450 with 500 games in the system
6 - 3 against a 400 with 500 games in the system
6 - 3 against a 500 with 500 games in the system
6 - 3 against a 450 with 50 games in the system
3 - 6 against a ??? with 0 games in the system
6 - 2 against a ??? with 0 games in the system
5 - 6 against a ??? with 0 games in the system
6 - 4 against a ??? with 0 games in the system

For the first 3 matches you were 18-9 against opponents averaging 450--so that's you playing at 550 speed. The next match you also performed at 550 speed, but the system would not count this as much because it has a weaker understanding of how that opponent plays. The next four matches are ignored because the system has no basis to assess your wins and losses. But it still remembers these games.

As time goes on these opponent ratings drift a little, but the major effect is the system starts to understand how those opponents play, all of them, and finally is able to interpret those games you played before.